Judge Samuel Alito

[The Robfather 0]

The judge's sister, Rosemary Alito, said her sister-in law took Graham's comments as a message of support. "Martha understood them to be kind comments," she said. "It was that expression of warmth, the feeling of support for Sam, that triggered an emotional response."

 

Link

[Vyce 0]

Are you people seriously considering that she PLANNED to cry, as in it was calculated? Goddamn, even I'm not that ridiculously cynical.

[NoCalMike 0]

Are you people seriously considering that she PLANNED to cry, as in it was calculated? Goddamn, even I'm not that ridiculously cynical.

 

 

No, I think most everyone is just messing around, but even you would have to admit that the media's constant coverage of "the crying incident" is fucking bullshit, like it is more important that then hearings themself.

[The Robfather 0]

Senate Democrat backs Alito

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Ben Nelson of Nebraska on Tuesday became the first Senate Democrat to announce his support of conservative Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito, who is expected to be confirmed later this month by the full Republican-led Senate.

 

"I have decided to vote in favor of Judge Samuel Alito," Nelson, a moderate, said in a statement issued by his office.

 

"I came to this decision after careful consideration of his impeccable judicial credentials, the American Bar Association's strong recommendation and his pledge that he would not bring a political agenda to the court," Nelson said.

 

The Senate Judiciary Committee, which held Alito's confirmation hearing last week, is expected to send President George W. Bush's nomination of Alito to the full Senate next week for anticipated confirmation.

 

Could it be, someone is up for re-election in a Red State?

[2GOLD 0]

Senate Democrat backs Alito

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Ben Nelson of Nebraska on Tuesday became the first Senate Democrat to announce his support of conservative Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito, who is expected to be confirmed later this month by the full Republican-led Senate.

 

"I have decided to vote in favor of Judge Samuel Alito," Nelson, a moderate, said in a statement issued by his office.

 

"I came to this decision after careful consideration of his impeccable judicial credentials, the American Bar Association's strong recommendation and his pledge that he would not bring a political agenda to the court," Nelson said.

 

The Senate Judiciary Committee, which held Alito's confirmation hearing last week, is expected to send President George W. Bush's nomination of Alito to the full Senate next week for anticipated confirmation.

 

Could it be, someone is up for re-election in a Red State?

 

 

Could be. Or it could just be a guy who realizes that it's a waste of energy to fight this battle. Course the guy just assured he'll never get a nomination for anything and he'll be lucky if his party gives him an ounce of support now. Coming out in favor of Alito might be a death nail in the guys political career.

[The Czech Republic 0]

I want to see how Uniter-Not-Divider Rising Star Barack Obama votes! Five dollars says with the party!

[The Robfather 0]

Durbin to vote against Alito, says filibuster possible

 

snip:

 

"A week ago, I would have told you it's not likely to happen," Durbin said. "As of [Wednesday], I just can't rule it out. I was surprised by the intensity of feeling of some of my colleagues. It's a matter of counting. We have 45 Democrats, counting [Vermont independent] Jim Jeffords, on our side. We could sustain a filibuster if 41 senators ... are willing to stand and fight.

 

"We're asking senators where they stand. When it reaches a critical moment when five senators have said they oppose a filibuster, it's off the table. It's not going to happen. But if it doesn't reach that moment, then we'll sit down and have that conversation."

[Art Sandusky 0]

I want to see how Uniter-Not-Divider Rising Star Barack Obama votes! Five dollars says with the party!

Voting either way makes you a divider. You can't vote for confirmation and rejection. Good job at grasping the idea of choice.

[The Czech Republic 0]

My point was, if he really was this reasonable moderate who sees the big picture beyond petty party squabbles, and thinks hard work and merit is what really matters, like his campaign was along the lines of, then he'd have the good sense and the balls to confirm a worthy nominee no matter who nominated him, and not just vote with Dick "Dick" Durbin.

 

 

 

good job

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

When did Obama claim to be a moderate?

[The Robfather 0]

I doubt many voters get excited about moderate politics.

