I lied about light blogging. I was perusing some leftist blogs and noticed an angry trend that confirms Power Line and my contentions regarding the similarities between the unreasonable client and the Democratic base. For instance

I’ve been holding off on my thoughts about Alito until I knew what was going to happen. Not like I didn’t know what was going to happen, but I wanted to believe in hope.

I’m not the only person upset tonight. I’ve visited other blogs and found quite a few that have a common thought: F$ck it, f$ck it all!!! Lots of people are quiting the party. When you have 14 Democrats without the balls to stand up, what else can you feel? Others are REALLY pissed off and ready for a take over of this party. When we can’t scare up 25 votes over a person like Alito (an unabashed racist and womanhater, not to mention what else), how can we hope that anything else can stand muster?

The few amount of gay rights we have gained over the years, like WA state getting a gay rights law passed in the last few days is already under attack, and bound to be overturned by an extremist court that only has one objective. Keep the right extremists in power.

And it goes on, and on, seething with unreasonableness. Then there’s the list of the condemned. Complete nuttiness like this

Senate set to turn our civil rights clocks back 30 years today…

not just for women and not just because of his views on abortion rights… but for gays and blacks and everyone who isn’t a pasty white bible thumping moron.

I’m not sure what happened in 1976, but it must have been big. Then there are attempts at self rationalization, “In the kingdom of the fascists, the moderate is the radical leftist.”

The base is practically demanding that the Democratic Party abandon all hopes of appealing to the majority of the electorate. The behavior of the Senate Democrats on the judiciary committee was not that of a party controlled from the reasonable center, but that of a vehicle steered by the braintrust over at MoveOn.org. In short, members of Democratic Underground have crept up from their subterranean lairs, daring sunlight, and have effectuated not only what to fight for, but how to fight for it. Their efforts have resulted in the liberal lion melting down on the Senate floor, muttering something about Judge Alito holding responsibility for children dying of asthma. And this resulted from a smear campaign that should only be reserved for the undeniably wicked.

To its credit, the Democratic leadership did step up, and managed to stop the bleeding. The fact that no filibuster materialized shows that the radical elements don’t completely control the party - yet. But the course of events demonstrates they have sway - and in primaries this year, that sway will likely be amplified.

Power Line Blog has an interesting analogy regarding the weak and late behavior by some Senate Democrats regarding Alito’s nomination and the similarities we lawyers experience with bad clients

All attorneys have had them, clients who take the fun out of practicing law. One sub-species is the client with a losing case who can’t understand why you’re not cleaning the other side’s clock. In fact, some otherwise agreeable clients are like this. Recall the story about the client who asked John Roberts how he could have lost a case in the Supreme Court 9-0, to which Roberts replied “because there are only nine Justices.”

The Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee have their own clients from hell — the juvenile left-wing of their party. During the Alito confirmation hearings, Senators Kennedy, Schumer, Durbin, et al. threw the kitchen sink at the nominee. They accused Alito of being unethical, of not caring about poor people and minorities, of associating himself with racists, of supporting police state tactics, etc. And most of them were full-throated about it. That none of the attacks stuck was down to reality, not lack of effort — the personal attacks were bogus and, on the substantive issues, Alito’s views were at least as close to the “mainstream” as those of his interrogators.

Of particular mention is a client a friend of mine had. The guy was charged with aggravated robbery of a convenience store. It turned out that the surveillance camera was perfectly positioned, showing the defendant angrily grabbing the clerk, waving his gun in the general direction of the camera (fittingly for Davidson County, the guy was wearing all orange at the time, too).

He refused all opportunities for a plea bargain. Naturally, the guy lost at trial. Quickly. He was fit-to-be-tied mad at his attorney, not understanding why the jury didn’t buy his side of the story. The reality that no one sensible and sober could believe his side of the story never came to him. So it goes with the Democratic base so rabidly opposed to Samuel Alito. The attacks on him didn’t stick for two reasons 1) they weren’t true, and 2) regardless of their truth, they were too over the top to be believed.

But again - hold out hope. Let there be a filibuster. Further, let Senator Frist require that the Democrats really filibuster, yellow pages and all. It would be amusing, and confirm to the public what indeed they really are all about. Too bad it looks like the votes for cloture are actually there.

 Powered by Max Banner Ads 

RedState has a list of senators uncommitted as to Alito’s confirmation, as well as those who have recently made up their mind here.

