Obama needed to be talked out of voting for John Roberts.

[jillan]

This is straight fromm Obama's website:

http://www.barackobama.com/2007/08/27/the_outsiders_insider.php

Sen. Barack Obama had hired Pete Rouse for just such a moment.

It was the fall of 2005, and the celebrated young senator -- still new to Capitol Hill but aware of his prospects for higher office -- was thinking about voting to confirm John G. Roberts Jr. as chief justice. Talking with his aides, the Illinois Democrat expressed admiration for Roberts's intellect. Besides, Obama said, if he were president he wouldn't want his judicial nominees opposed simply on ideological grounds.

And then Rouse, his chief of staff, spoke up. This was no Harvard moot-court exercise, he said. If Obama voted for Roberts, Rouse told him, people would remind him of that every time the Supreme Court issued another conservative ruling, something that could cripple a future presidential run. Obama took it in. And when the roll was called, he voted no.

"Pete's very good at looking around the corners of decisions and playing out the implications of them," Obama said an interview when asked about that discussion. "He's been around long enough that he can recognize problems and pitfalls a lot quicker than others can."

[stray cat]

1. On the other hand someone who listens to good advice is an improvement

No more non-inquisative isolate, bubble presidents!

[dkf]

2. Hey, at least he can be reasoned with. I like that.

[SoFlaJet]

6. man they are really fucking reaching today

aren't they dkf?

[dkf]

12. Yeah. It is getting very bad. :(

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

19. It's called desperation.

[SoFlaJet]

21. I'm telling you guys

it HAS to be the 65,000 new voters Obama's camp has just signed on...they have some internal data out of Pennsylvania that is very very troubling-I'm telling you I can feel it-something's up

[sandyd921]

18. Maybe I'm naive

but my standard for Democrats seeking high office is a bit higher. I expect them to "get" what cons and right-wingers have been trying to do to the courts and government of this country over the last 30 or so years.

[murielm99]

3. What does this say about Obama's future

SC nominees, if he is President? Is he going to reach across the aisle to find some nice right-wing judges?

[dkf]

4. You are kidding right?

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

5. "...something that could cripple a future presidential run"

No comment

[bhikkhu]

7. That's the way it is supposed to work.

Roberts does have an admirable intellect, obvious to anyone who admires intellect. You have to look a bit harder to see that it works in the service of a worldview obnoxious to the balance of powers and the more Democratic view of constitutional law.

[jillan]

8. Funny how other Dems didn't have to think twice about voting against Roberts.

They KNEW what he stood for, or should I say, against.

[bhikkhu]

10. I didn't follow the individual "for and against" rolls

but I admire a senator who looks at the case, considers the man and his positions, seeks the advice and opinions of his staff, does his due diligence and then makes the right decision.

Again, that is the way it is supposed to work. I suppose the alternative would be to either jump to conclusions or toe the party line, neither of which are presidential attributes.

[ProSense]

11. Feingold vote for him. Hillary, OTH, voted for the bankruptcy bill and against cluster bomb ban. n/t

[bettyellen]

13. he chose primarily to serve his own ambitions, and admits it. why can't you.

[bhikkhu]

20. He did the due diligence and voted against Roberts.

Its a bit hard to call that a self-serving choice without calling every senate vote of every candidate self-serving or based upon political maneuvering, rather than right or wrong.

[bettyellen]

24. that's why he's not really a "change" or better than hillary in most respects...

they are one in the same in most respects, there's no reason to belive her would have voted against IWR, yet that's his biggest appeal around here.
same old same old, he's just younger and more palatable.

[ProgressIn2008]

9. OMG, this is almost hilarious - Obama doesn't want to oppose judges on "ideological grounds"

as president! Great to know! Really makes me feel confident about his SCOTUS picks and his commitment to choice!

At least he's not hiding his phoniness on The Website, LOL: "still new to Capitol Hill but aware of his prospects for higher office..." "...something that could cripple a future presidential run..."

Yeah, we got it. Your problem with Roberts wasn't his positions -- oh, that "admirable intellect" gave ya shivers -- but the presidential campaign you were already planning. What a surprise!

