And we're still waiting.
John Roberts...who? I'm still not convinced. I agree with Ann Coulter in her special column today titled "Souter in Roberts Clothing" ( www.anncoulter.com/cgi-local/welcome.cgi ).
Here is someone who has a few cases under his belt. And not much else. I also agree with Ann that as we are being told to "trust Roberts" we were also told that we could trust Souter.
Ann goes on to say " If the Senate were in Democrat hands, Roberts would be perfect. But why on earth would Bush waste a nomination on a person who is a complete blank slate when we have a majority in the Senate!
We also have a majority in the House, state legislatures, state governorships, and have won five of the last seven presidential elections , seven of the last ten! We're the Harlem Globetrotters now - why do we have to play the Washington Generals every week? Conservatism is sweeping the nation, we have a fully functioning alternative media, we're ticked off and ready to avenge Robert Bork . . . and Bush nominates a Rorschach blot. ."
Even Fred Barnes, last night on Fox News Special Report, said that Roberts is NOT a Scalia or Thomas type justice (as Bush promised us during the election) but rather closer to Rehnquist.
Ann finishes her column with " The Democrats own polls showed voters are no longer fooled by claims that the Democrats are trying to block judges who would roll back civil rights. Borking is over. And Bush responds by nominating a candidate who will allow Democrats to avoid fighting on their weakest ground - substance. He has given us a Supreme Court nomination that will placate no liberals and should please no conservatives. Maybe Roberts will contravene the sordid history of stealth nominees and be the Scalia or Thomas Bush promised us when he was asking for our votes. Or maybe he won't. The Supreme Court shouldn't be a game of Russian roulette."
I'm going to find out what Robert Bork and Andrew Napolitano have to say on this one.
I trust them.