Ted Kennedy wants to know what YOU want to ask Alito

[jillan]

http://www.tedkennedy.com/page/s/askalito

You go Ted!

[fooj]

1. Thanks for this.

I'm getting my list together...

Peace.

[tocqueville]

7. I'd ask Alito (if I could) about Roosevelt's statement on SCOTUS

9 old men trying to stop democracy and social reforms, maintening the power of the rich...

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/USAsupreme.htm

the Democrats have completely forgotten that aspect, because of some progressive reforms done in the 60-70s.

For an European democrat, the SCOTUS is a complete abberration and the antithesis of democracy. It doesn't protect the constitution, but impairs it. Democracy cannot be ultimately controlled by judges, but by elected bodies accountable to electors.

American Democrats have completely forgotten this and Roosevelt's insight. They are paying the price today... and this can be a very heavy price for the American people.

[Smarmie Doofus]

24. Well, during the Warren era...

SCOTUS acted as a check on the RW tyranny of the majority re. church and state, police excesses , right to privacy and, indeed, right to abortion.

[tocqueville]

32. the problem is exactly there

a few "good deeds", probably due to some historical circumstances, but the record of the court is appalling historically. Roosevelt understood this. The system is flawed in itself when you let lifetime appointed judges decide in the end what's good for the people. And afterwards !!!!

the SCOTUS has no real counterpower and will be used by RW to maintain their power. There might be exceptions, but the rule is written in the system.

[Trevelyan]

76. Sen. John Edwards' site with petition to STOP ALITO!!

http://www.oneamericacommittee.com/
http://ga3.org/campaign/opposealito

When President Bush nominated Samuel Alito to replace Sandra Day O'Connor on the Supreme Court last year, I wrote you to express my strong opposition to his confirmation. His record, both on the bench and as an official in the Reagan and first Bush administrations, showed that he is an ideologue whose extreme views would put our fundamental rights at risk.

Now that his hearings in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee are underway, it is becoming even clearer that Samuel Alito is the wrong man for the job. It's time for Democrats to stand up for what we believe in. Join me in opposing Samuel Alito's confirmation to the Supreme Court.- John Edwards

[fooj]

2. We need to keep this kicked! Come on, DUers!

Let's SHARE our ideas with the Senator! This is our chance!

Peace.

[IndianaGreen]

3. Are you a member of Opus Dei and if so...

do you subscribe to their views on women, abortion, gays, Jews, etc?

[Ediacara]

4. How would you have decided in:

Bush v Gore (2000)

Kitmiller v Dover Area School Board (2005)

[Joyce78]

11. Great Thought

However, he wouldn't answer ... he'd say he wasn't sitting so it becomes moot ... or mute. He hasn't answered anything .... he seems to remember every court case that Repubs remind him of, but he can't remember being a member of CAP and he couldn't remember where he left his wife when she was earning her Oscar of the Year to the Best Actress Award. Do tears earn one an Oscar or a spousal award for a confirmation to the Supreme Court.

[baby_bear]

15. He was asked about Bush v Gore yesterday

Said he hadn't given it sufficient consideration, such as he would if a judge/justice, so he couldn't/wouldn't say.

jeez. anybody believe that he has no opinion on it?

b_b

[LearnedHand]

22. Well he GODDAMN well knows the situation and facts NOW

...and the asshole is his president, too. And with all the Republican "states' rights" and such, you mean he hasn't troubled his pretty little head about it at all???!!! :wtf:

I'm SO sure.

[Ediacara]

49. what a load!

[proud2BlibKansan]

5. Great idea

Thanks

[fooj]

6. Is it just me, or have we just been handed a GOLDEN OPPORTUNITY...

Peace.

[LearnedHand]

8. The questions I posted

1. How would you have voted in Bush v. Gore?

2. Describe hypothetical situations in which you believe a president is empowered by the Constitution or any other law or precedent to order the warrantless surveillance or wiretapping of someone who MIGHT do harm -- or support those who MIGHT do harm -- to the United States or any of its citizens or organizations.

3. What is your opinion of the Supreme Court ruling that corporations are essentially equivalent to a person and that the corporations AS ENTITIES are endowed with the same civil rights and liberties as are individual citizens?

