Frist: Alito is the "worst nightmare of liberal Democrats"

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Keep talking, Frist. Maybe you can help us get 41 anti-fascists to fillibuster Alito. Of course Alito is the worst nightmare of a lot more people than just liberal Democrats.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060121/pl_nm/court_alito_dc

[J. J.]

Keep talking, Frist. Maybe you can help us get 41 anti-fascists to fillibuster Alito. Of course Alito is the worst nightmare of a lot more people than just liberal Democrats.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060121/pl_nm/court_alito_dc

How terrible for the Democrats that they can't block, in the words of  Frist spokesman Bob Stevenson, "a thoughtful mainstream conservative jurist who is well respected by his peers, by Democrats and Republicans alike."

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Keep talking, Frist. Maybe you can help us get 41 anti-fascists to fillibuster Alito. Of course Alito is the worst nightmare of a lot more people than just liberal Democrats.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060121/pl_nm/court_alito_dc

How terrible for the Democrats that they can't block, in the words of  Frist spokesman Bob Stevenson, "a thoughtful mainstream conservative jurist who is well respected by his peers, by Democrats and Republicans alike."

"Worst nightmare" doesn't sound like "mainstream".

[J. J.]

Keep talking, Frist. Maybe you can help us get 41 anti-fascists to fillibuster Alito. Of course Alito is the worst nightmare of a lot more people than just liberal Democrats.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060121/pl_nm/court_alito_dc

How terrible for the Democrats that they can't block, in the words of  Frist spokesman Bob Stevenson, "a thoughtful mainstream conservative jurist who is well respected by his peers, by Democrats and Republicans alike."

"Worst nightmare" doesn't sound like "mainstream".

The Democrats who would consider it the "worst nightmare" don't sound "mainstream."

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Keep talking, Frist. Maybe you can help us get 41 anti-fascists to fillibuster Alito. Of course Alito is the worst nightmare of a lot more people than just liberal Democrats.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060121/pl_nm/court_alito_dc

How terrible for the Democrats that they can't block, in the words of  Frist spokesman Bob Stevenson, "a thoughtful mainstream conservative jurist who is well respected by his peers, by Democrats and Republicans alike."

"Worst nightmare" doesn't sound like "mainstream".

The Democrats who would consider it the "worst nightmare" don't sound "mainstream."

WTF are you talking about? Frist probabily considers anyone who cares about civil liberties a liberal.

[J. J.]

Keep talking, Frist. Maybe you can help us get 41 anti-fascists to fillibuster Alito. Of course Alito is the worst nightmare of a lot more people than just liberal Democrats.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060121/pl_nm/court_alito_dc

How terrible for the Democrats that they can't block, in the words of  Frist spokesman Bob Stevenson, "a thoughtful mainstream conservative jurist who is well respected by his peers, by Democrats and Republicans alike."

"Worst nightmare" doesn't sound like "mainstream".

The Democrats who would consider it the "worst nightmare" don't sound "mainstream."

WTF are you talking about? Frist probabily considers anyone who cares about civil liberties a liberal.

It means that they want a judge to do what they want him to do, not follow the law.  In most, if not all, of the cases that libs are complaining about, Alito was following either precedent or what the legislature's instructions on how to follow the law.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Keep talking, Frist. Maybe you can help us get 41 anti-fascists to fillibuster Alito. Of course Alito is the worst nightmare of a lot more people than just liberal Democrats.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060121/pl_nm/court_alito_dc

How terrible for the Democrats that they can't block, in the words of  Frist spokesman Bob Stevenson, "a thoughtful mainstream conservative jurist who is well respected by his peers, by Democrats and Republicans alike."

"Worst nightmare" doesn't sound like "mainstream".

The Democrats who would consider it the "worst nightmare" don't sound "mainstream."

WTF are you talking about? Frist probabily considers anyone who cares about civil liberties a liberal.

It means that they want a judge to do what they want him to do, not follow the law.  In most, if not all, of the cases that libs are complaining about, Alito was following either precedent or what the legislature's instructions on how to follow the law.

