.... or, that you have to have enough grey matter to either:
1)Listen to the hearings b4 you comment, or
2)Have enough grey matter to understand what the man says
The thing that is "not very encouraging" to me is that those two items seem to be beyond the grasp of more than a few freepers.
Roberts may turn out to be a huge disappointment. Kennedy surely did, and I had high hopes for him. However, there is NOTHING in the hearings that would disappoint anyone who listens and understands the man. All he has said so far is, in essence, "I can't comment on the cases, but I can assure you that if I destroy any of your shibboleths, it will be from a background that I understand CLEARLY how you reasoned to get there, CLEARLY how this law has become entwined in our culture, and CLEARLY how it must be overturned because of the incongruity with the words and intent of the Constitution."
IF the guy helps overturn ROE (big "if"), I will bet you he already has a gracious, irenic, and logically irrefutable brief in his head, which touches on the right to privacy and personal freedoms cited in Roe, incorporates both Blackmun's brief and Byron White's dissent, and the various precedents which have devolved from the ruling, along with a reason why the Court cannot OUTLAW abortion, but hands it back to the 50 states (where it was before Roe).
He strikes me as a guy who is as smart as Scalia, but one who, after he has demolished your argument, you want to go have a beer with him and talk about duck hunting or something.
I loved listening to him interact with the Senate.