I can understand why they’re so cautious. But a little strategic thinking could go a long way here.
I am referring to Lambda Legal’s exceedingly hesitant reaction to today’s news that John Roberts assisted in preparing the plaintiffs for their Supreme Court argument in Romer v. Evans, the gay community’s first big Supreme Court win. Basically, the Lambda statement goes out of its way to minimize the significance of Roberts’ participation in the case, then reiterates that they still have "significant questions" about him, and concludes by describing the whole situation as a "puzzle."
This strikes me as somewhat unfair to Roberts. It also strikes me as the wrong approach politically. Can you name any other person on President Bush’s short list who volunteered a helping hand to gay rights activists attempting to overturn an anti-gay state law in the Supreme Court? (Admittedly, this wasn’t widely known about Roberts before today – maybe they all did. But I doubt it.) So wouldn’t it be reasonable to give the guy some credit for what he did? I mean, he may have been instrumental in a hugely important Supreme Court victory for gay rights – would a little "thank you" be so difficult to muster? Moreover, if the Dobsonites were to see Lambda and similar groups softening their opposition to Roberts, isn’t there at least the possibility that they will start to see Roberts as potentially another Souter or Kennedy, and hence that they will start to see Bush’s nomination of Roberts as a betrayal? That can’t help but aid Lambda’s cause – the less inspired the Dobsonites are to turn out their troops for the Republican party, the better off the Democrats will be.
So, memo to liberal advocacy groups. Don’t get so caught up in your single-minded determination to object to anyone Bush nominates that, when something that is actually quite positive comes along, you’re not able to take advantage of it. Play smart. We’re still a minority party, but we don’t have to be for long.
UPDATE: The NYT is reporting that James Dobson views the revelation of Roberts’ participation in Romer as "not welcome news." They are worried, make no mistake. I wonder whether this "not welcome news" will act as the proverbial turd in the punchbowl at the upcoming Justice Sunday II.
Whoa, peeps! You’re going too fast, I can’t keep up! :)Interesting points, though.
Perhaps I don’t understand completely, but my logic seems to follow this way:1) Bush nominates Roberts. Conservative groups are thrilled.2) He helped bring about a landmark case for gay rights.3) Instead of opposing Roberts, Democrats should praise him and show their support.4) The far right, realizing that their candidate might not be staunchly conservative, pulls their support.5) The Republican right sees what’s happening and also pulls their support.6) Roberts is not confirmed.7) Bush now chooses someone MORE Conservative so the Republicans will actually vote for the person.Does that help?-Russell
Well, that’s one scenario, though I doubt it’s a likely one. Unless Roberts turns out to be a child molester, I cannot see Bush withdrawing his name. It is nearly inconceivable to me that he will not be confirmed. But there’s a much bigger picture here. This nomination and the way the Dems handle it could have a significant impact on the 2006 elections, if they play their cards right. That’s really what I’m getting at.
Perhaps folks are concerned about trumpeting this crumb of good behavior since so little is (still!) known about this guy.I mean, John Ashcroft once helped a little old lady across the street, but that doesn’t make him a good man.In short, I think folks are being cautious about their support for a specific action being spun as support for the person.
I’m not suggesting that the activists roll out the red carpet. What I’m suggesting is credit where credit is due. Seems to me that at least a modicum of credit is due in this instance. Moreover, the fact remains that if Roberts really thought that the Romer plaintiffs were pushing an “agenda” that he deeply believed was wrong, he surely wouldn’t have helped them out. Either that, or his legal work and his personal views have absolutely no relation to each other. Either works for me.
Hi, David! In my view, if this nominee is perceived to be palatable to liberals, Bush will face even greater pressure from the right with respect to the next nominee. I think the left should rather keep any encouraging signs to itself, publicly bemoan its circumstances, and hope that perception leaves this one in the “scary right” category. The left needs to focus its energies on the nominees to come.For what it’s worth, I think John Roberts is an excellent candidate. Remember Grubart?
Wow, Lise, you’re even sneakier than I am! An excellent observation. I wonder whether the reaction we’re seeing is because they’re thinking that way, or whether they’re just obsessed with defeating any Bush nominee. Frankly, I sorta suspect it’s the latter, but maybe they’re better strategists than I give them credit for.Thanks for visiting!