No Stephen Breyer is he, but they might get <a href="http://www.andrewsullivan.com/index.php?dish_inc=archives/2005_10_30_dish_archive.html#113078987757930595">along</a>.
<!--break-->
If you're the most conservative judge on the most liberal Circuit court, what does that make you? I don't think he's a strict constructionist, <a href="http://www.andrewsullivan.com/index.php?dish_inc=archives/2005_10_30_dish_archive.html#113077744153732787">more from MFGR</a>.
My only concern is that the Christian Right seems giddy, and the <a href="http://www.reason.com/hitandrun/2005/10/wow_a_nominee_w.shtml">libertarians</a> are less so.
What the hell are they up to anyway?
Miers was a decoy nomination, Bush offered her up as a sacrifice, knowing the Right would revolt. The renewed fervor from the Right, the not-so-Right, and the right-of-Center will coalesce behind Alito and make it that much harder to filibuster him.
-OR-
Miers was the real deal. Bush is sending out Alito as if to say to those on his Right: "OK, let's see how far your Scalia-lite candidate gets". Alito might loose enough Republican senators (Chafee, Specter, et al.) to make his nomination untenable. Not that I give the Right enough credit to realize that the judges they idolize are out of touch with the American public as a whole.
-OR-
Bush really wanted Miers. Bush really wants Alito. Which calls into question his decision making capability (again)... how could you pick Miers over someone with the record and experience of Alito? It's not the gender card either, there are plenty of qualified female judges out there.
I'm befuddled.
Still more excitement from the Religiuous Right than the Thinking Right.
_______________________________
<a href="http://www.andrewsullivan.com">MFGR</a>
<a href="http://www.economist.com">those limeys</a>
Basically, anyone whose viewpoint is not blinkered by allegiance to the Republican Party or is overly concerned with replacing the Constitution with the Christian Bible.
_______________________________
Sept. was the deadliest month in Iraq since January. Insurgents are building better bombs everyday.
I saw his earlier Headline "ALITO WIFE LEAVES HEARING IN TEARS AFTER DEM ATTACK", and thought it was probably correct.
But I watched the hearing sequence on PBS and Martha-Ann Bomgardner most definitely starts crying after Republican Senator Lindsey Graham asks Alito, "'Are you really a closet bigot?"
He has <a href="http://www.humaneventsonline.com/blog-detail.php?id=11521">posted this</a>, trying to support his position. Come on, Matt, what happened to you...?
Propaghandi: "Fuck You Rudy"
"Senator Lieberman said that a filibuster was on the table for him."
Yes! Here we go!
Anyone see David Brooks on Charlie Rose last night? I have to agree that the spectacle of Kennedy, Durbin, Schummer, and Biden orate endlessly did not make for a strong week for Dems in the eyes of the electorate. Especially when white, working-class Americans (who Kerry lost by 20 points in the election) identifies with the nominee.
There must be a better attack than his tardy Vanguard recusal and CAP membership. (Although I think he's disingenuous on both counts).
If the NSA wiretapping goes to Court, and Alito is on the bench, is there any question to whose side he'd be on? I think they should have pushed that angle. Maybe it was the media's fault, I mostly heard the other soundbites. NPR did a good bit on hammering home "stare decisis" and "unitary executive", I guess.
"If the NSA wiretapping goes to Court, and Alito is on the bench, is there any question to whose side he'd be on? I think they should have pushed that angle."
Who should have pushed this angle? The media? Shouldn't they try and not push any angle? The Dems on the Judiciary Committee? Of course, Alito doesn't have to answer a question that isn't even in court yet. I understand the concern, with the Scalia comparisons, and Alito will sometimes play politics from the court, but it seems moot.
Lastly, one of the things Karl Rove has taught us, it is that there is no such thing as "political capitol," and tenacious attacks win. The Dems could go for the 2006 House and the filibuster. If the next nominee, seems just as willing to let Bush slide closer to dictator, filibuster. They have the Senate votes.
It's not clear to me that a filibuster weakens Dem candidates across the board. If it does to the extent that it makes it impossible to win control of the House this year (not that it's a lock without a "damaging" filibuster), then there needs to be a calculation over which is worse for the country: Alito on the court, or Republicans in control of the House. Alito is for life, true, but we can see how 5 years of GOP control of the Congressional and Executive branches has been (irreparably?) damaging.
---
Hopefully the reign of Rovian partisanship and DeLayism is coming to an end. Brooks mentioned last night that Gingrich has had a hand in the current power struggle in the House. Another interesting topic that Brooks brought up was that America is not the old-style labor-management class warfare that the Dems (were) good at, but the stratification of society. The children of a family making $50k/yr. are much less likely to improve their class standing than the children of a familty making $90k/yr. The GOP is going to need to confront that at some point, otherwise they will never again be competitive in places like Ohio, Pennsylvania, etc. The upward mobility of the middle class, as happened after WWII, is gone.
"Democrats questioned Judge Alito so aggressively last week that his wife, Martha, broke into tears and left the committee room Wednesday for more than an hour."