The following post was first published in Sept. 2005 with the title "The real reason Schumer opposes Roberts?"
Among my favorite Roberts nomination op-eds is one I read today by Raymond J. Keating, chief economist for the Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council.
Here's part of what Keating says:
Keating's entire op-ed is here.
New York's senior senator [Chuck Schumer] portrays himself as moderation's great defender.
In a 2003 letter Schumer arrogantly advised Bush on how to pick a Supreme Court justice: "I start by encouraging you to use the same principles that guide me in evaluating judicial nominees. I consider three criteria: excellence, diversity and moderation."
Speaking in California last week, according to The Associated Press, Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia made an excellent point:"Now the Senate is looking for moderate judges, mainstream judges.Is it any wonder Schumer will oppose Roberts, someone he fears may turn out to be another Scalia.
What in the world is a moderate interpretation of a constitutional text? Halfway between what it says and what we'd like it to say?"
None of us like people who call attention to our arrogance and ignorance.
Hat Tip: Realclearpolitics.com