Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Liberal Coalition Is Making Plans to Take Fight Beyond Abortion
NY Times ^ | 11/14/5 | David D. Kirkpatrick

Posted on 11/13/2005 8:52:24 PM PST by Crackingham

A coalition of liberal groups is preparing a multimillion-dollar television advertising campaign against the Supreme Court nomination of Judge Samuel A. Alito Jr. that seeks to move the debate over his selection beyond abortion rights and focus instead on subjects like police searches and employment discrimination, several leaders of the coalition said.

The possibility that Judge Alito could vote to narrow abortion rights has dominated discussion among both supporters and opponents of his nomination. But Nan Aron, president of the Alliance for Justice and one of the leaders of the coalition, said a poll commissioned by her organization showed the potential to attack Judge Alito on aspects of his record that had received less attention.

In addition to the alliance, a liberal legal group that focuses on judicial nominations, the coalition includes the abortion rights groups Naral Pro-Choice America and Planned Parenthood, as well as People for the American Way, the A.F.L.-C.I.O., the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People and the Sierra Club.

Last week, the alliance released results of a poll that highlighted elements of the judge's record unrelated to abortion that the liberal groups say could have greater resonance with moderate voters.

Among the issues raised by the poll was Judge Alito's support as a lawyer in the Reagan administration for an employer's right to fire someone who had AIDS. Another issue was a judicial opinion he wrote supporting a police strip-search of a suspected drug dealer's female companion and her 10-year-old daughter. Others included his votes as a judge against employment discrimination suits and an opinion overturning part of the Family and Medical Leave Act.

(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events; Philosophy; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: abortion; alito; alitoakbar; constitution; leftists; liberals; obstructionistdems; samuelalito; scotus; supremecourt

1 posted on 11/13/2005 8:52:29 PM PST by Crackingham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

Bring it on....


2 posted on 11/13/2005 8:53:05 PM PST by Appalled but Not Surprised
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

They raised a whole bunch of money to fight Roberts and couldn't spend it all, so I guess they decided to blow it on this gunk.

This is definitely not going to work, so the more money they spend on this the better, less to spend elsewhere..


3 posted on 11/13/2005 8:54:55 PM PST by Mount Athos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Appalled but Not Surprised
"Bring it on...."

Thats right. Let the people see what the democraps really stand for. Let them do this 24/7 until everyone understand who they are and the trash they push on us.

4 posted on 11/13/2005 8:58:27 PM PST by GregoTX (The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

Note the free PR - pre-selling the advertising before the advertising has even occurred.

Pre-News -

The NYT should be on record for these campaign contributions.

We need better PR people, because we are not going to get an un-biased press.


5 posted on 11/13/2005 9:02:08 PM PST by Mr. Rational (God gave me a brain and expects me to use it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham; Appalled but Not Surprised; Mount Athos
Don't be so quick to dismiss this as saber-rattling, folks. The Dems are scared spitless over Alito and will use any number of dirty tricks to misrepresent and outright lie about his record.

If y'all thought the Dems were playing dirty by going after Roberts' adopted kids, you ain't seen nothing yet. Democrats are not handicapped by either shame or a soul.

6 posted on 11/13/2005 9:03:53 PM PST by Prime Choice (Never excuse treason as "dissent.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham
NYT use of the word "beyond" makes this PR initiative against Alito sound so very strong and brave; i.e. take the fight BEYOND abortion!! But what they mean is (I think) they are dropping the abortion issue like a hot potato.
7 posted on 11/13/2005 9:04:11 PM PST by NutCrackerBoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

Good luck with that. I'm sure all those soccer moms ouot there really give a crap about searches and employment discrimination cases.


8 posted on 11/13/2005 9:05:55 PM PST by Dems_R_Losers (The Kerry/Lehane/Wilson/Grunwald/Cooper plot to destroy Karl Rove has failed!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham
Woohoo! Go for it Libs! We want a fight over the Judiciary. Been a little disappointed you've been holding your fire.

Among the issues raised by the poll was Judge Alito's support as a lawyer in the Reagan administration for an employer's right to fire someone who had AIDS.

Back to the days of claiming Reagan wanted people to get struck with AIDS and die, huh? Nevermind his friend Rock Hudson.

