Alito In The Crosshairs
Yep, we're going back into judicial mode. We have less than a week to go before his hearings begin, and we move him up to the Supreme Court. I'm sure a lot of people right now are scratching their heads asking where I get my confidence from. Simple. READ up on him and his decisions, and you'll see why. Alito is going to run circles around the committee just like Roberts did. AND the plus is now the activists against him have only his politics to attack.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/05/politics/politicsspecial1/05alito.html?ex=1294117200&en=cc9ed3d8b705680b&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss
WASHINGTON, Jan. 4 - The battle over the Supreme Court nomination of Judge Samuel A. Alito, Jr. turned personal Wednesday with the announcement of new commercials that sharply escalated liberal attacks on him, moving beyond his legal views to attack his character and credibility instead.
The commercials come less than a week before confirmation hearings begin Monday. Steve Schmidt, a White House spokesman handling the nomination, called the commercials "dishonest" and "a desperation tactic."
Separately, the American Bar Association on Wednesday rated Judge Alito "well qualified" for the court, its highest rating, as expected. His supporters hailed the rating. Liberal groups said their complaint was his judicial philosophy, not his professional qualifications.
Ah, the cat's out of the bag. Alito's judicial philosophy is one rooted in the same philosophy shared by Roberts, Scalia, and Thomas. This is where their sticking point is. They don't like his philosophy. they want a judge who will make-up the law from the bench like O'Connor, Breyer, and Souter. They want a more "progressive" judge that understands the weight of society rather than weighing societies grievances in the law.
A commercial by one of the liberal groups, MoveOn.org Political Action, depicts Judge Alito as an actor receiving makeup and coaching.
"Yes, you wrote on a job application that a woman has no constitutional right to an abortion," a handler tells him. "But your excuse is brilliant: you only did it to get the job."
"You broke your promise not to rule on cases involving that company you invested with. Stick to your answer: computer glitch," the handler continues. "Oh, and the group you belonged to that wanted to restrict African-American admissions to your college. You've been saying, 'I don't recall.' Love it."
Typical of MoveOn to do commercials like this. Yet they won't address any of their more liberal associates who don't seem to handle the truth well, either. People like Chuck Schumer (involved in the Michael Steele credit info scandal), Michael Moore (never met a lie he didn't like), Al Franken (never met a charity he didn't like taking money from), Ted Kennedy (who did kill a woman in a drunk driving accident how many years ago), Hillary Clinton (who just quietly tidied up her PAC scandal in California yesterday), and the list goes on and on. But to make Alito look bad, they have to make things up and twist the truth to get their results.
The "job application" mentioned in the commercial refers to a 1985 memorandum Judge Alito wrote as a lawyer for the Reagan administration seeking a promotion. Judge Alito did express disagreement with the constitutional right to abortion, but the closest thing to the "excuse" described in the commercial is a statement attributed to Judge Alito by Senator Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of California, after they met.
"He said, 'I was an advocate seeking a job,' " Mrs. Feinstein recounted. " 'It was a political job. That was 1985. I am now a judge.' " She said he added: " 'It is very different. I am not an advocate. I don't give heed to my personal views. What I do is interpret the law.' "
And I'm sure that statement just drove her up the wall. Feinstein sits on the Judiciary Committee, and took her whacks at Roberts when he was up for nomination. She wasn't kind, but then again, neither was Roberts as he tore her apart. I'm hoping the same will occur with Alito.
In the same memorandum, Judge Alito said he was a member of Concerned Alumni of Princeton, a defunct conservative organization that the commercial asserts "wanted to restrict African-Americans admissions to your college."
The group never explicitly sought to limit admissions of black students, but it did oppose the school's affirmative action admissions policies and urged the admission of more children of alumni.
And I see no problem with opposition to a policy that is blatantly racist in it's inception and execution. Bollinger steamed me when the Supreme Court ruled that the University of Michigan's admissions policy, which awards extra points to minority students, was not only OK, but within the framework of the Constitution.
There is no other record of evidence of Judge Alito's involvement besides the 1985 memorandum. In answering a Senate judicial questionnaire, Judge Alito wrote that he had "no recollection of being a member."
MoveOn said it would pay $150,000 to run an advertisement nationally on CNN and locally in some states beginning Monday.
These ads, most likely, will be in the states of Democrats on the Judiciary Committee in a hope that pressure will force them to bow to the special interests. It isn't going to work. If the Democrats try to stall him in committee, they're going to end up cutting off their nose to spite their face. And MoveOn and the PFAW would be wise to remember that this is an election year. Any sort of shenanigans by the Democrats over Alito might cost them their reelection bids.
