Nomination should move quickly

President Bush nominated a man most of us have never heard of to the Supreme Court two weeks ago, but from all accounts Judge John G. Roberts Jr. is a brilliant jurist, a decent man, and a safe bet to be confirmed.

That hasn't stopped a few extremists on both sides from howling though. It seems the far right and far left, the folks with agendas, would be more comfortable if Judge Roberts had a longer paper trail behind him, so they could pin him down on certain issues - in particular abortion.

But the president has done what most presidents do in the end - he appointed someone he thought was qualified for the bench rather than someone who is a political lapdog.

Of course, the president has said all along that, given the chance, he would appoint a judicial conservative, like Justice Scalia or Justice Thomas - someone who would be an "originalist" rather than an "activist" when applying the Constitution to case law.

That's fine with us. We still subscribe to the idea that the president gets to appoint the nominee of his choosing. As Sen. McCain points out, "Elections have consequences," and it only makes sense that a conservative president would appoint a conservative judge.

The Senate, of course, gets to confirm the appointment. That means hearings, investigations and a little bit of political posturing (all right, a lot of political posturing). That is all fine, too. That's the way it should be.

At the end of the day, if a majority of senators decide to vote against Judge Roberts - for whatever reason - then the Senate has done its duty, and the president will come back with another nominee. No one gets an automatic pass to the Supreme Court.

But what we don't want to see is the Democratic minority holding up Judge Roberts in the Senate the way so many of President Bush's appeals court judges have been held up - with the threat of filibuster.

Every nominee, especially a judicial nominee, deserves the courtesy of the up-or-down vote prescribed by the Constitution. Most senators now seem to agree, although the so-called Gang of 14 who crafted the compromise currently in effect did leave open the window of "extraordinary circumstances" to jump back on the filibuster bandwagon.

We don't think there is anything "extraordinary" about Roberts except on the good side so far. He has a reputation for reasonableness and diplomacy. Those are certainly desirable qualities in a Supreme Court justice, and we would not object if they were found in more senators, too.

Barring the unforeseen, it looks like Judge Roberts will be quickly confirmed and will take his seat in time to join the court for the new session in October. That would be a rare case of government doing the people's business efficiently and effectively, and should be applauded.