[Joyce78]

13. I'll try to reply as I did to someone else

He wouldn't reply. Great questions but he'd evade. We have no voice ... we simply have our Dems who half-try and the Repukes (all of whom are tossing softballs and throwing praises). Isn't it funny 'tho that Lindsay Graham was the one who sent Best Actress of the Year Mrs. Scolita sobbing out of the room!!

[LearnedHand]

18. We can always hope

He's slickery, that Scalito fella.

[mom cat]

58. He was asked that and gave a mealy mouthed non reply.

[Trevelyan]

75. Sen. Kennedy has some other very interesting things on his blogs including

petitions, be a Kennedy supporter blog, messageboard posts - this was a fun post:

"Kennedy bitch slapped Specter, shows that he was lying through his teeth to stonewall Specter denied ever receiving a letter from Kennedy requesting that Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter issue a subpoena to the Library of Congress for documents related to the right-wing group Concerned Alumni of Princeton, of which Alito was a member. The documents contain “clipping files, background information, correspondence and memoranda, financial records, fund-raising material, lists of supporters, minutes of meetings, issues and other items.” The documents are critical because Alito now claims he can’t remember anything about his involvement with the group.

He denied ever receiving the letter, but now “Sen. Kennedy just introduced Specter’s reply to his December 22 letter into the record. So there is proof that Specter did get the letter.”

http://thinkprogress.org/2006/01/11/specter-stonewalls/

Here is the video, where Specter denied getting the letter, and from before Kennedy came back with a letter from Specter’s office replying to Kennedy’s request.

http://streaming.americanprogress.org/ThinkProgress/2006/alitocap.320.240.mov.html

And here Specter admits he has either becoming a doddering alzheimers victim or a bald faced liar:

“As to the letter, I am advised by my chief of staff, Michael O’Neill, that he first saw a computer letter, and that he believes later a letter was delivered to the Judiciary Committee headquarters, apparently near Christmas, perhaps on Christmas Eve. ... Mr. O’Neill did talk to me about it over the break between Christmas and New Year’s.”—Specter, 1/11/06, later in the hearings (See ThinkProgress.org for the video clip.)"

http://streaming.americanprogress.org/ThinkProgress/2006/kenresponse.320.240.mov.htm
http://www.tedkennedy.com/journal/576/senator-kennedys-closing-statement-at-the-alito-confirmation-hearings?commented=1&commented=1#c001056

HAVE THE REPUBLICANS NO SHAME? NO END TO THEIR LIES AND "I CAN'T REMEMBERS"

[Grateful for Hope]

9. Submitted mine

Thank you, Senator Kennedy!

[LearnedHand]

10. K&R!

Keep it going, folks!

[fooj]

12. You know what? I think it's important to expose him!

Show the judge as the liar that he is. Make certain you have the evidence to back it up and then nail his ass to the wall! Period.

Then let those pompous ass Senators explain why they voted the way that they did.

Peace.

[jillan]

This is what I posted -

Why he thinks he would be the perfect person for the position.
(It's the one question I keep asking myself - Why Alito?)

ALSO***** Keep talking about Harriett Myers. The dems need to bring it up ALOT more.

Senator Kennedy - you are doing an excellent job, thank you!

I also mentioned DU on the question of what website you are discussing the hearings at.
So hopefully someone from Kennedy's staff will stop by,

:toast: That's for you "Uncle Ted".

[fooj]

16. Don't you think we should send him a copy of this thread, as well?

Couldn't hurt!

Peace.

[txindy]

20. You're right, it couldn't hurt.

And every little bit helpls.

:toast:

[jillan]

21. Maybe send the link to the greatest page

If they want to see what we are talking about!

I don't think there is one unkind word about him on this board.
Even when people are talking about that accident. DU is pretty much a pro-Ted site :)

[fooj]

23. Let's just keep kicking and get this thread filled up for the Senator!

Full court press is on!

Peace.

[Joyce78]

19. Thank you Sen. Ted Kennedy

From one Irish American to another ... you've always kept my hope alive.

[txindy]

14. What is your stand on stem cell research?

Even Specter would want to know that, unless, of course, he's too busy trying to stack the SC to help his fellow repubs overturn any Abramoff-related corruption charges.

[fooj]

17. FACTS AND EVIDENCE! That's what we need to get to him!

Peace.

[hang a left]

25. Someone tell Teddy we have heard enough.

SHUT ER DOWN!!!!!!!!!!

[fooj]

44. Get up and walk out. Show these hearings for what they are.

The American People deserve answers from the judge and we are not getting them. They work for us, damn it.

