Posted on 02/14/2016 6:32:22 PM PST by Helicondelta
“You can indict the entire party on Roberts, same with O’Connor.
This is a useless post.”
Absolutely right, this whole argument is nonsensical. Now if Cruz (or Rubio or anyone else for that matter) had been a Senator at the time and voted for the confirmation, they MIGHT have somewhat of a point, but as it stands, Cruz is no more responsible for Roberts than the other 99% of the conservative intelligencia (including most of us here on FR) that supported his nomination.
But if Trump wants to play that game, then I think we can fairly infer that by financially supporting Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer, Trump “gave” us the 3 scumbag politicians who were pivotal in writing and passing Obamacare. Ergo, Trump “gave” us Obamacare.
What do you mean? The GOP publicly indicted themselves over and over.
Then why are so many Cruz supporters saying that Trump would put a lib on the court? He said he would recommend Bill Pryor, I wouldn't call him a liberal.
That's because the story doesn't fit your narrative.
That’s not the only source. Try google. His pro bono work for gay rights groups was well known at the time of the confirnation hearings.
22 democrats voted for his confirmation including Patrick Leahy, etc
John Roberts should be a quick confirm
Trump didn't work with Roberts nor write a glowing endorsement. He was running a business.
Yea, It’s not like he wrote a glowing endorsement for him ... oh wait he did.
Nice try, but wrong.
In 2005, at the time, both Ben Shapiro and Ann Coulter warned unequivocally, in print, that Roberts was a go along to get along type of guy, A RINO who was no originalist, "A Souter in Robert's clothing," in reference to the other Bush's catastrophic liberal court pick.
He that has ears let him hear.
A couple of thoughts.
First, I remember well the day here at FR when Roberts was nominated. A LOT Of us here were like “WTF?”. Who is this guy? We were VERY worried that GWB had picked someone who was not really a proven conservative. As it turns out, those of us here who are amateurs, unlike experts like Cruz and the other legal elite (I like Cruz by the way), were wrong. I recall that Ann Coulter was basically with us, the skeptics.
Also...with regards to your second point, Roberts is pretty obviously gay. He also did a lot of pro bono work as a lawyer in DC for gay rights. This is something that GWB 1) knew and didn’t care, or 2) didn’t know but should have (see the previous point).
Roberts is not as bad as Souter. Not even close. But he changed his vote on obamacare b/c they trotted out the file. It may not be JUST that he’s gay. It could be something else, but yeah, they got the goods on him.
Every conservative who understands the
Courts supported Roberts.”
Nope.
There were plenty of us here at FR who were raising hell the day GWB nominated Roberts.
We felt like the “lack of a track record of opinions” cut both ways. Sure, he might slip through confirmation. But he’s too much of a wild card. And no one turns out to be more conservative than expected.
He wasn't "blackmailed," this was just Roberts being Roberts. A weaselly people pleaser with no particular principles other than self interest, he didn't need to be blackmailed.
What's weird is that Cruz could just say that, but instead, in response to Trump's charge that he supported and pushed for Roberts, he opts with "I did not nominate Roberts. I would not have nominated him" instead, thus implying that he did foresee it and did not support him in any way. IOW, Cruz decided to lie in front of millions of people than to simply tell the truth which is perfectly harmless.
And you knew all that back then? Wow
you are 100% correct.
not to belabor the point, but, FR was hot with skepticism when Roberts was nominated. We wanted a rock solid conservative.
Now..admittedly...for the first few years, I was pleasantly surprised by Roberts. He’s NOT a Souter.
But he switched his vote on the most important case. And it seems he did it at the last minute, to the shock of the 4 conservatives.
He did it b/c they had the goods on him. And GWB should have known this.
Our skepticism was justified. Maybe overstated...but for the case that mattered, very much justified.
Cruz's claim is that he did NOT love Roberts. He "did not nominate him and would not have nominated him" in reply to charges that he supported and pushed Roberts. But we all know Cruz was one of Roberts' chiefest promoters. So why would Cruz deliberately mislead his audience without coming clean on that, even though coming clean is so harmless? Saying "we all supported him but he betrayed us" is a very simple argument to make.
Cruz's first instinct is never to be honest, but to obfuscate.
So? Everyone one the Right thought Roberts was a Constitutionalist.
In 2009, trump donated to Democrat Harry Reid and it wasn’t the only year he donated to Reid.
Conclusion, Cruz like everyone else on the Right looked at Roberts record before his SC rulings and belived him to be a Constitutionalist while trump looked at Reid’s record as a lefty and donated to him even after the Tea Party tried to oust him.
this is straight out of the playbook for people who are smarter than most people. they are too clever by half.
Oh great. The acolyte is back.
He found time for a reality show though
BTW Trump was a registered Democrat when Roberts was confirmed so completely stupid to see his supporters go after Cruz when he was on the other side fighting WITH the enemy.
Clown.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.