Roe No More? Maybe, Maybe Not...

According to Joe Scarborough, it's finally official: Judge John G. Roberts is not opposed to Roe v. Wade. When his show, Scarborough Country, put up a banner that read: "Roberts: Overturn Roe v. Wade," the White House called the show and demanded a retraction. What do you have to say to that, my conservative sisters and brothers? Will you finally face the facts, or shall we continue down De Nial on a crocodile?

Y'know, either way you look at this one, President Bush has clearly misled someone. If Judge Roberts isn't opposed to Roe v. Wade, then President Bush seriously misled his base and, indeed, all of the American people by all but promising during his reelection campaign that he would appoint someone who would overturn Roe when he got the opportunity. On the other hand, if Judge Roberts is opposed to Roe v. Wade, then the White House is right now trying to mislead both the Senate and the American people by trying to obscure his opposition to Roe. Which is it, I wonder? Since lying to the Senate about a judicial nominee is pretty serious business (that pesky "advice and consent" thing, and all), I'm guessing that President Bush lied during his reelection campaign -- especially since the Republicans have a background in lying to their base about judicial nominees.

I'm dumbfounded that more conservatives aren't upset or at least cautious about this. If you ask me, it's the Republicans who should be opposing Judge Roberts' confirmation, not the Democrats. It seems pretty clear to me that it's the Republicans who aren't getting the judicial nominee that President Bush promised them. Am I wrong? That's the beauty of it, isn't it? No one knows, because you can't prove this guy's views one way or the other. But either way, the Bush administration has misled somebody. And just when I was convinced that Bush was an idiot...