There's been a lot of talk recently about Barack Obama's
remarks on Senator Leahy's John Roberts vote:
I was deeply disturbed by some statements that were made by largely Democratic advocacy groups when ranking member Senator Leahy announced that he would support Judge Roberts. Although the scales have tipped in a different direction for me, I am deeply admiring of the work and the thought that Senator Leahy has put into making his decision. The knee-jerk unbending and what I consider to be unfair attacks on Senator Leahy's motives were unjustified. Unfortunately, both parties have fallen victim to this kind of pressure.
I believe every Senator on the other side of the aisle, if they were honest, would acknowledge that the same unyielding, unbending, dogmatic approach to judicial confirmation has in large part been responsible for the kind of poisonous atmosphere that exists in this Chamber regarding judicial nominations. It is tempting, then, for us on this side of the aisle to go tit for tat.
But what I would like to see is for all of us to recognize as we move forward to the next nominee that in fact the issues that are confronted by the Supreme Court are difficult issues. That is why they get up to the Supreme Court. The issues facing the Court are rarely black and white, and all advocacy groups who have a legitimate and profound interest in the decisions that are made by the Court should try to make certain that their advocacy reflects that complexity. These groups on the right and left should not resort to the sort of broad-brush dogmatic attacks that have hampered the process in the past and constrained each and every Senator in this Chamber from making sure that they are voting on the basis of their conscience.
In June of 2005, I attended a small fundraiser for Barack Obama's Hope Fund (his new PAC raising money for Democratic Senators up for reelection in 2006). At that event, Barack Obama said much the same things about Special Interest groups as he does now -- that their vicious, dogmatic, over-the-top attacks on Senators who don't vote exactly the way they want them to is bad for the institution because it discourages Senators from thoughtfully looking at complex issues with the degree of nuance necessary to solve public policy problems. He was mostly talking about the special interest groups on the right (i.e., Focus on the Family), but made clear that he was talking about "the Democrats' James Dobsons" as well.
I think his defense of Leahy in his press release therefore reflects what he sincerely believes, and is not some kind of Machiavellian maneuver by the senior Democratic leadership.