SCOTUS: Bush Nomination 1: John C. Roberts
9:26 EST: Bush appoints John C. Roberts to the Supreme Court (Report from the WhiteHouse)
THE PRESIDENT: Good evening. One of the most consequential decisions a President makes is his appointment of a Justice to the Supreme Court. When a President chooses a Justice, he’s placing in human hands the authority and majesty of the law. The decisions of the Supreme Court affect the life of every American.
Now watch the power of the internet, at the time of this posting, the following has ALREADY happened:
- 103 Websites have posted on this subject as measured by The Truth Laid Bear.
- Judge-Roberts-dot-com has already been registered and promoted by Progress for America
- And the Blogstorms have not even gotten into full force. Get ready for a ride!
And people still believe that blogs are a non-factor in politics?
So do you want to know who he is? The Washington Post already looked into that.
(No Jeremy-Gilby-dot-com Analysis on the nomination yet… I’m going to do some research first.)
(As for the numeration of the Blog Title… I don’t believe that this will be the only SCOTUS Appointment for Bush [There might be 2 more seats to fill])
But I’m leaning that this is a good choice… Roberts sounds like a Constitutionalist, which I argued about in my Previous Post.
Other Coverage:
Mixed Reviews on both sides, so far:
- “He’s a strict constructionist, like Scalia and Thomas” (That from a former White House Councel)
“He’s a weaker conservative than Rehnquist.” (That from Talk Radio)
“He’s anti-choice!” (That from NARAL)
“He’s sees Roe as bad law.” (Everyone else)”
“Get your camera rolling, I have something to say” (Chuck Schumer)
“What do you mean you are ‘out of film’, I still have something to say!” (Yeah, him again)
Should be interesting to see if the Dem’s filibuster, considering Bush has already seated him on the Appeals court-as approved by this senate (with the exception of the few that lost the recent elections).
The cold war may be back on when the nuclear option hits the floor again.
Comment by Chan — July 19, 2005 @ 9:45:54 PM
Well, Chan, or should I call you The-Evil-Doctor-Merlin-Channing-Lowe-Jr.?
You should already like him, as he is also a Jr. Which fits in your devious manifesto to replace everyone with “Junior” copies of themselves.
Comment by Jeremy — July 19, 2005 @ 10:00:03 PM
I for one, now that Jeremy has so eloquently explained to me the importance of this choice, was actually looking forward to who President Bush would select. I am not going to base my opinion on what he ‘has’ done, but on what he ‘will’ do. Sure, Justice Roberts’ previous exploits are important, but I try not to pre-judge (no pun intended) people.
And yes, I was the mystery person from Jeremy’s Cubicle Jungle who asked “Why is the Supreme Court important to Me? Why should I care who is appointed to it?”.
Comment by Dave — July 20, 2005 @ 9:34:43 AM
[...] Regardless, most of the pundits are being very careful (just like they were with the intial Robert’s Nomination) [...]
Pingback by Jeremy-Gilby-dot-com » SCOTUS: Bush Nomination 2.0: Harriet Miers — August 6, 2010 @ 2:55:47 PM