The reference to a broken promise about recusing himself echoes a commercial from a coalition of liberal groups led by People for the American Way, the Alliance for Justice and the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights.
The coalition said it would run its commercial this week on national cable news programs and locally in Maine and Arkansas, which have senators, Republican and Democratic, who hold potentially pivotal votes. Officials would not disclose how much they were spending.
Kennedy, Feinstein, and Kohl are on the committee, and all are up for reelection. Lord knows why these morons are targeting those states. No one on the committee comes from those states. It's as if they've reserved themselves to the fact the committee will pass him to the floor of the Senate, and they're targeting people that will be pivotal votes in his final passage. It's not going to work.
"News reports reveal he broke his own commitment three times, even ruling in favor of a company he invested with," an announcer says. "Then gave three different excuses why." Legal ethics experts, however, have said Judge Alito's lapses were minor. In his 1990 appeals court confirmation, Judge Alito pledged to recuse himself from cases involving two companies, Vanguard and Smith Barney, that managed his mutual fund investments. Ethics guidelines did not require him to step aside because a mutual fund investor has no stake in the fund manager, but Judge Alito pledged to do so to avoid even the appearance of conflict. And in all but a very small number of cases, he kept that commitment.
If the legal ethics board saw no wrongdoing, where do these people see it? There isn't any wrongdoing by Alito. Their accusations are unwarranted, and little more than plain hot air.
Judge Alito has offered multiple but not contradictory explanations for his lapses. He has said that they occurred because a courthouse computer failed to screen for one of the cases, that the case had not violated ethics rules and that his initial pledge covered only his first years on the bench.
To support Judge Alito, Progress for America Voter Fund, a group with close ties to the White House, is spending $500,000 to run a commercial on national cable news programs and in some states. "Every day, desperate liberals make up a steady drip of attacks against Judge Samuel Alito," an announcer says.
I hate to tell the Left this, but they're not going to win this fight. Alito's going to make it to the bench, and it will be one more originalist/textualist/constructionist on the bench. This means that there is a 5-4 split on the high court. The next one that steps down (I'm predicting at least one more before Pres. Bush leaves office) will be the game breaker in the war for the courts. As it is, Alito's ascension to the Supreme Court will be scaring the hell out of the Left; a swing vote by Justice Kennedy could spell the difference between furthering the Left's idea of progressive jurisprudence and maintaining the boundaries enumerated by the Constitution.
Publius II
Yep, we're going back into judicial mode. We have less than a week to go before his hearings begin, and we move him up to the Supreme Court. I'm sure a lot of people right now are scratching their heads asking where I get my confidence from. Simple. READ up on him and his decisions, and you'll see why. Alito is going to run circles around the committee just like Roberts did. AND the plus is now the activists against him have only his politics to attack.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/05/politics/politicsspecial1/05alito.html?ex=1294117200&en=cc9ed3d8b705680b&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss
WASHINGTON, Jan. 4 - The battle over the Supreme Court nomination of Judge Samuel A. Alito, Jr. turned personal Wednesday with the announcement of new commercials that sharply escalated liberal attacks on him, moving beyond his legal views to attack his character and credibility instead.
The commercials come less than a week before confirmation hearings begin Monday. Steve Schmidt, a White House spokesman handling the nomination, called the commercials "dishonest" and "a desperation tactic."
Separately, the American Bar Association on Wednesday rated Judge Alito "well qualified" for the court, its highest rating, as expected. His supporters hailed the rating. Liberal groups said their complaint was his judicial philosophy, not his professional qualifications.
Ah, the cat's out of the bag. Alito's judicial philosophy is one rooted in the same philosophy shared by Roberts, Scalia, and Thomas. This is where their sticking point is. They don't like his philosophy. they want a judge who will make-up the law from the bench like O'Connor, Breyer, and Souter. They want a more "progressive" judge that understands the weight of society rather than weighing societies grievances in the law.
A commercial by one of the liberal groups, MoveOn.org Political Action, depicts Judge Alito as an actor receiving makeup and coaching.
"Yes, you wrote on a job application that a woman has no constitutional right to an abortion," a handler tells him. "But your excuse is brilliant: you only did it to get the job."
"You broke your promise not to rule on cases involving that company you invested with. Stick to your answer: computer glitch," the handler continues. "Oh, and the group you belonged to that wanted to restrict African-American admissions to your college. You've been saying, 'I don't recall.' Love it."
Typical of MoveOn to do commercials like this. Yet they won't address any of their more liberal associates who don't seem to handle the truth well, either. People like Chuck Schumer (involved in the Michael Steele credit info scandal), Michael Moore (never met a lie he didn't like), Al Franken (never met a charity he didn't like taking money from), Ted Kennedy (who did kill a woman in a drunk driving accident how many years ago), Hillary Clinton (who just quietly tidied up her PAC scandal in California yesterday), and the list goes on and on. But to make Alito look bad, they have to make things up and twist the truth to get their results.
