Roberts has all the right enemies

When I went to bed last night here in Stuttgart, Germany, the press had appointed a woman named Clement to the Supreme Court. A fine moderate choice who has supported Roe and is a woman who would fill the seat of the retiring Sandra O’Connor, the first woman ever to take a seat on the court. The nomination should sail through. The press opined.

I get up this morning to find out the president had rejected the press’s nomination and nominated his own guy, John Roberts who is…GASP…“staunch conservative” instead. I’ve noted before that it takes about ten years to figure out what the real deal is with a Supreme Court judge. So, I’m not going to get all giddy with the idea that the president has chosen a “staunch conservative”. We’ll see.

I’m delighted at the reaction Democrats and their moonbat fringe that now comprises the biggest part of their base. The president’s choice prompted immediate attacks on Roberts from the usual suspects such as People for the American Way and NARAL Pro-Choice America. "We are extremely disappointed that President Bush has chosen such a divisive nominee for the highest court in the nation, rather than a consensus nominee who would protect individual liberty and uphold Roe v. Wade," NARAL Pro-Choice America said. These groups think that America survives as a nation only because it allows abortion on demand. They attacked Roberts for a 1990 legal briefing he wrote while serving in the first President Bush's administration that called for the Supreme Court's 1973 ruling legalizing abortion to be "overruled."

It should be overruled. Former ambulance chasers have no business making law. That is the job of the elected representatives of the legislative branch. The dirty little secret that NARAL et al don’t ever mention is that little would change were Roe to be overturned. The issue would simply return to the states. State legislators would have to wrestle with the issue and would be held accountable by voters for their decisions. This is as it should be.

Then there is this from Shrillary, "I look forward to the committee's findings so that I can make an informed decision about whether Judge Roberts is truly a guardian of the rule of law who puts fairness and justice before ideology." Yea right. I’m sure. And “fairness”? Since when did that enter into legal thinking? As anyone who has ever been caught up in a legal battle can attest, fairness has nothing to do with the law.

Prediction: Democrats and their moonbat friends will not be able to stop themselves. Before the week is out Roberts will be portrayed as some right wing nut too far out there for confirmation to the Supreme Court. The attacks will stem from a single issue – abortion.