The Cellar - John Roberts, Jr to become a Supreme

The Cellar (http://cellar.org/index.php)

- Politics (http://cellar.org/forumdisplay.php?f=5)

- - John Roberts, Jr to become a Supreme (http://cellar.org/showthread.php?t=8757)

A truly anti-abortion judge whose goal is to overturn Roe quickly is Karl Rove's worst fear. It quiets their own political power and enrages the other side.

i agree UT. i feel the same about both parties. they don't really want to solve any of their "problems" because then they wouldn't have any rallying cry for their faithful masses.

Quote:

Originally Posted by lookout123

Dammit Elspode, i'm really sorry someone ------ you over like that. that really really really sucks. :rar: don't shoot them though, we would miss your posts while you were in the pokey.

Yeah...something's wrong with a world where you can only use enough force to stop someone from doing whatever it is that is wrong at that moment. You should be able to use enough force to convince them to change careers...

Quote:

Originally Posted by lookout123

and i do understand your concern about Roberts abortion position or nonposition. i would assume he is antiabortion. but that is only to be suspected - just as during Clinton's years no one would expect that one of his nominations be antiabortion. we shouldn't really expect an anti abortion president to nominate a prochoice advocate.

Of course. I'm not a pollyanna, but when RvW is overturned, it is just going to be one more step back to the 1950's, when abortions, homosexuality, incest and other juicy societal circumstances existed, but we just didn't talk about them. I don't think that will be much of an improvement.

Quote:

Originally Posted by lookout123

in the end though, if this guy holds issues up against the framework of the constitution and says Yea or Nay regardless of his personal preference then we are ok.

Well, therein lies the rub, for sure.

CNN i haven't had time to really absorb it all, but i thought i would link it for your consumption. CNN has apparently gone back and reviewed a lot of Roberts' work from 1981-1982 and shockingly they have discovered he was a conservative :eek:

I'm guessing they still haven't found the affair with the illegal alien tranvestite maid who was a double agent for the Mossad and the KGB yet, have they?

He's making this process so difficult by insisting on being a conscientious jurist and an overall respectable guy.

Brilliant choice, not a point man, just a safe choice not to derail the agenda yet slide through congress. I'm sure W feels he'll have some more picks so stacking the court with safe choices is a logical tactic.

I've a feeling the french fry case caused a lot of parents to talk to their kids about eating on the subway. Maybe I'm too optimistic. :cool:

It's not exactly earth shattering news, but there isn't much meaningful coming out about Roberts, so here is CNN's newest peace. they think he tends to favor states' rights. or dislike toads. on or the other.

CNN

Quote:

Originally Posted by marichiko

Judge Roberts concluded that the D.C. law was constitutional because, although perhaps unwise, it was “rationally related to the legitimate goal of promoting parental awareness and involvement with children who commit delinquent acts.”

My problem is:

1) Where in the constitution does it state that the government should promote "parental awareness"?

2) How can a law be "perhaps unwise" while at the same time being rational?

3) Eating a french fry on the metro is hardly an example of hard core juvenile delinquency that must be brought under control.

Roberts was merely affirming the right of the government to use gestapo tactics against a 12 year old little girl. I have a MAJOR problem with this.

Well, going back to the French (freedom ;) ) fry thing. I still have the above concerns about the man which no one has addressed.

Because unwise and crazy aren't always the same thing. Irrational is having your 3.1415926535897.... and expecting to eat a piece of it à la mode w/tuna fish-pistachio chip.