|
Edited on Sun Jan-29-06 02:22 PM by Cats Against Frist
I've been really involved with the filibuster campaign -- I've called, written faxes and e-mails, called and e-mailed friends and family, and I've been following the news.
However, today, two things occured to me:
1. I don't think Alito will overturn Roe v. Wade. He ruled, I think, in Pennsylvania that a law against late-term abortions was not Constitutional. In Casey, I believe he only ruled in favor of the notification because there WAS an exception for spousal abuse, incest and other such complications. He said, in his pitiful hearing that Roe was settled, and I, personally, don't think that the GOP REALLY wants to overturn it. I think Bush is pro-choice, as are his daughters and wife, and I think he's a fucking ACTOR.
2. Therefore, playing into the inevitability of a Roe overturn is kind of like helping out the right wing by mobilizing their base -- like a wedge issue for the Supreme Court hearings, used in the same way that they do (and intend to with a re-visitation of the Marriage Amendment, this summer) in the legislature. Without the loonie winger contingent, support for Alito might not be so strong. His "die-hard" confirmation rating (NQA), in the latest polls, are only at 33 percent. There are many "I don't knows." In fact, if you examine it critically, I don't think that the fetus cult has ANY MORE certainty in the fact that he will overtun Roe that we do that he won't. What they do have, however, is the word of their fringy legislators and their Mullahs. I was looking for the text of Bushler's fetus cult call-in, at their march, to see what I could read into it -- I haven't yet found it, so I will reserve certain comment on that aspect. Other than that -- what they clearly have is our fear, manifested in this filibuster thing. Does it help, or hurt?
3. The real danger with Alito is this concentration in the executive branch thing -- which unsettles me, and is the major libertarian sticking point against him. I look to the libertarians, to see how they feel about this confirmation, and they are split. Cato has kind of come out for it, saying he could be worse, while some of the less Repuke-leaning libertarians have voiced concerns. His explanation of his interpretation of the unitary executive theory (power within in the branch v. increasing executive power, overall) seems plausible.
Both of those things taken into account -- is this an extraordinary circumstance? I don't know. We have, of course, the high-profile instances of the shooting of the purse snatcher, and the strip search -- but those things can be based on rather nuanced intricasies of the law, and, perhaps, not as cut-and-dry as it seems. To say "Alito is in favor of strip-searching little girls," is most likely a logical fallacy.
I am concerned of course, but I always have the "running dialogue" of the detractor in my head, at all times. Believe me, I would HATE to hand the Republicans this victory -- and I HATE the gang of 14 deal, as an exercise in masochism by the Dems -- but, since they agreed to it, it makes the question relevant: what is, exactly, the extraordinary circumstance?
I support the filibuster to continue debate, because it's brusish of the Cat Killer to have to race the nomination forward -- there's simply no point in that, other than helping the Criminal in Chief score points at his State of Lying address. They're dispicable -- and it looks to be a long, hot summer for the pukes with Abramoff and the Plame thing, and they're counting on this as a victory to save their asses in the fall.
As to the question of whether or not it will hurt Dems, my answer is "I don't think so," as I posted, yesterday:
The short-term fallout for the Dems, if the filibuster is not well-received is the 2006 senate races. From what I can tell, the only Dems who are in danger, in red states, of potentially not being re-elected are that cat from Nebraska, and Byrd. Everyone else seems relatively safe.
I don't think, in 2008, with another no-holds-barred presidential campaign, that people are going to be quite as concerned with "who filibustered" Alito. In addition, the filibuster could help 2006 senate races in Montana -- Burns is hanging on by a thread, and if it is clear to Montanans that the filibuster was to stop "big government," it can only help. The way I see it, that's the ONE red state who actually means the whole conservative thing, and not the fascism thing. It could also help sink Chaffee, by giving him his "whose side are you on, anyway?" moment. The only dem who is REALLY in danger of losing her seat is Cantwell, and, despite the fact that I hate her, I think she'll hold on. I think the open seats in Minnesota, NJ and Maryland are all good.
If Byrd and Nelson vote for Alito and don't support the filibuster, the threat is avoided -- and they're both leading, BTW.
The latest polls show that ONLY 47 percent say to confirm Alito NQA, while a slightly different poll shows that he has only 33 percent of solid approval.
If the Dems filibuster, it dares the pukes to force a rule change, which could have political fallout for them -- first of all -- they DO NOT HAVE THE POLITICAL CAPITAL -- to be forcing a right-wing wacko SC justice on the nation. Second, this would be a handy way to remind the populace of this, while the Democrats look stronger as an opposition party. I think that the right momentum could HELP the 2006 Senate races, and could be the ONLY possilbe event, short of anything catastrophic, that would tip the balance soundly in favor of the Democrats.
I think that the Dems hiding behind the "what will the public think of the obstructionists" are putting on a front for some other reason. Far as I can tell, the path is wide open for a filibuster.
I would like to add that I called Alito a "right-wing wacko" before I read his opinions -- I'm not saying that I've changed my mind, only that I'm mulling it over, carefully. At the very least, he's right-wing. What kind of right wing -- is my question. The social authoritarians, to me, are far more threatening than the "less big government" kind. He might be a little of both, but maybe not as much as we expect. Like I said -- I'm not sure, and truthfully, it is exasperating to read all of the opinions, but I don't think you could call me lazy sheep citizen. I just need a break. It would be great if some manic person would read all of the opinions and give a summary. Or maybe they have, but I just missed it.
**Edited for grammar, which I'm sure is still poor, but I've got swirly eyes from reading so much.
|