[RWR8189]

The New York Times is deeply saddened.

[decal]

And it's only January.

What will these Prog apologists be saying in early November?

[saganite]

It must be killing the NYT to admit that Bush has the prerogative to select conservative nominees and get them approved.

[SandRat]

They think this is going to leave an imprint? Wait until he gets to appoint one more.

[Paradox]

they were dismayed that a nominee with such clear conservative views - in particular a written record of opposition to abortion rights - appeared to be stirring little opposition.

Proof, once again, that the Democrats are out of touch with REAL America. Most Americans probably agree more with Alito than they do with the DNC. The Democrats simply refuse to believe that, they blame it on their inability to effectively communicate "their message". What they don't realize is that there message is broadcast every day, loud and clear, the American people just dont agree with most of it.

[Polybius]

Disheartened by the administration's success with the Supreme Court nomination of Judge Samuel A. Alito Jr., Democratic leaders say that President Bush is putting an enduring conservative ideological imprint on the nation's judiciary, and that they see little hope of holding off the tide without winning back control of the Senate or the White House.

How about that. The Constitution is working as it was designed to work.

[highlander_UW]

In interviews, Democrats said the lesson of the Alito hearings was that this White House could put on the bench almost any qualified candidate, even one whom Democrats consider to be ideologically out of step with the country.

What they fail to grasp is that he isn't ideologically out of step with the country...they are.

[A.Hun]

"George Bush won the election," said Representative Rahm Emanuel, an Illinois Democrat. "If you don't like it, you better win elections."

Duh..and at the rate the Dumbocrats are going, that will be a long time from now.

[supercat]

Republicans say that Mr. Bush...

"Mister" Bush?

[CAWats]

In interviews, Democrats said the lesson of the Alito hearings was that this White House could put on the bench almost any qualified candidate, even one whom Democrats consider to be ideologically out of step with the country.

They are NOT out of step with the country! The Dims don't get it.

[VeniVidiVici]

I saw some Dim propaganda today that mentioned that 7 out of the 9 justices were put on the Supreme Court by Republicans.

That's a nice soundbite for the illiterate side of the party.

[Buck W.]

"In interviews, Democrats said the lesson of the Alito hearings was that this White House could put on the bench almost any qualified candidate,..."

This statement deserves to be repeated. The dems are opposed to qualified candidates.

[JoeSixPack1]

[Darkwolf377]

Anyone recall how a few weeks ago the Dems were riding high? Bush poll numbers tanking, Iraq, high oil prices, post-Katrina fallout, the worst economy ever...

Now look at them. About all they can hope for is Abramoff to soil more Republicans than Demmocrats.

[HardStarboard]

>>>and that they see little hope of holding off the tide without winning back control of the Senate or the White House. <<<

...and they see little hope of winning back control of the Senate or the White House.

.....just cracks me up

[A CA Guy]

I hope George Bush gets to make one more appointment to the bench from one of two liberal judges that have been ill.

I wish no one harm or anything, but for the sake of others if one or both were gone when Bush can do the appointing, that would be good for America IMO.

[Clintonfatigued]

"The Democratic push began in earnest on the last weekend of April 2001, when 42 of the 50 Democratic senators attended a retreat in Farmington, Pa., to hear from experts and discuss ways they could fight a Bush effort to remake the judiciary.

"There were very few principles on which we could all agree," said Mr. Daschle, who was Senate minority leader at the time of the meeting. "But one was that we anticipated that the administration would test the envelope. They were going to go as far as the envelope would allow in appointing conservative judges."

At the retreat, Democrats listened to a panel composed of Laurence H. Tribe of Harvard Law School, Cass R. Sunstein of the University of Chicago Law School and Marcia D. Greenberger, the co-president of the National Women's Law Center. The panelists told them that the court was at a historic juncture and that the Bush White House was prepared to fill the courts with conservatives who deserved particularly strong scrutiny, participants said.

The panel also advised them, participants said, that Democratic senators could oppose even nominees with strong credentials on the grounds that the White House was trying to push the courts in a conservative direction, a strategy that now seems to have failed the party."

It did more than fail the party, it blew up in their faces.

[ThomasPaine2000]

Semantics/Logic 101.
What I have found interesting is the word "Power"..
After the closing remarks of the Alito hearings on C-SPAN,
Leahy said to Specter, that he was his second choice for chairman of the committee, implying that he was the first.
Stating that if they were in "Power", he would be the chairman; not that they were in the "Majority".
Interesting choice of words, in my opinion..

[calex59]

What the dems, and many others, miss here is that it doesn't matter if a judge is out of step with the country, what matters is that he be IN STEP with the constitution. If the dems want to change the constitution then let them do it through the legislative branch, the legal way and leave the judicial out of it.

The dems know they can't get their agendas passed any other way so their only hope is to load the judicial with leftist judges who legislate from the bench.

Just because an idea is popular doesn't make it constitutional and that is where good judges come into the picture.

[Seadog Bytes]