It’s simple - they have this unending procilivity for shooting themselves in the collective foot

A final vote on whether to make the conservative federal appellate judge the nation’s 110th Supreme Court justice is scheduled for Tuesday unless opponents win an uphill battle to impose a filibuster.

“The Senate has a constitutional responsibility to hold an up-or-down vote on Judge Alito’s nomination,” Bush said in his weekly radio address. “Throughout its 216-year history, the Senate has held an up-or-down vote on every Supreme Court nominee with majority Senate support.”

The president spoke as liberals led by Sens. Edward Kennedy and John Kerry, D-Mass., worked to deprive supporters of the 60 votes needed to limit debate. They faced resistance from some fellow Democrats as well as solid Republican opposition to the stalling tactic.

Unfortunately for the Democrats in the Senate, this move to filibuster is the price of consistency. If Alito truly is as bad as they have made him out to be, they have no choice but to make every effort to stop the coming shredding of the Constitution. Even if acting unconstitutionally is required in order to do so. John Kerry, though, continues to offer priceless comic relief

Kerry, defeated by Bush for the presidency in 2004, called for a filibuster Thursday while attending a world economic conference at a Swiss resort.

Asked Friday if the administration was taking Kerry’s call seriously, White House press secretary Scott McClellan chuckled and said:

“It was a pretty historic day. This was the first time ever that a senator has called for a filibuster from the slopes of Davos, Switzerland. I think even for a senator, it takes some pretty serious yodeling to call for a filibuster from a five-star ski resort in the Swiss Alps.”

It is delightfully appropriate that Senator Kerry makes a political pronouncement from a country that refuses to ever take a side on anything. The fact that he is skiing and not wind surfing is only of minor consequence. The larger point is that some Democrats, particularly those from mainstream Massachusetts such as Double Diamond Kerry, seem to feel there is a political gain to be made by filibustering a confirmable judicial nominee. Robert Byrd has pronounced support for Alito, for the sake of sanity. In total, we now have 58 votes for Alito to be confirmed, two shy of the number needed to put ice on Kennedy and Kerry’s ill-fated decision to push for a filibuster. In the meantime, I do hope they filibuster.

UPDATE

More thoughtful analysis over at RedState.

FURTHER UPDATE The Hamilton County Democratic Party blog thinks that a filibuster is a great idea, too.

Like I said - guns, feet and Democrats. Then they reload.

Per TeamGOP, Senate Democrats are pondering a filibuster to defeat the nomination of Judge Samuel Alito

Some senior Democrats told CNN they are worried that the move could backfire.

Republicans would need 60 votes to overturn a filibuster — a procedural move that extends Senate debate indefinitely, effectively blocking a vote. Senior White House officials said the move would make the Democrats look bad, and that Republicans believe they have enough votes to overcome any filibuster attempt.

Nearly all 55 Republican senators have said they will vote for Alito. Only three Democrats — Sen. Ben Nelson of Nebraska, Sen. Robert Byrd of West Virginia and Sen. Tim Johnson of South Dakota — have said they will vote for the nominee.

At least they’re improving. Just yesterday Senator Leahy wanted “90 or 100″ votes to confirm a nominee. At least now we’re down to 60.

UPDATE

Let us now forget the local bloggers who too want to frustrate that whole majority rules thing.

Judge Samuel Alito was confirmed by the judiciary committee today, along a party-line vote

But committee Democrats said they had no intention of voting for the 3rd Circuit Court judge, whom they described repeatedly as beholden to presidential power and against abortion rights.

“The record demonstrates that we cannot count on Judge Alito to blow the whistle when the president is out of bounds,” said Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass. “He is a longstanding advocate for expanding executive power, even at the expense of core individual liberties. In contrast to Chief Justice Roberts, Judge Alito’s record and testimony clearly reveal a willingness to grant the president a far greater role than is currently recognized by the Supreme Court.”

Huh. At least presidential power is actually in the Constitution. Of course, Senator Kennedy believes in that “living document” tripe, so the actual text is largely irrelevant. At least that saves you from having to read it every now and again. Unfortunately, though, Kennedy is not alone. That same view seems to have infected the other Democrats on the judicial committee as well.