Cool. I really hope you play up this angle. Blow the glass cieling off you people ever being remotely close to respecting President Reagan, as you've attempted to re-write history here as well.

9 posted on 11/13/2005 9:07:08 PM PST by Soul Seeker (Mr. President: It is now time to turn over the money changers' tables.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Rational
Note the free PR - pre-selling the advertising before the advertising has even occurred. Pre-News - The NYT should be on record for these campaign contributions.

Exactly. The way they report news (not!) about coming ad campaigns against same sex marriage, or anything else from the right.

10 posted on 11/13/2005 9:07:19 PM PST by NutCrackerBoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham
The possibility that Judge Alito could vote to narrow abortion rights. . . .

You know, even if the SCOTUS votes to reverse Roe v. Wade, that does not directly narrow "abortion rights." All it would do is get the federal government out of the business of telling the states what to do or not do. It would just be a "System Restore" to a point before Jan. 22, 1973. Then it would be up to each state to decide whether it wants abortion to be legal or not, in that state. Conceivably (no pun intended), you could have all 50 states making abortion legal, and nothing would change from today. God forbid, but theoretically that's possible. But at least then we would be following the Constitution, unlike today.

11 posted on 11/13/2005 9:07:23 PM PST by Charles Henrickson (Tenth Amendment constitutional conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

I, for one, would like to properly thank Sen. Arlen Spector for postponing the hearings on the Alito nomination until January, giving the dems plenty of time to raise money and dig up dirt on the nominee.


12 posted on 11/13/2005 9:08:24 PM PST by Behind Liberal Lines
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

Oops. Forgot to close the "sarcasm" tag in that last post


13 posted on 11/13/2005 9:09:28 PM PST by Behind Liberal Lines
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Prime Choice
Don't be so quick to dismiss this as saber-rattling, folks. The Dems are scared spitless over Alito and will use any number of dirty tricks to misrepresent and outright lie about his record.

LOL. These lefty groups spewed their garbage during the presidential and mid-term elections and still got their behinds kicked. Once they run their anti-Alito ads, people will see the "Paid for by..." at the end and shrug their shoulders with indifference (Cue the "Not This S--t Again" poster guy). Trust me, Alito is going to get confirmed and there's not a damn thing the left-wing groups can do other than vent and moan.

14 posted on 11/13/2005 9:13:41 PM PST by Extremely Extreme Extremist (Harmful or Fatal if Swallowed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham
Make them spend it all!

15 posted on 11/13/2005 9:35:22 PM PST by Paleo Conservative (Hey hey ho ho Andy Heyward's got to go!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

This is so typical of the Dems. They are still primarily animated by Alito being against abortion, but they can't say that because they have figured it out that unrestricted abortion is a losing issue for them. So once again the Dems will try to fool the people. They can't openly show what they stand for or the public will reject them.


16 posted on 11/13/2005 9:43:56 PM PST by DeweyCA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative

''Make them spend it all!''......My thoughts exactly!


17 posted on 11/13/2005 9:50:59 PM PST by Bush gal in LA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham
But Nan Aron, president of the Alliance for Justice and one of the leaders of the coalition, said a poll commissioned by her organization showed the potential to attack Judge Alito on aspects of his record that had received less attention.

They are determined to defeat any Bush candidate in their battle for political power. Now they are doing polls and focus groups to decide the best way to do it. His abilities, education, experience, and judicial temperament have nothing to do with it.

18 posted on 11/13/2005 10:42:07 PM PST by Mind-numbed Robot (Not all that needs to be done needs to be done by the government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Behind Liberal Lines

Haha!

Why on earth was Specter selected to head things up? Seriously.


19 posted on 11/13/2005 10:44:37 PM PST by CheyennePress
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

Why does the Senate even pretend that the american people have a say in the nomination of judges? The constitution makes it clear that the people as a whole are not to be trusted to have the sense to make decisions on judges. That is why the consent is in the Senate, which is NOT a representative body, rather than the house.

The more the senators allow political campaigns to determine votes for the supreme court, the more they undermine the view of the court as independent in the minds of the people.

The democrats rang a blow against the court in 2000, accusing republican appointees of "voting republican", but they have in fact approached nominations in this manner in this new century.


20 posted on 11/13/2005 11:13:44 PM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson