This may surprise some of you

I received a letter from John Kerry the other day. Well, an email to be exact. Although I strongly supported him in the 2004 election - and I'm talking about signs on lawns, making bag lunches, offering to have strangers doss on my New Hampshire living room floor in the final push, etc., etc. - we're not exactly chummy. That may be due in some part to the fact that I think he utterly fucked up his 2004 campaign. How a man with his brains and backbone was able to so soundly snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, I will never understand. But that's ancient history. I think it's more likely that I'm on that massive computer rollodex at the DNC than that my email was as personal as I might have hoped.

But I digress. Senator Kerry was writing to inform me of how he was going to vote on the Roberts nomination.

"I will vote against this vitally important nomination."

It surprises me to say this, but I think you're wrong, Senator Kerry - as are many of the democratic senators who agreed with you on this issue. I think you should have voted for Roberts.

Is he the best candidate for the job? Perhaps, perhaps not. The reality is that Bush won the election and that means he gets the perks of the job: Air Force One, that rather attractive presidential residence, and the right to pick names out of a hat for all these important posts. You may not like that fact, but it is incontrovertible. Stonewalling and bitching about who he picks isn't going to change the fact that you're not going to get your turn. Elections are a bitch that way.

So, Bush picks. I, quite frankly, was expecting a two-headed conservative monster, frothing at the mouth to devour Roe v. Wade and put bibles back in the classroom. But we got Roberts. Is he more conservative than I would like? Yes. Do I feel that he will side on all major issues in the way that I think is best? No. But is he the gorgon I had been expecting? Most definitely not.

"Win or lose on this vote, it is essential that we act on our deepest convictions. And I refuse to vote for a Supreme Court nominee who came before the Senate intent on demonstrating his ability to deftly deflect legitimate questions about his views, opinions and philosophy."

I have not had the time or inclination to even begin to scratch the surface of his past record, but I do find it interesting that he seems willing to examine and, in several cases, defend both liberal and conservative issues. However much I would like a liberally minded Justice to chair the Supreme Court, I will be happy to settle for a fair and balanced one. And no, this has nothing to do with you, Fox News. I do understand that justice can be meted out as well by a Republican as a Democrat - a concept that seems to be hard for either side of the political spectrum in Washington to understand these days.

"If he is confirmed - and he may well be - the Roberts Court will shape the course of constitutional law for decades to come. It will decide dozens of cases that will define the depth and breadth of freedom in America - our commitment to civil rights, our dedication to civil liberties, our devotion to privacy and a woman's right to choose."

Yes, this is true. But it is also true that often in life it falls upon us to make the best of a bad situation. And Dubya is definitely a "bad situation". His pick appears to be an extremely intelligent, moderately right wing man who has been known to defend both Reagan policies as well as Gay rights issues. A better choice than I would have expected.

Look at it this way folks. This is the same man who placed Michael Brown at FEMA. Compared with that, we're coming up trumps.