The Democratic politicization of Alito’s confirmation is unfortunate. Not only is it bad politics (the Dems stepped on their tail repeatedly on this one), but it makes for bad precedent. In blissfully ignorant fashion, they have twisted the words and positions of an individual overly qualified for the SCOTUS for short-term political gain. Alito demonstrated nothing in the hearings to justify Kennedy’s remarks. Further, the minority party in this country declaring that Judge Alito is “out of the mainstream” is ludicrous. Oh wait

“I, for one, really believe that there comes a time that you just have to stand up especially when you truly believe that the majority of people in America believe what you do,” said Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., referring to public opinion supporting abortion rights.

Yeah, that’s why there’s 45 of you guys out of 100. The American public has determined in their public policy preferences that is not the case. Elections sure are pesky things

“I wish we could have somebody who would have the support of all Americans,” Leahy said of the court nominee. “There are many, many, many people in this country who would have had 90 to 100 votes in the Senate, Democrats and Republicans would have joined eagerly to support them.”

That is perhaps the dumbest and most irrelevant thing any Democrat has said during the entire Alito proceedings. To have so ardently pretended to defend the Constitution throughout Alito’s hearings, the senator from Vermont is happy to toss it aside for the sake of political expediency. There is no precedent or textual requirement that “advice and consent” demands, requires, or otherwise prefers more than a mere majority. There is no public policy argument that you would get better judges with more votes (actually it is probably the opposite). The only argument by the committee Democrats here grounded in fact is this - we are a bunch of whiny senators who have happily sacrificed our constitutional credibility in a failed attempt to attack a sitting president and the Republican Party. Demanding majority treatment while in the minority is an indicator of gross immaturity. The sad part is that they expected the public to fall for their tactics. I am so terribly sorry that Leahy, Kennedy, Feinstein, etc. are unhappy with belonging to the lesser party. The burden is on the minority party to understand that they in fact are in the minority. It’s simple math, really. To act otherwise is insulting.

 Powered by Max Banner Ads 

The hearings are over, and the Democrats’ character smearing broadsides did no damage. But not all are done with the fight

But Kate Michelman, former president of the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League, said she was unconvinced that Alito would be as open-minded on abortion as O’Connor has been.

“In Judge Alito’s approach to the law, there are no individuals, there is no privacy,” she said. “And without them, there can be neither justice nor human dignity.”

What does that even mean? Ms. Michelman has never been known as reasonable, but such a statement regarding individuals and privacy ignore Alito’s jurisprudence and the hearings of the last week. Abortion rights advocates have never been big on constitutional scholarship. But rest easy - though Alito hates individuals and privacy, he is no racist

Despite Democrats’ criticism of Alito’s membership in the controversial group Concerned Alumni of Princeton, which opposed the university’s admission of women and minorities, Theodore Shaw, president of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, and Reginald Turner, of the National Bar Association, testified that they do not believe Alito is racially biased. Both men testified against Alito’s confirmation.

Whew! I’m finally glad we got the experts in to clear that up. Poor Ted Kennedy - after making a complete horse’s rear of himself, even the NAACP doesn’t believe Alito is a bigot.

Richard Cohen has an op-ed in the Washington Post regarding the ramifications of Senator Joseph Biden’s behavior during Alito’s confirmation hearings

The only thing standing between Joe Biden and the presidency is his mouth. That, though, is no small matter. It is a Himalayan barrier, a Sahara of a handicap, a summer’s day in Death Valley, a winter’s night at the pole (either one) — an endless list of metaphors intended to show you both the immensity of the problem and to illustrate it with the op-ed version of excess. This, alas, is Joe Biden.

The reviews for Biden’s first crack at Samuel Alito, the humorless Supreme Court nominee, were murderous. The New York Times had Biden out on Page One — normally a position to kill for — only this time it was not a paean to his considerable merits, but an account of how it took him nearly three minutes of throat-clearing to ask his first question and then took the rest of his allocated 30 minutes just to get in four more. He concluded with about half a minute still left to him — something of a personal best that even he had to acknowledge.

The funny thing is that many people thought Biden had any presidential chances at all. I lived with a guy in law school from the esteemed State of Delaware, who had the opportunity to interact with Biden on many occasions. If the way he treated people was any indication of his political savvy for the next level, he was sunk long ago. Add his mouth to that, and all you really have is a cartoon image of what might be a serious legislator, but certainly not a president.

Thanks to Outside the Beltway for the link.