Umm, we know we're not going to get a liberal judge. What we oppose is someone who allows the Bush adminstration to do whatever it wants, the law be damned.

[nlm]

I've got to say I'm less than pleased with this Alito fellow and some of his views regarding Executive power. I also think he will be a road block to government reform if he gets in, so I hope he doesn't. I'm all for some of what he stands for, don't get me wrong, just against enough that I believe there must be quite a few better people for the job.

I sure wish this whole Roe V Wade thing would just dry up and blow away. It's allowing to much crap to be pushed on to America. It's a poorly constructed law, and while I consider myself more pro-choice than otherwise (but am sure people at both extremes of that debate would have some not so clever things to say about my views) I'd be fine if it was undone. Let it be undone, it appears to be being used as a cloak to sheppard through Alito and his "Unitary Executive" theory.

It's also dishearting to see somebody in Bill Frists position using that fact that another group will find something to be a "nightmare" as a way to pander to others. I realize a lot of you folks wish hell upon your fellow Americans if they don't agree with your politics, and that a number of our elected leaders do as well, I just think it's f**ked up.

[TheresNoMoney]

I sure wish this whole Roe V Wade thing would just dry up and blow away. It's allowing to much crap to be pushed on to America.

Agreed.

It's a poorly constructed law, and while I consider myself more pro-choice than otherwise (but am sure people at both extremes of that debate would have some not so clever things to say about my views) I'd be fine if it was undone.

I might agree with you if not for the millions of women in conservative states that would turn control of their bodies over to the government. I wouldn't be OK with that.

It's also dishearting to see somebody in Bill Frists position using that fact that another group will find something to be a "nightmare" as a way to pander to others. I realize a lot of you folks wish hell upon your fellow Americans if they don't agree with your politics, and that a number of our elected leaders do as well, I just think it's f**ked up.

Bill Frist is a corrupt piece of sh1t. So is his family, whose for-profit hospital chaing HCA  paid the largest Medicare fraud settlement in the history of our country.

[J. J.]

Umm, we know we're not going to get a liberal judge. What we oppose is someone who allows the Bush adminstration to do whatever it wants, the law be damned.

And what makes you think that Alito would.  He seems to be deferential to precedent and legislative instructions.

[nlm]

Isn't he a supporter of the "unitary executive" theory and credited with the concept that if the president makes a statement when he signs a bill into law, a court interpreting the law should give his intent the same weight it gives to Congress's intent in writing and approving the law.

That sounds very fringe to me, and seems to indicate that he believes the Executive branch is quite a bit more than a co-equal branch of government.

[nlm]

It's a poorly constructed law, and while I consider myself more pro-choice than otherwise (but am sure people at both extremes of that debate would have some not so clever things to say about my views) I'd be fine if it was undone.

I might agree with you if not for the millions of women in conservative states that would turn control of their bodies over to the government. I wouldn't be OK with that.

What is gained and what is lost? I think you are taking a worst case view of this (which is possible, but I think doubtful), I doubt that we would see draconian legislation put forth, and if we did, those doing so would pay a large price.

[A18]

Isn't he a supporter of the "unitary executive" theory and credited with the concept that if the president makes a statement when he signs a bill into law, a court interpreting the law should give his intent the same weight it gives to Congress's intent in writing and approving the law.

That sounds very fringe to me, and seems to indicate that he believes the Executive branch is quite a bit more than a co-equal branch of government.

The unitary executive theory has absolutely nothing to do with the scope of executive power, and everything to do with the control of executive power.

Signing statements were designed to counteract legislative history.

[riceowl]

New Gallup poll:

The three-day telephone poll of 1,006 adult Americans was begun on January 20, a week after his confirmation hearing ended.

According to the survey, the percentage of Americans who believed Alito should be confirmed rose to 54 percent from 49 percent. Those opposed remained unchanged at 30 percent.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/01/23/alito/index.html

********
Sure hope the Senate feels like representing their constituents.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

New Gallup poll:

The three-day telephone poll of 1,006 adult Americans was begun on January 20, a week after his confirmation hearing ended.

