What does Roberts' performance as Chief Justice on the Court have to do with O'Connor's replacement? In the not-so-distant past, a majority of our nation's electorate came out in force and increased a Republican majority in Congress and re-elected a Republican administration, largely because of what was at stake in the judiciary. Fed up with legislation emanating from the bench and rulings flying in the face of the sensibilities of mainstream America, a healthy majority of Americans opted for the party that was most likely to restore sanity and strict constructionism to the judiciary. So why the burning desire on Specter's part to continue to pine for a "balance" that only serves to ensure the pathological judicial mechanisms that have all but destroyed judicial reliance on the Constitution? One does not cure a dysfunctional system by ensuring that elements of that dysfunctionality remain. One cures it by eliminating those elements altogether. There is no honor in upholding "balance" or tradition when such a "balance" becomes counterproductive to the greater good. But being the consummate RINO that he is, I suppose it is hardly surprising for that concept to be lost on the likes of Senator Specter.
Specter and Reid encouraged the president to delay a second nomination, saying it would help senators to see Roberts settle in as chief justice before debating a second nominee.
Specter said O'Connor is prepared to continue on the bench until the Supreme Court's new term ends next June.
"It would be quite a sacrifice for her, but she's prepared to do it if she is asked," Specter told reporters at the White House after seeing the president. "By next June, we'll know a lot more about Judge Roberts ... than we do today."