Here comes the kowtowing New York Times yesterday in its lead editorial entitled, “Too Much of a Mystery” (this after 22 hours and 510 questions’ worth of of hearings, dwarfing Ruth Bader Ginsburg or Stephen Breyer or just about anyone else, save Robert Bork and Clarence Thomas — is there a pattern here…?), they withhold their mighty endorsement of John Roberts for Chief Justice. “If the test were legal skill alone,” , they opine in a tortured piece, “Mr. Roberts would certainly pass.” But they go on to say that the real test is a whole lotta other stuff. They are concerned, for example, that he applied the letter of the law in such a way that upheld the arrest of a 12-year old girl in the Washington subway for eating a single french fry. So it’s not all about abortion and social issues for the Times, thank God (or other deity or non-deity of your choice.)
The Times concludes that Senators should vote against Judge Roberts “because he has not met the very heavy burden of proving that” he has the qualities to be an excellent Chief Justice. It’s fair to ask the Times, isn’t it, exactly who in history has endured the grilling that Judge Roberts has endured and who has passed the test of the Times.
Latest posts by NAM (see all)
- Manufacturers Win Several Website Design Awards - June 15, 2011
- China Makes Commitments on Trade, Intellectual Property - December 16, 2010
- ITC Details Widespread Theft of Intellectual Property in China - December 14, 2010