 

I've heard the media refer to Lincoln Chafee as a moderate, when he really has quite a liberal voting record. I don't know what to make of the tag, actually. Can a moderate be pro-life or is a moderate always pro-choice? Are moderates expected to support McCain's campaign finance reform? Does a moderate just split the difference on a particular policy matter? Seems like a meaningless term, at least to me.

[The Czech Republic 0]

When did Obama claim to be a moderate?

I don't know if the words ever left his mouth, but I know his whole deal was trying to be a man of integrity above all the partisan bullshit that everyone could agree on. Logical platform when you run against Alan Keyes.

[SuperJerk 0]

When did Obama claim to be a moderate?

I don't know if the words ever left his mouth, but I know his whole deal was trying to be a man of integrity above all the partisan bullshit that everyone could agree on. Logical platform when you run against Alan Keyes.

 

That's not the same thing as being a moderate.

[Danville_Wrestling 0]

Mark my words: if the Democrats filibuster Alito two things are going to happen:

 

#1-The Bush Administration will nominate a justice who is even more conservative than Alito which will prompt more filibusters

#2-The Democrats will be painted as obstructionists like they were in 2002 and will lose in 2006

 

The Democrats have clearly lost this battle. Alito didn't do much during the confirmation hearing that would prompt a filibuster or the majority of the country to support such a move like that. If the Dems filibuster after the smackdown they received during the hearings all the GOP has to do is show that crap till November and the Democrats are toast.

 

This is why the Democrats aren't mounting serious opposition to take back control of Congress this November b/c they are too busy with their petty squabbles over a Roe v. Wade decision that is NOT in jeopardy (Anthony Kennedy is going to vote w/the 4 liberals to give us 5-4) instead of crafting POLICY POSITIONS to win. I might be conservative, but I don't sell my vote to the GOP. I'm open to voting Democrat but they've got to give me SOMETHING other than "we're not Bush, Delay, or Cheney" to win.

[The Czech Republic 0]

When did Obama claim to be a moderate?

I don't know if the words ever left his mouth, but I know his whole deal was trying to be a man of integrity above all the partisan bullshit that everyone could agree on. Logical platform when you run against Alan Keyes.

 

That's not the same thing as being a moderate.

It implies that he's not going to be heavily left- or right-wing. You can't gain respect from everyone if you're a liberal nut or conservative nut, can you?

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

When did Obama claim to be a moderate?

I don't know if the words ever left his mouth, but I know his whole deal was trying to be a man of integrity above all the partisan bullshit that everyone could agree on. Logical platform when you run against Alan Keyes.

 

That's not the same thing as being a moderate.

It implies that he's not going to be heavily left- or right-wing. You can't gain respect from everyone if you're a liberal nut or conservative nut, can you?

 

Reagan was a conservative ideologue. LBJ was quite liberal. There have been very popular politicians who have leaned quite far one way or the other.

[snuffbox 0]

I dont know if the nomination/filibuster process is effecting anyone's November campaign at all....but dragging this out is taking all the heat off the CIA leak, Iraq, Bin Laden STILL around, scandals, etc, and that WILL effect the upcominf midterm election. Either the Dems have just completely lost their political minds, or the Republican puppetmasters are the goddamn shrewdest poltitians this country has ever seen.

[The Czech Republic 0]

The Democrats have clearly lost this battle.

It's not even supposed to BE a fucking battle, that's the worst part. Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who didn't answer much during hearings (with the blessing of Joe "I just don't KNOW enough!" Biden, of all people), was waved through 96-3, in a 57D-43R Senate. Essentially a consensus. Stephen Breyer, 87-9. He was qualified, he got through without a hitch. We get to John Roberts and it's 78-22. Where was the battle in '93 and '94?

 

And look at the cocksuckers that voted nay: Ted Kennedy, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, John Kerry, Dick Durbin, Barack Obama, Dianne Feinstein, to name a few. I'm sure they'll be joined by even more this time around.

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

Guys like Scalia & Thomas are *actually* decidedly out of the mainstream of American legal theory, but now it looks like they're going to make up 4/9 of the SCOTUS.