Former Reagan Administration Attorney General Ed Meese gives an interview regarding the status of the Alito confirmation hearings

General Meese shared some very blunt thoughts about Senator Kennedy attacking Judge Alito over the Vanguard recusal:

QUESTION:

On a separate note, Senator Kennedy and others have attacked Judge Alito’s ethics in regard to the Vanguard recusal issue. In light of Judge Alito’s responses and the fact that the ABA did review this issue, and gave him a unanimmous well-qualified rating, how would you describe these attacks?

ANSWER:

I would say again the attacks are political and it’s totally hypocritical and false for anybody like Senator Kennedy, of all people, to question anyone’s ethics, in view of his own past background. So, I think it is just politics and I think the ABA rating of well-qualified, their highest rating, which was unanimous, really says it all about Judge Alito.

Sounds familiar to me. Maybe Kennedy can demand those records be subpoenaed, too.

UPDATE Kennedy just said “We all make mistakes. I’ve had more than my share.”

 Powered by Max Banner Ads 

Ted Kennedy spent a lot of time on Samuel Alito’s quasi-relationship with the Concerned Alumni of Princeton. My former law professor, Todd Zywicki, makes a good point over at the Volokh Conspiracy, comparing Kennedy’s badgered attacks regarding CAP to similar tactics used by Joe McCarthy. The only difference is that McCarthy was at least addressing a real threat. But the real similarity is only in the hearing tactic. Kennedy needed only walk across the street to get what he wanted.

On a more general level, I do find it funny that Ted Kennedy is so focused on what could only be considered a youthful indiscretion by Alito. Ms. Kopechne did not immediately return calls for comment.

The RNC has sent out an email requesting that individuals contact senators regarding Alito’s confirmation. Operative is this part

Throughout the hearings, we have seen Democrat Senators from Ted Kennedy to Chuck Schumer to Patrick Leahy question Judge Alito’s integrity, suggest that he would undermine this nation’s commitment to one-man, one-vote, allow machine guns on the street, and make it easier for employers to discriminate. These baseless attacks are a disgrace to the process.

I say let the Democrats continue their ill-advised assault on Alito. It only serves to marginalize them and their agenda in the eyes of the American public.

One of Joe Biden’s aides must have whispered after yesterday’s Alito questioning, “Ummm, sir. You may not want to piss off Princeton graduates. Those Ivy League graduates have a lot of money and some of them may have wanted to support your presidential bid. Can you fix this somehow?”

Biden is currently “questioning” Alito (which more resembles Biden’s love of hearing his own voice) and he’s wearing a Princeton baseball cap. He spent several minutes clarifying what he yesterday described as his “distaste” for Princeton. He now loves Princeton because they graduate 24% minorities and 48% women. He meant that he specifically didn’t like the Princeton of the 1960s.

A baseball cap … too precious.

Howard Kurtz’s take on the Alito hearings yesterday

This is a vitally important appointment. But while cable is going wall to wall with the hearings, I don’t sense great interest in the country. It’s certainly less interesting, as a political spectacle, than the right’s takedown of Harriet Miers. I think it’s in part because, as conservative as Alito might be, there’s nothing in his record that has penetrated the media static as outrageous. He’s obviously smart, well-qualified and seems like a decent fellow. What’s more, there’s no cliffhanger here. Since there are 55 Republican senators, Alito is highly likely to be confirmed, and if the Democrats decide to mount a filibuster, I doubt they could peel off enough of the Gang of 14 to sustain it.

Kurtz compiles initial reactions to the hearing from all the main media outlets in the story, to include Andrew Sullivan and National Review. The consensus? They’re boring, because Alito is boring. He ought to make a good judge.

The piece chosen as the Nashville Eye column today focuses on workers’ rights, and how Alito would not be good for them. The proletariate speaks against the bourgeoisie, I suppose

Tennessee, like many other states, has been hit hard by the anti-worker climate fostered by big business and its allies in the Bush administration and Congress. From Jan. 1, 2000, through Dec . 31, 2005, Tennessee has lost a total of 110,759 jobs. Of these, 37,062 were Trade Adjustment Assistance qualified, meaning that those jobs were lost as a direct result of off-shoring.

Working families are struggling mightily in the face of declining wages, eliminated or drastically reduced health-care benefits and pensions, and a anishing sense of security on the job. Now more than ever, workers desperately need legal protections for their pay, benefits, retirement and health.

