Frankly I’m not a lover of G.W. or much to do with the right wing, but then just because G.W. and those on the right may feel someone’s a good candidate doesn’t mean he/she might not be a good candidate for everyone; certainly Souter and Kennedy both have shown that. There were candidates FAR more egregious than Roberts, and it’s well worth considering how much effort is worth expending on opposing a man who on the whole is well-liked by members of both parties and who has otherwise shown himself to be an accessible and emminently qualified jurist. If this were another Clarence Thomas I’d say it’s worth the effort. In this case Roberts is an intelligent, thoughtful, and well-qualified individual, one that has justifiably arrived at legal conclusions that those of different ideologies may not agree with but which doesn’t make him wrong or unsuited for the position before him. Moreover, as any follower of the Supreme Court surely knows, past performance is NOT an indicator of future returns.

Looks like they will avoid that awkward possibility. Roberts is supposed to be “brilliant,” but he doesn’t have the kind of record that will help him sail through the Senate.