John Roberts Should Be a Quick Confirm.

National Review ^ | July 20, 2005 | Senator Ted Cruz

[true believer forever]

mmmmmkay. I reckon you should be gigged for the eventual misdeeds of anyone you think might be a good hire, even if you were not the one who made the call to hire them.

That's the logic, here.

I know no one who picks well 100% of the time. (Otherwise, the Donald would never have had to say "You're Fired!".)

Some are easier to fire than others.

Cruz was just one of a herd of people who approved of Roberts, otherwise he would not have been appointed to the bench. But Ted gets the blame for things which were arguably out of character for Roberts (which is the reason for the still incredulous disappointment over the Obamacare vote).

I thought we didn't hang people for other people's actions.

My point was Cruz is always lauded as the one who would make the best SC appointments. The article proves that even he can be wrong, and isn't infallible like his supporters like to think. This perfectionist doctrine applied to Cruz is what is concerning. As for me, I am happy with good ol Trump and all his foibles, misspeaks, and human failings.

ps what does mmmmmmmkay mean? Just started seeing it yesterday.

[skeeter]

Fair enough, but you at least need evidence. Like an interview, photographs, on the record statements, etc. Don’t you agree?

[FreeReign]

Here's another one:

Trump once wrote Hillary Clinton would be 'great president'

[true believer forever]

Well, I still give Roberts a B- rating for this reason. Obama has PUBLICLY threatened him, his life, his family, his co-workers if he didn't give a favorable result to Obama, especially on the Obamacare issues. Otherwise, Roberts voted mostly with the conservatives.

Maybe you forget the number of people who have died or disappeared since Obama first ran for president. There was a list of them at Nachum's List for some time...and I think Roberts understood the threat to be real.

I would like to hear Roberts' story sometime (when the threat of death is not hanging over his head).

I really don't know that much about Roberts, he was before my time. My point was Cruz can be just as fallible and taken in like the rest of us, contrary to what his supporters believe.

I actually agree with what you say about the threats because I think I heard Rush read an article one day about how his decision actually seemed to change course in midstream, indicating he was going to rule differently than he ultimately did.

[wny]

Nearly everybody on the right was sand bagged by Roberts. He looked good on paper, but went over to the dark side. Paul Ryan call your office.....

[true believer forever]

Fair enough, but you at least need evidence. Like an interview, photographs, on the record statements, etc. Don’t you agree?

Actually, in my opinion, no. The more duplicitous your are the less likely there will be accessible proof. Like Cruz telling his donors behind closed doors that gay marriage wasn't a top priority for his administration.

Again, just a typical political ploy, nothing to get upset about. Only Cruz supporters think their candidate walks on water and is the only TRUE conservative out there, and would never be capable of such a purely political action.

[don-o]

I really don't know that much about Roberts, he was before my time.

Right in line with

"Well, I heard it's a big thing. I know nothing about it. But I hear it's a very big thing," Trump said

[true believer forever]

Nearly everybody on the right was sand bagged by Roberts. He looked good on paper, but went over to the dark side. Paul Ryan call your office.....

OMG, you're absolutely right!! I remember when Ryan was introduced as Romney's VP how happy I was to see someone so young, idealistic and conservative getting a national spot.

Only I don't have any problem admitting that. It's Cruz and his supporters who purport to have the perfect candidate. The smartest, the consistent, the only TRUE conservative.

[true believer forever]

[I really don't know that much about Roberts, he was before my time.]

Right in line with "Well, I heard it's a big thing. I know nothing about it. But I hear it's a very big thing," Trump said.

I don't know if you mean that as an insult or not, but I think it's kind of funny and I'll accept in good spirit.

[Pollster1]

At the time, I agreed with Cruz. There was no sign anywhere I saw in Roberts’ record that we were confirming a traitor as Chief Justice.

[Pox]

Really? That's your pitiful excuse for a half assed response?

Look into your own psyche and ask yourself why.

[Smokin' Joe]

I just threw it in. I can't help what others post.

As for Roberts, Cruz, Ronald Reagan, etc., they are all human.

The last person who was without flaw was a couple thousand years ago, and we saw how that turned out (at least in the earthly courts).

I don't expect perfection from any candidate, but I do expect core values, I expect the guts to stand up for those, and I expect them to stand up for the Constitution, not subvert it.

IMHO, Cruz has met that, even if one of the appointments he supported did not (Roberts makes his own choices, Cruz doesn't make those for him.)

I would expect Cruz to carefully study anyone he appointed and select candidates who would be most likely to uphold those core values and the Constitution. After that, there is always an element of risk that those candidates would not live up to that expectation.

So I don't hold Cruz up to be perfection, just who I consider best in the field.

The one thing Trump supporters so often seem to forget is that he is not only a businessman and negotiator, but a consummate salesman, too. Better kick the tires and slam the doors...

[KGeorge]

I guess it’s not that hard to miss, but some of these guys are pretty obvious. Hypocrites are one of my pet peeves. Some of them act all outraged as a mean to cover up their affinities. It doesn’t really work.

[sunrise_sunset]

So how good a friend of Roberts is Ted Cruz ?

[Enlightened1]

BTTT