[lumpy]

31. It's called the Dubya syndrome similar to learning on the job.

I should think we would prefer someone who has his/her ideology well formed and has the ability to recognize the ideologies of others.

[dkf]

14. I wish someone had talked Hillary out of voting for the IWR.

I'd be interested to know if anyone tried. If not, she has sucky advisors.

[Texas Hill Country]

15. Nice judgement Barak...

SCOTUS appointments scare the shit out of me and he almost voted FOR Roberts? Seriously?

[Usrename]

16. Who gives a shit who was chosen to replace Rhenquist?

They could have appointed Dick Cheney for all the difference it would make. Opposing Roberts makes no sense.

Now, selecting Alito to replace O'Connor is different thing altogether. And Obama's public statements about the filibuster have always pissed me off. He said something to the effect that it wasn't a good idea to use parlimentary tactics to block judges, or some such nonsense. In any event, he voted correctly, for the filibuster and against Scalito.

I still don't understand how the party could let this disaster happen. 41 votes were all that were needed to stop him, and 42 senators voted that he was unfit for the bench, and there he sits.

[jillan]

17. Yeah, you're right - who gives a shit about our rights?

[Usrename]

25. Which of our rights do you figure Rhenquist was going to protect?

Rhenquist was a tool. What does matter who replaced him?

[Texas Hill Country]

22. That is some serious dumb right there.

[Usrename]

26. I don't know what you're referring to. Do you mean me?

Or do you mean the vote in the Senate?

[Texas Hill Country]

27. Mostly to the Senate vote, but you saying it doesnt matter is not smart either

every appointment matters. it wasnt pivotal, but Roberts is the Chief Justice now and that is a HUGE deal.

[Usrename]

33. Well, it didn't affect the composition of the court, at all.

It wasn't anything to warrant all the hand-wringing over. It was the status quo, which is good under the circumstances.

The Alito appointment, OTOH, is what really changed the court. As bad as some think O'Connor was, she at least seemed to value her membership in the human race. Roberts, as a replacement for her, as was first intended, should have been opposed vigorously.

[depakid]

29. This soured me on Obama early on- and confirmed my hunches

about the nature of the man.

Instead of showing leadership- using his high powered rhetoric to rally the troops on what was perhaps the most important issue to come up during his tenure, he criticized the very process that ought to ensure that dangerous extremists didn't receive lifetime appointments to the federal bench.

What I saw in his statements was someone who didn't take "advice and consent" seriously -and coming from someone who taught constitutional law classes, I found that particularly disturbing.

Going along to get along- rather than standing up and leading the fight. It certainly wasn't his finest moment.

[Usrename]

36. Exactly!

That was what I was trying to say. It frustrated me to no end, too. I still haven't heard any explanation that makes sense.

It's not as if any president in the history of the country has gotten an up or down vote on all their judicial nominees.

The pocket veto, which has been in place for my whole lifetime, was unceremoniously disposed of by Sen Hatch, in direct contravention of the Judiciary Committee rules. I'm still beside myself when I think about it.

Leahy couldn't believe it either. It was unbelievable. And Obama just somehow ignored it all. Or else he wasn't aware.

[Major Hogwash]

23. Why didn't Bubba talk Hillary out of voting for the Iraq War?

She was sleeping with the last ex-President, wasn't she?

[Neshanic]

28. Well there he was supporting the gays. Can't fault him there.

[ampad]

30. Why oh why

Didn't someone talk Hillary out of voting for the IWR.

[lumpy]

32. Hillary lapse of good judgment was trusting the revered

Colin Powell, CIA operatives, her fellow congress people and of course George Bush for thinking he would use force only as a last resort as stated in the bill, as many others believed.

[qnr]

34. My problem is this: I'm a HS dropout, not elected to a prominent office as a

Democratic candidate. I don't need to look around any corners and play out implications to see that Roberts is bad news, it was pretty obvious.

[zabet]

35. K and R

So personal ambition is what Obama
bases his votes on.

[GeorgeGist]

37. Of course it never clouded anyone's ...

judgment that John Roberts judicial experience was barely 2 yrs.

[JoFerret]

38. Both candidates are deeply flawed

...but only one was hitherto believed to have been born in a manger.