"But like almost all stories that start out small and under control ...

In the same article Mr Engelhardt concludes with an admonishment of the Democratic Party that I've separated from the above analysis of available facts.

I've done so because as of late this afternoon it appears that Senator Specter has not been able to convince the Democratic members of the Senate Judiciary committee to agree to begin hearings on Sept 6, 2005. Moreover, Senate Democrats are increasing the pressure on the White House to release documents.



So, in that context, here is Mr Englehardt's concluding assessment of the situation:



Perhaps the Democrats in Congress are not quite ready to reach out and grab that 'sharpened razor.'

For the sake of the Republic, let us hope they reject Roberts and do much, much more in the next few months to stop dictator Bush and his neoconster regime.




Peace.

www.missionnotaccomplished.us - How ever long it takes, the day must come when tens of millions of caring individuals peacefully but persistently defy the dictator, deny the corporatists their cash flow, and halt the evil being done in Iraq and in all the other places the Bu$h neoconster regime is destroying civilization and the environment in the name of "America."

Here is a great artlcle from today by John Dean.

----
Supreme Court Nominee John G. Roberts:
How Many Of His Government Records Can Be Hidden From the Senate?
By JOHN W. DEAN
----
Friday, Jul. 29, 2005

Remarkably little is known about Supreme Court nominee John G. Roberts, other than the bare bones of his resume. Although he was recently confirmed for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, that confirmation hearing did little delving. So far, he has written only about forty opinions in his two years on the appellate court, on largely mundane legal matters. Thus, his judicial philosophy remains essentially unknown.

For this reason, several members of the Senate Judiciary Committee have said they will seek copies of documents that Roberts prepared as a government attorney in the Reagan and Bush I administrations, to see if these documents provide evidence of Roberts's thinking. Of particular interest are Roberts's years in the Office of the Solicitor General, for nowhere in the Executive Branch is there more thinking done about the High Court.



The Bush White House, and those speaking on behalf of the Administration, initially said that they would refuse to turn over documents, claiming attorney-client privilege. Apparently reminded that as Independent Counsel, Ken Starr pretty much made a nullity of that privilege for government attorneys, the White House later said that some documents would be made available, but not all.

In support of its position, it cited as precedent the rules that had governed the hearings of past government attorneys who have been selected for the high bench (Rehnquist, Bork, and Scalia). The problem is, it turns out that existing precedent -- in particular, precedent from the Bork hearings, the more recent of the three, cuts the wrong way for the White House.

snip>

http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20050729.html

These neocons will never, ever stop. Everything thing they touch turns foul and rancid. It's the "Rove touch", turns everything into turds.

".... when it comes to this administration, you can put your bottom dollar on the fact that they're just going to get bigger and messier and uglier as time goes by."

Yeap.


Peace.

www.missionnotaccomplished.us