Please protest Robert's nomination to SCOTUS (& Chief Justice)

Log in

01:12 pm September 14th, 2005

No account? Create an account

Remember me




			Please protest Robert's nomination to SCOTUS (& Chief Justice) - One person's lack of compassion does not equal another's comfort. One person's lack of comprehension does not equal another's consent.

fixx


	Please protest Robert's nomination to SCOTUS (& Chief Justice)
	You can use this link to easily alert your senator of your objection. http://mailcenter2.comcast.net/wmc/v/wm/43285917000CD063000037E32205886360040A9B020E030B?cmd=Show&no=1239&uid=58797&sid=c0 excerpt: If Roberts, who is only 50 years old, is confirmed as Chief Justice, he could lead the Court for the next 30 years or more and have a profound impact on the lives of ordinary Americans. Roberts is nominated to become the most powerful judge in the country, but President Bush still refuses to release documents from Roberts' time as a top political appointee in the first Bush administration.

3 Rubber Duckies or Leave a Rubber Ducky


	Comments

	From: nosebeepbear	Date: September 15th, 2005 03:12 pm (UTC)		(Link)

Do you really think we're going to do better? Not that I'm particularly happy with Roberts, but seriously, who do you think is going to get in instead? We could certainly do worse.

(Reply) (Thread)

	From: fixx	Date: September 15th, 2005 05:55 pm (UTC)		(Link)

I was speaking recently (in person) to a transexual who claim she knows him personally, something about she is either his next door neighbor or that she has friends who are. She spoke of the way he thinks, acts etc. She was more interested in educating him that necessarily keeping him out of SCOTUS.

Maybe you can't teach and old dog new tricks... Maybe he's not so old you cant teach him to respect others, but if you can't his age would seem to be a factor in how long he could be a thorn in our sides. I say that if you are going to put someone that young onto the Supreme Court you'd better know them pretty well.

Also I personally object to his unwillingness to answer most of the questions on the basis that he may need to rule on the issues they pertain to later. I say "Well DUH!?? That's why we are asking you dumbass!" Seriously, *if* he claims he is going to rule based only on existing law, and he does, then he ought not mind speaking his personal opinions, now should he, unless that is he has something to hide, and that's how it appears to me.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

	From: fixx	Date: September 16th, 2005 08:41 am (UTC)		(Link)
	Correction

after reading (most of) this article, http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050916/ap_on_go_su_co/roberts, I'm now somewhat more optimistic about what sort of job Roberts would actually do on the supreme court.

Even with this new optimism, my three reservations remain:

1) He was nominated by Bush, which alone is enough to make me afraid of him.

2) What little legal history that is known of him shows him to both racist and sexist, clearly lacking any real sort of compassion for others.

3) I personally feel that he comes across as sheltered, straight laced, and intelligent.

This causes me to feel that he's naive enough to believe that his conservative ideals are right for everyone and savvy enough to play his cards a certain way to get himself seated on the Supreme court regardless of the ethics of being so evasive in the effort to get himself into that position.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)


	3 Rubber Duckies or Leave a Rubber Ducky