President Bush is to be commended for keeping his promise to the American people by selecting such an impartial, accomplished jurist to fill this crucial seat on the High Court. Judge Roberts is an unquestionably qualified attorney and judge with impressive experience in government and the private sector. He has demonstrated at every stop on his career path the legal acumen, judicial temperament, and personal integrity necessary to be a Supreme Court Justice. ~Dr. James Dobson, who has expressed cautious support of the president’s Supreme Court nominee

Judge Roberts is a superb nominee. He is a man of keen intellect and extraordinary legal experience who will bring fidelity to the Constitution to his service on the High Court. I am most pleased that a man of this caliber and obvious judicial temperament has been nominated. ~D. James Kennedy’s more effusive praise for the president’s Supreme Court nominee

There can be no question that Judge Roberts is exceptionally well qualified to serve as the next Supreme Court Justice … A man of character, Judge Roberts understands the Constitution and has a record of applying the law — not legislating from the bench. ~Jay Sekulow, attorney who argues for prayer in government schools before the Supreme Court, but refuses to support Christian Judge Roy Moore, on the president’s Supreme Court nominee

Republicans are desperately trying to convince themselves that Roberts will be different because they want to believe Bush wouldn’t let us down on the Supreme Court. Somewhere in America a woman is desperately trying to convince herself that her husband won’t hit her again because he told her “things are going to be different this time.” (And yes, that woman’s name is Whitney Houston.)

Bush said “Trust me,” and Republicans trust him. It shouldn’t be difficult for conservatives to convince themselves that Roberts is our man. They’ve had practice convincing themselves of the same thing with Warren, Brennan, Blackmun, Stevens, O’Connor, Kennedy and Souter.~Ann Coulter on “fool me 8 times, shame on me” regarding the president’s choice of a Supreme Court nominee whose record is as bland as his name.

Even if every Democrat voted against President Bush’s nominee (plus a few RINOs), John Roberts would still win. I don’t care if his name is bland as long as his record is full of principled conservative spice. . . so why didn’t the president nominate somebody like that?

Though I’m growing weary of the same old, same old, I suppose we need to gear up for the next round of crying in the wilderness, when the so-called principled conservatives will be defending another reprehensible presidential nominee because “we can’t let Hillary get in the White House.”

Condoleezza Rice, anyone?