So it's John Roberts. No comment on another white male on the bench. Part of me is surpised that Bush didn't go for some sort of a minority - then again, why should I be? Interestingly:

Roberts has not been considered a "movement conservative," and in the past, some on the Republican Party's right have doubted his commitment to their cause.

Still, based on his political record, I think that conservatives will be pleased. (It's sad when your greatest hope is for a Souter...) Notably, he has argued in the past that Roe v. Wade should be overturned (in legal briefings). Two years ago, he indicated that he could abide by precedent. But what happens when he is on the SCOTUS and is not in charge of overturning precedent that he believes was incorrectly decided?

I suspect that since he is replacing O'Conner, the 5-4 decision suddenly 4-5... It greatly bothers me that he has an entire two years experience as a federal judge. This is a grave responsibility, there are only 9 such judges at a time, and you'd like to have more of a judicial record than two years.

He's young (50) and we can easily see him serving on the bench for 25 years. That can be a scary thought - still, he doesn't appear to be as crazy right wing as some that Bush could have picked.

And from all accounts, he's got legal skills - something that Thomas is sorely lacking. His credentials themselves aren't even close to questionable, which is more than I can say about several nominees that Bush has put forth for his administration. He has experience arguing before the SCOTUS. When Bush starts talking about Thomas as a model jurist, I worried. Especially with his track record of nominating unqualified idiots. I'll reserve judgement, say that it could be better, but it could certainly be a lot worse.