On Roberts, confirmed 78-22

The WaPo has the roll vote.

I haven't written much about the Roberts confirmation hearings because I agreed with everyone who thought it was a sure thing from the get-go.

But I didn't agree with the prevailing wisdom about why it was a sure thing.

It wasn't because I thought he was a moderate, or that he was going to show judicial restraint, or because he's a darn nice, good-looking, all-American fellow.

And I certainly didn't think it was his record that would get him through easily. He barely had a record and that should have raised the hackles right there.

This was a guy who was grown in some sort of protein medium in a pod in the basement of the Heritage Foundation and groomed his whole life to get through a confirmation hearing.

I thought it was a sure thing because from the get-go he was described as a Washington insider, a favorite on the cocktail circuit and a guy with friends on both sides of the aisle.

That means that he was always going to be covered by the DC beat reporters from the WaPo and the New York Times as a moderate who was going to show judicial restraint and is a darn nice, good-looking, all-American fellow.

The fix was in on this one from the start.

Too bad only 22 Dems had enough conviction to see past all that and vote no.