Re: Roberts - what did you expect?

[livinginphotographs]

Honestly, Bush will appoint someone. And eventually, one will get confirmed. So who did we expect?

We know he will appoint a conservative. We know we're going to get someone on the court whom we will disagree with on several key issues.

Roberts is anti-abortion, anti-affirmative action, and anti-environmentalist. Still, I wonder if we should just take what we can get. He's no Ashcroft at least...

The confirmation hearing should be nasty, definitely. I want this guy dragged over the fucking coals in front of the nation. But the sad fact is that he will eventually be confirmed. But we might as well air his dirty laundry to the nation so the public will see how little the Republicans care for their opinions.

My choice: pick our battles. I want Rove to stay in the spotlight. I want the disaster in Iraq to stay in the spotlight. I don't want the headlines turning from those issues into story after story about "obstructionist" Democrats.

Thoughts?

[henslee]

1. Roberts distracts from Rove distracts from missing $$$ in Iraq distracts

from NO WMD, distracts from missing Nat. guard records distracts from two stolen elections. (Quite an incongruous jump from no WMDS to missing records but hey, you know what i mean.)

[Jon8503]

2. You & I Are On The Same Dam Page:

He is gong to get confirmed so get it over with quick & keep the
focus on Rove.

Why do you think they moved this up so quick. Keep the news media on the confirmation process or Dems blocking him.

Don't know much about him but it sounds like on his last confirmation, Dems went with him including Biden of course.

They want all of the attention on this confirmation.

I say get it over with and stay on top of Rove.

[livinginphotographs]

3. The distraction angle was the first thing I thought of.

Why else would he take the "unusual" (as said by several networks) approach of announcing on national television in primetime? Distraction, pure and simple.

Let him have this jerk. Hopefully, W will be impeached before 2006, and this guy will be disgraced for having been associated with this admin.

[Jon8503]

5. Exactly./N.T.

[SaveElmer]

Yeah I agree...we really don't have a hand to play here

The guy looks like a rock hard conservative, but he has been arguing on others' behalf. He has some recommendations from liberal democrats who have gone up against him as a solid lawyer..."a conservative not an ideologue" I think was the quote.

Even if he is against Roe, which he probably is, though there is wiggle room in some of his public statements, by my count we still have a 5-4 edge on that question on the court.

Nobody Bush puts up is going to be better, and it looks like it could have been worse...I say the Dems rake him over the coals in committee...vote against him...but don't filibuster this one.

Get back to the real issue and that is the malfeasance going on with Rove et al over at the White House

[jedr]

4. ain't it the truth!

It was going to take a big bomb to cover up Rove-gate and they threw the big bomb.....what was up with the other two people they had out in the media earlier this afternoon???? was that just wild speculation or diversion???? * hasn't been able to do a damn thing since Terri Shiavo... let's keep on discrediting him on every issue, the truth seems to be winning.

[Ruffhowse]

6. I agree, best to pick our battles and stay focused on the key ones.

Dems can make their displeasure with Roberts positions well known during the confirmation hearings, and vote a solid "NO". That should cover us well for the '06 elections.

[goclark]

7. The problem with that is that our enemy does not pick battles

Our enemy fights every fight, they never apologize or quit fighting.

So, if we roll over for anything,we will have to roll over for everything.

I say, stay on course - there are enough of us to fight all the battles with them.

One strategy is to have our talking heads MENTION and TIE IN all the battles whenever the mike is anywhere within eye sight.

[livinginphotographs]

9. So what is your alternative?

Do you really think Bush will nominate Kucinich or something?

We knew he'd nominate a conservative - we know he'll get one appointed. I say we accept that fact, use this opportunity to go on record against them for 2006, and hope for one that will do the least damage.

[goclark]

10. My alternative is to clearly let the world know what this

new selection is going to do to our country.

Women need to hear it from now until 2006 that he is anti -abortion.
Can we stop his appointment -- NO.

Can we use it to our advantage - YES.

In other words,we need to call attention to the fact that this is the result of casting your vote for these clowns in 2004.

[livinginphotographs]

11. I agree.

The confirmation hearings are where we need to make our voice heard. The Dems to need to stand up and show that they oppose the guy.

I just don't want to see a fillibuster. That would be a disaster for the Democrats.

[ladjf]

8. I'm in you camp on this. If Roberts were to be stopped, Bush

would simply pick another Roberts. There are hundreds of them out there.