Judge Samuel Alito

[snuffbox 0]

Anyone have an opinion on this guy? Seems alright to me (I dont fear an overturning of certain laws if hes confirmed) and hes held up to some rather extensive self-indulgent questioning thus far.

 

drudgereport is covering Alito's wife leaving the room crying a bit excessively for those interested...

[Art Sandusky 0]

He's an older white dude, backed by Republicans. Just accept the general guidelines, realize it'll never get out of hand, and let him through. Of course I'd love to see the guy kept out, but not at the expense of the Democratic party.

[The Robfather 0]

I've watched quite a bit of the hearings. Yesterday, the Democrats hit rock bottom. It was embarrassing to watch them implode. I was impressed with the way Specter brought the smack down on Ted Kennedy.

[The Czech Republic 0]

He's an older white dude, backed by Republicans. Just accept the general guidelines, realize it'll never get out of hand, and let him through. Of course I'd love to see the guy kept out, but not at the expense of the Democratic party.

He's a middle-aged Catholic from Jersey. He could be an elderly Protestant from Texas. Count your blessings

[Art Sandusky 0]

See? Even better! He's Catholic! I feel much better about this guy.

[The Czech Republic 0]

Okay. What kind of person do you want. Apparently "older white dude backed by Republicans" is bad. If we're going by superficial things such as these, would a young black woman backed by Democrats automatically be better?

[Art Sandusky 0]

It isn't bad. It's just what he is. But he's Catholic, so it's cool.

[2GOLD 0]

I've watched quite a bit of the hearings. Yesterday, the Democrats hit rock bottom. It was embarrassing to watch them implode. I was impressed with the way Specter brought the smack down on Ted Kennedy.

 

Can anyone save the party from completely sinking? It seems like the guys who might have a chance are being ignored for the psychotic section of the party. I'm getting more and more worried who they are going to run in 2008.

[The Czech Republic 0]

Not as if the right is cutting its ties with lunatics; Wednesday was probably the first day in ages that any Republicans were rooting for Arlen Specter. But yeah, it's awfully worrisome, since Presidential hopefuls Biden and Feingold came off as bumbling idiots ("so you're saying you'd put Constitutional law above statutory law?"), and Kennedy just made the whole damn side look bad.

[NoCalMike 0]

Alito is horrid, but ala the Democrats in the hearings refuse to follow up with any tough questions, so Alito is coming off as a moderate. The democrats still haven't grown a pair.

 

The Conservative's plan is in full effect. They wanted Justice Roberts on the courts because he is a corporate lawyer who always will side with corporations over people, and they want Alito on the court because he is in favor of giving the President any "divine" power he wants. He wants to allow the President to define the constitution in his own way, and give the President the silly power to sign bills into law with a sig that says, "unless I feel it is necessary, then I don't have to follow this law"

 

Roe v. Wade is a smokescreen. It isn't getting overturned because the Republicans know their party would be destroyed if it was overturned during their watch while the courts were stacked with Conservatives.

[The Czech Republic 0]

The Conservative's plan is in full effect.

 

 

mwahahaha

 

Hey, Democrats are asking tough questions, just asking poorly. A for effort, F for execution. Before you making any sweeping generalizations about conservative judges always favoring corporations, New London, Conn. says hi

[Danville_Wrestling 0]

I've watched quite a bit of the hearings. Yesterday, the Democrats hit rock bottom. It was embarrassing to watch them implode. I was impressed with the way Specter brought the smack down on Ted Kennedy.

 

Can anyone save the party from completely sinking? It seems like the guys who might have a chance are being ignored for the psychotic section of the party. I'm getting more and more worried who they are going to run in 2008.

 

I totally agree. The more I think about it, Mark Warner may be the Democrats best chance in 2008 but no one is giving him the time of day b/c he might rain on the "Hillary parade" in two years. I swear, if I hear one more partisan pundit call Hillary Clinton a moderate I'm going to puke.

