Good work, DNC Research Team...keep DIGGING!!! Thanks:)

OK, let's assume he forgot. Doesn't this forgetfulness indicate he is not the caliber jurist we want on the Supreme Court? Don't we want someone with a photographic memory? Aren't we looking for the most articulate and educated candidate in the country to take a seat on the highest court in the land?

He is not a winner.

One minute he's a Federalist/Corporate Shill the next fighting for equal rights? Then turns around and helps to steal an election.

This Nomination is taking allot of weird twists.

Political opportunist or Supreme Court calibre jurist? There have been other political appointments to the Court but never one who tried to cover his tracks with so many misleading statements and omissions. Why doesn't he just admit who he is?

The pro-bono work alone tells the story.

Republicans don't foreget. That's why we remember that Democrats said Iraq had WMD, was a threat to the U.S., and had ties to al Qaeda.

Why dont we just auction off the Supreme Court to Walmart? We can look forward to John Roberts striking down gay rights, rights for the poor, giving government powers that circumvent the constitution, and a conflict of interest putting his party's ideaological bull crap over his role as a justice. For Republicans its "judges should not be activists" at least when it comes to tolerance and other 'liberal' issues.

Roberts supported Bob Jones tax breaks

It's exceedingly unlikely that John G. Roberts has any skeletons in his closet. But the ghosts of Emmett Till and the Scottsboro Boys could soon come back to haunt him.

Although conservatives now have the upper-hand in his Supreme Court nomination battle, that could soon change amid disclosures--first reported by chimpstein.com website and then the New York Sun--that Roberts was an aide to Attorney General William French Smith when the Reagan Administration tried to restore tax-exempt status to racially discriminatory schools, including Bob Jones University, which at the time barred inter-racial dating.

It was Smith who convinced Reagan to reverse the policy, relying heavily on extensive legal analysis. All this militates in favor of the conclusion that Roberts played a central role here in the effort...
The rest of the story is here
http://www.chimpstein.com/2005/07-25-roberts.php

Hey DNC research, don't forget to check out his kids . . . you know, the four and five year old . . .oh wait, The New York Times is already doing that, never mind!

So Roberts did pro-bono work for gay rights, and we are attacking him over "forgetting" to mention the good work he did and for apparently doing the work just because he would do anything his law firm asked him to do? Are there any legitimate reasons why he should not be appointed? This is not a candidate for public office, so arguments like "he voted to stop the recount" and "he forgot to mention his pro-bono work for gay rights" don't really do much to hurt his credibility when it comes to the Congressional hearing. Unless something incredibly scandalous and damaging is uncovered about Roberts, and I don't mean about the adoption of his children, then the Democrats have no reason to stop him from being appointed. This is a crucial moment for us because if the Democrats continue to attack him without good cause, and if the Democrats continue to stoop to the level that the New York Times did when the reporters started to investigate his kids, then our party will be no better than the ring-winged extremists we fight so hard to oppose. This nomination was a smart move on Bush's part. He's baiting the Democrats. And if we take the bait, we deserve all of the consequences.

This is a non issue. We can bitch about it until the cows come home but Roberts is the next justice to sit on the court.

He may surprise us but I seriously doubt it. He will probably be the turning vote to overturn Roe v Wade. Then probably quite a few other advancements in civil rights declaring that the federal government does not have the right to keep a state from denying rights to minorities or that the feds cannot keep a state from having an official religion, or that a state can practice separate but equal schooling.

So time will tell, but we have no choice or hand in the matter. He will be confirmed almost immdeiately and I pray to God we are not the worse for it.