Holy crap! This is for all of the marbles.

Peace.

[Dulcinea]

26. Here's mine:

Ask him point-blank if he would vote to outlaw abortion, & if so, how could he justify the deaths & maimings of women & girls that will surely result from driving the procedure underground?

[Dr Fate]

27. Ask him if he thinks filibusters are constitutional. n/t

n/t

[jillan]

28. lol!

I hope you sent that to Kennedy!
I'm sure his staffers could use a laugh. Must be pretty stressful in Teddy's office these days.

[Dr Fate]

35. Okay- here is what I sent:

Ask him if he thinks filibusters are constitutional.

But seriously, ask him to defend the precedent of not discussing cases that he might rule on. Ask him why the American people should not know how he might rule on future cases.

[jillan]

36. ---

:applause: :applause:

[stillcool]

29. That was very enjoyable...thank you!

:thumbsup:

[Trevelyan]

77. That was good Dr. Fate and funny!

:kick: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[Joyce78]

30. The Repukes always want "up or down" votes

Judge Alito: Up or Down ... Will you uphold Roe or will you seek to destroy a woman's right to govern her own body in this democracy??

[understandinglife]

31. K&R. The good Senator got some solid help from the NY Times Editors ...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=116134&mesg_id=116134


Peace.

[understandinglife]

39. Cool photo of the Senator and his poster!!!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2006/01/11/click-here-to-read-the-po_n_13659.html

Oh, and if you read the comments at the HuffPo link you'll see several foaming-at-the-mouth freeptards, well, uh, .... frothly foaming ....


Peace.

[fooj]

42. I can't believe how many whack-jobs there are out there!

The rat bastard and his cult of kooks! :cry:

peace.

[Canuckistanian]

33. SIGNING STATEMENTS!

For Gawd's sake, ask him what the Hell kind of executive power masturbatory fantasies he was having when he dreamed up THOSE!

[Triana]

34. Done...K & R - Cmon DUers! Let Kennedy know ...

...what we want him to ask Scalito!

DO IT NOW!

[AuntiBush]

48. Get on his Email List.

Rec'd the request earlier this evening and left my question. The link comes in his emails, thankfully.

Kennedy was good today. Spector made me absolutely ill.

[ClayZ]

37. Just say "NO" to court stacking!

"I will do everything in my power to restrict abortion."
- George W. Bush (Dallas Morning News, October 22, 1994)

[flyarm]

38. DONE AND PUT 20 FRIENDS NAMES ON IT!! K&R ..N/T

[fooj]

43. I feel like this is for all of the marbles.

:patriot:

[leftstreet]

40. What I'd REALLY like to ask Alito...

When the Supreme Court finally crushes the notion of separation of church and state, which religion would you choose as the national religion?
Catholicism?
Mormonism?
Wiccan?
Protestant?
Judaism?
Flying Spaghetti Monsterism?

But what I asked instead:

In Santa Clara County vs Southern Pacific Railroad, the Supreme Court cited The Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment (an amendment affording equal protection to newly freed African American slaves) as a reason to grant corporations certain rights of personhood. 1 - Would you have ruled the same way? 2 - Do you believe the decision reflected judicial activism?

[KittyWampus]

59. IIRC, SCOTUS did NOT cite 14th and grant corps Personhood. It was a clerk

who wrote comments to that ruling.... didn't the ruling itself go against the corps... but a clerk inserted commentary which was/is referred to rather than the actual ruling?

Someone tell me I"m wrong...

[cascadiance]

70. It was definitely a clerk that wrote the head note that created this...

Thom Hartmann writes a lot about this case in "Unequal Protection" and other articles you can find online. He also notes that this clerk himself had connections to the railroad companies power structure which should have had him recuse himself as a biased entity in this case.

The problem is that most subsequent cases were based on his head note summary that did ascribe rights of corporate personhood, and the actual case notes did not. Hartmann and a group he was working with took the actual case notes to many legal scholars and just about all of them said that "this was a mistake!". They also brought it to Rehnquist in one of the pivotal cases in the 70's and it forced in one instance for the court to deliberate a lot longer than usual and to at one point then say that they decided not to rule on it, a very unusual thing for the supreme court to do. Rehnquist, no matter what a bastard he was, did recognize this decision as flawed constitutionally, and has in fact been on record as dissenting on it's application to other cases they've heard. That's why if both Roberts and Alito support this "judicial activism" and try to rationalize it as not being so in their efforts to label themselves "constitutional constructionists" that it is in fact a gain of TWO votes on the Supreme Court for corporate interests from the Rehnquist era, and not just one vote as some might think.

