Democrats Struggle to Rein In Constituent Advocacy Group

[Don Corleone]

Well, a couple of observations...

First, I hate to do this to you, but in all fairness, I really have to question the source. The Online Journal and Progressive Press seems pretty dedicated to an anti-Bush agenda. Were what they printing so 'rock the boat' controversial as the author would have you believe, wouldn't MSNBC, CNN and some of the other more mainstream Democratic media outlets be running it? I mean, if you guys won't accept NationalReview, which to my knowledge has never had to publish a retraction, I sure can't accept that.

Second, even if it's true, the briefs Roberts filed while working as an attorney for a client give you little, if any insight into their jurisprudence. They are legally and ethically bound to represent the client to the best of their ability, regardless of their personal views. Do you really think female defense attorneys believe 'women deserve to get raped due to their promiscuity'?

Finally, there's nothing in the article that suggests Robert argued against the Voting Rights Act of 1965 we all know and love. He argued against strengthening it to the point where a proven unintentional denial of franchise would be considered a criminal act. In other words, if enough ballots weren't at a polling station, though an honest mistake, the local elections board could be headed off to jail. Hardly seems fair.

You know, two observations on Roberts. 1) I'm surprised Democrats are fighting against him. Most of his pro bono work has been on causes they pay lip service to, if not openly endorse & support 2) If anybody should be feeling queasy about his jurisprudence, it should be conservatives. Scalia/Thomas he ain't.

If you guys think the Backroom can handle it, I'll post a link to a hysterical fake blog that parodies the anti-Roberts efforts. I find it quite entertaining, but it might hit a little too close to home for some folks, so I'll hold off posting it for now.