JOHN ROBERTS IN THE HOUSE OF WAX

THERE ARE STILL A  FEW HOT DAYS LEFT TO SUMMER where Democrats Might Like to Take Advantage of the Heat to See if the cool, calm collected John Roberts has a pulse or anything that might keep them from voting for him.  Like what he actually thinks after his two years on the Federal bench.  The White House continues to congratulate itself for its genius, working off the foregone conclusion that Roberts can’t be opposed because he is less of a loud nut job than anybody else they could have proposed. Beware the quiet, really, really good guy.  Isn’t that always the guy who goes weird in the end of scary movies?  This movie has a chance to run for thirty years. Maybe the Democrats should act like that’s something other than a foregone conclusion.

THE NUGGET: WHAT THIS IS REALLY ABOUT AND THE SHOCK THAT SOMEBODY ACTUALLY SAYS IT. Of course it is more than just Roe v Wade, but the dance that takes place around what judges actually think and how they might do their jobs has a certain absurdity.  Senators voting on judges are like voters being told to vote for the best person, but without knowing what that person thinks right now.

[ARLEN SPECTER/NYTIMES]In this battle, the central issue remains Roe v. Wade, which established a woman's right to choose. Both sides are looking for assurances that Judge Roberts will side with them. Some senators have stated their intention to directly ask the nominee if he would overrule Roe v. Wade. While senators may ask any question they choose, the nominee may answer or not as he sees fit.


OF COURSE IT MIGHT BE HELPFUL TO KNOW WHAT ROBERTS ACTUALLY THINKS BUT, WHITE HOUSE WON’T TURN OVER ROBERTS’ PAPERS Because Um They Might Tell Something about What He Actually Thinks. Because of a “right to privacy?!” [AP]

HERE’S A GOOD QUESTION [SPIN DENTIST/ALL SPIN ZONE] Gee, the Justice Department is seeking access to the medical records of women seeking abortions, and that's likely to come up before the Supremes, isn't it?  Judge Roberts, why is your privacy more important than that of an average woman seeking an abortion in Michigan?

TOTALLY SPUN AND EATING WHITE HOUSE COTTON CANDY Peter Baker is not a crackerjack reporter. Hush, quiet now.  The reporter is repeating the PR guys pronouncements. . . .
[PETER BAKER/WAPO] The selection presented Bush with a test: He could choose boldness or safety. He flirted with nominating the first Hispanic justice at the risk of alienating his base. He considered naming a woman to replace the court's first female justice. He evaluated several passionate conservatives in the mold of Justice Antonin Scalia. Yet in the end, he circled back to long-standing convention, picking a white male with an impeccable résumé, presumably conservative but not so outspoken as to provoke an all-out fight. Rather than dismiss Senate Democrats, Bush called their bluff and consulted with dozens of them.

"We came to the conclusion that we could bombard them with volume," said a senior administration official who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the process was kept confidential. "It worked better than we thought."

THE HERETIK CONCLUDES Regular Programming with the hope that in the future reporters will work better than we thought.  Tune later this week for another episode of John Roberts in The House of Wax

RECOMMENDED READING
[CORRENTE] Remember the QUESTION we asked: Is Roberts, or has Roberts ever been, a member of the Federalist Society?
And remember John Roberts's eminently parseable denial that he had "no recollection" of belonging to The Federalist Society . . . .

MORE TO FOLLOW

 

Comments

[Aaron]

You're right he just might whip out a gun and slaughter the other justices in the name of Jesus and then rule that George be declared Emperor in perpetuity, all hail George Augustus Caesar and the new American Empire.

Bow down and worship at the feet of Dubya or be crucified as a HERETIC.

[The Heretik]

We heretiks are very sensitive to whom the word applies, Aaron. Looking at Roberts after I finished that graphic, it occured to me he looks a bit like a slightly skewed twin of Bill Murray.

[Aaron]

I think that should be a very skewed twin of Bill Murray, lest your characterization and caricature one day be construed as an insult to Bill. But it sounds like a good idea for a future picture.

Actually I think I'd prefer Bill Murray on the Supreme Court, we could use the comic relief. He could revise his Carl character from Caddie Shack and stuff some C4 down Antonin Scalia's gopher hole.