Hey Dems, you have the right and the duty to say no

E.J. Dionne has a kickbutt op-ed in today's WaPo on why the Dems should find some backbone and just vote no on Roberts. A few choice morsels:

How senators vote on Roberts -- and in particular how Democrats and moderate Republicans vote -- depends on where they believe the burden of proof lies. The accepted Washington view is that deference should be paid to a manifestly qualified presidential nominee.

But the doubts about Roberts have nothing to do with his good heart. The issue is the power about to be put in his hands and into the hands of President Bush's next appointee -- power both will enjoy for life. The Senate and the public have a right to far more assurance about how Roberts would use that power than they have been given in these hearings. The Senate is under no obligation to give the president or Roberts the benefit of the doubt.

If senators simply vote "yes" on Roberts, they will be conceding to the executive branch huge power to control what information the public gets and doesn't get about nominees to life positions. The administration has stubbornly refused to release a share of Roberts's writings as deputy solicitor general. This is a dare to the Senate, and the administration is assuming it will wimp out. A "yes" on Roberts would be a craven abdication of power to the executive branch.

Roberts is smart for sure and even, as Dionne notes, slick. But smooth answers and broad evasions do not serve the public interest. Our kids and our grandkids will have to live with this choice. It won't do the Dems any good in 06 or later, if they don't stop kowtowing to the GOP message machine now.