BS: Cool! a conservative white man nominated

Subject: RE: BS: Cool! a conservative white man nominated
From: GUEST,ar282
Date: 23 Jul 05 - 11:05 PM

Whatever happens, America deserves it. We brought this on ourselves. Compared to what we're doing to the Middle East, we're getting off pretty mildly I would say.

Subject: RE: BS: Cool! a conservative white man nominated
From: dianavan
Date: 23 Jul 05 - 09:56 PM

He's an intelligent, Christian White man with a little son who likes to dance.

Probably the best PR move that Bush ever made.

Subject: RE: BS: Cool! a conservative white man nominated
From: GUEST,Clint Keller
Date: 23 Jul 05 - 07:33 PM

bb, I'm real tired of tiresome adolescent crap like this: "Brilliant, respected, unquestioned integrity and fair-mindedness... sounds like no liberal could think of voting for him...."

'Tain't funny no more.

And who is that liberal you're talking about? Richard Nixon fits the bill better than anyone I can think of -- look at his VP and Attorney General, among others. Who would've thought?

clint

Subject: RE: BS: Cool! a conservative white man nominated
From: Bill D
Date: 23 Jul 05 - 11:08 AM

"speak for"??? gee, oh esteemed soother of troubled psyches, I don't "speak for" anyone...I just draw on my now overwhelming(age, you know) store of observations of LO these many years and report on what is obvious to anyone who hasn't been running lambent through too many hurricanes recently ;>)

There I was, attempting to support, as I always have, the improvement of opportunities and consideration for various groups (NOT just women), while trying to recognize the inherent differences in perceived ambitions ....and what do I get? Demands for facts and statistics! Cor, blimey! I didn't ASK 270,000 folks their ultimate goals...that would have taken more time than hollowing a 12" chunk of Live Oak!



but I did find this: *grin*...data on applications to Law Schools

(yeah, women ARE finally applying in 'almost' the same numbers as men)....Now, what precise % follow thru and graduate and seek to become judges, I'm not sure has been researched, and though it's probably higher that those who seen to drive in the INDY 500, I'd venture that it is still lower than for men. As Bobert might say, "That's my opinion, an' I'm stickin' to it"

Subject: RE: BS: Cool! a conservative white man nominated
From: harpgirl
Date: 23 Jul 05 - 10:14 AM

Hey wooden bowl breath! How do you presume to speak for what most women strive for? Facts?
l,h

Subject: RE: BS: Cool! a conservative white man nominated
From: van lingle
Date: 23 Jul 05 - 06:02 AM

I, for one, apply "litmus tests" to judicial appointees and this guy fails most of mine from what I see, so far. At the very least he's guilty by association and appears to be just another gift to the upper 1 or 2% by our little pissant of a president. vl

Subject: RE: BS: Cool! a conservative white man nominated
From: Bobert
Date: 22 Jul 05 - 09:46 PM

Hey, when the Bush team of lawyers stopped the recount in Florida in 2000 because they argued that if it were to continue that their guy "would be harmed", it was a forgone conclusion that the Supreme Court was gonna move further to the right...

Like what is the big shock 'n awe here???

Ain't rocket surgery...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Cool! a conservative white man nominated
From: Bill D
Date: 22 Jul 05 - 09:18 PM

"Or blacks, hispanics, homosexuals, or Russians huh, Bill?"

yes, that's correct....I didn't say it was nice, and that I was in favor of it. Those groups also are not striving to be race car drivers or professional bowlers or bass fishers in the same percentages as the 'dominant' group, but when they DO strive, they are beginning to be noticed & chosen more often...which is a GOOD thing.

You don't think *I* am in favor of keeping "blacks, hispanics, homosexuals, Russians OR women" from applying and suceeding at anything they wish to compete in, do you? I am trying VERY hard to balance what would be nice to see with the realities of life as it works.

You seem to be suggesting something like 'affirmative action' quotas for jobs on the Supreme Court, and I gotta tell you, that just wont work. All we can do is try to level the playing field to make the OPPORTUNITES fair & open, and remember that the most qualified for job 'X' will often NOT be from a minority group.....it is up to us to be sure minorites are allowed to BECOME qualified and to be fairly considered....and yes, I KNOW how awkward and uphill that battle is at times!

