I find this mind-boggling:
Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid has told associates he intends to oppose confirmation of John Roberts as chief justice, Senate sources said Tuesday as rank and file Democrats began staking out positions on the man named to succeed the late William H. Rehnquist.
Reid scheduled a speech on the Senate floor for mid-afternoon, at which he was expected to make his announcement public.
Roberts has strong Republican support and appears headed for easy confirmation.
As party leader, Reid had urged fellow Democrats not to announce their positions until the conclusion of last week’s confirmation hearings for Roberts.
By stating his own position first, Reid likely would set the stage for strong Democratic opposition to the 50-year-old appeals court judge and former Reagan administration lawyer.
For months I have heard Harry Reid fashioned as a moderate or centrist Democrat, so it simply makes no sense to me why he would be opposing John Roberts. For that matter, I don’t understand why the majority of Democrats are not relieved John Roberts was the pick, and begging/hoping/praying (in a secular way, of course) that the next pick will be as thoughtful and sane as Judge Roberts.
Judge Roberts is no fire-breathing ideologue, and if the Democrats do everything they can to block his nomination, and mount a strident and contentious opposition, they are sealing their own fates. If someone like Roberts is going to get 30-40 votes against from Democrats, I see no reason why Bush doesn’t appoint a fire-breathing ideologue. Let ’em filibuster.
If Roberts is unacceptable, the simple fact is Democrats can’t deal with a Republican appointee. Period.