It’s time for another Dvorak Uncensored poll. After two days of hearings, what do you think? Should Judge Samuel Alito be confirmed to the Supreme Court?
What’s up with the Dems and their softball questioning? Are they planning on lowering the boom later? Is there a boom to lower? Has he allayed fears regarding knocking down Roe? Executive supremacy? Other issues? Did he dodge a bullet on Vanguard? Is there a bullet? Is the boringness, softball questioning and so on of the hearings simply because the Senators aren’t legal scholars and professional debators and aren’t able to keep up with someone who is?
Inquiring minds want to know what you think.
He’s another Sluggo who will say whatever is required to get the gig. Just more of the stage management characteristic of the poseurs running our government.
Um, HELL NO. Not that it matters as screwed up as the current house/senate/white house are.
I couldn’t oppose Alito more, he changes the entire scale of justice in a direction that would eliminate individual rights and privacy. He’s lied to the Senate before, in previous hearings for his Appellate Court position, how will we know when he’s lying? The checks and balances between the THREE BRANCHES of government is key to the success of the United States of America. I’m worried that all the power would be given to the executive branch. Which horrifies me, but if you agree with bush, jr. think about the same power in say, Hilary’s hands. Decisions made by the supreme court with Alito, will crush us for generations to come. Write your senators about your opposition to Alito, today!
Thank you,
MissM
I don’t think he should be affirmed. His Assistant Attorney General job application 20 years ago and the subsequent memos clearly show a much different mind set then what he is telling the Senate committee. So he either lied on the job application or is lying now.
Confirm him
MissM,
How could a judge who favors a more limited constitutional government be more dangerous to individual liberties than a liberal judge who agrees that the government should have its fingers in everything? This seems illogical to me.
The less power the government has, the more freedoms the people have, and vice versa.
It’s the president’s choice and unless the candidate is unqualified at judging constitutional issues (see Meirs, Harriet), or totally out of the mainstream (and has an agenda), he or she should be allowed to sit on the bench.
It’s just so disingenuous to watch the dog and pony show, where it’s just a lot of lying, posturing, etc. If I thought a real debate over important issues like privacy, executive powers, etc. it would be great.
I just laugh when Alito says things like “I’ll judge it case by case” without admitingthat he can have tendencies and leanings. Jeez, are we stupid? Clearly Scalia and Thomas tend to lean one way, etc. etc. so denying or surpressing it just makes him sound evil, like he is hiding something. He is a conservative person who leans in the same direction as the republicans have in the last 40 or so years. Vote him up or down on that. End of story.
Confirm him quickly! Besides, CNN is missing the breaking news of Angelina & Brad…
I say no because of his exec powers stance.
It’s now a requirement to “allay fears regarding knocking down Roe” in order to be confirmed? Will he get more than one vote? I have to laugh when the media and these dimwhit senators describe Alito as the new swing vote. It was okay when O’Connor was the swing vote because she swung to the left but swinging to the right makes you unqualified for the job. I think “Lou” nailed it. “Pat” on the other hand… Alito might be a different person than he was 20 years ago so he must be lying. Is there anyone who does not change over a 20 year span?
Yes, and why does he have to anser, Ginsber did not have to. Also if it was a democrate pres do you think the democrates would be calling for a “moderate” judge or would they be calling for another liberal judge?
Also the president has the right to chose the judges (unless as mentioned before they are unqualified at judging constitutional, but I disagree on the statement about Harriet Meirs we don’t know one way or the other) Clinton got his judges, and you did not have infact his judge was confermed (IIRC) at something like 90-3, I doubt there were less then 10 Republicans at that time
If Alito gets shut down, it will create huge problems for Hilary in the next term. Liberals should shut up, let the Republicans confirm him, and bide their time.
Steinmetz — chuckle — if Alito isn’t confirmed and the Republikans bring it up as a critical issue in the next election, the average American’s reaction [by then] will be — Who?