   There is a lot more than slogans and critical rhetoric needed to make the needed gains...whether in driving in the Indy 500,or sitting on the Supreme Court.

Subject: RE: BS: Cool! a conservative white man nominated
From: Donuel
Date: 22 Jul 05 - 08:56 PM

A person from Nebraska said that Roberts primary qualification is that he is a good Christian.

It is apparent to that gentleman that Christians are automatically superior to everyone else.

Enough of the Uber Christians.

Judge the man, not the religion that prays to a God that shares their political predjudice.

Subject: RE: BS: Cool! a conservative white man nominated
From: harpgirl
Date: 22 Jul 05 - 08:43 PM

"The court is a collection of 9 supposedly intelligent legal minds....and most women don't work to be in that group."


Or blacks, hispanics, homosexuals, or Russians huh, Bill? Just white middle class males! The dominant superpower of the planet, rapidly moving us all towards extinction! Hooray for you guys. I really want you representing me on the court. Not

Subject: RE: BS: Cool! a conservative white man nominated
From: dianavan
Date: 22 Jul 05 - 07:41 PM

Harpgirl - I am very surprised to hear you say, " Reigster everyone by their religion! Keep those muslims out!!!!" Were you kidding? I hope so.

Subject: RE: BS: Cool! a conservative white man nominated
From: GUEST
Date: 22 Jul 05 - 06:02 PM

Harpgirl, honey. Could you get me some coffee please?

Subject: RE: BS: Cool! a conservative white man nominated
From: Bill D
Date: 22 Jul 05 - 05:58 PM

"... the court is not representative of our population."

and it never WILL be! That's not the way it was set up and not even a good idea. It would require elimination of the 'lifetime appointment' clause and would mean even worse battles than we NOW have to try to implement. Proportional representation is only slightly sucessful in the House of Representatives. Any time the President gets to appoint, he WILL appoint from his own perspective, and for a few years we had a court with some real scholars and socially aware jurists...sadly, some recent appointemnts are suspect.

The court is a collection of 9 supposedly intelligent legal minds....and most women don't work to be in that group, so there is NEVER as large a pool to choose from, though we are, thankfully, finally getting some women considered and appointed.

Subject: RE: BS: Cool! a conservative white man nominated
From: GUEST,Martin Gibson's Mind But Not Body
Date: 22 Jul 05 - 05:45 PM

Harpgirl wants a feminist Spanish speaking black who wears a turbin, obviously.

Typical response from a feminist.

Reasonable left wingnuts here know Roberts is a fine choice and Bush made a choice that will make anyone against him look like a crybaby.

Subject: RE: BS: Cool! a conservative white man nominated
From: frogprince
Date: 22 Jul 05 - 05:42 PM

Register everyone by their religion!

Harpgirl, I wish I hadn't even read that.

Subject: RE: BS: Cool! a conservative white man nominated
From: harpgirl
Date: 22 Jul 05 - 05:31 PM

Well, I am outraged that the court is not representative of our population. It should be weighted with women, slightly more liberal than conservative and reflect the racial balance of the United States. Anything less is simply unacceptable.

But Georgey boy, has all the marbles!

And these stupid white men are going to frisk people on the new york subway by a number system like one in five (that's of one million daily riders, right???)and not target any special races!

The fundamentalist muslim crazy men are doing this to the world. Pick up those guys, you fools! Reigster everyone by their religion! Keep those muslims out!!!!

l,h

Subject: RE: BS: Cool! a conservative white man nominated
From: Bill D
Date: 22 Jul 05 - 05:19 PM

yep, PoppaGator...that's what I tried to say. Bush has almost 3 years to go, and we "fellow lefties" are not likely to see just what we want from him, and I doubt we can block appointments for 3 years (NOT a good idea to try)...this whitebread fellow is at LEAST brighter that we might have hoped for....and ya' know, sometimes basic intelligence will get through as a justice sees real cases.....

Subject: RE: BS: Cool! a conservative white man nominated
From: PoppaGator
Date: 22 Jul 05 - 02:15 PM

Trivia: Assuming JR gets approved, it will be the first time that a former Supreme Court clerk and the justice for whom he clerked would serve on the court at the same time.

