He's a liar. He's creepy. He's anti-democracy. What's to think about?

[quiet.american]

Samuel Alito promised to recuse himself from Vanguard litigation because he had a great deal of money invested with the company. He didn't. He lied.

Samuel Alito doesn't blink an eye at the prospect of a ten-year-old being strip searched, in fact, he argues for it. Some are on trial for this kind of thing, not presiding over them. Creepy.

Samuel Alito supports Bush doing anything Bush wants at the drop of a hat. No checks, no balances, no nothing -- it's all good. Perhaps he hopes to be the one to actually place the crown on the head of King George at the coronation. That's anti-Constitutional.

What's to dither about.

Vote no and vote filibuster.

Good night and good luck.

[0007]

1. Call him anyway. I have a feeling he'll change his mind

Ken Salazar of Colorado (1-888-355-3588 PRESS 2 or 202-224-5852)

Ben Nelson of Nebraska (202-224-6551)

Bill Nelson of Florida (202-224-5274) need your phone calls.

Evan Bayh is also on the fence on voting for Alito and the filibuster! CALL: [phone]

Robert Byrd - 202-224-3954 or 304-343-7144 or 304-342-5855 or http://byrd.senate.gov/byrd_email.html

JOE LIEBERMAN* - [phone] OR FAX [phone]

Lincoln Chafee (R-RI) [phone]

Joe Biden. 202-224-5042

KENT CONRAD of ND - Phone: [phone]

Frank Lautenburg (D-NJ) - [phone] - http://lautenberg.senate.gov/webform.html

Robert Menendez (D-NJ) - [phone]

Mary Landrieu - [phone]

Tim Johnson (ND) - [phone]

Barack Obama (IL) - [phone]

Republican Lamar Alexander (R-TN) - moderate, possibly could be moved. TRY. [phone]

Ben Nelson (NE) originally stated he would vote Yes for Alito. But it looks like he is putting his finger in the wind. He is now taking calls and tallies as well: 202-224-6551 .

[quiet.american]

2. Thanks for posting the list here. I'll be calling again all weekend! n/t

[tigereye]

3. um as much as I would prefer someone else

I think that this statement is hyperbole. Just sayin.


"Samuel Alito supports Bush doing anything Bush wants at the drop of a hat. No checks, no balances, no nothing -- it's all good. Perhaps he hopes to be the one to actually place the crown on the head of King George at the coronation. That's anti-Constitutional."

[quiet.american]

4. And....? :) n/t

[converted_democrat]

5. BS... We all know he isn't going to "crown" him, but Alito has made it

clear that he believes in unitary power.. That means that Bush can do pretty much whatever he wants, simply because he is the President... The only thing that's wrong in that paragraph is the crowning part... I'm sure that they are not going to put a crown on his head, but everything else is dead on...

[quiet.american]

6. 'Preciate the shout-out, converted. n/t

[converted_democrat]

7. No problem, anytime.....n/t

[tigereye]

8. I think your point goes beyond all the legal complexities

of previous cases and when he was working for the justice dept and the way that our government is structured. Yes, I know he was trained to be a quite conservative justice. Yes, I know that with Roberts, that puts us in a very bad position. I just wonder why there was so much less complaining (at least on the part of many or our Senators) about Roberts when he is cut from very much the same cloth as Alito and came out of the same attempt by Conservatives to nurture conservative justices for, sadly, just this very purpose.

But I think these extreme statements devoid of actual case information and lacking historical perspective about past courts are not a good argument on the whole. And I say this not as a lawyer, which I am not, but as someone who is fascinated by the inner workings of the court and the way that opinions are developed.

Also can you name a justice whom you would have preferred * nominate? Knowing that * is highly unlikely to appoint someone to our liking, whom would you have suggested he nominate?

(please understand that I am playing devil's advocate here, as a SCOTUS junkie.)

[quiet.american]

9. Howdy, there are times for complexity, and times for just calling it.

This is one of those times. We've been through all the dissecting.

I would prefer Bush to be impeached and unable to nominate anyone, if I had my 'druthers. :)

I would also prefer for anyone Bush nominates to be filibustered into oblivion, because we know he will only nominate someone supremely unqualified and/or a crony and/or ideologue.

