Why I'm Not Too Concerned

Seems like tons of folks are still up in arms about the whole John Roberts thing. It's becoming almost unhealthy how the scorn-filled posts are just about everywhere these days...

Oh wait. There aren't all that many of them, are there. In fact, running back for an entire week for the left-leaning ones on my blogroll, I can't find any. Zero, zip, nada, nothing, zilch, bugger-all. And this from everyone that's been screaming head-over-heels obsessed with him and praying for someone to find a bunch of old Polaroids with the nominee having wild crazy monkey sex with a toy poodle and his neighbor's twin daughters.

Okay, maybe not the poodle part.

So here's my views on the subject:

(Of course they are my views on the subject! Sheeesh, OC, get a grip on yourself, will ya! Who else would be writing on this blog? Nobody. Not even a hacker would take over this piece of garbage... They'd want their deed to have an actual audience. Well, enough with the parenthetical comments.)

Will Judge Roberts make decisions I disagree with? Definately. But that's no big suprise. Anyone other than myself will, at some point in time, do something that I will, either figuratively or literally, claw their eyes out for. Hell, look at the Kelo decision! And that piece of judicial dung was written up by the (supposedly) pro-individual side of the Court.

Will Judge Roberts make decisions I agree with? Definately. And not simply in the manner of "a stopped clock is always right twice a day" way, either. Take Rhenquist, for example. The Chief wrote the decisions for a good number of the decisions out there, and I found that I liked the result of his decision at least 40% of the time. Now, that could just be because I'm a moderate Democrat rather than the screaming liberal of a Kos or Atrios. But I doubt it.

Will Judge Roberts make his decisions honestly and from his own convictions? Yes to both. Regardless of his political viewpoint, I can see just from his extended interview with the Judiciary Committee that he honestly believes what he is saying. (Unlike, for example, Clarence Thomas and David Souter, who I believe both said what needed to be said in order to get seated on the Bench rather than their honest viewpoints.)

And with these questions all being answered yes, then I have little to no problem with Roberts getting confirmed. He's about the same as Rhenquist was, in a political sense. Now, whether he'll be as effective as Chief Justice, particularly having to deal with a bunch of primadonnas on the Bench, is something that only the future will be able to tell us.