Batting around the Roberts nomination

Re “Roberts Sees Role as Judicial ‘Umpire,’” Sept. 13

Judge John G. Roberts Jr. says, “Nobody ever went to a ballgame to see the umpire.” But, more than once, I have been to a ballgame that has had its course changed -- and the final outcome altered -- by a bad call from an umpire. I don’t think the country, nor the Constitution, can afford the long-term effects of the decisions of an umpire who is so clearly a cheerleader for only one of the teams.

JIMMY GOW

Torrance

*

Justices Stephen Breyer’s and Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s hearings lasted three days. Ginsburg declined to answer 55 questions during her Senate hearings. How long will it take for Roberts to be confirmed, and will he be allowed to decline to answer questions on ideologies without rebuff?

MARY BURKE-FARRELL

Northridge

*

Re “To Fill O’Connor’s Shoes, Bush Might Want to Cross the Aisle,” Sept. 12

I thought I had seen (and read) it all, but Ronald Brownstein threw me for a loop. We had a very tough, very close election, with the Supreme Court a key issue. But the man who won, President Bush, is supposed to name a Democrat to the court, in Brownstein’s strange world, because it would be a nice thing to do. What are elections for? Does anyone think John Kerry would have named a Republican? The thinking on the woozy left is beyond belief.

PAUL KNOPICK

Laguna Hills