How disturbing is it that we have to put up with the idiocracies of another conservative possible Supreme Court Justice? I am 16 years old, and I even understand that he will try to sway the entire Supreme Court. His extremist conservative ways will, we can only hope, come back to bite him in the years to come. God help us all!
Justin Fleenor
http://bristolweather.blogspot.com

neo-cons and conservatives alike will think the sky is falling because there is nothing that would turn a politically passive Democrat into a party activist quicker than those two possible events. The conservatives would very quickly lose the house, senate and WH. Our primary concern at this time should be voting rights. The Democrat party should immediately adopt a policy that all Democrat ballots are hand counted. Nationwide. For all elections. That policy needs to be part of the party platform.

I have long since come to believe that people never mean half of what they say, and that it is best to disregard their talk and judge only their actions.  Dorothy Day

There will need to be a complete overhaul of our entire Supreme Court at some point because of the foul soiling of ethics that resides there now.

It's not a "Supreme Court" at all. It's mostly a bunch of greedy corrupt criminals in robes who would probably be common gang members if they didn't have the upbringing and money that allowed them their law degrees.

Bush and the criminals like him are abusing their power and using the American system to their evil and greedy and preverse ends. I hope to see Republicans like him in prison one day --- and every so-called 'judge' they placed in the Supremeless Court thrown out on their duffs.

ha.

Perhaps Bush didn't listen to Laura Bush [re; a woman nominee] --does this mean Judge Roberts will listen to his 'feminist right-wing nut wife'?

********************************
Though John Roberts’ views on privacy and reproductive rights are still unknown (like so much about the nominee), Roberts’ wife is a prominent anti-choice activist.

Jane Sullivan Roberts has extensive ties to the conservative group Feminists for Life. As late as 1998, Mrs. Roberts was the group’s Executive Vice President. In 2001, she was identified as the “FFL board counsel,” and in the Summer 2002 FFL quarterly, The American Feminist, Roberts is listed as a member of the “Elizabeth Cady Stanton Circle” of fundraisers, who have raised between $1,000-$2,499 for the organization.
http://thinkprogress.org/2005/07/20/roberts-wife

Somehow, when I was researching this nominee, I came up with this link and I am perplexed and concerned...

http://www.modernhistoryproject.org/mhp/EntityDisplay.php?Entity=USMarin...

Does it mean that George Schulz was in the Marines with Joe McCarthy, Baker and Donaldson officers under them, and then Colson was an officer under Baker?, -- or does it mean just that they were all in the Marines... Relevance you ask? Well, I saw Larry King (it was on at my parents' house) interviewing Robert's best friend, Dean Colson, (they clerked together for Rehnquist), who is also a lawyer and major JEB buddy in FLA. I believe Dean is Chuck's son.

http://www.colson.com/Bio/DeanColson.asp

So I am thinking.... uhhh... Colson, Watergate, the religious right,Baker, the Carlyle Group... this not just a membership in the Federalist Society. I stand by my comment that Roberts' legal credentials are exceptional... but I think I am taking my opinion back on his ability to abstain from social engineering from the bench. I think he was chosen as the nominee long ago by the BA cronies and the RR....

Review of cases during his appellate court confirmation process -- worth reading:

http://www.independentjudiciary.com/resources/docs/John_Roberts_Report.pdf#search='attorney%20John%20Roberts'

It's not just that Roberts is an ideologue, he also a Bush/Rove/Cheney enabler of their dirty deeds. He was the lawyer in charge of stopping the Florida election recount, '00. He was one of 3 judges that gave Cheney a free pass on the mnutes of Enron meeting with Ken Lay, plus his wife, also a rightwing nut, is working for a Wash law firm involved with Iraq war profiteering. What else?? Clearly he will be another rubber stamp on the Supreme court like Clarence Thomas.

