Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

FWIW: Newsmax thinks Roberts is a foe of Roe v. Wade

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
Skinner ADMIN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:39 AM
Original message
FWIW: Newsmax thinks Roberts is a foe of Roe v. Wade
Edited on Wed Jul-20-05 11:39 AM by Skinner
Some freep signed me up for the newsmax email. Anyway, they seem to think Roberts is a "rock solid conservative" and a "foe of Roe v. Wade."

I know some of you want to take a "wait and see" approach here. But as far as I'm concerned if Newsmax is convinced of this guy's right-wing cred, I think we should be very afraid.

Bush Picks Roberts, Foe of Roe v. Wade

Breaking from NewsMax.com

President Bush has chosen federal appeals court judge John G. Roberts Jr. as his first nominee for the Supreme Court, selecting a rock solid conservative whose nomination could trigger a tumultuous battle over the direction of the nation's highest court.

Read the full details, the latest commentary and Roberts' strong criticism of Roe v. Wade -- Go to NewsMax.com Now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:41 AM
Response to Original message
1. and Newsmax is known for its scrupulous honesty?
I think I will wait to see what the National Enquirer says, they only lie most of the time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nicholas D Wolfwood Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:41 AM
Response to Original message
2. I don't doubt that's a possibility.
Edited on Wed Jul-20-05 11:41 AM by Vash the Stampede
I'm still at a loss as to what action we can take to prevent him from being confirmed. Without a paper trail, it will be literally impossible to filibuster him. Short of discovering he ate a small child, I don't think we can do a damn thing but wait and see, and in the meantime, put the magnifying glass back on Rove.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeftNYC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:47 AM
Response to Reply #2
14. Today on Hannity and Colmes...
The left says Roberts ate a "small child". There is no proof except for the videotape we will show you. Also, RNC Chairman Ken Mehlman explains how this videotape vindicates and exonerates Roberts and how this is nothing more than a tempest in a teapot.

You love the "ate a small child" line. I agree that we dont know much yet and the Rove story should be our priority.. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Doctor. Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:53 AM
Response to Reply #14
20. ROTFL!
The only way to cast disfavor on anyone in this administration amongst the Bushbots would have to be far more heinous than eating live babies on national TV.

See here;
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeftNYC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:59 AM
Response to Reply #20
28. LOL! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ulysses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:41 AM
Response to Original message
3. in full agreement, Skinner.
We need to fight.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zomby Woof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 12:04 PM
Response to Reply #3
29. This even pulled me back in
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ulysses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 12:22 PM
Response to Reply #29
32. I saw that last night.
Would've replied, but didn't want it to seem like I was all up in your koolaid of late. :D

Good to have you back.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zomby Woof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 03:29 PM
Response to Reply #32
39. You LOVE the taste of ZombyKoolAid!
:D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shugah Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 12:30 PM
Response to Reply #29
33. nice to have you back in the fight
:hug:

this one has to be fought. there is always much at stake these days, but this time pretty much everything is at stake.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dogday Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:42 AM
Response to Original message
4. I have been saying that from the beginning
This guy is on the "far right side" of the law with many connections to Bush. Check out this link


http://courtinginfluence.net/nominee.php?nominee_id=55
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bloom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 12:47 PM
Response to Reply #4
37. Under "Former Energy Industry Lobbyists Among Nominees" "
"Another Bush judicial appointee with experience representing the mining industry is John G. Roberts, Jr., a former colleague of George Miller's at the Hogan & Hartson law and lobbying firm. Roberts was one of the co-authors of Millers amicus brief on behalf of the National Mining Associations challenge to the government ban on mountaintop removal. In 2003, Roberts was confirmed to the powerful D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, where earlier this year he ruled against environmentalists who were pushing for more restrictive government regulations of copper smelters--many of whom are members of the National Mining Association that Roberts once represented. As a lobbyist in the 1990s, Roberts worked on behalf of the peanut industry, pushing federal legislation that maintained government subsidies which the GAO estimated cost consumers $500 million a year. Agricultural and mining interests are often involved in regulatory cases that come before the DC Circuit Court where Roberts now sits."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Armstead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:42 AM
Response to Original message
5. The right wing loves him
His wife is a mucky muck in one of those "family values" organizations.

Unless they have an amazingly tolerant marriage, that in itself should be a red flag about what his real views are.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:42 AM
Response to Original message
6. This guy is young too
We have to fight this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dogday Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:46 AM
Response to Reply #6
12. Good Point To Bring Up
This guy could be making law for the next 30 years. Think about that..... That is a big consideration.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ElectroPrincess Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 12:18 PM
Response to Reply #6
31. No, this guy could change ... there are also true conservatives
that are equally appalled by the Neo-Con take over of our Executive Branch.

