Posted on 08/08/2005 5:42:05 AM PDT by OESY
...If the ABA rates Mr. Roberts fairly, he will receive a unanimous "well qualified" rating. There is simply no question that he satisfies the ABA's criteria, which boil down to integrity, professional competence and judicial temperament. Before becoming a judge, he was one of the most accomplished and respected appellate lawyers in America... [of} "unquestioned integrity."...
If history is any indication, however, the ABA will struggle with the Roberts rating for a simple reason: He is conservative. For that sin, the nominee may earn a split vote or worse. That disservice was infamously done to Robert Bork in 1987, when President Reagan nominated him to the Supreme Court. Mr. Bork earned four "not qualified" votes from the ABA's 15-member committee -- an egregious insult.
In 1991, the ABA again let politics cloud its judgment when rating Clarence Thomas.... Two of the ABA's committee members branded him "not qualified" -- again an outrage, given his record....
If anything, the ABA has become even more stridently left-wing, yielding an organization that advances a vision more akin to Howard Dean's than James Madison's or even Bill Clinton's....
The ABA prides itself on the diversity of its membership. But there is one vital dimension of diversity with which the ABA is pointedly unconcerned -- diversity of political opinion.... [T]he ABA takes a fanatically liberal position and treats it as undebatable, ignoring the historians, academics, lawyers, government officials and even courts that disagree....
Within the ABA there is some hushed concern about its stagnating membership and creeping irrelevance to the practice of law. But precious few insiders are willing to recognize that the ABA is reaping what it has sown for decades: Its increasingly vocal advocacy of an increasingly extremist agenda appeals only to a minority of the profession....
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
How degrading for the ABA to be regarded this way by the second-ranked newspaper in the world!
NOUN
1a. A religion or religious sect generally considered to be extremist or false, with its followers often living in an unconventional manner under the guidance of an authoritarian, charismatic leader. b. The followers of such a religion or sect. 2. A system or community of religious worship and ritual. 3. The formal means of expressing religious reverence; religious ceremony and ritual. 4. A usually nonscientific method or regimen claimed by its originator to have exclusive or exceptional power in curing a particular disease. 5a. Obsessive, especially faddish, devotion to or veneration for a person, principle, or thing. b. The object of such devotion. 6. An exclusive group of persons sharing an esoteric, usually artistic or intellectual interest.
The ABA is run by liberal partisan ideologues.
The ABA is not "just another" biased interest group.
It is among the most biased interest groups. Give them their due.
But lawyers being lawyers, I'm afraid that common sense will never find refuge on a court that prefers penumbras and emanations.
(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
Good point, but I think that statement applies across the board. There has long been a very thin line between a professional organization and a partisan political organization, and in this age of bloated government (with huge piles of money at stake) I'd say that line has been all but erased.
The title is wrong it should have read
The WSJ is 'Not Qualified' to rate the ABA - it is just another biased newspaper.
Professions rate their own members. The ratings attempt to assure professional competence, not public satisfaction. It's not a perfect system but it's better than any other.
"The WSJ is 'Not Qualified' to rate the ABA - it is just another biased newspaper."
"Professions rate their own members. The ratings attempt to assure professional competence, not public satisfaction. It's not a perfect system but it's better than any other."
"Mr. Smith, a former deputy attorney general of Colorado, co-chairs the Professional Liability Litigation Committee of the ABA's Section of Litigation."
Being that the writer is one of their (ABA) own...well, reading comprehension is a good thing.
One of the best things Bush has done in office was when he downgraded the status given to ABA reports on candidates.
They should go further of course, and give absolutely no attention or consideration to them at all.
What you're saying, with regard to the ABA, is a complete and utter crock.
It is a good thing. So is common sense. Unanimity can never be achieved.
And with regard to the American Medical Association, the associations of scientists who support evolution and global warming, newspaper guilds, labor unions, the film Academy, and all other organizations whose views you don't like?
I'd say it's you who is the complete and utter crock.
The ABA is an association - or club - of professionals who seek to set and maintain certain standards.
If you think that the ABA maintains professional standards, you are wrong. That is the job of the Bar of each state.
I am not wrong and what makes you think the Bar is any better?
I suggest you consult the states and courts before which Judge Roberts has been admitted to practice, and determine if there are any indications that he is unfit to practice law.
If you research my posts you'll see that I've rated Judge Roberts as supremely qualified and urged his confirmation.
I'm afraid your knee-jerk has kicked out your brains.
Say what you like abou me. (Isn't there something about personal attacks here?)
And then read post #15 over and over slowly until it sinks in.
Enjoy your day!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.