ARC's 1st Law: As a "progressive" online discussion grows longer, the probability of a nefarious reference to Karl Rove approaches one

Monday, October 31, 2005

It's Alito

I have a feeling that the base will be pleased with Bush's decision to nominate Justice Samuel J. Alito, Jr (nicknamed Scalito):

Bush to Nominate Alito for Supreme Court
Monday, October 31, 2005

WASHINGTON — President Bush, stung by the rejection of his first choice, will nominate Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court, selecting a conservative federal judge to replace retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, a moderate.

The choice, confirmed by two senior Republican official, was likely to spark a political brawl. Unlike the nomination of Harriet Miers (search), which was derailed by Bush's conservative allies, Alito will face opposition from liberal Democrats.

Bush planned to announce the nomination at 8 a.m. EST.

The White House hopes the choice mends a rift in the Republican Party caused by his failed nomination of Miers, and puts his embattled presidency on a path to political recovery. Democrats already put the White House on notice that a conservative judge such as Alito would create problems.

So consistently conservative, Alito has been dubbed "Scalito" or "Scalia-lite" by some lawyers because his judicial philosophy invites comparisons to conservative Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia (search). But while Scalia is outspoken and is known to badger lawyers, Alito is polite, reserved and even-tempered.
Here's the Wikipedia entry for Samuel J. Alito, Jr, which will likely be updated as we learn more. He's 55 and reliably conservative. Oh, and he has all the credentials that the GOP elites require... Princeton as undergrad, Yale law school, etc. But, we'll certainly have a fight on this one... Let's hope that the GOP caucus gets behind this nominee. Losing this nomination would be a huge defeat.

Check out Scotusblog, Confirm Them, Wizbang, and Michelle Malkin for more.

***UPDATE***
Two things:
  1. There is no doubt in my mind that Schumer & Co will see this as extraordinary circumstances and a "dagger" at the heart of our country's judicial system and there will be a fillibuster. That's not even a tough call. The biggest question is whether the spineless 7 GOPers in the Gang Of 14 will get behind the nominee and stop the fillibuster. This will be interesting to watch, but a disaster if ScAlito never gets confirmed.
  2. Here are the talking points from the Left:
    • Extremist on Abortion
    • The base is supporting this nominee because he's white and male. Just Another White Guy from the Republicans.
    • The timing of this is curious. No doubt Rove wanted the press off of his back. What did he know and when did he know it?"

***UPDATE***
Here's the initial response from the Lefties over at DemocraticUnderground:
Start the filibuster now

Refer to the nomination as "dead in the water". No point in even discussing the nomination. No point in even delving into the personal/professional history of Alito. It's all moot. He won't serve on the Supreme Court, so there's no need to even discuss the issue. Start the filibuster now.

Of course, they had a similar reaction when Miers was nominated, but this isn't just your standard kneejerk reaction to anything Bush does. In this case, there's a originalist track record to which they're reacting, not just the fact that he's nominated by a Republican. Fortunately, DUers and Kossacks don't sit in the judiciary committee or in the full Senate. Ooopppssss.... what am I talking about? The Duers, Kossacks, and MoveOn-ers bought & paid for the Democratic Party and have a lot of influence in the MSM.

And per my previous update, the DUers smell Rove behind the timing:
25. Tin foil hat being placed on head.

Has the criminal-in-chief chosen the nominee most likely to cause a ruckus in order to allow Fitzy's investigation to sink into the background? I hate the smell of Rove in the morning.

Your Co-Conspirator,
ARC: St Wendeler

Comments (2)
Monterey John said...

That's more like it.

One thing about W, he doesn't make the same mistake twice.

Orewan said...

Respect for the presidential election is important in deciding whether or not the minority party should fillibuster a president's nominee for the Supreme Court. A fillibuster is required when a nominee is unfit for the appointment or clearly contrary to the American people's sense of justice and the constitution. The majority of Americans voted for Bush in 2004 knowing that he would likely be appointing new Supreme Court justices. The American people have the right and the obligation to live with the consequences of their vote.

I disagree with many of the decisions Alito has made, especially with regards to women's and workers rights, civil rights, and gun control. But, Bush is an intellectually challenged ideologue with a penchant for cronyism, and we are lucky he didn't appoint one of his daughters to the high court. Democrats lost in 2004 and they need to get a lot smarter to be able to win in 2008. Fillibustering Alito's nomination now is not be part of an effective long-term strategy. It would be a continuation of the kicking and screaming begun after the 2004 election.