I too would like to see someone like Feingold or Kennedy ask about this, but going up against corporate interests in asking this question is probably quite risky now in the climate we have of legalized bribery that is called campaign finance laws that we have in place now. If any congressman would ask this question, that would immediately put them on my presidential list for 2008. Hope Feingold could do it, though I'm not counting on it.

To me, this question, along with those about States Secrets and others related to giving more executive power are the fundamental questions that should decide whether to accept Alito or not, and I feel at this point what he's given us and what we know there's a definite NO in my mind on his nomination and a call to fillibuster.

Thanks for asking this question. Were it not for my current concern for States Secrets rulings, I'd have asked this one too. I did ask it in the Roberts hearings.

[Rainscents]

41. My Question...

Senator Kennedy,

Q)Judge Alito, if your daughter was strip searched, would you approve of it?

Q)Judge Alito, you stated, you had no problem with retarded man having broom up his anus? Would you approve if this happen to your children?

[fooj]

45. There you go. Let's personalize all of these "hypotheticals"...

Peace.

[Tsiyu]

46. Mine?

Republicans claim to want to shrink the size and scope of the government. Having been appointed by a Republican prezteldent (sorry, can't resist) you surely share some of these same values.

What role should the Federal government take when decisions must be made regarding an individual's health care and medical decisions? Does the Federal government have any authority over adult's sex lives? Should the government be smaller or larger when it comes to these issues?

What do you believe should be the government's role when it comes to the private rights of its citizens? Smaller or larger?

I also agree about asking how he'd have ruled on Gore v. Bush, even though he'll just hem and haw and whine and cock his head.

[radio4progressives]

47. Did you sign off on Ollie North's plans to suspend Constitution ?

"Did you sign off on Ollie North's plans to suspend Constitution ?"

""From 1985-1987, Alito served in the Office of Legal Counsel as Deputy Assistant Attorney General where he provided constitutional advice for the Executive Branch"" in the Reagan administration era...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=364&topic_id=104764

[Beam Me Up]

50. My question:

Why should I accept your nomination to the Supreme Court of the United States of America when you were nominated by a criminal currently occupying the White House which your predecessors originally INSTALLED? Why should any American citizen consent to this nomination--indeed, this FARCE that is being made of Democracy?

[fooj]

52. Did you hear Specter say Shrub was "awarded" the presidency

by the Supreme Court? I couldn't believe my ears.

Peace.

[Beam Me Up]

68. No, missed that.

One way of looking at it, I suppose.

[cascadiance]

51. I asked him how he'd rule on "State Secrets" censored cases...

Since the Supreme Court isn't offering opinion on cases like Sibel Edmonds' and Jeffrey Sterling, and probably Russel Tice's now in the near future, we should get *his* opinion on how this privilege should and shouldn't be used on cases, so that we can later hold their feet to the fire and have fuel for impeachment if they use it to cover up things instead of truely using it for protecting national security.

[rucky]

53. Why is Alito lying under oath about CAP?

http://www.oregonlive.com/printer/printer.ssf?/base/editorial/113330852481971.xml&coll=7

"In 1969, the board of trustees of Princeton voted to admit women, ending two centuries of exclusion. As former Princeton President Robert Goheen recalled, "The claims of American women to equal treatment and the ability of many of them to play active, shaping roles in education, business, the professions and public affairs were at last gaining wide recognition and acceptance."

Not everyone agreed.

Sam Alito, class of 1972, was one of the first Princeton men to share his college experience with women. How did this experience affect him? Upon graduation, he joined Concerned Alumni of Princeton, a conservative organization formed to oppose Princeton's decision to admit women.

This was no youthful indiscretion. In 1985, as a 35-year-old lawyer, Alito listed his membership in the alumni organization in an application for a promotion within the Reagan administration's Justice Department."