 

I also agree that Roe v. Wade is a smoke screen for Alito. Roe v. Wade should be overturned as far as I'm concerned b/c I don't agree that the Constitution gives the woman a right to an abortion and I think that decision should be given in state legislatures moreso than any other body. One of the reasons the abortion debate is so crazy here as opposed to our international counterparts is they legislated on this issue rather than having the courts impose a decision from above, something that has fanned partisan flames for over the last 30 years. Aside from this, though, I still see the margin of upholding Roe on the court, assuming Alito gets confirmed, at 5-4 b/c I don't see Anthony Kennedy voting to change his decision in 1992 and overturning it. Thus, the Roe v. Wade debate has just changed from 6-3 to 5-4 (Breyer, Stevens, Ginsburg, Souter, and Kennedy vs. Thomas/Scalia/Roberts/Alito).

[snuffbox 0]

The Constitution doesnt say anything about why people cant smoke herb either...

 

The Dems will have a fine chance in '08 if they run someone with a little charisma (Feingold, Bayh) and dont run the campaign like a boardroom full of retardeds (John Kerry). The Republican party has been doing a swell job of damaging itself lately.

[Justice 0]

Wow. NoCal has become yet a bigger joke. Talk about missing the forrest for inane conspiracies...

[The Robfather 0]

In the lead up to the hearings, I got the impression that this would be the battle to end all battles, an impassioned debate over the role of the Supreme Court. That never happened. The Dems big mistake is they tried to produce a gotcha moment. It seemed to be their only strategy. The highlight was Kennedy and Spector arguing over mail sent/received. The entire thing became comical.

[2GOLD 0]

The Constitution doesnt say anything about why people cant smoke herb either...

 

The Dems will have a fine chance in '08 if they run someone with a little charisma (Feingold, Bayh) and dont run the campaign like a boardroom full of retardeds (John Kerry). The Republican party has been doing a swell job of damaging itself lately.

 

It seems like they are hell bent on running Hil, which a lot of dems don't want and I don't blame them. I'd vote republican just to stop Hilary. And no matter how damaged the republicans make themselves, the dems always ALWAYS seem to run face first into the open door and fall to the ground crying. In the last 8 years, I've YET to see an election the dems shouldn't have ran away with.

 

And I think some of the rulings by the democratic judges (I refuse to say liberal or conservative because it's stupid) prove that it doesn't matter what party you belong to, everyone has a price. Corporations can get anyone they want, no matter what letter they vote for.

[The Czech Republic 0]

Voting for letters, indeed...why not abandon all pretense and just have people vote for the letter first and then have the party appoint the Congressman. We're not voting for people any longer.

[Art Sandusky 0]

Kinda weird how 90% of electing a person these days is done while people are talking about who might run. But since we see the last 10% and push a "VOTE" button, we feel pretty cool about it.

[snuffbox 0]

I honestly believe that Hilary will have just too much exposable baggage to win the Dem nomination.

[Vyce 0]

Wow. NoCal has become yet a bigger joke. Talk about missing the forrest for inane conspiracies...

 

On a lighter note, Czech gave a rather nice slapdown with his New London reference.

 

I would say that the Dems best chance at reclaiming the White House in 08 is Mark Warner. He could sway a shitload of moderates and even Republicans to vote for him, if he ran the right campaign. What I'm terrified of is that Hillary gets the nomination but convinces Warner to be her running mate. There's no good result if that happens. Either she loses and Warner is damaged for a possible future run, or she wins and we're stuck with at least four years of Hillary as Prez when we'd be INFINITELY better off with Warner in that job.

 

As for Alito.......you know, ultimately, this shit is supposed to be about whether he's qualified or not, rather than his personal politics. Is he qualified? Absolutely. So confirm him.

[The Czech Republic 0]

As for Alito.......you know, ultimately, this shit is supposed to be about whether he's qualified or not, rather than his personal politics. Is he qualified? Absolutely. So confirm him.

I liked every witness who went "This is not about how qualified he is, we don't doubt that. This is about..." whatever. Also amusing was "Well, of course I'd prefer a woman/African American/Latino/Jew/liberal, but..."

[CheesalaIsGood 0]

The Conservative's plan is in full effect.