We will weather through this storm. No need to fight this guy unless he's actually committed a crime or is unqualified. He may change toward the left. Many have in the past. Wisdom does tend to make a person more charitable. Usually :-).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 12:33 PM
Response to Reply #31
34. I will be calling on my Senators to fight
his nomination.

Tired of rolling over and playing dead for these liars ElectroPrincess.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ElectroPrincess Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 12:40 PM
Response to Reply #34
36. I support you Jax ... hope it makes a difference with those who listen
Excuse me if I believe emailing Senators Allen and Warner (VA) is a waste of time, but it is. :-)

If there is a real issue ... reason for doubt, go for it and best wishes. :-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Doctor. Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:43 AM
Response to Original message
7. From what I gather...
The Supreme Court won't even hear (or at least isn't supposed to hear) a case that present no 'De Novo' evidence. If there's nothing new to bring the case to the court, they're not supposed to even hear it.

Somehow I doubt anyone could come up with enough for the court to hear a new case and overturn Roe v. Wade.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurgherHoldtheLies Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:43 AM
Response to Original message
8. I think it's a given....
His wife belongs to some group called 'Feminists for Life'...that, along with what little history has come to light on him, there is no way he has an open mind on choice.

I'm trying to grasp the 'wait and see' attitude right now as the Dem party line. While I understand the probable futility of a filibuster, I would hate to see ANY Democrat or ANY pro-choice Republican vote 'yes' on this guy (including Senator Specter).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kathy in Cambridge Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:44 AM
Response to Original message
9. I agree. We need the Dems to fight this one.
If anything, we need our representatives to show some cojones so that Bush will think twice about presenting a wingnut as a nominee.

It frightens me that so many Dems are willing to sell the rights of their mothers, sisters, wives and daughters up the river.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lars39 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:44 AM
Response to Original message
10. Baptist Press News is pushing him, too.
It's what I expected, but still very alarming.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Modem Butterfly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:45 AM
Response to Original message
11. Ann Coulter calls him a latter-day Souter
Edited on Wed Jul-20-05 11:46 AM by Modem Butterfly
http://www.anncoulter.com

It means nothing that Roberts wrote briefs arguing for the repeal of Roe v. Wade when he worked for Republican administrations. He was arguing on behalf of his client, the United States of America. Roberts has specifically disassociated himself from those cases, dropping a footnote to a 1994 law review article that said:

In the interest of full disclosure, the author would like to point out that as Deputy Solicitor General for a portion of the 1992-93 Term, he was involved in many of the cases discussed below. In the interest of even fuller disclosure, he would also like to point out that his views as a commentator on those cases do not necessarily reflect his views as an advocate for his former client, the United States.

This would have been the legal equivalent, after O.J.'s acquittal, of Johnnie Cochran saying, "hey, I never said the guy was innocent. I was just doing my job."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ibegurpard Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:51 AM
Response to Reply #11
16. An old trick
When you want something to make it through with little controversy you get your biggest nutcases to make a stink about it, thus making it appear that it is something EVERYONE is unhappy with and therefore a middle-ground solution.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Modem Butterfly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:53 AM
Response to Reply #16
19. I don't think so
Roberts wouldn't have undercut himself on this issue like that in the hopes that 11 years down the road he would be nominated to the Supreme Court for a second time and provide cover for the Neo-Con agenda.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ibegurpard Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:56 AM
Response to Reply #19
25. You underestimate these people
Many of them have been planning and orchestrating since the Nixon era.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Modem Butterfly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:58 AM
Response to Reply #25
27. There's no such thing as psychics
There may very well be an overarching plan, but I don't think this is part of it. If it were, * would likely have put up a serious Nazi to make Roberts look even better.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MidnightWind Donating Member (428 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:47 AM
Response to Original message
13. But it seems to me that the GOP is dying for us to oppose him--
they were quoting left and right last night opposition that Dems had made to former court nominees. They seem to be trying to provoke us to oppose this guy so the focus will get taken off of Rove. Just my take on it, fwiw.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Baconfoot Donating Member (653 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:56 AM
Response to Reply #13
24. The guy pointing a gun at your head is dying for you to hand over...
Edited on Wed Jul-20-05 11:57 AM by Baconfoot
the cash in the register.

But the analogy isn't perfect here because while the robber can choose not to shoot you, Bush has already nominated this guy.

That's what makes the Bush administration evil geniuses.

Superman MUST stop to push the boy out from under the bus even though it costs him precious time. ANd this "boy" is a lifetime appointment of a n anti civil-rights anti-choice 50 year old to the Supreme Court.