[BurgherHoldtheLies]

54. Is our Constitution a document which grants freedoms or strips freedoms?

[Surya Gayatri]

55. Did anybody hear the guest

on "Majority Report" w/ Sam Seder last night? His 2 major recommendations were excellent: 1) Go after Alito's public record of praise for BORK--force him to explain what he so admires there, 2) Corner Alito into agreeing w/ Bush's interpretation of executive power by pointing out the fallacy in the "Must obey the law IF the law is constitutional" meme. SG

[enough already]

56. Does goosestepping provide a good cardiovascular workout? n/t

[mom cat]

57. "Will you say anything to anybody just to get a job? "

Will you say anything to anybody just to get a job?
This is not only about CAP, but also about "assurances" he made in private to Sen Feinstein that are obviously different than the assurances he gave to the right wingers who want to turn the hearings into an anti-abortion spectacle. He is "representing" himself in a way calculated to get the job, not in a forthcoming way that should be required.


In the "categories" section, I put "other":
Saying anything to get the job...he is doing it now in these hearings.

[KittyWampus]

60. Momcat, I used your question, hope you don't mind. Labeled it "Integrity"

[malaise]

61. Dupe

dupe

[malaise]

62. Ask him to

ask Borkalito to explain the role of the Senate in the appointment of a Supreme Court Judge and what the separation of powers is supposed to mean in this process. Then ask who coached him and if Graham (a senior Senator) violated this process.

[mod mom]

63. $161,000 of Exxon Mobil stock bequested from "family friend"

Have you read this on Alito.  This needs to be looked into!:

In his questionnaire, Alito provided new details about his financial holdings, including that he owns $161,000 of Exxon Mobil Corp. stock. Altogether, Alito estimated his net worth at $2.1 million, of which $870,000 is in real estate, $789,000 in stocks and mutual funds, $244,000 in cash and $60,000 in federal Series EE bonds. 

According to previous financial disclosures reported last month by the Associated Press, the Exxon Mobil stock was a bequest from a family friend. 
 

We wrote about Alito's 2004 inheritance of Exxon-Mobil stock on the day he was nominated (although the exact $161,000 amount was revealed in late November, and buried in stories about his 1985 abortion memo disclosed in the same questionaire.) 

http://www.pnionline.com/dnblog/attytood/
*********************************


 In his questionnaire, Alito provided new details about his financial holdings, including that he owns $161,000 of Exxon Mobil Corp. stock. Altogether, Alito estimated his net worth at $2.1 million, of which $870,000 is in real estate, $789,000 in stocks and mutual funds, $244,000 in cash and $60,000 in federal Series EE bonds. 

 According to previous financial disclosures reported last month by the Associated Press, the Exxon Mobil stock was a bequest from a family friend. 

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/120105A.shtml

[bunkerbuster1]

64. I asked him to hammer about Vanguard

yes, the strip search is a good 'un, but for a great kitchen table issue, there's nothing like the Vanguage recusal-refusal.

Alito owns several hundred thou in Vanguard, he promises to recuse himself from Vanguard cases, and he gets a case with the word "Vanguard" in the goddamned title and somehow he forgets his promise?

And blames it on a computer error?

I think this is one John and Jane Q. Public "get." It's one the Reeps can't defend.
And he hasn't been hammered anywhere near enough on it.

[Little Star]

65. I would like him or any Dem to ask

Did you pad your resume when you listed CAP as an organization you belonged to? If not, then where are the records of you being a member?

Me thinks this judge is a LIAR!!!!!!!!!

[Jo March]

66. My ?: Did Sen. Graham help you to prepare for these hearings?

If so, don't you think that Sen. Graham should recuse himself from this entire process?

[No Exit]

67. Dear Sen. Kennedy: I want to ask

My questions for nominee Alito:

Do you believe that the Chief Executive should be able to bypass the FISA court and listen to private conversations of any American citizen, whether talking to a foreign person or not? If so, do you believe that this should be allowed in peace time, as well as in wartime? How do you define "wartime"? If a president is able to begin a war, and to prolong that war for whatever duration he chooses, even for the length of his entire two terms, isn't his using that war as an excuse for ignoring the 4th Amendment a one-sided assault on the separation of powers doctrine? Isn't this the same sort of "activist" view of the law which also allows an executive to make a signing statement, while signing a law, which essentially declares that he will ignore said law if he chooses? Aren't you particularly in favor of these "presidential signing statements"? Where under our law are such presidential signing statements authorized?

Mr. Alito, on too many occasions to count, you have stated that you have no memory of your past actions--as, for example, when you state that you have little or no memory of your membership in Concerned Alumni of Princeton. Do you think that a U.S. Supreme Court justice should have at least a better memory of the past, considering that he/she will be often basing decisions on past precedent?

