Posted on 01/20/2006 8:17:40 PM PST by nwrep
WASHINGTON (AP) — Oregon Sen. Ron Wyden said Friday he will oppose Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito, saying he is not convinced that Alito will bring an impartial viewpoint to the court.
Wyden, a Democrat, met with Alito on Wednesday and talked about executive power, legal precedents and abortion rights.
“I cannot reconcile the seemingly moderate and amiable jurist of the past few weeks” with Alito’s two-decade record as a federal appeals court judge and official in the Reagan and Bush administrations, Wyden said Friday.
“It is my conclusion that Judge Alito’s record portends a view on the power of the president that would undermine our proven and constitutionally-mandated system of checks and balances,” Wyden said.
“His record demonstrates a dangerous and narrow interpretation of the commerce clause (of the Constitution), which could lead to results that would threaten the health and safety of all Americans.”
Wyden also criticized Alito for “standing with large, corporate polluters who fouled our air, poisoned our waters, and then don’t want to pay for it.”
Wyden is the latest among a growing number of Democrats who say they will oppose Alito, a veteran appeals court judge from New Jersey. Wyden voted for Chief Justice John Roberts last fall.
The Senate Judiciary Committee is scheduled to vote Tuesday on Alito’s nomination to replace retiring Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, with the full Senate voting after that. Alito is widely expected to be confirmed by the Republican-controlled chamber.
Sen. Gordon Smith, R-Ore., has said he expects to vote for Alito, calling him “supremely qualified.”
The rules change is a big issue for both parties. Right now, what is stinking out the joint is the asymmetry. The dems are playing litmus test politics on judicial nominees backed up by filibuster threats, but this only works as long as (1) the pubbies don't change the rules and/or (2) the pubbies don't play tit-for-tat the next time a democrat is president.
In the latter case, it would be the democrats clamoring for a rules change, and probably doing it. The "nuclear" option, remember, is actually the "Byrd precedent." They've done it before. This whole dem kabuki dance is a gamble that Republicans won't retaliate in kind.
My prediction: the dems will go through the motions of a filibuster but -- unless they are sure the Republicans don't have 50 votes for a rules change -- they will make sure the votes are there for cloture, so as not to force the endgame. A half a dozen of the moderate and/or red state dems will get a wink, nod, and shove from the leadership, and the Republicans will get 61 or 62 votes for cloture while the rest of the dem caucus runs through a charade to satisfy the moonbat wing of the party.
P.S. I am genuinely conflicted. In the current polarized environment, I don't think legislative filibusters would long survive a rules change on judicial filibusters; the precedent would not be contained. With majority rule in the Senate, we could do Social Security and tax reform right now, and probably make big strides on vouchering education and health care. I appreciate how much conservatives relied on the filibuster during the decades of demlock in Congress, and I know the dems will have a majority again someday. But right now, we have the votes (absent a filibuster) on a pretty extensive list of needful things, and it's tempting.
Are the issues I've noted above important enough to throw away the filibuster? Perhaps, but I am conflicted. But if the dems force our hand on judicial filibusters, they -- not we -- will have settled the issue. The more I think about it, the more I hope the dems blunder into a nuclear option vote.
Is Gordon Smith still going out of his way to cater to Wyden, who defeated Smith in a 1996 special election to succeed the once popular Bob Packwood?
Actually, Collins is slightly to the right of Snowe on most issues. Is Snowe still married to the former ME governor, McKernan, I believe was the name?
Taney was also the brother-in-law of the legendary Francis Scott Key! And Francis Scott Key {F. Scott} Fitzgerald was named for Francis Scott Key, one of his ancestors.
Do you think if GWB has a third appointment, he will choose a liberal?
There is a kind of odd political connection between IL and TN. Howard Henry Baker, Jr., married Joy Dirksen of Pekin, IL, and also became the son-in-law of legendary Republican Everett McKinley Dirksen, who he later followed as Senate Republican leader. Former TN Governor Don Sundquist is an unpopular IL native and was somewhat similar in governance to indicted former IL Governor George Ryan. TN may be inclined to join IL again and elect the second sitting black U.S. Senator, Mr. Ford, to join the wildly popular Mr. Obama. I suspect that TN want to show it is "not prejudiced" and could elect Ford if 2006 is a heavily Democrat year. VA has already done such with the popular L. Douglas Wilder in 1989. It looks like the TN GOP is unable to agree on just who should oppose Ford. Perhaps the TN GOP can unite behind a plurality primary winner, but they may not either.
Alito will probably get no more than 5 dem votes. Here's my list:
Landrieu
Lieberman
Ben Nelson
Bill Nelson
Byrd
He could have read them on the plane over. I did ask my senator (well I really asked one of his staff of handlers) to qualify his decision.
Their efforts are so transparent it is a wonder that they still use the same tired rhetoric.
Yes, they like to appear at townhall meetings together.
Indeed it was. The voters passed a ballot measure in 1922 removing the ability for children to attend private schools. The KKK was behind this measure, and was using it as a means of attacking Catholics.
It led to the Supreme Court decision, Pierce v. Society of Sisters, which found that parents have the right and responsibility to direct their children's education.
Weyden has a 40 IQ.
Wyden has about a 40 IQ, he hardly knows where Canada is and he's from the Northwest; whereas Alito's IQ is about 220. Senator Ron must feel terribly inferior.
Wyden is also infinitely lower ehical & moral league from Alito, as well, since, for instance, Wyden had to steal his Senate seat with hundreds of faks mail-in votes form single addresses as nursing homes & mental health residential facilities.
If the Rats filibuster, they lose the opportunity to ever filibuster again.
Smith voted (along with every other Republican) to add "new sections of trail" to the National Trails System. I own property that was used briefly (South Alternate Oregon Trail)by emigrants. I kept in contact with Smith all the time, met with him, etc. and told him all about the lies and underhanded ways in which OCTA was operating to add my property to their trails system. He acted all concerned and told me he supported private property rights and then went and voted for the bill. To he!! with him.
Amazing pictures.
I'd say even siginificant.
Excellent post and right on the money!
I WANT WYDEN OUT OF OFFICE
I don't care if Mannix runs against him, I am voting for WHOM EVER opposes Wyden. That morally corrupt money grubber. Out for all those abortionist dollars. I want you out of office you lying thief!
Do you expect anything else from that gutless commie?
It's a race against time now. Will another liberal Justice die or step down while Bush is still Prez or not. If one does, and we don't lose our numbers in the 2006 election, then we can use the nuclear option when we really need it, which will be to replace a true lib with a true conservative. If we lose our numbers in the Senate in the mid-term elections, then we have problems, and probably won't be able to use the nuclear option after that. The ideal situation would be if a lib Justice leaves before the mid-term elections, but that is undoubtedly asking too much. But one can hope.
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.