Can Dems Say 'Finito' to 'Scalito'?

The Nation ^ | 10/31/2005 | David Corn

[lemura]

Now that George Will, William Kristol, David Frum, Linda Chavez, Charles Krauthammer, Edwin Meese, Robert Bork and all the other conservative power brokers have forced George W. Bush to fall to his knees and kiss their feet--by nominating Federal Appeals Court Judge Samuel Alito to replace Harriet "I Love W" Miers to replace Sandra Day O'Connor on the US Supreme Court--there is no escape for the Senate Democrats. They have only one strategic option: Make the battle over Alito a political fight about substance.

...

If the Alito nomination becomes the titanic battle that both sides in the judicial wars have been anticipating for years, the Democrats and their allies in the lobbying groups will have to create a new playbook to have even a chance of beating back Alito. If they stick to the same old strategies, they could end up wishing that Harriet Miers had fared better.

[lemura]

This is perhaps the most rationale commentary I have ever seen from someone on the left. For once, one of their leading opinion makers is stating simply that the Dems should fight over political philosophy ie what is the role of the courts? To that, I say "great, bring it on".

[Fenris6]

"there is no escape for the Senate Democrats. They have only one strategic option: Make the battle over Alito a political fight about substance."

LMAO. Do they remember how to do that? LOL.

[Jaysun]

I scoffed at that too. LOL!

[advance_copy]

If the RATS were smart, they'd back down from this one. It's only been eight hours and they're already getting clobbered.

[manwiththehands]

Pigs are flying everywhere!

[EternalHope]

They have only one strategic option: Make the battle over Alito a political fight about substance.

No way. Truth is not even relevant. They will have no trouble manufacturing slime.

For instance, they are already charging Alito is soft on the Mafia.

[riri]

I think they will back down from this. I sense a great deal of defeatism from them. heheheheheeheh

[Always Right]

This is perhaps the most rationale commentary I have ever seen from someone on the left. For once, one of their leading opinion makers is stating simply that the Dems should fight over political philosophy ie what is the role of the courts? To that, I say "great, bring it on".

The only problem is the left know they can not be honest in the fight. They have to tell everyone about back alley abortions, legalizing the rape of women, back to the days of separate Buses for blacks, and goodbye safety nets hello corporate greed. The left can't win the arguement on merit, they must use the same old scare tactics.

[Always Right]

Sorry, scratch what I just said, I think I just wrote tomorrow's liberal talking points.

[lemura]

The Supreme Court, they (Dems) should argue, keeps becoming more significant in the lives of Americans, deciding critical matters (privacy rights, religious controversies, environmental laws, assisted suicide and at least one presidential election). Consequently, Democrats should say they are now going to judge potential Justices on the basis of where these men and women may lead the nation.

Can you believe this? Oh please, please tell the American people how the judiciary should continue to appropriate our legislative rights.

[Capt. Tom]

David Corn wants the socialists (dems) to change horses in the middle of the stream. - tom

[MNJohnnie]

Hey David the Insane.

Saw you on Cspan yesterday. Tell the Doc to triple the daily doseage on your meds.You clearly are on the verge of a complete hysteric break down.

By the way, Merry Alitomas! Embrace your political irrelevence Losers! Make this fight over substance. PLEASE do! Give us some more clear proof of WHY you side is completely unfit to EVER hold any power EVER again.

There is a reason your side keeps losing David. It IS you lunitic ideas that defeat you.

[JesseJane]

rofl!

[RichInOC]

COME SIETE SIGNORI!!
TUTTA LA VOSTRA BASE È APPARTIENE A NOI.

[The Electrician]

Now that George Will, William Kristol, David Frum, Linda Chavez, Charles Krauthammer, Edwin Meese, Robert Bork and all the other conservative power brokers have forced George W. Bush to fall to his knees and kiss their feet--by nominating Federal Appeals Court Judge Samuel Alito to replace Harriet "I Love W" Miers to replace Sandra Day O'Connor on the US Supreme Court

Once again, Corn lets loose with a whopper. By all accounts, Alito has always been on President Bush's 'short list' to fill an opening on the Supreme Court. So, in essence, Corn is claiming that a shadowy cabal of conservative 'names' that the Left loves to hate somehow "forced" Bush to do something that Bush had already been planning to do for the longest time. How ridiculous can Corn get?

[JesseJane]

By the way, Merry Alitomas!

HAAAAA!!

[Rutles4Ever]

The battle was over before it began. They may as well fast-track this because the Dems are already conceding.

[NeoCaveman]

Can Dems Say 'Finito' to 'Scalito'?

Typical liberal double standard. "illegal amigos" is somehow racists by "finito to scalio" isn't.

[lemura]

Corn starts out in typical rant mode, but only to bait the reader. The rest of the article is something one would normally see from an analytical conservative.

[Bahbah]

The Supreme Court, they should argue, keeps becoming more significant in the lives of Americans, deciding critical matters (privacy rights, religious controversies, environmental laws, assisted suicide and at least one presidential election). Consequently, Democrats should say they are now going to judge potential Justices on the basis of where these men and women may lead the nation.

This is quite interesting. So they are just going to up and admit that they want these crucial issues decided by the magnificent and untouchable nine rather than elected representatives and Corn thinks this will be a winning strategy. We want the Supreme Court to become LESS significant in the lives of Americans. I think we can win this argument.