Bang Bang.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ibegurpard Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 12:39 PM
Response to Reply #13
35. They ARE dying for us to oppose him
And that is why the nuts (like Ann Coulter) are bashing him right now...they're expecting us to play our role and bash him from the left, thus making him appear "moderate."
Democrats are handling it properly at the moment...appearing to take a wait-and-see attitude that will give them more credibility come hearing time. Be sure you contact them and let them know your concerns.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ibegurpard Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:47 AM
Response to Original message
15. Absolutely
Ann Coulter, et al. are simply playing the "protest but not too loudly" game that makes it seem like he is a moderate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zomby Woof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:52 AM
Response to Original message
17. NPR is doing a major feature now
The woman representing the RW is spewing all the major talking points we should be expecting - "We want a judge who won't impose his views on the bench", "Roe v Wade was wrongly decided", and of course, she raised the spectre of "the gruesome" so-called 'partial-birth abortion'. Always love that "impose their views" bit, which is always okay when the views are anti-choice, naturally.

They seem a bit too excited about him. Caution is merited.

Also heard Senator Kennedy's statement, which was not exactly welcoming of the nominee, without being too much on the offensive. Perfect balance to set up a bigger fight when the hearings are ready.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ibegurpard Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:55 AM
Response to Reply #17
21. Agreed
And the Democrats are handling it well right now...keeping their views about it low-profile. Coming out of the starting gate opposed to it simply makes it look like they were set up to oppose any nominee Bush put forth. Keep talking about the Rove treason issue until the hearings.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Baconfoot Donating Member (653 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:52 AM
Response to Original message
18. I just now realized people seriously don't believe he'd overturn RvW
Well if you think his MANY arguments as an attorney against RvW friendly positions (the most important coming while he was in a POLITICAL position might I add) don't constitute evidence as to how he thinks about this issue, think again. And while you're thinking I'll be flying down or driving down or walking down to where ever I can do some good in fighting the LIFE-TIME appointment of this horrible YOUNG anti-civil rights stepford husband to the Supreme Court.

This is more important than midterm elections.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Goldmund Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:55 AM
Response to Original message
22. Yes, he seems pretty bad
Edited on Wed Jul-20-05 11:58 AM by Goldmund
However -- what are the chances that he could ultimately be stopped and somebody more moderate nominated instead?

Let's think about that question. I'm not saying I have the answer -- but I am saying that if we conclude that he will be confirmed in the end anyway, then there is no sense in fighting it.

We have the GOP in the corner on a whole bunch of issues; this one has the potential of being beneficial to them. If fighting this has almost no chance of success, then we should turn to issues where we have them cornered.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:56 AM
Response to Original message
23. The climate we live in now is not the usual Dem. verses Rep. politicking
where politicians trade barbs, people disagree, and the democratic process keeps on churning...

Selection 2000 should have dispelled the notion of a healthy and viable democratic process. Selection 2000 was no mere symptom - it was the diagnosis of the disease.


Right wingers are bolder and more dangerous now than they have ever been. They have stolen the reigns of power and have run with them. They don't intend on letting go.

Words of compromise from a republican mouth mean nothing. They are playing for keeps and far too many fail to recognize this to the detriment of everyone.

I agree...be afraid.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cessna Invesco Palin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:57 AM
Response to Original message
26. John Roberts...
The new super happy fun face of right-wing bigotry!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ElectroPrincess Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 12:13 PM
Response to Reply #26
30. Down the road he may prove O.K. ...
Remember the Right Wing is not happy with either O'Connor - they consider her a liberal. And what about Souter? Don't get the Republicans talking about that mistake. :-)

He doesn't have any major skeletons in his closet so I'm not going to get worked up in a lather over this.

What does crack me up in a funny way is how Rehnquist put the Right Wingers in their place by flatly stating he is NOT YET ready to retire.

The right wing was foaming at the mouth for TWO nominations before October. That was a very very nice announcement by a Justice I do not agree with politically.

You have to realize that if Rehnquist has RESERVATIONS about retiring now, things are BAD, real BAD for genuine conservatives.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
me b zola Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 12:48 PM
Response to Original message
38. Roberts is a political activist who will legislate from the bench!
Roberts was heavily involved in the 2000 recount in Florida.

He was rewarded for his work by being confirmed to the Court of Appeals.

Now he is being further rewarded.

I will be writing to the Senate today to inform/remind them of this and to let them know that this is unacceptable.


Skinner, could we make this a project for the DU Activist Corp?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maddy McCall Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 05:55 PM
Response to Original message
40. ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Jul 30th 2014, 04:52 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC