who are you...

i've been watching the senate hearings for the new chief justice of the american supreme court. i have to admit - that i do not really know anything at all about judge john roberts - but i do know that he is gwb's nominee and that fact alone makes me think i won't like roberts. a quick google search turned up the interesting fact that judge roberts provided legal advice to florida govenor jeb bush in 2000 regarding the presidential election. more specifically - how the florida legislature could legally find in gwb favour. that rumour aside, to be somewhat fair - from what i see today, roberts appears to be eloquent, cautious and polite in the face of some not so polite questioning by some of the senators.

but look at his eyes! his eyes! his eyes! his eyes look like the grown up version the village of the damned kids. yes, he may have dyed his hair dark - but his eyes still look bizzarre and like he's about to unleash his powers that will make us all fall under his thrall.

roberts keeps emphasizing that he has no firm and calibrated judicial philosophy and this seems to be the very thing that the committee is attempting to uncover. for someone who has stated that he's not running for political office and that he does not have a platform to run on - he sure is answering like a politician. sidestepping just about everything that comes his way.

the position of chief justice is a lifetime appointment and roberts is only 50 years old. he could conceivably have this power for the next 30 years. that is power. power for roberts, power for the republican party and a very powerful legacy for gwb. roberts would become one of the most powerful men in the united states.

a quote yesterday from one of the democratic senators pretty much sums it up :

Sen. Charles Schumer, D-New York, told Roberts he needed to answer senators' questions so they can determine "whether you're in the mainstream."

"In a sense, we have seen maybe 10 percent of you -- just the visible tip of the iceberg, not the 90 percent that is still submerged," Schumer said. "And we all know that it is the ice beneath the surface that can sink the ship."

the republican senators are holding the line that roberts should not answer any questions about how he might rule in a case or issue that may come before the supreme court. (well, then, shall we talk about playstation 2 or the latest golf swing techniques?). and the democratic senators are pushing to know more about the personal viewpoints of this judge. another democratic senator took a pretty sharp focus on the events of the coming week :

"Judge, if I look only at what you've said and written ... I would have to vote 'no,' " said Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Delaware.

"This is your chance, judge, to explain what you mean by what you have said and what you have written. "

the hearings are meant to wrap up by the end of the week and if judge roberts is confirmed he will take his place as chief justice when the court begins sitting again in october. why, oh, why, oh, why did sandra day o'connor retire? a moderate republican... does such a thing exist anymore?

[music | nine inch nails, "ringfinger"]