Once again Pres Bush shows us the great man he is (John Roberts nominated for SCOTUS)

O

Ozzieman

New member
WASHINGTON - President Bush named federal appeals court judge John G. Roberts Jr. for a seat on the Supreme Court Tuesday, delighting Republicans while unsettling some Democrats with the selection of a young jurist with impeccable conservative credentials.

Once again we the people might controle the courts, instead of the liberals which want the crinimals to control the courts.

WAY TO GO Mr BUSH!!!!!!
 
I hope you don't mind my editing your title, but I was really surprised to come home and find no discussion of the Roberts nomination at all. When I got out of the car to go to class, ABC was just breaking the news that it might not be Clement after all, and by the time we finished and I got back in the car, I was hearing about Roberts!

All I've heard so far is that Dick Durbin and Chuck Schumer don't like him, nor does "People for the American Way," so he's off to a good start in my eyes. I want to know more, though.
 
All I've heard so far is that Dick Durbin and Chuck Schumer don't like him, nor does "People for the American Way," so he's off to a good start in my eyes.
Click to expand...

I was sitting here watching Nightline as I read this. "Leaky" Leahy was going on about him. Then they proceeded to show the home page of several websites from the usual suspects, all with the same "doom on the court" type headline.

Most of the rest of the show was the standard "experts" from NPR, a Chicago based law institute, etc.

The undertone of the whole thing was that we are in for a Robert Bork style confirmation process.
 
I still remember when Kennedy appointed his footbal player friend and presumed fellow liberal to the SCOTUS. Once confirmed, you could feel the wind when he did a 180. I want to know more too.
 
From what I have read on him, he seems to be just what we were looking for. Firm beleiver in conservative ideals. He hasn't done much in the line of speaches but he studied under Rehnquist as a clerk. His ideology is along conservative thinkings. That is what has got Schumer and Ted all worked up.

It should be an interesting senate debate.
 
There will be no Senate debate, if the Dems get their way. They will try to bottle him in committee so only one or two can speak about his qualifications and never let him get to the floor for a REAL debate.

Pops
 
I just don't understand why a judge who could be described as liberal OR conservative would be a good choice as a judge at all.

Selecting someone for the job of being an impartial decision-maker runs counter to them being partial to "conservative ideals".


I would be far more impressed by a candidate with a record of impartial, yet strongly academic, opinion on Constitutional law.
 
From what I understand from my research, this nominee has appeared 39 times in the SCOTUS. He has a proven history.
 
Last edited:
The democrats have stated [Mr Schumer] that they are going to war over this regardless of Bush's choice !!! They'll " Bork" him !! Disgusting politics.
 
"Really? 46% of Americans no longer trust Bush. Less than half trust him. This is greatness?"

It worked for Clinton with 43% of the vote, heck that was even considered a mandate for power then. President Bush with 54% is leading a divided Country by todays standards huh?
Here's a number for you 51, thats the number needed in the Senate to confirm our new Justice. Looks like a Schu in to me. :)

kenny b
 
Telewinz...

Really? 46% of Americans no longer trust Bush. Less than half trust him. This is greatness?
Click to expand...

Wow. Awesome.

Let me ask you something: since when did public opinion make a man great?

I had no idea that Gallup could make a man great, that's good to hear. :rolleyes:

As far as the nomination... I think that the earlier poster is correct, we shouldn't want a 'conservative' judge, but one that will faithfully uphold the constitution. Hard to do without personal prejudice. However, it does seem like this guy will be a protagonist for the RKBA!!!
 
Once again Pres Bush shows us the great man he is
Click to expand...

Sorry, I voted for him but "great" no can't buy that. Perhaps a great leader
exist it would be very hard to find one now in modern America.
 
As happy as I am to see the left grumbling, I've got to reserve judgement on Roberts until I know more. It seems like he'll be another Rehnquist or a 'Scalia Lite'. While thats not an entirely bad thing, I'd much prefer to see another Thomas on the Court (remember Raich?) .
 
Really? 46% of Americans no longer trust Bush. Less than half trust him. This is greatness?"
Click to expand...

Hmm I wonder what the numbers would have looked like if you did a poll on Abraham Lincoln in 1864.

How about one on Roosevelt in 1942???

Polls do not a great man make.
 
"Polls do not a great man make."

Funny how we can understand that, but some people can't, eh?



I'm fully expecting an all-out war by the liberals on this choice.

Which is REALLY funny considering that Ruth Bader Ginsburg, a Clinton nominee, was an attorney for the frigging ACLU before being appointed to the court, and she won nomination something like 93 to 3.

As I watched the pundit shows last night, it really, truly struck me just how duplicitious the Democrats are, what with the statements coming from Durbin, Schumer, and one other in that group.

I have a nasty feeling that we're going to see the same kind of Democratic shenanigans over this nomination that the Democrats pulled during Bush's first term with the Ashcroft nomination to Attorney General.

Drunken Ted really covered himself in something during that fiasco, and it wasn't glory.
 
I don't need a poll to tell me that Bush has acted unconstitutionally in the past, and I don't need a poll to tell me that John Roberts does now and will if appointed to the SCOTUS ignore the constitution when it conflicts with his Republican (big R -- the party) beliefs. He seems to have a few libertarian streaks, and his dislike of federal expansion might even get him to reject the majority opinion in a case like Raich. But there's little doubt his social philosophy is that of a conservative Republican.
 
NRA Happy?

I must assume that Judge Roberts views the second as an individual right. I've not been able to support this assumption.

A U.S. President is not great when:

1. "He" prefers a U.S. without borders
2. "He" wants to fight a compassionate war on terror. (post London comment)
3. "He" allows countries to harbor combatants who cross borders, kill our soldiers and then return to safe haven behind borders... No, I'm not talking about Vietnam.
4. "He" is incapable, or unwilling to communicate in a straight forward manner and without political correctness when discussing the war. He may simply be incapable of communicating/selling his ideas.
5. "He" fails to complain publicly when the Supreme Court of the Socialist States of America strikes a major blow to the constitution when an individual's property rights are eroded.

Having said that, I hope that he continues to appoint strict constitutionalist to the courts. He makes me proud when he makes Shoesmeeer and company unhappy with this appointment. He had it right during the first months after 9/11. He is capable of greatness.
 
Supreme Nominee

Anyone know where he is on Second Amendment/gun rights issues??

I've tried to read most of today's news articles on John Roberts, President Bush's nominee to the Supreme Court. The one comment that is consistant is a 'lack of paper trail' reflecting his views. Conservatives seem pleased, liberal groups and Senators are expressing concerns over abortion and environmental protection. :confused:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top