Yahoo/AP: Dems Try to Slow Alito Confirmation (demand vote delay)

[DeepModem Mom]

Democrats Try to Slow Alito Confirmation
By LAURIE KELLMAN, Associated Press Writer


....Democrats argue that the former Reagan administration lawyer is likely to tip the court's balance to the right in replacing centrist Sandra Day O'Connor. But with little success so far peeling away Alito's support to be the nation's 110th Supreme Court justice, the Democrats were noncommittal about trying to mount a filibuster on the Senate floor.

Instead, they are seeking to slow Alito's ascension by demanding that the Judiciary Committee's chairman, Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., delay the panel's vote a week.

Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid "is urging all Democrats to refrain from committing to a vote either for or against confirmation prior to the caucus next Wednesday," Reid spokesman Jim Manley said....

***

Democrats want to give their caucus time to study the hearing transcripts, Manley said. Also to be considered is whether any reason exists to filibuster the nomination, but the chances of a filibuster happening appeared slim.

"I don't think he's going to get many votes from Democrats on the committee," Sen. Charles Schumer, a New York Democrat on the committee, told CBS' "The Early Show." "As for a filibuster, it's something we'll have to discuss. So it's not on the table or off the table right now."...


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060113/ap_on_go_su_co/alito_143

[rodeodance]

1. the RW will label the Dems as abusing Mrs. Alito.--with this delay.

[ananda]

2. ermm

Mrs. Alito is already an abused woman.

She is married to a man who systematically has used the law
to hurt women and minorities.

She knows deep down that she's married to a horrible misogynist,
racist asshole...

... and that's why she's really crying.

Sue

[zann725]

5. If Mrs. Alito was wife of Dem Nominee, and broke-down crying,left room..,

the Repugs would IMMEDIATELY begin "frying" her in the press as Mentally Unstable DAYS AGO, and would've dug into her past and found "something" however remote to substantiate the "instability" accusation...as grounds for helping to "disqualify" her husband any way possible.

On that subject, HAS Mrs. Alito any 'history' of instability? After all, she IS the wife of a VERY IMPORTANT life-time nominee?

If a Filibuster won't work...

[worldgonekrazy]

34. As far as I'm concerned she made herself a fair target

By pulling that stunt. I don't like dirty tactics but the Dems need to do whatever it takes in this battle.

[wordpix]

3. message to Senate Dems: DELAY the committee vote and FIGHT this nominee

he's a freeper, pure and simple:

anti-abortion, anti-Roe v. Wade
pro-corporate
pro-Big Brother gov
anti-affirmative action

We haven't heard anything about his environmental stands.
And he won't answer the questions put to him.
He's a freeper!

[nashville_brook]

4. worse than a freeper -- they are but minions

he's an ideologue building a corporatist state. the merging of capital and govenment isn't 'free-market.' freedom for the highest bidder isn't democracy. god will sort it out isn't a civic virtue.

he's a fascist according to the dictionary definition. not a 'nazi' -- a fascist. i just can't imagine that all the people who died in the forming and sustaing of this union had HIM and his ilk in mind when they took their last breath on the battlefield.

there is nothing NOBLE about greed.

[JudyM]

6. Powerful post - the truth of this got me choked up. n/t

[pinerow]

7. A strategy...At last!!!!!

nt

[Algorem]

8. Democrats plan to delay first vote on Alito

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/nationworld/bal-alito0113,1,6990598.story?coll=bal-nationworld-headlines

Originally published January 13, 2006, 6:07 PM EST

WASHINGTON // Democrats confirmed today that they will make a last-ditch attempt to slow Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito's momentum by delaying the first vote on his candidacy.

Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., said in the waning minutes of Alito's confirmation hearing that unnamed Democrats will "exercise their rights" to put off next week's scheduled Alito vote in the Senate Judiciary Committee.

That vote would have been Republicans' first chance to officially endorse President Bush's pick to replace retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. All 10 GOP Judiciary Committee members have already announced their support for Alito, a 55-year-old federal appeals judge, former federal prosecutor and Reagan administration lawyer...

But Democrats say they won't be ready Tuesday to vote on his nomination, since Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid of Nevada has called on party members to hold off making a decision until after a Wednesday meeting...

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000103&sid=alofCXFSdXM4&refer=us

U.S. Senate Democrats Seek to Delay Vote on Alito (Update2)

Jan. 13 (Bloomberg) -- Democrats sought a week's delay in the Senate confirmation of U.S. Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito that Republican leaders had hoped to complete by Jan. 20.