According to the survey, the percentage of Americans who believed Alito should be confirmed rose to 54 percent from 49 percent. Those opposed remained unchanged at 30 percent.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/01/23/alito/index.html

********
Sure hope the Senate feels like representing their constituents.

Not surprising, the media is very pro-Alito.

[Beet]

New Gallup poll:

The three-day telephone poll of 1,006 adult Americans was begun on January 20, a week after his confirmation hearing ended.

According to the survey, the percentage of Americans who believed Alito should be confirmed rose to 54 percent from 49 percent. Those opposed remained unchanged at 30 percent.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/01/23/alito/index.html

********
Sure hope the Senate feels like representing their constituents.

That's precisely correct. If Senators choose to take into account factors other than the candidate's strict constructionism, such as the opinion of their constituents, that is perfectly within their right as guaranteed by the constitution.

[riceowl]

Yeah. It's that he's been proven to be more than qualified, and the will of the people is almost 2:1 in favor of his confirmation.  I just don't get why there would be a filibuster.

[TheresNoMoney]

What is gained and what is lost?

The woman's right to control her own body, obviously. This right would be lost in many states if Roe v. Wade is overturned. It would be a disaster.

I think you are taking a worst case view of this (which is possible, but I think doubtful), I doubt that we would see draconian legislation put forth

Of course we would! Hell, many states already have laws banning abortion as soon as Roe v. Wade is overturned. I think your underestimate the impact it would have. Put yourself in a woman's shoes, do you really want the government controlling your reproductive decisions?  Quite a horrifying thought.

and if we did, those doing so would pay a large price.

Quite possibly, but it's still not worth the damage to womens rights.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Yeah. It's that he's been proven to be more than qualified, and the will of the people is almost 2:1 in favor of his confirmation.  I just don't get why there would be a filibuster.

Because people who haven't been getting all their information from right-wing sources realize what an extremist he is. The way that the right-wingers made the political winds be blowing at this very instant should not determine whether an extremist gets a lifetime appointment to the nation's highest court.

[Emsworth]

The woman's right to control her own body, obviously. This right would be lost in many states if Roe v. Wade is overturned. It would be a disaster.

...

Of course we would! Hell, many states already have laws banning abortion as soon as Roe v. Wade is overturned. I think your underestimate the impact it would have. Put yourself in a woman's shoes, do you really want the government controlling your reproductive decisions?  Quite a horrifying thought.

All of this is utterly irrelevant to whether Roe v. Wade is constitutionally correct. The judiciary is supposed to interpret the law, not make policy; thus, the impact of overturning Roe v. Wade is not the least bit important.

[A18]

Can't wait to see jFraud's reaction to Alito being sworn in.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

The woman's right to control her own body, obviously. This right would be lost in many states if Roe v. Wade is overturned. It would be a disaster.

...

Of course we would! Hell, many states already have laws banning abortion as soon as Roe v. Wade is overturned. I think your underestimate the impact it would have. Put yourself in a woman's shoes, do you really want the government controlling your reproductive decisions?  Quite a horrifying thought.

All of this is utterly irrelevant to whether Roe v. Wade is constitutionally correct. The judiciary is supposed to interpret the law, not make policy; thus, the impact of overturning Roe v. Wade is not the least bit important.

How do you feel about Harper v. Virginia State Board of Elections or Loving v. Virginia?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Can't wait to see jFraud's reaction to Alito being sworn in.

You guys have nothing positive to offer, so everything is about attacking liberals for you guys.

[A18]

Actually, I'm the one who supports Alito's confirmation. You're the one just calling everyone a fascist.

[Emsworth]

How do you feel about Harper v. Virginia State Board of Elections or Loving v. Virginia?

Harper was incorrect. Until the passage of the Twenty-Fourth Amendment, the poll tax was constitutionally permissible. To quote Justice Hugo Black's dissent, the Supreme Court reached its decision "not by using its limited power to interpret the original meaning of the Equal Protection Clause, but by giving that clause a new meaning which it believes represents a better governmental policy."

Loving may or may not have been correctly decided. It must be remembered that even John Marshall Harlan, the lone dissenter from Plessy, believed that anti-miscegenation laws were constitutionally permissible. There are strong arguments on both sides.