The entire article takes shots at Alito for interpreting the law as it is written. And the “facts” cited are just incorrect. This chart shows exceptional wage growth in Tennessee going back to 2003. This one and this one show job growth by county in Tennessee for the last two years. To cite a loss of jobs during the national slow growth period immediately after 9/11 is misleading. To do so now as the economy expands at a blazing clip, new home sales continue at record levels, inflation remains nonexistent, corporate headquarters transplant to Tennessee and unemployment hovers at a historical law is worse. And blaming the “woes” on a hostile legal climate isn’t supported by evidence.

As far as I can tell, Alito’s employment decisions are consistent with the law as it is written. Don’t hold him accountable for rightly interpreting laws as written by Congress.

From the San Francisco Chronicle

Questions about Roe skirted with skill or Nominee skirts Roe vs. Wade questions
But Alito backs right to privacy, protection for women’s health

It’s as if the editors couldn’t decide on a headline and left all possible options open. From the exchange with Chuck Schumer of New York

Over and over, Alito said that if confirmed he “would address that issue in accordance with the judicial process,” which he said would involve analyzing legal precedents and constitutional doctrines.

Schumer said he wasn’t asking about the process, just about Alito’s opinion. Same answer. The New York Democrat said he didn’t want to know about case law, just Alito’s current view. Same answer. He noted that Alito’s 1985 memo proclaimed that he proudly shared President Ronald Reagan’s position on abortion. No luck.

After at least a half-dozen attempts, Schumer finally gave up and said he hadn’t really expected an answer. A little while later, he held up a copy of Alito’s 1985 memo and said that the judge’s refusal to disavow his view meant he probably still held it, and that Alito would probably vote to overturn Roe vs. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court ruling legalizing abortion.

Actually, Alito’s answer is right, and ought to satisfy both sides of the political specturm. Schumer’s badgering on the point accomplished nothing. It’s especially bothersome as Schumer himself admitted that he didn’t expect to “get an answer.” What he meant to say was he didn’t expect to “get an answer he wanted.” And as a lawyer, Shumer knows better than anyone the different roles of an advocate and a judge. The farce continues.

I am streaming the Alito hearings through my computer at work. So, I am always diligent in my attention to the needs of my fine students, I may be missing nuances here and there. I could not, however, help but be drawn to the “questioning” currently underway by Senator Joe Biden. I must put questioning in quotations because he is really using his half-hour to listen to his own voice as much as possible.

Biden let Alito that he really doesn’t like Princeton. He said he arrived on the campus as an Irish Catholic boy and just didn’t fit in with the other students. He reiterated several times, “I really have a distaste for Princeton.” First of all, say goodbye to the potential donors that would come from that wealthy alumni group. And, second, what’s the relevance? The statement seems to have the same feeling to it as when our student section would yell, “Duke Sucks!” at basketball games. (Actually, some students reversed the words and then changed the first word to a different word that rhymes with the original word and also took the “s” off of that first word. I never took part in such vulgarity.)

Biden can’t understand why Alito liked Princeton so much. Apparently, the cool kids wouldn’t play with Biden at Princeton so no one else should be allowed to like the school. It’s OK, though, Senator Biden. There are some things that I can’t understand, either … like why anyone would want to live in Delaware. Rehoboth is a nice beach and all, and you can’t help rooting for those Fighting Blue Hens, but Delaware (with all of its chemical plants) just seems like the forgotten stepchild of New Jersey.

N0te — I’m not sure when Biden attended Princeton, as he graduated from University of Delaware. Perhaps he just visited the school. I missed that part of the hearing.

The Washington Post is also blogging the Alito confirmation hearings here.

MoveOn.org is raising money to run an ad on CNN opposed to Alito. You can view it here. The tagline? “Samuel Alito is no moderate. But he plays one on TV.”

Wow. A judicial candidate who worked for the Reagan administration, despises unconstitutional quotas, and who otherwise believes in a strictly interpreted Constitution is no moderate? Lordy be! I’m glad that MoveOn.org is here to tell us these things.

It’s a silly premise, really, as MoveOn is being intellectually dishonest with the ad. Ted Kennedy is almost too conservative for these folks, as well as anyone who doesn’t respond to “comrade” in public, so even if Alito would be considered a “moderate”, they still wouldn’t support him. But please, let the ad begin.