Judge Samuel Alito meets with Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, on Capitol Hill in Washington Wednesday, Nov. 16, 2005, to discuss Alito's nomination to the Supreme Court. (AP Photo/Dennis Cook)
Hey Harry, repeat after me:
Justice Samuel Alito.
I detect the whiff of a filibuster being brewed.
HAR! Dingy Harry concerned? Of course he is, just like the rest of the Thugocrat socialists who need the SCOTUS for illegal law making and liberal activism....
Choke on it Harry!!!
"Concerned" was a word we often heard tumble from the lips
of that clown from South Dakota that "retired" from the Senate last year,isn't it?
"A picture of Sam Alito is emerging that may explain why the extreme right-wing is popping champagne corks .. " -- Harry Reid..
----
No, Harry.
Here's a mirror, pass it around to your Senate colleagues.
That's why we're popping corks, and have been for years now.
Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito (2nd L) speaks with
Senator Edward Kennedy (D-MA) in his Capitol Hill office in
Washington November 15, 2005. (Joshua Roberts/Reuters)
I resent being called "extreme" because I don't think babies should be murdered. I think Reid is extreme (and an idiot)!
IOW, Reid will give any smear and lie about Alito and/or Alito's family, no matter how outrageous, a complete non-stop public airing until the nomination has been defeated. Go on and try it, you little scumbag.
"Concerned" now, "Deeply saddened" later.
I guess abortion is an "American value."
Harry Ried says:
They decided she (Harriet Miers) was inadequately radical or insufficiently aggressive for their purposes, so they gave her the boot."
And then he says
A picture of Sam Alito is emerging that may explain why the extreme right-wing is popping champagne corks
By this logic Reid believes that Miers would have kept the court "balanced" since Alito will tilt it to the right
Ried then continues to say:
The appointment of Judge Alito largely fails to diversify the court," Reid said.
Which means one of two things.
1) He is not a she,a minority, handicapped or gay
2) Changing the court from "Neutral" to "Right" is not diversifying.
According to Sen. Reid, one of two things is what should be considered when contemplating a nominee:
1) The person should be considered only because of race, sex, sexual preference etc... and not the content of their character, so to speak
2) Changing the court from "Neutral" to "Left" is diversifying while changing the court from "Neutral" to "Right" is not.
To sum it up, according to Reid the only acceptable nominee is someone the Democratic party considers in their pocket belief wise, or is a member of a sub group that historically votes democratic.
I am so glad he cleared this up for us. Thanks, Senator!
By inference you are suggesting Alito is radical. This is respectful Reid?
And yet our Senators cower to this mental lightweight that contradicts himself in his own statement.
Senator Reid, considering Miers was YOUR nominee why did you never vigilently defend her and announce you would vote for her confirmation? Could it be because you are full of it? Thank God the President put his finger in the air and bucked you the second time.
My only question is whether the U.S. Senate Republicans will continue to announce their intentions to be the minority Party in 2006. WOT and Judiciary are the biggest issues for those that vote for them. They've already waved the white flag on the WOT. They've allowed the filibuster to exist and still be used against other nominees. Will they cement their damn fates with Alito by not ensuring he is confirmed?
Now we can be sure Alito is the right man. If dusty doesn't like him I do.
Harry, Harry, Harry. When will you learn. You don't get to make the final decisions. Vote no, and STFU!
"Abortion rights activists are concerned that Alito and recently confirmed Chief Justice John Roberts would move the Supreme Court to the right and perhaps overturn the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that established abortion rights."
That line has more in it than people may realize. The idea that overturning Roe will end abortion is a myth perpetuated by the loonies on the left. All that would do is toss the abortion laws back to the states, where it belongs anyway.
The last part of that little sentence is telling. The Constitution did not establish abortion rights? Nope, the Supreme Court did. It may be simple semantics on my part, but words do mean things. Why did not the Supremem Court before 1973 find a right to abortion? Were those men just not as learned as the ones who found the right? It's anybody's guess.
I say overturn Roe, let the states decide. Maybe our founding fathers were smarter than liberals think.
Harry Reid is concerned about the abortion document? He's always claimed to be pro-life. So much for that.
Harriet Reid is a relentless a-hole.