The Lafayette Journal & Courier has an editorial criticizing Senator Bayh for his decision to vote against Judge Roberts. Bayh’s dissent, says the Journal & Courier, is “stupefying” because there is wide consensus that Judge Roberts will be confirmed.
I am of two minds here. First, and this is based on very imperfect information, I think I like Roberts. And, I don’t think Bayh’s purported reasons for voting against Roberts are the real reasons. I think the real reason is that Bayh is running for President and thinks a no vote will appease the Democratic base. His purported reason is Roberts’ refusal to answer the Senate’s questions in any meaningful way.
However, on the other hand, I’m against the Journal & Courier’s response to Bayh’s purported reason. The J&C doesn’t seem to care about Roberts’ evasiveness. Bayh said,
“‘Advise and consent’ must mean more than ascertaining collegiality and strength of resume,” Bayh wrote in a statement explaining his decision. “More important are a nominee’s beliefs. On this score, in too many important areas, we can only speculate.” . . . “When I introduced Judge Roberts at his confirmation hearing, I said that I looked forward to a full and clarifying discussion of his views,” Bayh wrote. “Regrettably, that did not happen.”
The J&C responds:
[W]here has Bayh been, and what exactly did he expect? From what we heard, Roberts was about as candid as the process allows.
See, it’s the fault of “the process.” Nothing can be done but rubberstamp the nominee. The Senate should just shut up and take what’s given to it. And they should say, “thank you.” After all, that’s what they apparently did for former FEMA director Mike “Brownie” Brown.
So, I think Bayh’s full of crap, and I don’t think much of the Journal & Courier’s defeatist view of the Senate’s role in the process. Guess it’s just another cranky Saturday morning in the Masson household.
Leave a Reply