Making Liberals Mad (Wait, they already are)

AP: Roberts Heads Toward Likely Confirmation---

WASHINGTON - Supreme Court nominee John Roberts carefully picked his way through a second day of questions from the Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday as Republicans challenged Democrats to support his all-but-certain confirmation as the nation's 17th chief justice.

"If people can't vote for you, then I doubt that they can vote for any Republican nominee," said Sen. Orrin Hatch (news, bio, voting record), R-Utah.

Minority Democrats sounded unswayed.

Sen. Charles Schumer told Roberts he was "cutting back a little on what you said yesterday," referring to an earlier statement that the Constitution provides a right to privacy.

The New York Democrat made his charge after Roberts declined to cite any examples of disagreement with the opinions of Justice Clarence Thomas on the subject. Thomas has written there is no general right to privacy, a right often viewed as the underpinning of a right to abortion.

"We are rolling the dice with you," Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del., told the 50-year-old appeals court judge, who turned aside questions about abortion, the right to die, the permissibility of torture and other issues he said may come before the court.

Too bad, Joe! The last thing this country needs is another activist judge like the kind you would prefer.

GOP officials say they are confident of the support of all 10 Republican members of the panel when the committee roll is called on Thursday next week, although it is possible all eight Democrats will oppose him. The full Senate may vote the following week, in time for Roberts to take his seat before the high court opens a new term on Oct. 3.

Officials in both parties say Roberts is likely to receive votes from several Democrats when his nomination reaches the full Senate. Among them are senators who represent Republican-leaning states or those who joined in a bipartisan compromise earlier this year to defuse a threatened showdown over the administration's conservative appeals court judges.

Good to hear. This vote should have been done and over with long ago.

Later, Specter told reporters Roberts had "answered more questions than most."

"Nominees answer about as many questions as they think they have to to be confirmed," added the Pennsylvania Republican. "I think it may well be, and it's too soon to say with certainty, that Judge Roberts has gone beyond."

Schumer disagreed. He told Roberts he had turned the hearing room into a "cone of silence."

Feinstein voiced a different concern.

"I guess what has begun to concern me a little bit is Judge Roberts, the legal automaton, as opposed to Judge Roberts, the man," she said as she tried without success to elicit his views on end-of-life issues.

Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., said Roberts, a steel executive's son who attended a private boarding school in Indiana and later graduated from Harvard, lived a comfortable life, and he questioned whether he could deal with cases involving society's less fortunate.

"I had a middle-class upbringing in Indiana," Roberts said. "I worked in the steel mills outside of Gary" during the summers. "Comfortable, yes, but isolated in no sense."

So, Schumer, are you saying no one outside the room could hear what Judge Roberts was saying? I've seen Get Smart too. Are you sure you applied the term properly?

And as for Feinstein, what has begun to concern me is how easily Liberals throw out tradition. It is very hard to get Liberals to have any completely solid beliefs. They change with the way the wind blows.

As for Durbin, does it ultimately matter how Judge Roberts grew up? Should we question how Dick Durbin grew up? According to his website's biography, he attended Assumption High School, which I assume to be a Catholic high school, which means his parents probably paid tuition, and received two degrees from the expensive Georgetown University. Not a bad upbring, huh, Durbin?