FORUM POLL : Are you happy with bushs nominating Alito for the supreme court

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

With great risk for being called a Republican in Democratic guise by my fellow Democrats, I will say that at first glance I view Alito positively.  The president has a right to appoint judges that are closest to him ideologically (has that not almost always been the case?), and I have enough respect for the institution that I would prefer an intellectual conservative with immense experience and/or credentials to a moderate who has no notion of constitutional law, or other credentials other than being the crony of the president.   

Also, at this point, I would personally vote to confirm him if I were Senator.  We will see what the confirmation hearings will reveal first.   

You DINOs are destroying the party.

[AuH2O]

I love leftists in meltdown mode.

Also, Emsworth... you really are too smart to be a Democrat.

WTF?

Real mature post.  What are you, 16?  What kind of person goes and assumes that people of one ideological stripe are generally dumber than those of another?  There are plenty of liberal and conservative wackos out there, but no party on the whole is "smarter" than the other. 

Grow up and try making a coherent argument without insulting people.

I don't think you understood my meaning. He makes arguments that are more Republican on economic and legal issues... you too narrowly interpreted "smart"

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Another thing. All of the top lawyers clerk for the SCOTUS. Even a lot of law professors who never take the bar exam or become judges do that. Alito didn't clerk for the SCOTUS.

[Emsworth]

Another thing. All of the top lawyers clerk for the SCOTUS. Even a lot of law professors who never take the bar exam or become judges do that. Alito didn't clerk for the SCOTUS.

So? I believe that Ginsburg, Souter, Thomas, and Scalia have never clerked for a Supreme Court Justice before, either (or, at least, that is what this source informs me).

It is quite clear that Alito is qualified in terms of judicial experience.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Another thing. All of the top lawyers clerk for the SCOTUS. Even a lot of law professors who never take the bar exam or become judges do that. Alito didn't clerk for the SCOTUS.

So? I believe that Ginsburg, Souter, Thomas, and Scalia have never clerked for a Supreme Court Justice before, either (or, at least, that is what this source informs me).

It is quite clear that Alito is qualified in terms of judicial experience.

Ginsburg didn't because of sexism.

[A18]

Uh, even if we accept that as true, it leaves three other justices.

[Jake]

Jfraud is hilarious when he gets like this.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Uh, even if we accept that as true, it leaves three other justices.

Of course it's true.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruth_Bader_Ginsburg

[Jake]

You're accepting the author's opinion, for which he has shown no factual backing, as fact. That is incredibly stupid, especially when I can go in and edit that part out right after I post this.

[Defarge]

No, but then again in all honesty I wouldn't be happy with anyone Bush picked .

[A18]

As I said, even if we accept that as true, it leaves three other justices.

O'Connor is older, and apparently clerked for a Supreme Court justice.

[ATFFL]

To my knowledge, O'Connor never served a clerkship.  None is mentioned on findlaw.

O'Connor Bio

Ginsberg did serve a clerkship to US District Court jduge. 

Ginsberg Bio

Looking through those Bios, serving a clerkship to a major court is an exception rather than the rule.

[A18]

I was just going by Emsworth's list of exceptions.

[Frodo]

With great risk for being called a Republican in Democratic guise by my fellow Democrats, I will say that at first glance I view Alito positively.  The president has a right to appoint judges that are closest to him ideologically (has that not almost always been the case?), and I have enough respect for the institution that I would prefer an intellectual conservative with immense experience and/or credentials to a moderate who has no notion of constitutional law, or other credentials other than being the crony of the president.   

Also, at this point, I would personally vote to confirm him if I were Senator.  We will see what the confirmation hearings will reveal first.   

You DINOs are destroying the party.

You are predictable as always, Jfraud.  Here's a suggestion: while you're focused on pushing every Democrat out that doesn't satisfy your every criteria on what makes a Democrat a Democrat, why don't you start a thread here with my name on it (and other forum Dems that you think are 'DINOS') demanding that I leave the Democratic Party and join the Republicans instead, and see how much luck you will have then?  I could use the attention.   

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

With great risk for being called a Republican in Democratic guise by my fellow Democrats, I will say that at first glance I view Alito positively.  The president has a right to appoint judges that are closest to him ideologically (has that not almost always been the case?), and I have enough respect for the institution that I would prefer an intellectual conservative with immense experience and/or credentials to a moderate who has no notion of constitutional law, or other credentials other than being the crony of the president.   

Also, at this point, I would personally vote to confirm him if I were Senator.  We will see what the confirmation hearings will reveal first.   

You DINOs are destroying the party.

You are predictable as always, Jfraud.  Here's a suggestion: while you're focused on pushing every Democrat out that doesn't satisfy your every criteria on what makes a Democrat a Democrat, why don't you start a thread here with my name on it (and other forum Dems that you think are 'DINOS') demanding that I leave the Democratic Party and join the Republicans instead, and see how much luck you will have then?  I could use the attention.   

