even if the chimp manages to alienate some fellow criminals with his next nomination, you still have bed wetters like leahy or biden who will vote with him...
Posted by at September 22, 2005 08:44 AMFor what it's worth Feinstein just announced she's voting no on Roberts.
Posted by snark at September 22, 2005 08:45 AMWhat happened to Spector requesting O'Connor to stay on until after Jan. 06? It's better than most other options. Also, it will allow us to determine a little of how Roberts will conduct himself!
Posted by bbtb at September 22, 2005 08:49 AMHow sure are you that Reid is a champ? Since Roberts apparently is a sure thing, opposing him isn't strong evidence. If he was waging an all out fight for a filibuster, it would be more convincing. Do you know anything about a magazine article reporting he agreed to give Bush's judicial nominees a pass if Bush would appoint a friendly face to the Atomic Energy Commission that controls the placement of a nuclear waste dump in Nevada? My wife saw the article in a doctor's waiting room magazine back when the "nuclear option" on filibusters was an issue, but doesn't remember which magazine.
I suppose Reid might reasonably value blocking the nuclear dump as more important than lower court judges, but might not feel the same about a Supreme Court appointee.
Posted by Jerry at September 22, 2005 09:24 AMBush is going to nominate a black or hispanic.
Leahy etal. are going to be in the position of having voted for the white guy but against the black guy.
That's really going to be great.
Posted by Mister Go at September 22, 2005 10:47 AMFive Dems voted against Roberts on the Judiciary Committee;
Dianne Feinstein of California
Joseph Biden of Delaware
Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts
Charles Schumer of New York
Dick Durbin of Illinois
Voting for Roberts;
Herb Kohl, Wisconsin
Russ Feingold, Wisconsin
Patrick Leahy, Vermont
pffft!
Posted by snark at September 22, 2005 11:12 AMExcellent point, Mister Go.
Posted by Steve Soto at September 22, 2005 11:13 AMSorry.
I missed the update at the bottom of the post.
Posted by snark at September 22, 2005 11:26 AMI'm surprised DiFi voted No. She's done a decent job representing the moderates in CA.
Posted by muckdog at September 22, 2005 11:47 AMmuck,
Drop her a line and ask wifi?
Posted by snark at September 22, 2005 11:50 AMShe's done a decent job representing the moderates in CA.
Perhaps she realizes that Roberts is no moderate.
Posted by ann at September 22, 2005 12:58 PMAnyone with a brain and Google knows that Roberts is no moderate!
Posted by pessimist at September 22, 2005 01:20 PM