Fellow lefties: Bush could hardly have been expected to nominate someone with whom we agree 100%, right? Or even 20%... All things considered, this guy might be OK in the long run: way brighter than the typical neocon dittohead ~ and young ~ he just might grow and evolve on the job to become be the Earl Warren on the coming era. Or not (of course).

Subject: RE: BS: Cool! a conservative white man nominated
From: snarky
Date: 22 Jul 05 - 02:15 PM

white bread and mayonnaise

Subject: RE: BS: Cool! a conservative white man nominated
From: Wesley S
Date: 22 Jul 05 - 01:50 PM

This is from his www.nndb.com profile -

AKA John Glover Roberts, Jr.

Born: 27-Jan-1955
Birthplace: Buffalo, NY


Gender: Male
Religion: Roman Catholic
Ethnicity: White
Occupation: Government

Level of fame: Niche
Executive summary: Bush nominee for Supreme Court

Clerk for William Rehnquist, 1980-81, and after that special assistant to US Attorney General William French Smith. Private practice, 1986-89 and 1993-2003, associate for Hogan & Hartson and partner from 1993 onward. In 2003, his gross income at Hogan was $1.04M. For 1989-93 he was Principal Deputy Solicitor General, responsible for arguing 32 cases in the US Supreme Court. Presently, he serves on the US Court of Appeals for District of Columbia Circuit. A conservative, though the paper trail on him is thin. He believes in a narrow interpretation of the Constitution and limited government. In one of his briefs he stated that "we continue to believe that Roe was wrongly decided and should be overruled" -- but in later confirmation testimony stated "Roe v. Wade is the settled law of the land... There's nothing in my personal views that would prevent me from fully and faithfully applying that precedent." George W. Bush nominated Roberts to replace Sandra Day O'Connor in a televised broadcast on 19 July 2005.

Father: (Bethlehem Steel manager)
Sister: Kathy
Sister: Peggy
Sister: Barbara
Wife: Jane Sullivan Roberts (m. 1996, two children adopted)
Son: Jack
Daughter: Josie


    High School: (Indiana)
    University: AB, Harvard University (1976, summa cum laude)
    Law School: JD, Harvard Law School (1979, magna cum laude)


    Harvard Law Review Managing Editor, 1978-79
    Bethlehem Steel summer jobs

Subject: RE: BS: Cool! a conservative white man nominated
From: Bill D
Date: 22 Jul 05 - 01:46 PM

...but ain't generic usually cheaper? Maybe lower quality binders and coatings, making it harder to swallow...but often does as well as fancy, well-advertised name brands.

Take two and call me in a month...

Subject: RE: BS: Cool! a conservative white man nominated
From: freda underhill
Date: 22 Jul 05 - 11:01 AM

OBERTS VOWS TO BE MOST GENERIC WHITE MALE IN HISTORY OF SUPREME COURT
Bush Praises Nondescript Nominee

John G. Roberts, President Bush's nominee to replace Justice Sandra Day O'Connor on the United States Supreme Court, made a case for his own nomination today, telling reporters that, if confirmed, he was determined to be "the most generic white male in the history of the Supreme Court."

With a beaming President Bush at his side, Judge Roberts said that if he serves on the nation's highest court, "The nondescript American white male, who is woefully underrepresented in this country at present, will finally have a voice."

Judge Roberts summarized the life experiences that had put him in touch with the needs of the generic white male, including a brief period in the early 1980's when he modeled generic men's sportswear for K-Mart, as well as a later stint as a downloadable generic white male icon for ClipArt.

While President Bush praised his nominee for being both "interchangeable" and "unremarkable," a poll taken just hours after the nomination was announced suggests trouble ahead, with a clear majority of Americans being unable to remember Judge Roberts' name.

According to the poll, over fifty percent of those surveyed identified Mr. Bush's nominee as either "Jim Rogers" or "Bob Roberts," with over seventy percent confusing him with CBS news anchor John Roberts, yet another prominent generic white male.

For his part, President Bush appeared unfazed by such numbers, telling reporters at the White House, "I have total confidence in Don Rogers."

Elsewhere, over 150,000 women in Great Britain submitted applications to become actor Jude Law's new nanny.

from Today's political satire & parodies

Subject: RE: BS: Cool! a conservative white man nominated
From: harpgirl
Date: 21 Jul 05 - 10:12 PM

Roberts is a f***king disaster in a Zegna suit! Thank God these white men are going extinct!

