Rest assured, in their universe, Spock wears a beard.
Posted on 01/11/2006 5:01:17 AM PST by OXENinFLA
I haven't paid close attention while he speaks (preoccupied or multitasking), but I get a good sense of his tenor. I read parts of the transcripts based on exchanges of interest to me, or exchanges pointed out by others. For example, I read the "establishemnt" material because Torie said it was amazing.
Well, I am in awe. I don't agree with all of his take on application of the Constitution, but he really has a handle on the details of fact and details of law - and he has a powerful intellect in application. He'll run circles around the jurisprudence of O'Connor.
Damn impressive and incredible indeed - very appropriate labels. He also comes across as honest to a fault.
And your point is taken as well. As such, it is likely not an unpleasurable thing for them.
I'm amazed this guy can tie his shoes properly, let alone be elected to the United States Senate.
Well, out of the four dim senators between us, at least he's the... the.... LEAST DANGEROUS. Yeah, that's my story, and I'm stickin' to it.
Rest assured, in their universe, Spock wears a beard.
I have been reading the papers today- so far, the MSM is now dropping this straight onto the shoulders of the Democrats. I am shocked.
And not only that - but- like Roberts- he's done all this without notes:)
He's remarkable.
I'm guessing this was the way CBS reported it. Hewitt was talking about it last night.
I saw the propaganda piece on CNN last night and was stunned. The spliced and diced the tape of the hearings to change the facts to fit their spin. It was disgraceful, and I let them know in an email. Pure propaganda.
Dear Friend,
Samuel Alito began his Senate confirmation hearings Monday, after weeks of intense preparation by some of the President's closest aides.
The Senators on the Judiciary Committee -- including Senator Kennedy -- now have the duty to peel back the carefully constructed facade. We have to get to the bottom of Mr. Alito's record and judicial philosophy and determine how he would impact the rights and freedoms of every American.
Sre you starting a nww thread for today?
I could have sworn it was Schumer who went right after Graham because I made a mental note between Graham's soft spoken demeanor and then Schumer's questioning Alito as if he was guilty of kidnapping some little girl and hiding her somewhere.
Do you think we're gonna need one?
Yup..you should start it..they'll be some firworks this morning I believe..
Give me a sec..... I'll make one up.
Here are the appearances of "Kelo" in yesterday's transcript:
BROWNBACK: ... One last thing I'd like to get into just very briefly is the takings clause in the Kelo case -- it was in a neighboring circuit to yours, Kelo v. City of New London, where private property was taken by another private group -- private property was taken by a public group and given to another private group.[There was no remaining time, and no response from Judge Alito]BROWNBACK: Judge O'Connor wrote eloquently in her dissent: "Nothing is to prevent the state from replacing any Motel 6 with a Ritz Carlton or any home with a shopping mall or any farm with a factory now."
I just conclude by putting that in front of you, saying that this is one that people have relied upon for a long time: You couldn't take private property to another private individual; it's for public use. And I hope that's one that the court will end up reviewing at some point in time.
SESSIONS: Judge Alito, many important decisions of the Supreme Court in recent years touch on the deepest values of the American people. They deal with things like Kelo and the property that they own, matters of faith and morality, decency and pornography.SESSIONS: Do you have a sense of where the American people are with regard to these issues? Can you indicate to us that you have any appreciation for legitimacy of some of those concerns?
ALITO: Well, I do, Senator.
SESSIONS: Regardless of the technical laws it involves, but just that fundamental policy.
ALITO: I think I have an appreciation of people's concerns -- certainly with respect to Kelo, which is a recent decision and I can't comment on how I would rule on any matter concerning that; and it involves the power to take property for public use through eminent domain.
I certainly understand that what occurred in that case which, as I understand it, was the taking of the homes of people of modest means for the purpose of building a large commercial facility that was thought by the city to be beneficial to the economic welfare of the city, that this is an enormous blow to the people whose homes are being taken.
People live in homes and they have a sentimental attachment to them. They have memories that are attached to the homes. They can remember what happened in particular rooms. The neighborhood means something to them. The neighbors mean something to them. The things in the home mean something to them.
And taking their home away and giving them money in return, even if they get fair market value for the home, is still an enormous loss for people.
So I certainly can appreciate what they feel in that respect.
SESSIONS: Well, let's talk about that a little bit, because this is a matter of real power and it's a matter that the Congress gets drawn into sometimes whether we want to be drawn into it or not.
We've discussed Roe v. Wade. People remain concerned about that. The polling numbers continue to drift against that decision.
We talk about the district court opinion. I believe Senator Brownback raised federal court on marriage, on redefining the traditional statutory definition of marriage contained in states and in state constitutions around the country.
In Kelo, it's pretty clear to me that the court just changed the meaning of the words.
SESSIONS: The Constitution said you could take property for public use. The court felt that was too restrictive, basically, and a majority just changed it to say you could take property for a public purpose, which includes some private redevelopment of the area in their minds.
See, that's not founded in the Constitution. That's an overreach, in my opinion.
ALITO: I agree that overreaching by the courts can undermine respect for law. Our authority is based on the belief that what we are doing is different from what Congress is doing, because otherwise why would people tolerate our functioning? Nobody elects us. And we have a system of government that is fundamentally democratic. It's based on the sovereignty of the people. So how do you explain an unelected branch of government making decisions?So all of our authority is based on the idea which was expressed in Marbury v. Madison that the Constitution is law. It's not conceptually different from statutory law. And our job is to interpret the Constitution, it has a meaning, and you apply it to the situations that come up.
SESSIONS: Well, right now there is a strong feeling, that I share, that the court on some very important issues that people care deeply about is exceeding its authority. They're calling on me and those of us in Congress to do something about it. I got a lot of letters saying, "Withdraw jurisdiction? Why aren't you supporting legislation to do that?"
And Congress, I think, has shown restraint. But I hope that when you become a member of this august body, the Supreme Court, and I believe you will, that you will take those concerns with you and share with the members of the court that their views on policy issues are of no greater value than mine, frankly, at least in my opinion they're not, and that the Congress has been showing some restraint here. But we really want the court to be more modest and to draw back from some of its intervention and policy issues that are causing much angst around the country.
You want to comment on that?
Otherwise, Mr. Chairman, I would yield my time.
ALITO: Well, Senator, I think your policy views are much more legitimate than the policy views of the judiciary because members of Congress are elected for the purpose of formulating and implementing public policy and members of the judiciary are appointed for the purpose of interpreting and applying the law.
Ahem. Isn't it time for the Day 4 thread?
And while the Senate sits on his posterior, many of the citizens of NO are going to find their neighborhoods Keloed out of existance.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.