| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| WaPo Endorses Roberts |
| 2005-09-18 |
| Posted by:Fred |
| #5 I think we should nominate Donald Rumsfeld for supreme justice. At least we know how he would vote, every time. |
| Posted by: Crick Elmuger1423 2005-09-18 23:32 |
| #4 No, it's because the WaPo isn't as liberal as some of you seem to think (they were totally on board with Reagan's overt Central American foreign policy, including the Contras, in the '80's, for example) and because, although they are to the left of this administration, they don't think any other Bush appointee would be "better" from their standpoint than Roberts. I didn't much like his statement that the Commerce clause allows the USG to regulate anything it damn well pleases. I'm not sure small-government conservatism exists as anything other than a fringe movement in this country anymore. |
| Posted by: VAMark 2005-09-18 17:44 |
| #3 No, it's part of a subtle plan to cause conservatives to have second thoughts. The next step is for Cindy Sheehan to announce that "The Bush admin is trying to control her mind with satellites ... and that she supports John Roberts". |
| Posted by: DMFD 2005-09-18 11:40 |
| #2 Delightful problem for the Dems. If they vote to confirm the Koz crowd, Move-On, NARAL, etc. will be furious. If they don't vote to confirm, they will be admitting they are not responsible to ever govern again. On the other hand, Roberts did endorse the absurd doctrine of 'the constitution provides a right to privacy'. |
| Posted by: mhw 2005-09-18 07:58 |
| #1 "We endorse John G. Robert, primarily because if we don't we look just like another leftist rag, and because we know we can't win this one." Love, WaPo |
| Posted by: badanov 2005-09-18 03:16 |