Subject: RE: BS: Cool! a conservative white man nominated
From: Bill D
Date: 21 Jul 05 - 06:39 PM

no..first I have to get it to feed paper
(and I am always reasonable!....a condition totally incompatible with being a Bushite!)

Subject: RE: BS: Cool! a conservative white man nominated
From: beardedbruce
Date: 21 Jul 05 - 04:13 PM

Be carefull, Bill... There are those here who will call you a Bushite if you keep being reasonable....


BTW, I found one cartridge for the LJII- Need it yet?

Subject: RE: BS: Cool! a conservative white man nominated
From: Bill D
Date: 21 Jul 05 - 11:49 AM

from Marc Fisher's column in today's Wash. Post (it is just about what I remembered.)


"The matter wound up in the U.S. Court of Appeals, and Roberts's decision last fall shows him to be a witty writer with the confidence to show some heart. He seems pleased that after "the sort of publicity reserved for adults who make young girls cry," Metro changed its policy and no longer arrests young snackers. Roberts recognizes that Ansche wants the charges nullified because no one wants to have to say yes to that standard application question, "Ever been arrested?"

But Roberts quickly divorces himself from the human side of the case. He has no sympathy for the notion that Ansche was discriminated against because of her age. Roberts says government has every right to treat children differently, setting age requirements for voting, marriage, driving and drinking. Anyway, he notes, the fact that Metro changed its policy so quickly shows "that the interests of children are not lightly ignored by the political process." But Roberts rejects the idea that the court should weigh in on whether the police trampled on Ansche's freedom."

so...he did agree that the arrest was 'legal', if poorly thought out under bad policy. Sorry M. Ted, but even though I agree with you that we could have better choices, just saying "Roberts is the one who ruled in favor of arresting the 12 year old girl..." is misleading and incomplete. I actually though he showed some humor & comapssion in the case.

Subject: RE: BS: Cool! a conservative white man nominated
From: GUEST,Stilly River Sage
Date: 21 Jul 05 - 11:38 AM

Looks like Martin Gibson is back and in fine form, doesn't it?

Subject: RE: BS: Cool! a conservative white man nominated
From: GUEST
Date: 21 Jul 05 - 10:31 AM

SRS and dianavan obviously responded with the penis envy feminist attitudes that were expected from their sorry lives.

Subject: RE: BS: Cool! a conservative white man nominated
From: GUEST
Date: 21 Jul 05 - 10:22 AM

Mr. Ted, what is this about a girl being arrested for eating a "French Fry"??

Subject: RE: BS: Cool! a conservative white man nominated
From: Wolfgang
Date: 21 Jul 05 - 07:28 AM

This actually seems like one the better decisions of Bush.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Cool! a conservative white man nominated
From: GUEST,G
Date: 21 Jul 05 - 06:53 AM

SRS - Regarding Clarence Thomas, I have never meet the man but his educational background seems to be more meaningful than that of any golden retrieve I have run across. I do know that a retrievers' brain is physically small and in all cases has been proven to be nomially trainable. I guess I just need more "evidence".
Nice play on words though, "thats a no brainer".
Maybe you know of a golden retriever that has a law degree?

Subject: RE: BS: Cool! a conservative white man nominated
From: van lingle
Date: 21 Jul 05 - 04:44 AM

But, can a golden retriever detect a pubic hair on top of a coke can?

Subject: RE: BS: Cool! a conservative white man nominated
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 21 Jul 05 - 12:21 AM

He doesn't need to pre-judge any case when he answers a basic question about his views on privacy as they are understood according to the constitution.

Guest G said Things I don't understand at all are statements like;

"At least he has more brains than Clarence Thomas".

Now, how can anyone say that and have the evidence to back it up.

I'd say that your average golden retreiver has more brains than Clarence Thomas, and a lot more character. That's a no-brainer.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: Cool! a conservative white man nominated
From: Bill D
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 10:56 PM

interesting so far...even though *I* would have picked someone WAY different from Roberts, I see those on my side fudging on some of the arguments. He has said several different, and apparently contradictory, things about Roe....but each side points only to the ones THEY want to emphasize.

