Thursday, July 21, 2005
John Roberts Mainstream
USNews.com: The National Interest: Roberts will redefine 'mainstream' (7/20/05): "at least some Democrats will use the material compiled long since by the left-wing groups to support the case that Roberts is 'out of the mainstream.' But when you read that material on the Web, you find it is pretty thin gruel. "
Barone lists several tactics that the Dems may employ against the nominee.
I also caught Chuck-a-luck Schumer on PBS last night indicating that he had voted against Roberts appointment to the bench because he felt Roberts had not been forthcoming in his responses to the Senate Committee. Chuck-a-luck promised to provide his questions to Roberts in advance and he restated his commitment to have his questions answered. Schumer, the special interest collection boy of the Dems, still believes that the nominee must prove himself. This was certainly not the intention of the founders. Jay T. Jorgensen, in his article for the Federalist Society, "Precedent From The Confirmation Hearings of Ruth Bader Ginsberg For the Conduct of Judicial Nominees," reports that nominees appearance before the Senate Committee only became a regular part of the process in 1955. (Jorgensen is actually quoting Joe Biden--and gives proper credit, something Biden seems to have had trouble with himself). Nominees have refused to appear before the committee and were nevertheless confirmed. Historical evidence is contrary to Schumer's position that the burden of proof is on the nominee. The nominee has nothing to prove. -- See next post above for Federalist 76 on this issue.
Barone lists several tactics that the Dems may employ against the nominee.
I also caught Chuck-a-luck Schumer on PBS last night indicating that he had voted against Roberts appointment to the bench because he felt Roberts had not been forthcoming in his responses to the Senate Committee. Chuck-a-luck promised to provide his questions to Roberts in advance and he restated his commitment to have his questions answered. Schumer, the special interest collection boy of the Dems, still believes that the nominee must prove himself. This was certainly not the intention of the founders. Jay T. Jorgensen, in his article for the Federalist Society, "Precedent From The Confirmation Hearings of Ruth Bader Ginsberg For the Conduct of Judicial Nominees," reports that nominees appearance before the Senate Committee only became a regular part of the process in 1955. (Jorgensen is actually quoting Joe Biden--and gives proper credit, something Biden seems to have had trouble with himself). Nominees have refused to appear before the committee and were nevertheless confirmed. Historical evidence is contrary to Schumer's position that the burden of proof is on the nominee. The nominee has nothing to prove. -- See next post above for Federalist 76 on this issue.
// posted by Zerin Hood @ 9:48 AM 
