Do you support Alito for SCOTUS?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Vote

[Gabu]

Polls generally stir up better dialogue if they're not blatantly biased.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Polls generally stir up better dialogue if they're not blatantly biased.

If I was really biased, I would have given only 6 options.

[dazzleman]

yes

[Virginian87]

yes (Democrat).  The fact that you have DINO next to yes shows just how intolerant you are.

[opebo]

yes (Democrat).  The fact that you have DINO next to yes shows just how intolerant you are.

The new and better term - I believe coined by Bandit - is 'Vichy Democrat'.

[© tweed]

I'd probably vote against his confirmation, if that's what you're asking.

[MasterJedi]

Yes

[A18]

I guess the Cato Institute is full of LINOs.

[Tory]

I guess the Cato Institute is full of LINOs.

Every libertarian to him is a LINO, as is every sensible Democrat a DINO

[Frodo]

Yes (Democrat) -and I am not going to reiterate the reasons why...everyone should know them well enough by now. 

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

No. I would NEVER support any judge appointed by Bush. Period.

[A18]

He hasn't been appointed by Bush. Unless you mean George H.W. Bush.

[Beet]

I'd probably vote against his confirmation, if that's what you're asking.

^^^^

What concerns me more right now though, is not whether he is confirmed or rejected but that Senators' right to confirm or reject him based on whatever criteria they deem fit is upheld. If they want to take in the views of their constituents or the likely policy outcomes of a justice's position, I believe that is fully within their constitutional right and their right as members of the Senate to do so. And further, that all idealism aside, the practical reality of our Supreme Court for most of the past century or even beyond has made taking into account these other factors not only rightful but important.

I am certainly positive that President Bush took these factors into account while he was making his selections himself, knowing that they would be on everyone's mind. It is important to the health of the process that all concerned do not hide the truth or allow elephants to sit in the room without acknowledgement. It is no sin for the thoughts of men to escape their lips. It is no travesty for truth to be aired to the light of day.

[dazzleman]

I'd probably vote against his confirmation, if that's what you're asking.

^^^^

What concerns me more right now though, is not whether he is confirmed or rejected but that Senators' right to confirm or reject him based on whatever criteria they deem fit is upheld. If they want to take in the views of their constituents or the likely policy outcomes of a justice's position, I believe that is fully within their constitutional right and their right as members of the Senate to do so. And further, that all idealism aside, the practical reality of our Supreme Court for most of the past century or even beyond has made taking into account these other factors not only rightful but important.

I am certainly positive that President Bush took these factors into account while he was making his selections himself, knowing that they would be on everyone's mind. It is important to the health of the process that all concerned do not hide the truth or allow elephants to sit in the room without acknowledgement. It is no sin for the thoughts of men to escape their lips. It is no travesty for truth to be aired to the light of day.

The most interesting thing here, that nobody is really talking about, is how assuming that Alito is confirmed, the Democratic strategy on judges has completely failed.

Up until pretty recently, there was trepidation about what would happen if Bush appointed a truly conservative judge.  Democrats clearly wanted to force Bush to appoint someone in the mold of O'Connor by creating this mythical requirement that a president not be able to move a court ideologically with his appointments, a requirement they never applied to themselves when they held the White House.

But now Bush has appointed two conservatives in a row, after one misstep that I think may have been planned.  One has already been handily confirmed, and the other appears about to be confirmed.

Democrats were forced to back off their filibustering threats, and at this point don't dare to filibuster Alito.  So it seems their scare tactics have not worked, as a majority of Americans seem to favor Alito's confirmation, and strident opposition to him is identified as a far left position.

[nclib]

No.

[Bdub]

Yes.  I support him.

[WalterMitty]

yes (rino) 

[nini2287]

Yes (Vichy Democrat)

[MaC]

I would most certainly vote to confirm him if I were in the senate.

Wow!

[AkSaber]

Yes, I do.

[Brandon H]

I have some concerns about him, but Robert Bork says he is a good nominee and this is the best I expect from Bush, so I am leaning yes.

[Cubby]

I have some concerns about him, but Robert Bork says he is a good nominee and this is the best I expect from Bush, so I am leaning yes.

Well if Crazy-Beard likes him then he must be a real nut.

No/Democrat

[Sam Spade]

Yes.  My position on the appointment of judges is pretty well known.

[Democratic Hawk]

Yes, but I don't have the same level of confidence in Alito that I did in Roberts

Dave