And I'd have to look up the exact text of what he said about the 12 year old girl, but I 'thought' he merely ruled that the law was technically enforced correctly, though in a heavy-handed manner and the incident should have been handled better. Maybe that was in todays paper...(Let's be as clear & fair about representing the man's record as we can, folks. If we get all excited and can't stomach THIS one, just imagine who they have waiting! You don't think Bush is gonna give us another Byron White or Thurgood Marshall, do you?

Subject: RE: BS: Cool! a conservative white man nominated
From: beardedbruce
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 10:44 PM

Frank, Try reading my post before you make comments. I don't call the Clinton administration Republican Reactionary.

Subject: RE: BS: Cool! a conservative white man nominated
From: M.Ted
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 10:38 PM

146 members of the DC Bar--by a recent estimate, there are more than 40,000 lawyers in Washington--that isn't exactly a plurality. So you are simply spinning the party line, Bruce, trying to make this extremely partisan man seem reasonable--

Roberts is the one who ruled in favor of arresting the 12 year old girl for eating a French Fry while she was standing on the Metro platform--and, lest we forget, he has advocated for the right-wing religious terrorists who, in turn, advocate bombing abortion clinics--

So we'll see--

Subject: RE: BS: Cool! a conservative white man nominated
From: Frankham
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 10:36 PM

Brilliant, respected, unquestioned integrity and fair-mindedness... sounds like no liberal could think of voting for him....

That's only because this really sounds like Republican Reactionary hype.

Frank

Subject: RE: BS: Cool! a conservative white man nominated
From: Amos
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 10:30 PM

Here's what MoveOn says about his record, FWIW. I am not coming out swinging here, but just posing this viewpoint for consideration:

John Roberts has little experience as a judge—he was only appointed in 2003. But he's got a lot of experience as a corporate lobbyist and lawyer, consistently favoring wealthy corporations over regular Americans.

Here's a list of some of the things that make Roberts the wrong pick for the Supreme Court:

*        Wrong on environmental protection: Roberts appears to want to limit the scope of the Endangered Species Act, and in papers he wrote while in law school he supported far-right legal theories about "takings" which would make it almost impossible for the government to enforce most environmental legislation.

*        Wrong on civil rights: Roberts worked to keep Congress from defending parts of the Voting Rights Act.

*        Wrong on human rights: As a appeals court judge, Roberts ruled that the Geneva Convention doesn't apply to some prisoners of war.

*        Wrong on our right to religious freedom: Roberts argued that schools should be able to impose religious speech on attendees.

*        Wrong on women's rights: Roberts wrote that "Roe v. Wade was wrongly decided and should be overruled." He also weighed in on behalf of Operation Rescue, a violent anti-abortion group, in a federal case.

President Bush could have chosen many fair-minded and independent jurists to replace Sandra Day O'Connor. Instead, he chose a corporate partisan loved by Bush's right-wing base but out of step with the rest of the country.

---

I think there is some merit to these views.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Cool! a conservative white man nominated
From: Bee-dubya-ell
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 10:23 PM

From what I've heard on the radio today, Judge Roberts sounds like a pretty decent human being. Far better, in fact, than the person who put forth his nomination. Any chance we could just let Roberts be President instead?

Subject: RE: BS: Cool! a conservative white man nominated
From: GUEST,Ron Davies
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 10:19 PM

In 2003, as M. Ted noted, Roberts said "Roe v Wade is the settled law of the land...There's nothing in my personal views that would prevent me from fully and faithfully applying that precedent."

In fact, for that very reason, some of the fire-breathing anti-abortion groups are not thrilled with him.

However, he sure does toe the business line--so laws like the Endangered Species Act stand to be progressively undermined--he has already signalled this in a recent dissent while on the DC Circuit. This is a real danger. And a lot of people may be up in arms about "Kelo", but the anti-environmentalists plan to exploit this feeling to attack the "takings" clause--now used to prevent development which puts endangered species at risk.


The worst aspect of his being chosen is that he's 50 years old--will likely be on the Court for a LONG time--30 years or so of relentless strict constructionism.

