By now you know that Sen. Schumer (presumably on behalf of all Dems) has presented Judge Roberts w/ a list of 50 questions about his judicial philosophy that he'd like answered when the Senate opens hearings on his nomination to SCOTUS. Conventional wisdom is that he should take the Ruth Buzzy Ginsberg approach and refuse to answer substantive questions so as not to prejudice any future rulings. (Ann Coulter's wisdom is he should throw a few bombs and have a real debate.)
But a couple of us were talking it over at dinner last night (ok, hubby, bro & me; the kids had no opinion), and we think it would be more fun if Roberts would answer all the questions in the way he imagines Schumer would like him to. Call Roe "settled law," say the Constitution emanates penumbras galore, do whatever it takes to get Schumer & Kennedy smiling and patting themselves on the back. Then, at the close of his testimony, he should say, "By the way, Senators, of course I reserve the right to revisit any question in the context of the case that actually comes before me."
Wouldn't it be fun if he just played them like that? Sigh.