The "job application" mentioned in the commercial refers to a 1985 memorandum Judge Alito wrote as a lawyer for the Reagan administration seeking a promotion. Judge Alito did express disagreement with the constitutional right to abortion, but the closest thing to the "excuse" described in the commercial is a statement attributed to Judge Alito by Senator Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of California, after they met.
"He said, 'I was an advocate seeking a job,' " Mrs. Feinstein recounted. " 'It was a political job. That was 1985. I am now a judge.' " She said he added: " 'It is very different. I am not an advocate. I don't give heed to my personal views. What I do is interpret the law.' "
And I'm sure that statement just drove her up the wall. Feinstein sits on the Judiciary Committee, and took her whacks at Roberts when he was up for nomination. She wasn't kind, but then again, neither was Roberts as he tore her apart. I'm hoping the same will occur with Alito.
In the same memorandum, Judge Alito said he was a member of Concerned Alumni of Princeton, a defunct conservative organization that the commercial asserts "wanted to restrict African-Americans admissions to your college."
The group never explicitly sought to limit admissions of black students, but it did oppose the school's affirmative action admissions policies and urged the admission of more children of alumni.
And I see no problem with opposition to a policy that is blatantly racist in it's inception and execution. Bollinger steamed me when the Supreme Court ruled that the University of Michigan's admissions policy, which awards extra points to minority students, was not only OK, but within the framework of the Constitution.
There is no other record of evidence of Judge Alito's involvement besides the 1985 memorandum. In answering a Senate judicial questionnaire, Judge Alito wrote that he had "no recollection of being a member."
MoveOn said it would pay $150,000 to run an advertisement nationally on CNN and locally in some states beginning Monday.
These ads, most likely, will be in the states of Democrats on the Judiciary Committee in a hope that pressure will force them to bow to the special interests. It isn't going to work. If the Democrats try to stall him in committee, they're going to end up cutting off their nose to spite their face. And MoveOn and the PFAW would be wise to remember that this is an election year. Any sort of shenanigans by the Democrats over Alito might cost them their reelection bids.
The reference to a broken promise about recusing himself echoes a commercial from a coalition of liberal groups led by People for the American Way, the Alliance for Justice and the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights.
The coalition said it would run its commercial this week on national cable news programs and locally in Maine and Arkansas, which have senators, Republican and Democratic, who hold potentially pivotal votes. Officials would not disclose how much they were spending.
Kennedy, Feinstein, and Kohl are on the committee, and all are up for reelection. Lord knows why these morons are targeting those states. No one on the committee comes from those states. It's as if they've reserved themselves to the fact the committee will pass him to the floor of the Senate, and they're targeting people that will be pivotal votes in his final passage. It's not going to work.
"News reports reveal he broke his own commitment three times, even ruling in favor of a company he invested with," an announcer says. "Then gave three different excuses why." Legal ethics experts, however, have said Judge Alito's lapses were minor. In his 1990 appeals court confirmation, Judge Alito pledged to recuse himself from cases involving two companies, Vanguard and Smith Barney, that managed his mutual fund investments. Ethics guidelines did not require him to step aside because a mutual fund investor has no stake in the fund manager, but Judge Alito pledged to do so to avoid even the appearance of conflict. And in all but a very small number of cases, he kept that commitment.
If the legal ethics board saw no wrongdoing, where do these people see it? There isn't any wrongdoing by Alito. Their accusations are unwarranted, and little more than plain hot air.
Judge Alito has offered multiple but not contradictory explanations for his lapses. He has said that they occurred because a courthouse computer failed to screen for one of the cases, that the case had not violated ethics rules and that his initial pledge covered only his first years on the bench.
To support Judge Alito, Progress for America Voter Fund, a group with close ties to the White House, is spending $500,000 to run a commercial on national cable news programs and in some states. "Every day, desperate liberals make up a steady drip of attacks against Judge Samuel Alito," an announcer says.
I hate to tell the Left this, but they're not going to win this fight. Alito's going to make it to the bench, and it will be one more originalist/textualist/constructionist on the bench. This means that there is a 5-4 split on the high court. The next one that steps down (I'm predicting at least one more before Pres. Bush leaves office) will be the game breaker in the war for the courts. As it is, Alito's ascension to the Supreme Court will be scaring the hell out of the Left; a swing vote by Justice Kennedy could spell the difference between furthering the Left's idea of progressive jurisprudence and maintaining the boundaries enumerated by the Constitution.
Publius II
posted by Syd And Vaughn | 11:16 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home