The allegedly liberal L.A. Times urges Democrats to vote for John Roberts because we wouldn’t actually want to have spines on anything, seeing as how great that’s worked out so wonderful for our party and America.
>> The Case For a ‘No’ Vote on Roberts
>> Feminist Bloggers Say No to John Roberts
Fromthe article:
It will be a damning indictment of petty partisanship in Washington if an overwhelming majority of the Senate does not vote to confirm John G. Roberts Jr. to be the next chief justice of the United States.
We wouldn’t want to dispense with our petty partisanship, would we?
Is there anyone who can say (with a straight face) that corporate america is a bastion of liberal ideology. latimes and wapo are the latest print media to lose their reportage autonomy. Now that everyone is rejoicing about NYTIMES supporting Judith Miller they can also rejoice over the recent financial reverses and downsizing at same.
It is a victory for truth and justice everywhere, that the final arbiter on social issues will rest with the bean counters .
Frank;
We are ready to dispense with partisanship. Are you?
If the answer is yes I hope you don’t mean in ihe sense your Leader does.
‘Work with me’ generally means ‘do it my way’ to the Shrub.
Bi-Partisanship usually means ‘I need you help on this one’ to republicans.
When In the name of the Republic, when?
Well, the President DOES get to nominate Supreme Court Justices. Says so right there in the Constitution. And the amount of consideration shown Senate dems has been “unprecendeted”, so your characterization of “do it my way” is off the mark as well.
When In the name of the Republic, when?
When the Shrub gets Raptured, I guess