No. It’s time we started minimizing Bush’s influence on future politics, not allowing it to grow.
Mike: “How could a judge who favors a more limited constitutional government be more dangerous to individual liberties than a liberal judge who agrees that the government should have its fingers in everything?”
Are we talking about the same liberals and conservatives here or are you thinking of the Republican ideals of 30 years ago? The Republicans of today are all about taking away your liberties (PATRIOT act, warrantless wiretaps), nation building (afghanistan and iraq), raising the deficit and federal spending (almost hit that 10 trillion cap), intruding on state powers (schiavo and more), and the list goes on. Are any of those things conservative in the least bit? Hardly. And if Alito supports those things, you won’t see him protecting anybody’s rights but his political party’s.
We can only pray that he isn’t confirmed.
If he is, we can kiss our constitution, and the country, as we know it, goodbye!
New day, new moron, same administration.
Confirm him. We expect and give judges too much power. It’s the job of Congress and the president to protect the rights of people. Judges are to interpret the law, not make it.
JEEZ, talk about a group of doomsday naysayers.
Even listening to NPR liberal radio, they say that Alito is being required to answer questions many other SC judges didn’t have to or refused to during confirmations under Bush Sr. and Clinton. Also, that it almost always turns out the judges to the far left and far right come toward the center once they get on the court. Every liberal in the land is convinced that every judge appointed by a conservative Prez will lead to the overturn of Roe v. Wade. Lets see, how many years, err decades, has it been now? Not even Reagan’s judges have done that. Calm down.
I cringe whenever ANYONE talks about strict constitutionalism. It’s been a bogus idea since the 1800’s. Strict abidence means strictly applying the bill of rights, which Bush seems to interpret very liberally (see the part about warrants and searches for details). Political ideology is nothing but a twist of words used to justify political opinions on specific issues. The constitution may not explicitly mention a right to abortion, but it doesn’t give congress the power to regulate medical practices either. I don’t know about Alito. He’s just a bit too suspicous, considering his history.
If Alito proves to be like Scalia or Thomas, I will be satisfied. They are the two most likely to rule based on what the Constitution actually says, instead of what they might want it to say. Everything I have read suggests that he is very similar in philosophy to Scalia.
I don’t want a conservative or liberal, per se, I want a strict constitutionalist. That is my only desire for anybody who sits on the court.
“It’s been a bogus idea since the 1800’s. ”
You mean to say that rulings based on law instead of personal beliefs is bogus?
Absolutely not!
I think he should be put in. We need more judges that interpret the Constitution as it was meant to be read, not making the law with a very loose interpretation of it.
He should, and will, get in. The left brings nothing to the discussion about his appointment, and will never be for a Republican nominee.
James Hill
Confirm him, he is qualified and the President’s choice. After all, the Rebublicans confirm Clinton’s pick of Ruth Ginsberg, and she is a liberal as they come. When you elect a President one of his perks is being able to staff vacantcies as he sees fit. The Senate job is to make sure the nominee is qualified and competent to serve on the highest court, not judge based on wether or not they are liberal or conserative enough to their liking.
Confirm.
>>disagree on the statement about Harriet Meirs we don’t know one way
>>or the other
You lost all credibility there, dude. The mushrooms in my back yard are more qualified to opine on constitutional issues than that peabrain.
>>Alito is being required to answer questions many other SC judges
>>didn’t have to or refused to during confirmations under Bush Sr. and
>>Clinton.
That’s b/c Bush Sr. and Clinton were not Charlie-McCarthy-style dummies, saying what Kommandant Karl Rove told them to say. ANYTHING and ANYBODY proposed by Dumbya has to be given extra scrutiny. You just KNOW that he/ Kommandant Karl Rove has something up their sleeves.
>>Confirm him, he is qualified and the President’s choice.
That he is “the President’s choice” is the biggest thing he’s got going against him.