August 31, 2005

Telephone call.

I am calling for a national coalition of law professors looking for signatures for a letter opposing the nomination of John Roberts...

That would not be me. I support him.

19 comments:

Jeff said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Brando said...

Good for you, Ann. Why don't you explain what the opposition is about, and why you oppose it, i.e. support Roberts.

Ann Althouse said...

Brando: I have tons of old posts on that subject. The point of this posts is to note the current effort at putting together a letter.

h said...

Shouldn't Law Professors who support him, such as you and Glenn Reynolds, get working on your own signature collection? Just Askin'.

alkali said...

It is unclear to me on the basis of your past posts whether you support Roberts, or don't oppose him (assuming you think, as I do, that there is a difference).

Brendan said...

Not one day of testimony, and he's already been tried and convicted.

Matt said...

I think there's definitely a distinction to be drawn between support and "do not oppose." Thus far, I do not oppose, but do not actively support the nomination, and based on how confirmation hearings have typically gone, were I a Senator, my vote would likely be "yea" on cloture (if it comes to that, which seems exceedingly unlikely) and "present/abstain" on "up or down."

Drethelin said...

Do these signature collection things ever actually have an effect? I've never seen them as more than a self-pleasing way of sharing your hatred of something with others.

Drethelin said...

Do these signature collection things ever actually have an effect? I've never seen them as more than a self-pleasing way of sharing your hatred of something with others.

Matt said...

I think the "lawprofs supporting McConnell" letter was a substantial factor in there not being a fillibuster on him, especially given that the letter was signed by lawprofs from across the ideological spectrum. These things are only effective if they're more than an echo chamber.

Charles said...

I agree with Brendan, he is tried in public court, damned with testimony not under oath (as if that made a difference) and threatened with being held to standards well beyond what got the present court on their seats. Just another congressional circus and pompous grandstanding. Ho hum. Wish they would spend my money wisely instead of listening to each other blowing hard.

Ruth Anne Adams said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Eddie said...

I am sure next week will begin the politics of personal destruction on John Roberts. Every word he has uttered will be nitpicked. However, it is the genius of President Bush in choosing him that I am most impressed by. Someone who is starkly conservative, yet was popular among Democrats is a great pick. There will be stones thrown. In the end vote, he will sail through.

Brando said...

I am sure next week will begin the politics of personal destruction on John Roberts.

What, is Karl Rove working for the Democrats now?

Yevgeny Vilensky said...

What, is Karl Rove working for the Democrats now?

Brando--

You're just bitter that his dirty-tricks actually work. Don't worry, the Democrats have their own slime-balls: my Senator Chuck Schumer, Ted Kennedy, Nan Aron, Ralph Neas, Erwin Chemerinsky, etc.

It's not like Karl Rove invented, you know, dirty politics! Ever heard of the JQAdams/Jackson or Tilden/Hayes elections?

Brando said...

You're just bitter that [Rove's] dirty-tricks actually work.

And you're proud? Proud of the swift-boating of John McCain during 2000? Proud of the viscious campaign to discredit Joe Wilson that--oops!--accidentally outed an undercover CIA agent? Proud that you can't get your candidates elected on their merits or honestly convince the public of you policy positions?

richard mcenroe said...

brando — Damn straight I'm proud of the Swift-boating of McCain. That man is a dangerous fraud and I look forward to repeat Swiftings for him every time he even looks cross-eyed at the Oval Office...

Bruce Hayden said...

I seriously doubt that a joint petition or whatever from a bunch of liberal law school profs is going to change anyone's mind in this issue - esp. as it is likely that they would submit a similar petition regardless of whomever President Bush nominated, as long as they were reasonably conservative.

Brando - you should know that on the right, Swift Boating has a very different connotation - that of a large grass roots organization pointing out inconsistencies in Mr. Kerry's exagerations and fabrications, notably his excellent adventure in Cambodia on Christmas in 1968. Ditto for the "outing" of Valerie Plame.

I point this out, not to get an OT discussion going on these subjects, but rather that slogans that work in one forum often don't work in another. Ann here seems to have a nice mix from both sides, reflecting what appears to be her moderation.

chip said...

Brando: I have tons of old posts on that subject. The point of this posts is to note the current effort at putting together a letter.online payday loansseo article writing