To Buzz: I have been doing some what the people at the Ann Coulter website call Weaseling Again just to find out what the other side thinks of Roberts and it isn't all that favorable either. Coulter seems to think that Roberts will turn "liberal" as she puts it so nicely. Liberal is a filthy word to her and she reminds everyone in her columns that the democratic party stands for "murder, sodomy and atheism."
Roberts will be the next sitting Supreme Court justice and let's just hope that we are all not forced to join a state sponsored religion and send our kids to religious schools to be brain washed into idiotic, irrational thinking. I'm not anti-religious but I do draw the line at state sponsored religion which IS unconstitutional. I draw the line at civil rights abuses as well. What the hell is this administration trying to do? Send us all back into the dark ages when it was okey dokey and peachy fine to lynch a man for the color of his skin? Women's rights as well will be gone not just the abortion issue but it will be illegal to obtain a prescription for birth control if Roe v Wade is over turned and the abortion issue given back to state juristiction. Labor unions as well will be deemed unconstituional. Workers will have no rights. By the way, I am a right to life democrat. That dosn't mean just the unborn but the poor and those less well off. One more thing on want to touch on is that in Bush's radio address today he stated that the economy is booming. He stated that x amount of jobs have been added and that it is better now than in the 80's, 90's an early part of this decade. I don't believe him. What kinds of jobs are these? Fast food or other service industry jobs that pay low wages? He also stated that his tax cuts are working to stimulate job growth and put revenue into the treasury? How can this be, other than those with the lousy jobs are paying those taxes to support our treasury department not the weathly. When one takes something out one has to put something back to replace it and guess who is paying those taxes? Not the wealthiest of the bunch. He said small buisness is booming but said nothing about tax breaks for those folks. Does Bush's logic make any sense to you? Not at all to me and he's a lousy mathmetician to boot!!

Buzz Has it right - John Roberts is a very good man. I have had the pleasure of his company and know him to be the quality person we need on the Supreme Court. The NYTs and any other witchhunt foolishness will only hurt our Party more than it can afford.

Buzz Has it right - John Roberts is a very good man. I have had the pleasure of his company and know him to be the quality person we need on the Supreme Court. The NYTs and any other witchhunt foolishness will only hurt our Party more than it can afford.

This shows how corrupt Georgie and the Repooplicans are. They will do ANYTHING to get what they want. Even it means unethical practices. How pathetic. Don't worry though. John Kerry WILL BE PRESIDENT on January 20, 2009. I assure you, when John Kerry becomes President, the Repukelicans BS games WILL STOP.

This is stupid. Why can't our party do something constructive instead of wasting time digging into minor statements trying to defimate someone who is going to sit on the Supreme Court.

Also, it isn't like he is going to vote to overturn Brown v. Board. Roe v Wade maybe. But stop going overboard with things he may overturn.

Also, why don't some of you people stop reading only the parts of the Constitution that you want to read. Read all of it. The government does have limited powers and expressed powers. All other stuff not forbidden to the states is reserved for the states. (I'm speaking of gay rights.)

Do we dare put a Conserative Catholic on the Bench in view of the fact several Conserative Catholic Bishops said,"They would refuse to serve John Kerry Communion because of his views on some of the Democratic Issues?" When those Conserative Catholic Bishops stated that didn't they seal the fact that Conserative Catholics cannot serve all the people? Bishops will even use EXCOMMUNICATE to bribe Judges to vote per the Catholic Church beliefs? Are you willing to support the State Church as Catholic?

STOP IT! YOU ARE KILLING THE PARTY!

This is the reason that people hate us. RIGHT HERE! THIS THREAD! We can talk all day long about how we represent the mainstream of America, which I think a majority of our issues do, and about how the Republicans don't care about people, which I believe, for the most part, they don't. However, we're using ad hominem attacks for the purpose of political gain, no other reason. We're making up little horror-fantasy worlds and saying that this one Justice will destroy everything we find sacred, we're attacking the fact that he WORKED IN SUPPORT OF GAY RIGHTS! We're using scare tactics - you know that thing that we always accuse the other side of doing - to knock them down, not to raise our own issues. This is ridiculous, and a little bit dispicable.

Look, agree with him or not, Mr. Roberts is qualified. He won't make labour unions unconstitutional. He MIGHT be the deciding vote striking down Roe v. Wade, but it's not going to be very long before another Court reaffirms it. He's not going to vote to have a State sponsored religion. And what's this ridiculous attack against conservative Catholics? WE'RE THE PARTY OF INCLUSION!

Sorry for calling out individuals here, but we're acting ridiculous and really conforming to the negative image that Conservative create for us. Keep your eye on the ball. Jeez - seems like you guys would fight if the President nominated a freaking liberal! Chill out. Keep your eye on the ball. Let's work on getting rid of this horrific flag-buring ammendment, and get the Kids First Act through Congress, and figure out how to straighten up in Iraq.

Sorry for the long post - I just get sick and tired of the political idiocy sometimes.

Here's some food for thought.

Both Georgie and John Kerry went to Yale. John Kerry graduated two years ahead of Georgie. The big difference, John Kerry DIDN'T have to cheat to get his degree. Then Georgie found out that the easiest way to get what he wants is to cheat. Georgie cheats at everything. He would probably cheat at a card game with his family.