As five days of hearings on Alito's nomination were concluded in Washington, the Senate Judiciary Committee's ranking Democrat, Vermont Senator Patrick Leahy, said members of his party would exercise their right under the rules to delay the committee's scheduled Jan. 17 vote for a week. That would force a week's delay in the final Senate vote.

Pennsylvania Republican Arlen Specter, the panel's chairman and a supporter of abortion rights, said he will vote to confirm Alito, 55, nominated to replace Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. Specter dismissed arguments that Alito had evaded questions about his views on the high court's 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling that legalized abortion nationwide.

``Judge Alito went as far as he could on considerations on Roe,'' Specter said. ``I don't think that his 1985 statement binds him'' to vote to overturn the landmark decision...


On the Net

Senate Judiciary Committee: http://judiciary.senate.gov

[babylonsister]

9. Good. This gives us all more time to call, write, fax, e-mail, etc., and

just generally annoy the BFEE!

[nautibits]

10. another upside to the delay

is that * won't be able to toute Alito's appointment as an acheevement at the upcoming State of the Union speech.

ha ha ha

[babylonsister]

12. Hey, nautibits-welcome to DU!

:hi:

[nautibits]

13. thank you

:hi: :hi: :hi:

[LSparkle]

15. WH was pushing for early vote so not to interfere with SOTU

The "Unitary Executive" dictating the schedule to the Senate ... just a preview of coming attractions. Senators ought to be pushing back with everything they've got; this nomination requires a full debate, no a fucking rubber stamp.

[Olney Blue]

30. Good point, nautibits!

Welcome to DU!

[wordpix]

27. also, Senate Dems need time to contact those hurt by Alito's decisions

let's get a few choice quotes from those impacted by Scalito's rulings

[realFedUp]

11. and as Dionne wrote:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/12/AR2006011201502_pf.html

A Hearing About Nothing

snip
Democrats seem to be wary of mounting a filibuster. What they should insist upon, to use a euphemism Alito might appreciate, is an extended debate in which his evasions will be made perfectly clear to the public. If moderate senators want to vote for a justice highly likely to move the Supreme Court to the right, they can. But their electorates should know that's exactly what they're doing.

[babylonsister]

16. Thanks for that; I usually agree w/Dionne, and do here.

They, and we, need to make some noise!

[Jayhawk Lib]

14. Prolonging the agony

Lets face it. Alito is going to be confirmed. The pubs are going to vote for him and the Dem's are not. We are the minority for now and I am afraid we are powerless until after the 2006 elections. I wish I could be more upbeat but I can't. There will probably be some Dem's that will vote with the pubs....

[LSparkle]

17. That's why a long debate is required ... more time to call Dems

and make sure THEY DON'T vote for this joker. Even moderate Thugs ought to be against him, and if their constituents have a chance to see/hear what Scalito stands for, maybe they'll grow spines and vote no.

[FogerRox]

18. SHUT THE SENATE DOWN

[connecticut yankee]

19. How much you wanna bet

Lieberman will vote with the Repukes.

I just got an email response to my letter asking him to vote against Alito. It said:

"Thank you for contacting me to express your views on the nomination of
Circuit Court Judge Samuel Alito to fill the U.S. Supreme Court vacancy to
be left by Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. I appreciate your views on this
serious issue, and I welcome the opportunity to respond.

"Considering nominees to serve on the U.S. Supreme Court is an
important responsibility entrusted by the Constitution to the United
States Senate. Senators must take care to ensure that prospective
appointees are not only qualified, but also capable of analyzing and
applying our laws and the Constitution and deciding cases in a wise and
impartial manner.

"I have always taken the Senate's advice and consent role very
seriously, especially when it comes to the U.S. Supreme Court; and I
believe that my general desire to give the President's nominees the
benefit of the doubt must be tempered by the need to maintain rigorous
standards. Supreme Court Justices are appointed for life terms; barring
misconduct and impeachment, once the Senate confirms them, they face few
additional checks throughout their career. Each individual Senator has an
obligation to make certain that he or she carefully considers each nominee
and votes to confirm only if he or she believes the nominee will be able
to fairly and impartially discharge their judicial duties. The courts are
the ultimate guarantors of our liberties. We place our trust in them and
count on smart, independent, wise judges to apply our laws within the
framework of the Constitution.

"The Senate has a constitutional obligation to review and, when
necessary, serve as a check on the President's choices. That is what I
intend to do.

"I have urged the President to select a nominee who is in the mainstream
of American jurisprudence, who would come to the Court without a divisive
pre-determined ideological agenda and would address each case on its own
merits. I do not yet know enough about Judge Alito to know whether he
meets the criteria I have laid out. I take very seriously my
constitutional responsibilities as a Senator to engage in a searching
review and consideration of Judge Alito's fitness for this position.
Please be assured that I will keep your views in mind as the Senate
continues this important confirmation process."

