I know what's wrong with the (democratic members) of the Senate

[no_hypocrisy]

Judiciary Committee: They aren't good prosecutors or even trial lawyers.

For all the talk about how many members of Congress have law licenses, I don't see much evidence that any of them were pretty good attorneys before they traded their shingles for politics.

I don't see enough members consistently ask insightful hard-edged follow-up questions when Alito gives a general response. How do you think that defense attorneys get the testimoney they're seeking from hostile witnesses in trial (for example, a corporate executive testifying about knowledge of a defect in a design that caused a death or 100). How do you think that criminals get convicted when either the defendant (unlikely due to the Fifth Amendment) or their accomplices are on the stand? A good lawyer knows when a witness is dancing, fudging the facts, and stonewalling.

Research. Knowing what the witness knows. Getting them to testify and pointing inconsistencies, lies, prior statements on the record, etc. are useful to getting to the heart of the issue that the attorney is trying to prove to the factfinder.

I wish that some non-Congressional attorneys could take a crack at Alito. THEN we'd see some real answers.

[Avalux]

1. I think Alito should be questioned in a open forum of citizens

He should be forced to travel all over the country and answer questions in a town hall-like forum. For a lifetime appointment, it's the least he could do.

[sirjohn]

7. The Constitution does not require town-hall meetings

for confirmation of Supreme Court justices.

[Avalux]

8. I didn't say anything about the constitution requiring such -

I simply stated what I would prefer to see happen. This Senate hearing serves no purpose, IMHO.

[sirjohn]

10. Sorry, I must have misunderstood "should be forced". n/t

[still_one]

2. they are too much into their own importance

that is the problem

[Clark2008]

3. Yep - Biden has a law license, but he's been in the Senate

since he was 30.
He wouldn't have had time to practice too much law - maybe six or seven years - at most.

[acmejack]

14. There are many types of law.

My sister has been an attorney for 35 years, and last year was the first time she was in a courtroom since law school and it was on a matter completely unrelated to her practice, which is in land use law. So not being a good questioner is in no way reflective of one's proficiency in their particular specialty.

[Freddie Stubbs]

4. Both Kerry and Lieberman are former prosecutors

Perhaps they sould be serving on the committee.

[Tesha]

16. Yes, but we want people willing to prosecute *REPUBLICANS*!

Both Kerry and Lieberman may have been former prosecutors,
but Kerry proved his incompetence in the 2004 debates (where
he should have been able to kick Bush's ass from one side of
the stage to the other and back again) and Liberman seems
far more willing to prosecute liberals than Republicans.

Tesha

[emulatorloo]

17. Kerry is not on the judiciary committee

and he did "kick Bush's ass from one side of the stage to the other and back again" in the debates. It was noted at the time in most every poll of viewers who watched, esp debate one. and to claim that Kerry was poor in the debates is revisionist history.

[Tesha]

21. 59 million people say you're wrong.

> and he did "kick Bush's ass from one side of the stage to the other and back again"

59 million people say you're wrong. It should have been
sufficiently obvious that *NO AMOUNT* of post-debate media
spin could have propped-up Bush's failure(s).

Tesha

[emulatorloo]

24. Kerry Won The Debates - "59 Million People" didn't watch them

You are still engaging in revisionist history, for what reason I don't know. All punditry except the most blindly subservient to Rove said that Kerry won the debates. Polls at the time said viewers felt Kerry won. Especially debate number one on foreign policy.

[Tesha]

26. Sez you. Many apparently disagree.

> Kerry Won The Debates

Sez you. Many apparently disagree.

Bush should have been left (metaphorically) bleeding on the
TV studio floor, unable ever to show his face in public again.

Tesha

[SoFlaJet]

5. yea?

you hear Russ Feingold?Go over to live oak's Can-o-fun and click on some of his sound bites.

[converted_democrat]

6. Biden really pissed me off yesterday..

I swear it took the man almost all of his alloted time to get one question out. When he wasn't kissing ass he was talking about himself.. It was pathetic.

[sirjohn]

9. True, it would have been amusing if not so pathetic. n/t

[Inland]

12. Biden wanted to hear himself and his own opinions more than Alito's.

I can't imagine this guy being any more open to differing opinions than Bush, not because he's simple, but because he loves to hear himself talk and won't listen. He'll take a good idea, but who could ever get one in edgewise?

[Inland]

11. Well said. They are shitty at gettting real information.

But one suspects that the real point is to get as much face time as possible.

[realFedUp]

13. Unfortunately this isn't a courtroom

It's a dog and pony show and not much will change
the mindset of Republicans who will vote for him
even if he started drooling. I think the Dem
side has asked smart lawyerly questions so far.
They can't get him to answer if he just won't.

[sirjohn]

15. They would have had a much easier time with Harriet Myers

This guy is too smart and too smooth for some of these dinasours.

[no_hypocrisy]

18. My point reiterated:

Getting real answers from Alito is possible if done using the devices of logic, rhetoric, the Socratic method from law school, and yes, humor. How about the simple exercise of "Judge Alito, you didn't answer my question. Let me rephrase it," and not moving on until some specific is on the record.

[sirjohn]

19. Kennedy trying that now and it's not working well

He would do better to focus on something more important.

[no_hypocrisy]

20. Agreed. Right device, negligible issue.

However, Alito sounds rattled, so the effect is appreciated. Kennedy using the inconsistent statements versus the records trick.

Hold the phone, Kennedy must have been warming up. He's progressed to civil rights protection.

[sirjohn]

23. Kennedy was just as rattled when it blew up in his face

This dinasour does not serve us well.

[hang a left]

25. THey have done that. They would burn all their time if they just

tried to get him to answer the question that has been asked. Not answering the questions and bobbing and weaving shows his deceitfulness and that he is hiding who he truly is.

[yodermon]

22. Yes! question:

Was John Edwards on the Judiciary committee when he was in office? God I miss him. I sometimes wish he had just run for re-election instead of President. He's so young he could have had a great impact. Can you imagine him questioning Alito? 'Twould be a sight to behold.

[Kansas Wyatt]

27. Democrats continue to show up at a gun fight with....

Only a knife, and both hands tied behind their backs.

The Democrats wouldn't want to offend the ones, who keep blowing holes in them, yet they cannot understand why they can't hold their own in elections.

Dammit, stand up and call a spade, a spade!

Americans love leaders who level with them and tell it like it is, they despise politicians who fill them full of shit and crawfish on their promises.

[no_hypocrisy]

28. One more point. Suppose the dems used a page from the Sam Ervin

playbook as a theme of questioning?

http://home.att.net/~howington/sam.html

Scroll down to "Constitution" and "Criminal Activity" among others.

[Cleita]

29. They need Helen Thomas to ask the questions. She isn't

a lawyer, but she sure knows which questions to ask.

[Wind Dancer]

30. Wouldn't that be interesting?

Helen Thomas would not let him get away with these BS answers. I'm so tired of him refusing to acknowledge the racist group he belonged to and supported. It's disgusting, pure and simple.