When Eisenhower was asked if he made any mistakes as president, he would answer yes - two of them. They were his two appointees to the supreme court. The point is that no one knows what kind of justice John Roberts will be - not even President Bush.
And everyone has one or two or twenty litmus tests that they use to weigh any justice. These are different for each person. And add to that that each person is then left looking at John Robert's record and trying to guess how he will rule on those litmus items.
But here's the bottom line. Bush is president, not Kerry, not Hillary, not anyone else. And so the nominees are going to be conservative. If you want a liberal nominee the first step is to elect a Democratic president (please, please, please).
And John Roberts appears to be a thoughtful restrained judge. He also appears to be a consensus builder and that is critical for the chief justice since they are trying to manage eight totally independent individuals.
For those who are bothered by the idea of Roberts as chief justice, just think for a moment about Scalia or Thomas - either of whom Bush could have nominated. Now there's a nightmare. Not just for their extreme views, but in Scalia's case the court would have divided into waring camps while under Thomas there would have been no real leadership.
So those Senators who are strongly opposed, state your reasons and vote against. But lets not turn this in to a giant fight. And lets not have slime-ball ads. And lets not have attempts to find irrelevant reasons to oppose him.
Let's keep it on target and professional. Fighting a war over his nomination does no one any good and debases all involved.
