Posted on 10/28/2005 8:33:00 AM PDT by Rutles4Ever
Multiple sources are telling RedState that Samuel A. Alito, Jr. of the Third Circuit Court of Appeals will be named by the President at the next associate justice of the United States Supreme Court as early as Monday.
“The situation is still in flux,” says one source, “but not very much.” Says another, “The White House Counsel’s Office is not doing too good at keeping this a secret.”
Still another source says, “Luttig and Alito were the fall backs to Miers. They have both been vetted. Alito seems more palatable. There is no need to drag this out, he’s been vetted a million times.”
And yet another source tells me that he is convinced Alito is the nominee barring some last minute unforeseen issue. All signs are pointing to Judge Alito right now. Things could change, but as the weekend draws closer it seems more and more likely that Judge Alito will be the nominee and conservatives will have a fight on their hands in the Senate — a very winnable fight.
Man, it woulda bea nice-a to see-a another Italiano ona the Courta!
We don't seek your redemption.
This would just be too awesome and will give the lefties apopletic fits! I'll even go back to referring to Mr. Bush as President Bush once again if it's really true.
WH Press Secretary Scott McLellan told reporters this a.m. that Bush would not name his new SCOTUS choice today.
The name we hear from just about everone is Alito.
http://hotlineblog.nationaljournal.com/
If this is true, all is forgiven!!! Bush would then be my favorite American not named Knievil.
He also extremely serious about protecting the 2nd Amendment.
No way Bush puts one of Laura's best friends through all this just for strategy.
What happens if the three FR rockstars are rejected? Why risk them when we have such a weak position in the Senate? Once they are rejected they become damaged goods and a re-nomination will likely never occur -- especially if the background digging by the left finds some dirt on them. Then they are blackballed forever even if the GOP gets more Senate seats.
It has never been clear to me why the more hard core conservatives want to ignore their own horrible failures at electing conservative Senators from Massachussetts, Vermont, Illinois, Maryland . . . and pretend that there are votes in the Senate that don't exist. It's time to look in the mirror and recognize our own failures. Why reject an incremental victory that is certain for a big failure that is likely?
If you can't elect a solid, overwhelming majority of Senate conservatives including Mass, VT, IL and even Maine, why would we be inclined to think we deserve a mandate?
One thing to consider. If it's Luttig, we have John Warner from the "gang" supporting the nomination because he's from Virginia. If it's Reynolds, we have Graham supporting the nomination. If it's Alito, there is no one from the gang who is from NJ, and he might not have the support of either senator from that state which may hurt his chances. I think this points towards Luttig.
Christopher Dodd
Joseph Lieberman
Joseph Biden
Daniel Inouye
Tom Harkin
Paul Sarbanes
Barbara Mikulski
Edward Kennedy
John Kerry
Carl Levin
Max Baucus
Harry Reid
Frank Lautenberg
Jeff Bingaman
Kent Conrad
Patrick Leahy
Robert Byrd
Jay Rockefeller
Herbert Kohl
Would Alito hold that case law supercedes the Constitution? If not, why did he say, "Our responsibility as a lower court is to follow and apply controlling Supreme Court precedent," in regard to an abortion case? If appointed to the Supreme Court, would he follow a stare decisis view of Roe V. Wade and other unconstitutional rulings?
Luttig 4th Circuit
>
Answer: the nominee is rejected.
Either way, it's a win. If we get the votes in the Senate, we get a good Associate Justice on the court; if we don't get the votes, the base is fired up for '06.
>
No, that's a LOSS. An enormous LOSS. Who celebrates and gets fired up because "your own party betrayed you" -- meaning the RINOs? How would having the party fracture fire up anyone?
You want to know who that fires up? I'll tell you.
What happens is the DNC throws a victory celebration and raises more money from its victorious base that just destroyed a Bush nominee than they have EVER raised before. And that wins control of Congress in 2006.
This rejection of incremental victory on the part of FR is just bizarre.
I really don't think W has let us down every time...Just a bit of an exaggeration there.
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.