I would like to direct some comments today to those who are feeling betrayed by certain Democratic and Blue-state Republican Senators. Armando in particular has caught my attention, not solely because of his front-page posting status but also because his writing makes me think he takes a Senator's decision to vote up or down as a personal insult.
While I can see how Judge Roberts' philosophy will affect both Armando and myself quite personally over the next 30 or so years, I for one find it more useful to be objective about the process of politics. It's ugly enough without tangling it up with my own crap.
My experience with Judge Roberts is limited to what I heard of his committee hearings on NPR last week. He sure does put on a good face. After listening to him answer and not answer, my opinion is that he answered more than he didn't answer. I cannot agree with the widespread notion that he is an unknown, a mystery. I think he made his views quite clear--at least, he made clear what he wants the committee to think his views are--and it was pretty consistent all the way around.
The precedent, by the way, of not answering questions about specific issues and not criticizing court opinions was set down by then-nominee Thomas. So Roberts is in the clear as far as his boundaries go. It's too late to win that fight.
Far be it from me personally to simply accept any Bush appointee at his word. No. And there is the lingering question of documents Roberts wrote when he was in the solicitor general's office. But again, these documents are protected by attorney-client privelege, a long held and well founded principle that I for one would not rail against as a private citizen, and I would not like to hear a Senator rail against it either.
Which brings up an interesting point. Nobody on this blog other than Barbara Boxer and Russ Feingold are Senators. You don't have a vote. They do. If a Senator thinks that Roberts is qualified, then he or she should vote yes. Period. If not, then no. Period.
It's got nothing at all to do with you, Armando, or anyone else. So get over it and let's not dwell on this loss (which happened in the fall of 2002 as far as I am concerned) and let's set the groundwork for victories in 2006, 2008.
There certainly are plenty of opportunities for political victories these days. Making a fuss over a nominee who is pretty much squeaky clean and a media darling is not one of them. I do not belittle the importance of the SCOTUS, or of Judge Roberts' nomination. I am saying that this fight was lost before it started and no amount of blogging will change that. And don't write about Patrick Leahy as though he broke into your house and farted on your toast while you weren't looking. He's a good Senator and he is going to vote yes because either he thinks Roberts is qualified or he had his arm twisted. Either way, yes it is.
Love
Don Overwith.