Another Take On John Roberts

While the religious rightwinges celebrate that Bush has picked a "true conservative," their celebration may be short lived.

While Roberts is indeed a traditional, Washington, legal three piece suit, there are hints that he is not Michael Luttig or Edith Jones or Janice Rogers Brown. In other words he is not a religious conservative nor a strict idealogue. Rather he is a lawyer's lawyer. Someone who will probably rule somewhat to the right of O'Connor, someone who will be a reliable conservative vote in favor of the power of the executive branch, but also someone who may surprise both liberals (positively) and religious rightwingers (negatively) by being surprisingly libertarian on social issues.

We could have been hit with far worse.

or do you have any actual facts to back it up?

part of it is based on things he said during his first confirmation hearing. Notably, that he would not have a problem upholding Roe V Wade.

He's also not from the South and is not culturally a religious rightwingers. He's a country club, northeastern Republican. Much better animal.

based on what I heard about his upbringing and also the way he presented himself tonight. I wonder if the fundies noticed that he thanked bush, his parents, and his wife-but did not thank god.

Oh, thank God. ;)

But surely he didn't forget to bless America, did he?

What's his stance on the Schiavo debacle?

from everything I have read there are two possible ideologies for a potential Bush judge; the corporate or the religious. Which master would Bush likely serve?

Although I am worried about the overturning of Roe, I still feel Bush would serve his corporate masters first.

this guy is a straight arrow, harvard corporate lawyer. He will vote against the little guy on almost every corporate case brought before the court. But he may be surprisingly moderate on civil liberty and privacy issues. Both of which, incidentally, Bush cares nothing about, other than to pump the religious rightwing for votes.

at his hearing. Although, Hatch has schedued 5 judges, including Roberts, to be questioned on the same day.

A red flag says that he is very conservative on women's issues,including Title IX, against privacy for women going to clinics to obtain reproduction advice and information and of course, Roe v Wade.

I, being woman, just may have a problem with him. Not withdstanding that he has only been a judge for two years and has the conservative label of acceptance....the Federalist society.

I shall wait and see.

http://www.dkosopedia.com/index.php/John_G._Roberts_Jr.

Robert's wife is an active member of Feminists for Life. They have two adopted children.

Trolling the Freepers for the above.

jane roberts and "feminists for life" and came up with nada.

Maybe this is a freeper daydream.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

masters is the main goal of this administration. The religious stuff is just red meat to hold the fundie base together. He isn't religious, his god is money. I find this part even scarier.

For what it's worth, I agree. I say confirm Roberts and let's get back to other issues. No use wasting time as he WILL be confirmed.

Ann Coulter or John Ashcroft were the nominee?

Oh, and why don't we just stop voting. After all, Diebold controls all the elections. No need to fight. We might make the Republicans mad.


http://www.cafepress.com/liberalissues.21326737

That's all I am saying.
No, I don't buy into the silly Diebold theories.

this guy is a white shoe, cautious lawyer. don't get me wrong, I think he's going to be conservative, but he is not a religious rightwing movement conservative. I think he'll be to the right of O'Connor and the left of Scalia.