Rumor: It’s Roberts (UPDATE: RUMOR CONFIRMED)
Hugh Hewitt says the wires are reporting that the nominee will be John Roberts.
Good choice.
UPDATE at 5:48 p.m.: I blogged the above at a stoplight based on what I heard on the radio.
I’m home now, and it looks like everyone is reporting this, so it looks about as close to official as you can get before the actual announcement. Which will be soon.
UPDATE at 6:02 p.m.: Bush has Roberts by his side. I’d say it’s official.
Let the dishonest attacks begin.
We’re ready.
Not rumor.
Angry Clam (280c3c) — 7/19/2005 @ 5:17 pmWhat the Clam said. Or, if it is a rumor, then FoxNews, CNN and the Dog Trainer are all helping to spread it.
Xrlq (ffb240) — 7/19/2005 @ 5:28 pmHmmm … The SCOTUS Nomination blog has a post where they can’t quite decide if Roberts = Souter. Another young guy who hasn’t much of an independent track record. There were better choices. Easy confirmation, though, as the Dems hope it IS another Souter.
Kevin Murphy (9982dd) — 7/19/2005 @ 5:33 pmRoberts seems like an excellent choice.
Now, perhaps, the coutry will finally have that long overdue debate about abortion.
For those who would like to polish their mettle, here is a post with some good comments from both sides of the debate over the issue that will take center stage: Thinking Critically about Abortion
In this thread we are concerned about the Constitutional first principle arguments for/against abortion. Your contributions to the debate are welcome.
P.S. Maybe Garza will be the next pick. Oh well, I can live being 1/2 wrong with this prediction.
Paul Deignan (99d051) — 7/19/2005 @ 5:36 pmYou have to laugh at all this talk of huge money being spent to run ads to affect the confirmation. It’s not like Senator Boxer will ever approve of any Bush nominee. It would be astonishing if any Senator changed his vote – this isn’t like an election.
The only concern is if there’s an illegal nanny/gardener issue.
Shredstar (91b3b2) — 7/19/2005 @ 5:45 pmNot rumor.
Well, I was in the car, blogging at a stoplight what I heard on the radio. I figure it’s not 100% official until Bush tells us, but it sounds pretty solid.
Patterico (756436) — 7/19/2005 @ 5:46 pmI don’t have enough information yet to know if I have a raised eyebrow. — Mark Pryor (D-AR)
Shredstar (91b3b2) — 7/19/2005 @ 5:58 pmYup, it’s true… The speech just started a couple of minutes ago – but how did Wikipedia get that encyclopedia article updated so fast?
Aakash (a075a3) — 7/19/2005 @ 6:04 pmJohn Roberts – USSC nominee
Looks like he will be the President’s nominee.
Sister Toldjah (59ce3a) — 7/19/2005 @ 6:35 pm“Blogging at a stoplight”!?
Must be LA.
Paul Deignan (99d051) — 7/19/2005 @ 7:17 pmDon’t they have 802.11 at your stoplights?
Kevin Murphy (6a7945) — 7/19/2005 @ 10:36 pmI recently blogged on my lunch break, which was daring enough for me.
As for Roberts, it seems that the libs are throwing a fit because he opined that he didn’t like Roe v. Wade, but that from a professional standpoint, he wouldn’t object to it. Mark my words, the LA Times will have the headline tomorrow, “BUSH NOMINEE HUNTS DOWN PEOPLE WHO HAVE ABORTIONS AND EATS THEM – ALIVE”.
Okay, maybe it’s not that drastic, but it’ll still be something of the sort.
Nick @ HBR (5bfb69) — 7/19/2005 @ 10:53 pmOur senator (Durbin) is a vocal opponent so I guess Roberts will be a GREAT choice.
Isn’t it strange that “mainstream America” is being defined by 3 shrill, left wing, senators who are the laughing stock of our country.
Ray (75a3b5) — 7/20/2005 @ 7:03 am“Mainstream America” must not get out and vote too often.
Kevin Murphy (6a7945) — 7/20/2005 @ 8:15 amWho will it be?…
John Roberts [?]…
University Blog (c7e395) — 8/20/2008 @ 12:40 pm