the stealth nominee
He's 50 years old, bright, ambitious, and prominent. He's said to be a man of principle, living in the middle of a culture war. Yet he apparently has no enemies. That's curious, isn't it?
No, I'm not ready to panic. There's no evidence that would cause panic. Nor is there evidence that encourages confidence. Yet:
- The New York Times doesn't sound worried.
- The Washington Post doesn't sound worried.
- The Boston Globe doesn't sound worried.
- Even Hillary Clinton doesn't sound worried.
OK, now I'm worried.
An appeal from our founder, Dr. Jeffrey Mirus:
Dear reader: If you found the information on this page helpful in your pursuit of a better Catholic life, please support our work with a donation. Your donation will help us reach seven million Truth-seeking readers worldwide this year. Thank you!
Our Fall Campaign
Progress toward our year-end goal ($60,947 to go):
All comments are moderated. To lighten our editing burden, only current donors are allowed to Sound Off. If you are a donor, log in to see the comment form; otherwise please support our work, and Sound Off!
Posted by: The OX -
Jul. 26, 2005 6:37 AM ET USA
I checked with ABA office in Chicago. Roni stated that John G. Roberts is NOT a member of ABA. ABA is pro-abortion. American Bar Assoc. 321 N. Clark Street Chicago, IL 60610 312.988.5000 Roni Let's put the pressure on American Medical Assoc. re: WHEN LIFE BEGINS. Their neutral position won't hold up. Then revisit Roe V Wade. Take WHEN LIFE BEGINS out of the hands of American Bar Assoc. As long as it's legal changing hearts ???? Dump RC's Leahy, Kennedy, Durbin, Biden.
Posted by: -
Jul. 26, 2005 1:17 AM ET USA
Well, at least we can hope it is the Holy Spirit confounding our enemies....
Posted by: -
Jul. 25, 2005 7:38 PM ET USA
I think both of the comments are correct. Every one of the liberal types including Senator White Sheet Byrd have qualified their approval by saying something like "as long as nothing damaging comes out". I think they are submitting to the inevitable here. Oh by the way, Anita Hill never worked for Judge Roberts did she?
Posted by: Eleazar -
Jul. 25, 2005 11:54 AM ET USA
With all respect and humility, I think you’re both wrong. The “calculating types” are biding their time while their attack dogs, (move-on.org, ACLU, et al) are furiously trying to dig up the dirt on Judge Roberts. If they can find or fabricate something, you’ll see the whole lot start to yowl like hormone-besotted cats.
Posted by: -
Jul. 25, 2005 9:14 AM ET USA
Phil, you're drawing the wrong inference. Hillary and the MSM are worried, but they know there is nothing they can do. Their opposition on Roberts will just make them look silly and extremist. These calculating types have already decided that they lost the battle on Roberts. Better to make the most out of the situation, look reasonable, and then maybe they'll regain some credibility so they can obstruct the next nominee (who may not be as handsome or as bright).