The Republicans were not shy about filibustering Clinton nominees. Why should we be?

[tigereye]

11. true, but

I don't know that Alito is "unqualified" - I think his ABA rating was fine. He's conservative, which does not equate with unqualified.

I really haven't seen much dissecting here... and that's why I commented. :)

[quiet.american]

13. Alito is to conservative as Bush is to presidential. :)

As for the ABA rating, sure, technically he's a qualified jurist, but the ratings criteria doesn't take into account ideology, does it?

Conservative?

From Sen. Biden:

He <Alito> disagreed with all 10 of his colleagues who would have overturned the jury in Barbara Sheridan's case, stating that an employer may not wish to disclose his real reasons for making personnel decisions.

In another solo dissent, he would have deferred to a corporation's, quote, "subjective business judgment." An approach his other colleagues said would, quote, "eviscerate the anti- discrimination law."

For instance, Justice Thomas in the Hamdi dissent lays out views of unchecked unitary executive to wage war and exercise foreign policy.

Although Judge Alito says his interpretation of the unitary executive was much narrower and that he couldn't recall Justice Thomas using that term, I find his explanation not at all convincing.

Most use the term "unitary executive" in the manner in which John Yoo, the legal architect of the administration's views, conceives executive power, as well as the Professor Calabrese, who was quoted by Senator Kennedy.

I asked Judge Alito whether he agreed with Professor Yoo's reasoning that would allow, even in the absence of an emergency or imminent threat, the president under his plenary power to invade another country, to invade Iran tomorrow, no matter what Congress says.

Judge Alito declined to answer such a basic, fundamental question.

I'm convinced that Judge Alito will join with the present members of the court who have struck down three dozen federal laws, more than six times the rate of activism over the history of our republic, laws which said you can't have guns within a hundred to a thousand feet of an elementary school, laws battling violence against women, laws requiring the clean-up of low-level nuclear waste and laws designed to ensure freedom of religion.

On the bench, Judge Alito has fully embraced, in my view, even aggressively sought to increase this new activism.

Apart from all that, one more sure sign Judge Alito is truly not conservative is that Pat Robertson and James Dobson and all their fevered minions have kept silent about this nomination. If they were not assured he is on their team, we could be assured Messrs. Robertson and Dobson would be out there whipping up the faithful to shoot down this nomination.

[tigereye]

14. thanks for the explanations

explanations make the argument better than hyperbole, that's all I was saying. However, your last statement about Dobson et al's silence is not necessarily a determiner that he is a conservative. But you are saying that he is beyond conservative. Ok.

sorry, I just feel like pinning people down on their arguments about this. Must be a throwback to my debating days.

:)

[quiet.american]

16. :) It's all good.

However, you know, I was in the mood for hyperbole, and had not intended line by line cross-examination with this particular post -- guess I have learn to do hyperbole better. :)

(I had been tempted to put <rant> in my headline, but figured that was self-explanatory).

[converted_democrat]

10. First off, I think he should have replaced a women with a women...

Judge Sonia Sotomayor, Judge Carolyn King, or Judge Mary Schroeder would have all been good appointments in my opinion..

I agree that Roberts is cut from the same cloth that Alito is.. And I don't like him either.. I was more or less under the impression that we would not fight Roberts, and we would save our powder for the next appointment.. I stood by when it came to Roberts, but I will not stand by this time.. Alito is a racist, and a bigot, and he has no business on the highest court of the land..Period.

[tigereye]

12. it would have been great to see another woman justice

thanks for providing some actual options...

[Dixie Flatline]

15. He's not even a conservative

Aren't real conservatives against a strong executive and big invasive government?

[democracyindanger]

17. But his wife broke out into tears!

It's a little known clause in the Constitution: If the spouse of a Supreme Court nominee sheds a tear during Congressional hearings, the nominee is automatically awarded a seat. If the spouse of a Supreme Court nominee rends his or her clothing in sorrow during the hearings, the nominee is made Chief Justice.

[bklyncowgirl]

18. Ralph Reed, Jerry Fallwell and Pat Robertson love the guy

That did it for me.