 

 

mwahahaha

 

Hey, Democrats are asking tough questions, just asking poorly. A for effort, F for execution. Before you making any sweeping generalizations about conservative judges always favoring corporations, New London, Conn. says hi

 

 

 

Hardly a "sweeping generalization" about ALL conservative judges when he BY NAME mentioned only Judge Roberts. Sorry, to pop your balloon pit pigs. But you know what happens when you assume.

[NoCalMike 0]

The Conservative's plan is in full effect.

 

 

mwahahaha

 

Hey, Democrats are asking tough questions, just asking poorly. A for effort, F for execution. Before you making any sweeping generalizations about conservative judges always favoring corporations, New London, Conn. says hi

 

 

 

Hardly a "sweeping generalization" about ALL conservative judges when he BY NAME mentioned only Judge Roberts. Sorry, to pop your balloon pit pigs. But you know what happens when you assume.

 

 

Ex-f'n-actly. I didn't anywhere say "all conservative judges" I simply said Judge Roberts himself.

 

And the wonderful corporate media, who love to NOT cover the rea meat and potatoes of a story, have been going on and on about Alito's wife breaking down and crying, and suprise suprise, INCORRECTLY report that she was crying because of the democrats questioning her, which is an outright lie, as when you watch the tape, she starts crying when a conservative judge is talking about how awesome Alito is.

[NoCalMike 0]

Wow. NoCal has become yet a bigger joke. Talk about missing the forrest for inane conspiracies...

 

What conspiracy do you speak of? Was Roberts not a corporate lawyer? Is Alito not refusing to answer questions that have to do with Presidential power(s)?

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

The Conservative's plan is in full effect.

 

 

mwahahaha

 

Hey, Democrats are asking tough questions, just asking poorly. A for effort, F for execution. Before you making any sweeping generalizations about conservative judges always favoring corporations, New London, Conn. says hi

 

 

 

Hardly a "sweeping generalization" about ALL conservative judges when he BY NAME mentioned only Judge Roberts. Sorry, to pop your balloon pit pigs. But you know what happens when you assume.

 

Actually she started crying when Republican Senator Graham was defending her husband. The same Lindsay Graham that helped prep Alito for the hearings. Staged, anyone?

 

 

Ex-f'n-actly. I didn't anywhere say "all conservative judges" I simply said Judge Roberts himself.

 

And the wonderful corporate media, who love to NOT cover the rea meat and potatoes of a story, have been going on and on about Alito's wife breaking down and crying, and suprise suprise, INCORRECTLY report that she was crying because of the democrats questioning her, which is an outright lie, as when you watch the tape, she starts crying when a conservative judge is talking about how awesome Alito is.

 

Actually, she started crying when Republican Senator Lindsey Graham was defending her husband. The same Sen. Graham that helped prep Alito for the hearings.

[Art Sandusky 0]

To defend a racism charge, you can't just go "he's a cool guy," especially if you wanted to highlight the terrible playcalls by the Democrats to even go down that path. He was indeed being told how awesome a person he was.

 

And what the fuck is up with that crying crap anyway? How dumb is that woman?

[2GOLD 0]

To defend a racism charge, you can't just go "he's a cool guy," especially if you wanted to highlight the terrible playcalls by the Democrats to even go down that path. He was indeed being told how awesome a person he was.

 

And what the fuck is up with that crying crap anyway? How dumb is that woman?

 

She's either extremely dumb or extremely smart since she dragged a lot of coverage about her crying more than anything else. That deflects a lot of questions and critisms away since a crying woman runs better press.

 

Even if that was her intent, I still think she's dumber than a sack of nails in a kids sandbox.

[Art Sandusky 0]

I mean, the timing was awful. It's dumb either way she tried to play it. You cried because someone was saying your husband had good character, or did you miss the cue to cry during the actual prompting of the compliments?

[2GOLD 0]

I mean, the timing was awful. It's dumb either way she tried to play it. You cried because someone was saying your husband had good character, or did you miss the cue to cry during the actual prompting of the compliments?

 

Maybe he beats her and hearing someone say he has good character made her feel worthless. Someone should dig deeper into this. Maybe we are truly missing some seriously dark dirt.

[Art Sandusky 0]

It'll be like the rectangular bulge in the President's coat during the first 2004 debate. Something that's probably the tip of a huge iceberg but no one pursues it for whatever reason.