Just because I'm unhappy with a Democrat doesn't make them a DINO. However, anyone who supports an extreme-right nominee like Alito is a complete DINO. He is far more conservative than Roberts who was also a right-winger. Why would you support such an extreme person and call yourself a Democrat? Don't come whining to me when the federal minimum wage is declared unconstitutional.

[Sam Spade]

Jfraud is hilarious when he gets like this.

[MarkDel]

What a wonderfully illustrative example of what's wrong with Liberals in this thread. The hypocrisy of those of you on the left truly knows no bounds.

Liberals go on and on and on about racial and ethnic "insensitivity" over the slightest little thing...over and over again we hear about racism, sexism, homophobia, blah, blah, blah...

And what happens in this thread? You have people going around calling Judge Alito a WOP and making all sorts of anti-Italian implications and none of you Liberal hypocrites are the least bit offended. But let a Republican say that he thinks homosexuality is against God and you morons blow a gasket, or let someone suggest that Islam may be a warped religion and you leftists lose your minds.

What a pathetic bunch of hypocrites. It's really, really sad that a movement (liberalism) that once stood for so much good in the development of civil society has degenerated into a bunch of cultural elitists with reasoning powers dominated by their ID. Modern liberals should be truly ashamed, especially the ones on this forum who demonstrated today with their silence, and lack of outrage, what childish hypocrites they are.

[Ebowed]

I think that's a bit of an unfair generalization, Mark.  I for one couldn't care about the racial/sex/sexual orientation diversity of the court, as long as the nine people on there are good, solid justices.  As an Italian-American myself I wouldn't tolerate anyone on my side of the political spectrum making these remarks, either.  Additionally, I'm not screaming doomsday; frankly this was a better nomination than Miers (at least Alito isn't an unqualified crony) and I'm willing to reserve judgement till the hearings.  I'm hoping Alito gives a better performance than Roberts did (looking back on it, Roberts' refusal to answer many questions was rather annoying).

[MarkDel]

Ebowed,

Despite your Red Avatar, you are not exactly a bastion of left wing ideology. There are, of course, exceptions to every rule, and having read many of your posts, I am aware that you do not fit the all-too-common and all-too-true stereotype of a modern left winger.

By the way, it's good to see a fellow "Goomba" on the forum...LOL

[Sam Spade]

I'm hoping Alito gives a better performance than Roberts did (looking back on it, Roberts' refusal to answer many questions was rather annoying).

Actually nowadays, if one is nominated to the Supreme Court and answers questions, he/she probably won't be confirmed.

I therefore doubt we'll see much better out of Alito.

However with Alito, we at least have 15 years of Circuit Court opinions, and can therefore make a more educated guess on where he would decide.

And it's still an educated guess, because as a Circuit Court, you're bound by precedent and cannot create anew (as can a SC justice)

[Erc]

The reason why Scalia and Thomas have really high rates of striking down laws as unconstitutional is probably solely because they are the two judges on the court who have the most respect for the free speech clause of the First Amendment--and, as such, have voted against countless laws and lower court rulings which would infringe upon those rights.  Would Scalia suddenly become less of an 'extremist' if he shared Stevens' views on free speech, jfern?  Since you strike me as a fan of the first amendment, somehow I suspect the answer there is no.

Statistics are nice, but you can't expect them to explain everything.

[MarkDel]

JFern,

What lie might that be? Go back and read this thread. Some of the stuff was edited after the fact, but thanks to cut and paste, a few of the ethnic slurs can still be found and they WERE posted and you leftists said nothing.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

I'm hoping Alito gives a better performance than Roberts did (looking back on it, Roberts' refusal to answer many questions was rather annoying).

Actually nowadays, if one is nominated to the Supreme Court and answers questions, he/she probably won't be confirmed.

From what we've seen of Ginsburg and Roberts' hearings, I'm sorry to say you're probably right.  It's a shame really. :-

You can quit parotting right-wing lies.

Ginsburg at her confirmation hearing:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

JFern,

What lie might that be? Go back and read this thread. Some of the stuff was edited after the fact, but thanks to cut and paste, a few of the ethnic slurs can still be found and they WERE posted and you leftists said nothing.

So you're not talking about the Drudge/Chris Matthews lie? How about the quote feature so we know what the hell you're talking about?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

The reason why Scalia and Thomas have really high rates of striking down laws as unconstitutional is probably solely because they are the two judges on the court who have the most respect for the free speech clause of the First Amendment--and, as such, have voted against countless laws and lower court rulings which would infringe upon those rights.  Would Scalia suddenly become less of an 'extremist' if he shared Stevens' views on free speech, jfern?  Since you strike me as a fan of the first amendment, somehow I suspect the answer there is no.

Statistics are nice, but you can't expect them to explain everything.

The statistics clearly refute the myth that only liberals are activist judges.