I'll be very surprised if Lieberman votes against Alito.

[regnaD kciN]

20. That gives us ONE DAY...

The Caucus meets Wednesday morning. Almost certainly, a head count will be taken to determine whether they have the 41 votes to even attempt a filibuster. If not, they'll politely announce that they're going to let the nomination come to a vote. :-(

Monday is MLK Day, with Senate offices closed.

That means we only have Tuesday to impress upon vacillating Senators that we want them to stand up and fight.

We had better be prepared for an all-out campaign push that day, from the opening of business long into the night.

Others have probably posted much more detailed strategies, but my point would be this: do not restrict yourself to calling the Democratic Senators from your state. Most of them will go against Alito anyway. What you need to do is call Democratic Senators from outside your state. Particularly those from red states who will be sorely tempted to appease...and who have aspirations to higher office. Let them realize that, while it might not hurt them with their current constituency, it will kill their chances in a future Presidential primary.

You also need to call your Republican Senators, particularly if you live in a blue or "purple" state, and most especially if it is a state known for strong pro-choice sentiment. I would think Maine would be a prime example.

And, if you can't call on Tuesday, fax (preferably) or leave a voice-mail message over the weekend, so that they'll be snowed under when they return from the holiday.

Seriously, you can bet that the fundies are mounting a similar campaign even as we speak. Our only chance to save this country is to make sure we drown them out.

[realFedUp]

21. it gives more time for more Americans to get educated

about this guy. Pass around info to people you
know who aren't paying attention.

[wordpix]

28. yes, it takes the sheeple a LOT of time to be educated. They just don't

get it that their rights and Constitution are at stake.

[Algorem]

22. "Democrats plan delay but no filibuster of Alito"by JAN C. GREENBURG

(why's she pretend to know?)

http://www.sanluisobispo.com/mld/sanluisobispo/news/politics/13622193.htm

Posted on Fri, Jan. 13, 2006

JAN CRAWFORD GREENBURG

Chicago Tribune

WASHINGTON - As the weeklong hearings on Judge Samuel Alito's Supreme Court nomination came to an end Friday, Senate Democrats indicated they would delay a vote on his nomination for a week. But those on both sides of the aisle said they expected Alito to be confirmed this month without a filibuster by the full Senate.

Gaveling the hearing to a close Friday afternoon, Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter announced he would vote for Alito, setting the stage for a 10-8 party-line vote in the committee in favor of the nomination. No Democrats among the eight on the committee have officially announced how they will vote, but all have suggested they will oppose Alito.

In previous battles over President Bush's judicial picks, a party line vote out of committee has presaged a filibuster. But several Senate Democrats said a filibuster was highly unlikely, largely because of Alito's performance during 18 hours of questioning.

This week's hearings were widely expected to be contentious. Alito, nominated to replace moderate Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, could shift the balance on the court philosophically to the right on key social issues in which O'Connor had sided with the court's liberals. Those issues include abortion, affirmative action, religion and the death penalty...

[babylonsister]

23. Maybe they're just being smart:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x127848

[BlueIris]

37. Thanks. Hadn't seen that. Good to see I'm not totally alone.

:-)

[dbt]

24. "Dickless Democrats Plot Meaningless Gesture" is more like it.

Oh, they'll make a little noise and pose for the cameras, looking like they actually have spines, but in the end they'll roll over like the Good Little Darkies they are and let dat ole Corporate Money scratch their tummies right into $ubmi$$ion.

Christ, this party is SO over. Somebody turn the lights out.

:think:
dbt
Remember New Orleans

Well, if you don't like the Party, why don't you just LEAVE it?? Did that. Save your breath.

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

25. Good! Now that we know about the pre-911 illegal wiretaps

I don't believe that Bush has the right to make ANY Supreme Court appointments until his own legal status is clarified.

[jfalchion]

26. filibuster!!!!

We have 40+ senators-















-don't we?


:kick:

[wordpix]

29. history of these nominations is that Senate in past has brought names for

pres to approve, as well as the other way around. There is no rule or law saying the pres has to offer a nominee first.

[BlueIris]

31. Kick. nt

[jazzjunkysue]

32. Is is possible, the dems will actually pool their power and vote together?

Nawwww.....

[high density]

33. "Centrist Sandra Day O'Connor"?

Centrist??

[DeepModem Mom]

35. They've succeeded in moving the spectrum so far to the right...

it's ridiculous -- and frightening.

[BlueIris]

36. Kick. Have some faith, posters. It's not over yet.