And of course he will be soon joined by another judicial spring chicken clone of Rehnquist--though my guess is that, for his second pick Bush will choose his Hispanic Texas buddy--thus assuring his place as first to pick a Hispanic. (Of course the "Religious Right" is not happy with (is it Gonzalez?) either---but where are they going to go?--and at this point, not ever facing any more elections, Bush is far more concerned with his imagined place in the history books.

But as far as fighting Roberts' nomination, unless there's a smoking gun in his private life--ain't gonna happen.

Subject: RE: BS: Cool! a conservative white man nominated
From: Bill D
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 10:16 PM

well, bruce...I thought that was sort of what I said....but, ok...I'll officially agree with you...so far..*grin* (but we both know BOTH sides will want to know (or think they already do) about how he is likely to decide certain types of cases.

Subject: RE: BS: Cool! a conservative white man nominated
From: beardedbruce
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 10:04 PM

BillD,

Do you really want ANY judge that will decide a case before hearing the arguements?

ANY questions about how he will rule in specific cases should be off-limits.

Subject: RE: BS: Cool! a conservative white man nominated
From: Bill D
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 10:01 PM

ok, 'G'...'never mind' officially dropped. I admit I am a bit surprised to see Bush appoint someone who is obviously well qualified and intelligent....and I also admit I was expecting nothing BUT mud-slinging in this thread. I hope it is kept to a minimum, and I hope Roberts is as forthcoming as someone ought to be during the hearings. I, at least, would not expect him to 'announce' all his potential decisions prior to actual cases, but I hope he doesn't obfuscate either.

we shall, as they say, see...hmmm?

Subject: RE: BS: Cool! a conservative white man nominated
From: GUEST
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 09:50 PM

Our John Roberts has been nominated for the Supreme Court Justice opening? If he was having heart problems before, this will really do him in. Just say no, John!

Subject: RE: BS: Cool! a conservative white man nominated
From: beardedbruce
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 09:44 PM

"Roberts' nomination to the appellate bench attracted support from both ends of the ideological spectrum. Some 146 members of the D.C. Bar, including officials from the Clinton administration, signed a letter urging his confirmation.

The letter stated: "He is one of the very best and most highly respected appellate lawyers in the nation, with a deserved reputation as a brilliant writer and oral advocate. He is also a wonderful professional colleague both because of his enormous skills and because of his unquestioned integrity and fair-mindedness."


http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/07/20/roberts.profile.ap/index.html

Brilliant, respected, unquestioned integrity and fair-mindedness... sounds like no liberal could think of voting for him....

Subject: RE: BS: Cool! a conservative white man nominated
From: dianavan
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 09:40 PM

Common sense is ethno centic. Since America has no specific culture of its own (unless you include Hollywood), I think your name says it all. If you think America has a specific culture, you should explain more specifically what that implies.

I think you are Martin and we all know that he has no common sense at all.

Subject: RE: BS: Cool! a conservative white man nominated
From: jimmyt
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 09:39 PM

I hope he is a moderate and hope against hope that Rehnquist is still on the court when the next election comes around. I am one conservative that believes we need a balanced court and nothing will benefit by getting it weighted one way or the other.

Subject: RE: BS: Cool! a conservative white man nominated
From: GUEST,G
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 09:37 PM

To Bill D.; Drop the "Oh, never mind". Your points are well taken.
While we may not always vote for the same people, although I think there are times we may, I get the feeling that we (you and I) have the ability to respect each others opinions. And that is just what they are, opinions. I sometimes wonder who is on the correct path.

Things I don't understand at all are statements like;

"At least he has more brains than Clarence Thomas".

Now, how can anyone say that and have the evidence to back it up.

Subject: RE: BS: Cool! a conservative white man nominated
From: kendall
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 09:20 PM

At least he has more brains than Clarence Thomas.

Subject: RE: BS: Cool! a conservative white man nominated
From: M.Ted
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 09:14 PM

For what it's worth, Roberts has actually said that the Roe vs. Wade decision is the law of the land and should be respected. As to his other dubious activities--it has been pointed out that he did it what he did because he was paid to be an advocate--

God knows what he'll do when he can decide on his own--and that's the principle that has made our legal system what it is;-)

Still, I'm against him--cause I know that the folks who are against me support him. I just sent a bunch of money to MOVE-ON, and I'm looking forward to the fight!