The Robert Bork hearings were easy

Here’s a story about the nomination of Judge John Roberts.

And here is the text of Roberts’ smile-for-the-cameras remarks.

Three things:

1) Never let it be said that George W. Bush is one to back down from a fight.

2) There will be a fight.

3) And this nomination goes to show that, in William Goldman’s words, “Nobody knows nothin’.” Who predicted the Roberts pick? I did a fair bit of reading leading up to this nomination and never once ran across his name.

And to all a good night.

Print Friendly

  • Jill

    World Mag. mentions him briefly (among the profiles at the bottom of the page) in their current issue found online at http://www.worldmag.com/subscriber/displayArticle.cfm?ID=10841

  • http://clientandserver.com dw

    Perhaps the philosopher and orator Michael Buffer said it best:

    “LET’S GET READY TO RUMBLE!!!!!!!!!!!”

  • http://guildedlilies.tripod.com/index.html Steve Nicoloso

    There’ll be a fight for sure, but I’m beginning to suspect one more akin to the WWE genre, i.e., full of sound a fury, signifying nothing. Thus, Mr. Buffer’s philosophizing seems rather appropos. Assuming W’s own party backs him fully (which seems likely), the dems will have to hold together 41 out of their 45 senators in opposition to ultimately defeat the nomination (which seems unlikely). Sure, there’ll be figurative hell to pay–spittle-spraying Senators screaming for the enjoyment of the viewers, doomsday TV ads, and all. The many $millions spent pro and con? All PR for “better luck next time”. But in the end, W’s gonna get his guy confirmed.

    Cheers!

  • http://tennessee-catholic.blogspot.com/ John

    Weird thing: arch-conservative columnist Ann Coulter seems to think Roberts is a trojan horse: a pro-life exterior with a liberal crouching inside. Her column is reprinted on Drudge but her site doesn’t want to open right now.

  • Brad

    Actually, here’s an article that profiled him in the Washington Post days before the announcement.

    It seems to say he would be a conservative, but not a loud or terribly ideological one (and contrasted him with one that it said *would* be loud and ideological).

    This seems to be a nomination that is conservative enough to make conservatives happy, but respected, serious and thoughtful enough to make it really hard for liberals to attach him.

    Brad

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/16/AR2005071601049.html

  • Stephen A.

    As John says above, Ann Coulter is not at all pleased. She mentions, for example, that when arguing against Roe v Wade on behalf of the first Bush administration, he made sure to footnote the brief to make clear that the views expressed did not represent his own.

    This guy is a blank slate, somewhat, and that’s a warning sign for some conservatives. Like Coulter says in her column, “If a smart and accomplished person goes this long without expressing an opinion, they’d better be pursuing the Miss America title.”

    Again, for the sake of being on-topic, anyone know his religious background?

  • http://onlinefaith.blogspot.com C. Wingate

    Well, that’s an intersting question. And I can find copious documentation of his controversial legal career, I have found nothing that admits that he goes to church.

  • Mark

    The New York Times’ news analysis says only that “Friends described the couple as devout Catholics.”

    It can be found here, in the 10th paragraph:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/20/politics/politicsspecial1/20judge.html?ex=1123128000&en=dacfade5a0c1bbae&ei=5087

  • Tom Breen

    Salon reported today that he’s Catholic, but gave no details about church attendance, etc.

  • http://onlinefaith.blogspot.com C. Wingate

    Interesting. Are Protestant conservatives increasingly resort to putting Catholics on the bench to ensure conservative outcomes?

  • Stephen A.

    That’s a good observation. It seems in recent years, Catholics and Evangelical Protestants have found common ground on fighting on behalf of social issues like abortion. Therefore, supporting a Catholic for public office isn’t automatically unacceptable, as it once was.

    That, of course, would have been unheard of 30 years ago, but it’s actually a logical ‘fit’ for them to work together on some issues and I’m sure that very thing dawned on folks in each camp a while back.

    There’s a point where common ideology outweighs religious preference.

    I suspect the same would be true for Gov. Romney if he ran for president. Mormons share much of the social agenda of Evangelicals, if not all of it.

  • Andy Putman

    The last few paragraphs of the following article give more details on their Catholicism :
    http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0504186.htm
    I don’t know about him, but it seems that his wife at least is rather active in Catholic stuff (for instance, the John Carroll Society).

  • http://onlinefaith.blogspot.com C. Wingate

    “Therefore, supporting a Catholic for public office isn’t automatically unacceptable, as it once was.”

    Ah, but even more interesting to me is the corrollary that there does seem to be a problem with presenting conservative Protestant candidates because they do provoke intense controversies. Curious.

  • Stolzi

    What on earth is that picture?

  • http://guildedlilies.tripod.com/index.html Steve Nicoloso

    The picture looks strangely familiar, but I can’t place it. Guess: something from Twilight Zone? Second guess: something from Outer Limits?

  • http://www.getreligion.org/?p=2 Douglas LeBlanc

    That’s Slim Pickens’ character, Maj. T.J. “King” Kong, in the closing moments of Dr. Strangelove.

  • Stephen A.

    It took me a while to get that picture, too. Then I remembered the “nuclear” theme.

    It almost looks like a WWII German officer in the water after his sub was torpedoed (boy, was I far off on that one!)


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X