...That's an awful lot of name-calling for one post.
And frankly, I didn't see the same "sneering" you did in his memos. Care for individual citations?
The one I see trotted out most often, the "women lawyers" line, was clearly a joke. And, as someone who's known a few women lawyers, actually rather funny. (Given the multitude of jokes women tell about men in the public life, and the fact that men and women joke about one another rather freely in private, I wouldn't say it's out of place in a memo.)
I'm sure there's some stuff in there that's objectionable, but you react with such vitriol that I'd like to know what, exactly, has your dander up.
As far as "Elitist"?
Is that really such a bad thing? I mean, personally, I'd want one of the 'elite' to be named to the Supreme Court, of all places.
Most of what we know about what John Roberts has ever really thought is contained in memos he wrote when he served as a young lawyer in the Reagan Justice Department and White House. In these documents, a real personality shines through -- a smart-ass smarty-pants who mocked or disdained nearly anything related to civil rights, women's rights, liberals, etc. We've all seen this type -- in college conservative clubs, on right-wing talk radio, at Federalist Society events: the know-it-all who sneers and snorts.
On Tuesday, Roberts tried to distance himself a bit from the snotty young elitist punk of those 80's memos, sometimes saying he was just reciting administration policy (though the record shows he was sometimes to the right of more senior Reaganauts like Brad Reynolds and Ken Starr), and also referring to the period as a time "when we were 25 and had all the answers." Roberts was cool and rational most of the time, the very face of the Washington legal establishment, and sometimes strong and assertive in the face of thundering, sputtering liberal lions who tried to take him on.
But we still don't know who he his -- and how much of that disdainful, elitist young right-winger still lurks inside. I don't think anyone, let alone this group of Senators, is going to get Roberts to explode and admit that that he ordered the Code Red.
Though it's important for those who believe in fair justice and our constitutional rights to keep pressing Roberts, I think now that Roberts is the replacement for the right-wing Rehnquist, and not for O'Connor, many people are just getting through this and looking ahead to the next battle -- one that counts more. Will another Scalia/Thomas or another Roberts replace the more confusing but occasionally correct-voting and justice-seeking O'Connor? R. Novak reported this week that Bush met at the White House with one of his most extreme nominees, Judge Priscilla Owen. Given that, and Bush's past record of loading up extremists no matter what, we probably will have a battle on our hands. Outrageous detention policies, and solidification of conservative-Latino ties aside, I guess we have to hope for Al Gonzales.
Please remember that Campus Progress' terms of use do not allow promoting or endorsing any particular political party or candidate for office. Posts or comments that do this will be deleted.
And frankly, I didn't see the same "sneering" you did in his memos. Care for individual citations?
The one I see trotted out most often, the "women lawyers" line, was clearly a joke. And, as someone who's known a few women lawyers, actually rather funny. (Given the multitude of jokes women tell about men in the public life, and the fact that men and women joke about one another rather freely in private, I wouldn't say it's out of place in a memo.)
I'm sure there's some stuff in there that's objectionable, but you react with such vitriol that I'd like to know what, exactly, has your dander up.
As far as "Elitist"?
Is that really such a bad thing? I mean, personally, I'd want one of the 'elite' to be named to the Supreme Court, of all places.