The truth is that Judge Roberts is not a member of the Federalist Society. See Newsweek and others. Can you correct this post please?
Buckeye Bob

the supposed fact that Roberts does not actually, legally, belong to the Federalist Society. From many sources, Roberts did not officially pay the $50 membership fee--in order that democrats would not tie him to this society. What the definition of 'is' is...sort of another wag the dog Repugnant invention to avoid scrutiny.

Conjecture: It is also possible that if he were a dues-paying member in good standing, he would not have been paid for the many lectures/speeches he has made before the Society.

In this case, does he walk like a duck?, Quack like a duck?, Look like a duck? Yes, he certainly does.

Since the Federalist Society declines to open their membership list to public scrutiny...and that would be the definitive proof one way or another...we may have to assume that he is--at the least--a fellow traveler.

Another Repugnant avoids a connection to something on a mere technicality. Does anyone feel that the Society would not welcome his $50 membership fee with open arms?

To openly state that he is not a member, based on a number of right-wing sites claims, only means that one must produce the membership list to prove that Judge Roberts is indeed, not on the list.

And, to take conjecture a bit further, if Judge Roberts avoided paying the membership fee to avoid investigation into his relationship with the Federalist Society...only means that this supposedly-instant nomination(by Bush)has been in the planning stages for months--IF NOT YEARS.

Guilt by association? You bet.

If Roberts is careful not to leave a paper trail of his associations then posters should not draw attention to BOTH his associations AND his sneakiness.

Roberts, Richard Mellon Scaife, and the Arkansas Project. There are hints out there.

Truthfulness matters folks, so let's be accurate. If you want to reject the guy b/c you don't like his conservative views - that is fine - but you don't have to lie about it or come up with far fetched rationales about what how he might be "avoiding a connection." It is not like he is avoiding membership in the "wife beater's club." Its the freakin' federalist society - most folks of that ilk go out of their way to let you know they belong. There are more constructive ways to criticize the guy than this.
Buckeye Bob

and yours have just slipped from factual to ... ummm...lets be nice and say that your views are somewhat suspect.

Charles Lane
WP Staff Writer
Monday 7-25-2005

"Supreme Court Nominee John G. Roberts Jr. has said he has no 'memory' of belonging to the Federalist Society, but his name appears in the influential conservative organization's 1997-1998 leadership directory."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/24/AR200507...

This is an individual who has a mind like a steel trap. There is no way he could forget his [deniable]connections with the FS. Further on in this article, it is mentioned that to 'forget' to pay dues is not problematic for the group...particularly the leadership. He served this organization well at very high levels.

Read the article...note the legalese...the 'what part of is 'is.' Then tell us again, with a straight face, that he was 'never' a member.

thread be moved over here?

I have long since come to believe that people never mean half of what they say, and that it is best to disregard their talk and judge only their actions. Dorothy Day

Ken Starr(closely), and so many others. Dig a little and maybe you might find a connection with Newt Gingrich/GOPAC. No doubt many others...yet his background is almost flawless. The 'flawless'background probably covers a multitude of sins.

.

When did the White House start running ads to promote a nominee for Supreme Court.

Who is paying for this advertising? An ad runs at least every 30 minutes here in Texas

Robertson claimed that, in the wake of Katrina, Roberts can "be thankful that a tragedy has brought him some good"

Pat Robertson, host of Christian Broadcasting Network's (CBN) The 700 Club and founder of the Christian Coalition of America, stated that, in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, Supreme Court nominee John G. Roberts Jr. can "be thankful that a tragedy has brought him some good."

On the September 1 edition of The 700 Club, Robertson argued that "out of this tragedy, the focus of America is going to be on these [hurricane] victims," and "inflamed rhetoric" from senators during Roberts's confirmation hearings "is just not going to play well now." Robertson also commented that, following the hurricane, if senators "[go] on a vendetta against Roberts" by sharply questioning or criticizing him, "it's just going to hurt them."

http://mediamatters.org/items/200509060005

"They want the federal government controlling Social Security

- George W. Bush in a debate in St. Charles, Mo., Nov. 2, 2000