A Vote for Roberts
It comes from center/left columnist David Broder, who swoons: "[Roberts] is so obviously -- ridiculously -- well-equipped to lead government's third branch that it is hard to imagine how any Democrats can justify a vote against his confirmation."
Well, it's hard to know whether this should make conservatives nervous or not.
But Broder's reasons seem excellent to me -- Roberts' intellect, temperament, the "depth of his appreciation of what it means to be a judge." The only thing Broder "forgets" to do is commend President Bush for such an excellent choice.
He ends his piece, in essence, hoping that the President sends up another nominee of John Roberts' caliber. Luttig, McConnell, Jones . . . any of them would do the trick.
Well, it's hard to know whether this should make conservatives nervous or not.
But Broder's reasons seem excellent to me -- Roberts' intellect, temperament, the "depth of his appreciation of what it means to be a judge." The only thing Broder "forgets" to do is commend President Bush for such an excellent choice.
He ends his piece, in essence, hoping that the President sends up another nominee of John Roberts' caliber. Luttig, McConnell, Jones . . . any of them would do the trick.
posted by LadybugUSA at 10:51 PM
1 Comments:
Some years back, "Driving Miss Daisy" got best picture and best screenplay awards. Yet the director, Bruce Beresford, wasn't even nominated for best director. This compelled Oscar host Billy Crystal to declare that "the movie directed itself."
Broder's forgetfulness on Bush is reminiscent of this. Broder evidently takes Roberts as a judge who nominated himself.
Can anyone doubt that the blame for any black mark on this judge would be put straight on Bush? So Dave, where's the credit?
Or did Roberts just nominate himself? Perhaps David Broder should be part of the Film Academy.
Post a Comment
<< Home