Mr. Alito, how many years have you spent as a non-government lawyer? If any, were these years outnumbered by the years you have spent as either a judge's clerk, a government prosecutor, or a judge (in the employ of the U.S. government)? If your years as an employee of the U.S. government (which includes judge's clerk, government prosecutor, and judge) outnumber your years as a privately employed attorney, won't that tend to create a bias in you in favor of the government and authority?

Do you consider the fact that we made an unprovoked invasion of a sovereign nation, and that the invasion was (we now know) based on incorrect information, troubling? Do you consider this harmful to the United States?

Do you believe that one party should have virtual control of all three branches of our federal government? Do you not find this to be detrimental to the separation of powers which is supposed to act as a protection for the people against a government which has too much power?

[satya]

69. I'm on Kennedy's email list and sent this response yesterday afternoon:

Where in the constitution is the president given the power to interpret laws passed by Congress by issuing “signing statements”?

Article II says the President may fill vacancies “that may happen during the recess of the Senate”; where does it say he can bypass the Senate by filling already existing vacancies during the recess?

The 9th amendment assures us that the people have rights beyond those enumerated in the Bill of Rights, yet Presidential powers are strictly limited in Article II, Section 2. Mr. Alito’s so-called “Unitary Presidency” seems to be an attempt to justify an expansion of presidential powers beyond what the founders intended. How does he reconcile that view with his claim to be a “strict constructionist”?

Mr. Bush is now “warning” people not to speak out against his illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq. How does this fit within the framework of the Constitution?

Clearly, George W. Bush simply wants to appoint someone to the Court who will aid him in his quest to turn our republic into a dictatorship by expanding his powers. Please stop him.


(pirhana -- thanks for posting this here!)

[meowomon]

71. Ask him why he is lying

Ask him if he is in the first stages of senile dementia where the memory is the first to go or is he the type of guy who pads his resume with lies?

[fooj]

72. Here's our smoking gun, IMHO...

I've been thinking about the vital importance of the PNAC
documents and the need to educate the public. IMHO, if one of
our senators asked Alito "Are you familiar with the Project
For a New American Century...and if so, do you subscribe to
their beliefs?" I am convinced that the question would have
stopped these hearings right in their tracks. Can't you hear
the audible "gasps" in the room? It would have been a perfect
opportunity to empower the American People with some info re:
this maniacal regime's "gameplan"!!!

What do you think the chances of convincing Dean to run an ad
printing the Mission Statement of the PNAC? IMO, this is
our smoking gun. If PNAC had been mentioned during these
hearings, hundreds of thousands of Americans would have been
afforded the opportunity to at least learn about who they are
and what they have done to our country. What are your
thoughts?

Peace.

[Trevelyan]

78. I think it is important to get info on the PNAC out there.

The owner of http://www.StopTheLie.com/ about the PNAC deception was a conservative and now talks about the falseness of the left/right paradigm (Corporate Hillary, etc.)

A definition for terrorist and related to the dictatorship powers that bushler is claiming for being a "wartime president" with a war that will never end would have been a very, very good line of questioning and may have overridden the soap opera paid shills comments on the histrionic Mizzus.

"They knew that when Alito, for the zillionth time, spouted "Jackson" "Marbury", "Madison" etc., he was using simple code, in which each mention of "settled" law actually covered for a well known, three word phrase, replete with a most familiar expletive. In a touch of irony, it was the same expletive laden expression as Dick Cheney threw at the Committee's ranking Dem, Pat Leahy. (Only Cheney could never have shown such grace while being so vulgar, as Alito did (and was, to our Constitution.)

If the Dems had hired a good constitutional lawyer, as was touted by Alan Dershowitz, Samuel Alito might have had a far tougher time throwing obfuscation and legal confetti before the eyes of this dance contest's judges, the American people.

So we need to take back Congress, and do so with people who do NOT favor the Repugnant-Lite beer served by groups like the Democratic Leadership Council."

http://www.bluecollarpolitics.com/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/650

[Usrename]

73. What is the legal definition of terrorist and terrorism?

No one will ever ask the real question, who are we at war with?

[paineinthearse]

74. Dawn breaks on DU

Thank you for recognizing the work this man does. Too many posts sourced in his website have fallen by the wayside without so much as a comment, let alone 24 "greatest" nominations.