Beltway Traffic Jam

Create your own linkfest below.

To join in, choose a post from your blog to highlight, edit it to add a link to this post, and then send a TrackBack. If your blog doesn’t automatically generate one, use the Send TrackBack feature below. For more information, see this post.

FILED UNDER: Uncategorized,
James Joyner
About James Joyner
James Joyner is Professor and Department Head of Security Studies at Marine Corps University's Command and Staff College. He's a former Army officer and Desert Storm veteran. Views expressed here are his own. Follow James on Twitter @DrJJoyner.


  1. Jim Pfaff says:

    Ann Coulter has written an article on her website castigating John Roberts:

    . . . [A]ll we know about him for sure is that he can’t dance and he probably doesn’t know who Jay-Z is. Other than that, he is a blank slate. Tabula rasa. Big zippo. Nada. Oh, yeah…we also know he’s argued cases before the supreme court. big deal; so has Larry F[l]ynt’s attorney. Apparently, Roberts decided early on that he wanted to be on the Supreme Court and that the way to do that was not to express a personal opinion on anything to anybody ever. It’s as if he is from some space alien sleeper cell. Maybe the space aliens are trying to help us, but I wish we knew that.

    Whoa! Wait a minute here. What planet have you been on Ann? Are you adding something positive to the debate here or just tossing Molitof Cocktails for effect? Or worse: is your idea of an acceptable nominee someone who will when confronted with a liberal screed from an ACLU attorney below the bench jump up from his or her chair, rip off their robe and put on sackcloth and ashes? I guess you give us the answer here:

    Even as they are losing voters, Democrats don’t hesitate to nominate reliable left-wing lunatics like Ruth Bader Ginsberg to lifetime sinecures on the High Court.

    So, Ann, what we want is a right-wing lunatic? Would David Duke be acceptable? Lyndon LaRouche? Are you seeking a Supreme Court bomb thrower when you say:

    . . . [L]ets ponder the fact that Roberts has gone through 50 years on this planet without ever saying anything controversial. That’s just unnatural.

    By contrast, I held out for three months, tops, before dropping my first rhetorical bombshell, which I think was about Goldwater.

    Please define what you mean by your statements, because they come across fantastical and serve only to support the theory held by many liberals that conservative thinking is intolerant and predjudiced.We would be more well-served with cogent analysis rather than bombastic diatribe.Another problem with Coulter’s analysis is her comparison with Souter. Roberts is a Rehnquist man and is as unknown as Rehnquist was when he was nominated in 1981. Most of us think he turned out pretty good. That’s a good sign in my opinion.