Comments on: The John Roberts dossier

By: Anthony

Anthony — Tue, 26 Jul 2005 03:28:00 +0000

Republicans didn’t pass that law AB CD – Or rather the ones that did pass it were in the minority.

By: AB CD

AB CD — Mon, 25 Jul 2005 13:35:14 +0000

What laws would a conservative judge pass? The most activist they can get is striking down some federal laws and the recent decision that the government can force someone to sell their house or business whenever thet can get more tax money . Congress and legislatures should pass laws, not judges.

By: Teyecoon

Teyecoon — Sun, 24 Jul 2005 20:07:20 +0000

You’re right laineypie but in this country “majority” trumps intelligence and rationality so all we can hope for is a slow decline of the nation under this administration as they have this country by the balls and they are masters at convincing the American people that it is for their own good and benefit. Your not likely to see a “neutral” judge picked by “Dumbya” and with Congress in his control, this is the recipe for the “perfect storm”. We can only hope to weather this situation with an eye towards mitigating the damage rather than the unrealistic notion that we can prevent it.

By: Anthony

Anthony — Sun, 24 Jul 2005 02:22:15 +0000

Neutral path?!?! Neutral is good?!

This is exactly why Kerry wasn’t elected President – He was as neutral as you get.

Neutral is the very last thing this country wants or needs.

Second of all the Democrats were on Bush even before he nominated John Roberts (which is pretty much the best Democrats can hope for mind you). This isn’t your standard Presidential nomination. This is a supreme court justice. Based on history no one has any right to step in the way of this appointment. This isn’t some High School popularity contest. The only reason the matter can be voted on is to prevent down right insane nominations (something that has never been a issue in this subject). It’s not to assure a person that both sides of the aisle like (or even one side for that matter).

With out looking I’m sure there have been times in history when the supreme court clearly leaned to one side. Why? Because Americans leaned to that side when they voted for the President. Not because of some random kind of fate, or whatever BS you want to come up with.

Oh… And try all you want but the gender of the person has nothing to do with the nomination. Bush has been quite open to putting minorities in power most notably Condoleezza Rice (who is both female, and black if you happened to conveniently forget).

By: laineypie

laineypie — Sat, 23 Jul 2005 17:06:33 +0000

What are you people thinking?? The reason Dems are making such a big deal about this John Roberts guy is because it IS a big deal. This man will be appointed to the Supreme Court for life. He has the potential, along with other conservatives on the bench, to completely overturn monumentous decisions in our nation’s history and write new laws and policies that will affect us all. So what if he doesn’t look so bad, or sound so bad? Why wasn’t Edith picked? I will tell you why Edith wasn’t picked, one she is a female and two she has always chosen the most neutral path in her rulings, swaying very little to either extreme, and that wouldn’t fit a nominee of Bush now would it?

This John Roberts guy is all for Corporate USA. He’s going to be Bush’s handpuppet on the Supreme Court. If Rehnquist retires and they appoint a second judge, we can all say goodbye to our health and our rights, because after that we will all be screwed. Oh well, that is what we deserve for electing a moron republican as president.

By: Sound the alarm

Sound the alarm — Fri, 22 Jul 2005 16:37:56 +0000

Child arrest records are automatically erased when the child turns 18 unless the crime involves death.

By: Don

Don — Fri, 22 Jul 2005 13:29:16 +0000

Have you noticed how this has put the novocaine to the Karl Rove thing? He’s already faded to page 5 and he’ll be off the radar completely by the end of another week.

By: Anthony

Anthony — Fri, 22 Jul 2005 03:28:50 +0000

“And when you consider the fact that this guy was involved in the Microsoft case you have to support him just so the tech world can have someone with some concept of tech on the bench. Come on.”

A very good point. Sad but true (and you can’t really blame the justices that currently sit for their lack of knowledge on the subject).

By: Teyecoon

Teyecoon — Thu, 21 Jul 2005 23:14:24 +0000

Yeah, I agree that the next “option” is only likely to be worse as the Democrats will be fighting from a weaker standpoint on the “no compromise – rejection again” fence. They would probably be better off by easily accepting this guy, which will give them some “we compromised points” and then get tough on the next one when Renquist retires.

By: Brenda Helverson

Brenda Helverson — Thu, 21 Jul 2005 23:11:16 +0000

I WAS WRONG! Here’s the French Fry case twist that makes it bad law. The child was arrested under a bad law that DC soon repealed. The victim sued to expunge the arrest form her record so that she wold not be forced to check YES for the rest of her life when asked if she had ever been arrested. Roberts couldn’t rfind some way to help her and her arrest record stands. This fact alone makes him an asshole.

By: JimBob

JimBob — Thu, 21 Jul 2005 21:59:28 +0000

I think you are right on. The French Fry thing is a little disturbing but that isn’t really Robert’s fault. The Dems should check Roberts out and make sure everything is ok but they should be smart about it. If they filibuster Roberts without a good reason then Bush will nominate an even more conservative person next time. The Dems need to understand that this is one of the better decisions Bush has made in a long time.

By: Brenda Helverson

Brenda Helverson — Thu, 21 Jul 2005 20:57:54 +0000

I think that the Dems will ignore this minor soundbite and I agree that we should. However, we should take the time to imagine the outcry if this decison had been rendered by a Clinton nominee. Judge Roberts would be a threat to The America Way, O’Hannity would rant and call people names, and it would be Clinton’s fault.