[Art Sandusky 0]

But that's cool, because only cocksuckers can have reservations about future rulings a Supreme Court justice might help render. All this "why are you guys playing politics when the guy's qualified" shit is going to explode in their face when a qualified liberal is nominated.

[The Robfather 0]

Obama voted against John Roberts, and if a Dem couldn't support him, I doubt a Dem could support any Republican SC nom.

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

Obama voted against John Roberts, and if a Dem couldn't support him, I doubt a Dem could support any Republican SC nom.

 

If Roberts' ruling in the recent Oregon assisted-suicide case is any indication, he's just going to be another Scalia puppet.

 

In a prior case in which a state banned assisted-suicide, he wrote that he thought "it's important not to have too narrow a view of protecting personal rights. The right that was protected in the assisted-suicide case was the right of the people through their legislatures to articulate their own views on the policies that should apply in those cases of terminating life, and not to have the court interfering in those policy decisions. That's an important right."

 

Yet he somehow voted against the state of Oregon's law.

 

According to Roberts, it's fine for states to legislate bans on terminally ill patients rights to end their lives because of state's rights to legislate on this issue.

 

But it's not okay for states to legislate allowing certain terminally ill patients to ask their doctors for medication to end their lives because states do not have rights to legislate medical practices.

 

Apparently states' rights to legislate only apply if the state's legislature is right-wing?

[SuperJerk 0]

The Democrats have clearly lost this battle.

It's not even supposed to BE a fucking battle, that's the worst part. Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who didn't answer much during hearings (with the blessing of Joe "I just don't KNOW enough!" Biden, of all people), was waved through 96-3, in a 57D-43R Senate. Essentially a consensus. Stephen Breyer, 87-9. He was qualified, he got through without a hitch. We get to John Roberts and it's 78-22. Where was the battle in '93 and '94?

 

I have to say this repeatedly:

 

Just because the Republicans didn't want to fight over a Supreme Court nominee 12 years ago, doesn't mean the Democrats aren't supposed to fight over anyone ever again.

[The Czech Republic 0]

SCALIA IS TEH EVIL PUPPETMASTER

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

SCALIA IS TEH EVIL PUPPETMASTER

 

Yeah just be a dumbshit instead of, ya know, actually defending ya boy.

 

Also, Clinton conferred with the Republicans in Congress and Ginsburg was a name submitted to him by Sen. Hatch.

[The Czech Republic 0]

Is it possible that maybe Justices Thomas and Roberts act on their own volition, and are not just "puppets"? Isn't that possible?

[Vampiro69 0]

Not according to the teachers at my university.

[EricMM 0]

on one hand, precedent does say that nominees go through without a fight.

 

On the other hand, letting Bush turn 1/3 of the American govt. over to Right wing assholes is NOT what I vote for. I depend on my representation to represent myself. And I would never allow Scalia or anyone like him onto a court if I could help it.

[Vampiro69 0]

C'mon what is wrong with Scalia? He said that he likes group sex!

[Danville_Wrestling 0]

But that's cool, because only cocksuckers can have reservations about future rulings a Supreme Court justice might help render. All this "why are you guys playing politics when the guy's qualified" shit is going to explode in their face when a qualified liberal is nominated.

 

I have no problem with a justice who is highly qualified regardless of their political ideology getting onto the Supreme Court. For example, I disagree with Stephen Breyer's judicial philosophy a lot yet believed he should've been confirmed because he was qualified enough to be a justice. Therefore, I don't think this is going to blow up in my face at all.

 

I love how we always get the "out of the mainstream" talk whenever a conservative is nominated. Where was such talk when Ruth Bader Ginsburg was nominated and she had worked in the higher offices of the ACLU, an organization that was founded on the premise of defending communists and draft dodgers. Hell, you can't get much more left-wing than that.

 

All in all, the only reason this is a battle is because liberals have lost every other branch of government. They don't control the executive branch and they don't control the legislative branch anymore. The Supreme Court is the very last stand for their influence in a branch of government and that is why they are fighting so hard to keep it from being given a conservative majority. I can't say I blame them but they are going about it in the wrong way.