The Alito schism (1985 job application memo puts Senate at nuclear brink)

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10073443

The Alito schism
How a 20 year-old job application may push the Senate to the nuclear brink

By Howard Fineman
MSNBC contributor
Updated: 7:29 p.m. ET Nov. 16, 2005


Howard Fineman
MSNBC contributor


WASHINGTON – Next January, at Super Bowl time, we’re going to witness a battle for the ages here. But it won’t be like a football game, because neither side will win.

For two Supreme Court nominations in a row – John Roberts and Harriet Miers – the country avoided a brutal debate over the role of the court on issues such as abortion, civil rights and race. At first glance, I thought the choice of Judge Samuel Alito, Jr. would make it three peaceable outcomes in a row. He was qualified (as Miers, who withdrew, was not) and modest (as Roberts, who was confirmed, seems to be).

I was wrong. (as the 1985 document pushes the Senate closer to the nuclear option than he previously suspected)

===================================================================================
GOP warns that any effort to block a vote on Alito would be "outrageous" ....

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/17/politics/politicsspecial1/17confirm.html

Debate in Senate on Alito Heats Up Over '85 Memo

By DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK
Published: November 17, 2005

WASHINGTON, Nov. 16 - The debate over the Supreme Court nomination of Judge Samuel A. Alito Jr. escalated into a full-fledged fight in the Senate Wednesday as top Democrats sounded new alarms about his approach to the law and Republicans warned that any effort to block a vote on him would be "outrageous."

Partisans on both sides of the nomination were reinvigorated by the disclosure this week of a 1985 memorandum from Judge Alito when he was a member of the Reagan administration and was seeking a promotion. In the memorandum, he professed his strong support for a conservative legal approach to abortion, affirmative action and limits on federal power over the states.

"A picture of Sam Alito is emerging that may explain why the right wing is popping champagne corks," said Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the Democratic leader, taking a sharply critical tone in his first speech about the nomination on the Senate floor. "We don't have to guess whether Judge Alito's description of himself in that memo would predict what kind of judge he would be. For the past 15 years, Judge Alito has been one of the most conservative federal judges in the country."

Mr. Reid's criticism was quickly followed by floor statements from Senator Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts and Senator Charles E. Schumer of New York, both prominent Democrats on the Judiciary Committee. They spoke a day before a coalition of liberal groups is expected to announce plans for a national television advertising campaign opposing confirmation. <snip>

Alito would be a disaster on the Supreme Court. He is a far right wingnut, who has no respect for women, minorities, or the rights of individuals as opposed to corporations. He represents everything a judge should not be.

:toast:

:-)

There are three possible outcomes to this. Only one is in any way good.

1. Dems cave again to limit damage in next election. Hopefully avoid filbuster-proof majority for Repubs.

2. Dems fight and get :nuke:d. We try to "shut down the Senate". In an election year. Republican landslide ensues. So do rules changes to strip all remaining power from Dems. Goodbye 2-party system.

3. They try to invoke the nuclear option and fail. :party::grouphug::party::party: But is this even remotely possible?

need to get out in front of this thing, and let people know what Samuel Alito is all about. They need to paint him as an extremist at every turn. Don't mince words, and don't relent until he withdraws. If our side's Reps and Senators are going to be afraid of the Pugs going nuclear every time Democrats get in their way, then maybe we need stronger Democrats in Congress.

1. Dems cave again. Alito joins SCOTUS to the dismay of most of the country. Dems win back the Senate in 2006 but can't do anything because Repugs threaten to filibuster anything of importance.

2. Dems fight this time and get nuked. Alito joins SCOTUS anyway. Dems win back the Senate in 2006 and kick ass because the Repugs took away their own ability to filibuster.

Of course, both of these scenarios are simplistic and based on variables which can turn any number of ways, affecting the outcomes. The only thing that seems certain is that Alito joins the SCOTUS whether Dems filibuster or not. I say filibuster.

Even with honest elections that is a long shot.
It would take a miracle with


Yes, I know the polls say we should kick ass next year.
But look what they did to us in Ohio last week!

even if we lost would mean getting strong liberals on the Court suddenly becomes possible.

It has not been possible in my lifetime.

The best we get is an ex-ACLU, or ex-NAACP lawyer - always of the non-bomb throwing type.

If the GOP Scali and Thomas are allowed the original intent via random 18th century writings writings that get those two to a far right judgment, then the left should counter with some on the left who are without fear about ending corporate personhood and who see our "Christian" past as an excuse to take everything from the rich at death so as to give it all to the poor. And once the GOP goes nuke, when our turn comes, it will be easy to offset the right wing bomb throwers with our own brand of bomb throwers as judges.

I think most GOPers realize this and will back off -

but we are in a no lose situation if we agree to force the nuke option.

take everything from the rich at death so as to give it all to the poor

If you actually implemented that, it would have 2 results:

1. People who own a home in a place like California would be automatically classified as "rich" due to the value of their home.
When they died, their dependents would be left homeless and destitute.

2. Those who are truely rich would move their assets offshore to avoid such confiscatory inheritance taxes.

The pre-Bush** inheritance taxes often took half the estate or more.
I don't think you can go too much higher than that without triggering #2, and at 100% (what you propose) you also get #1.

Of course, there's no way that such a thing would be enacted here anyway, since Congress would not vote to take away everything away from their own kids.
(Congresscritters tend to be rich, in case you hadn't noticed).

once they have packed the Court, the Court will stop Democrats from using it.

If they pull the nuke option then it'll be them going down in the next election. By forcing the issue its win/win for the Dems. But, we have to be ready to capitalize on it either way that it ends up going.

the nuke option. 59 percent of Americans oppose it.

when ironically people are losing trust in the Feds. Since there is no real way- one hopes- that the pendulum would swing back to the worst of the States Rights days(when the RW objectives were the same but divided between north and south) it can be used as a wedge into the great GOP identity crisis where every single foundation has been turned on its head from fiscal responsibility to reduced government and wars that are good for business only, not to mention the whirling spin away from the ideals of Lincoln and TRoosevelt and the lessons of Hoover and Nixon.

Bush never nominates anyone decent. Find the chink and drive the spear home.

amounts to the "extraordinary circumstances" needed to trigger fillibuster.

Unless he clearly and specifically RECANTS this statement, pro-reproductive rights senators will have no choice but to oppose his nomination with all available parliamentary options. If Bush wants to destroy the senate, I say so be it.

Caving would demonstrate filibuster is without value anyway.

Alito wears that air of annointment that Scalia tried to give Dubya when he literally put oil on his head (playing Pope, Nino? Alito may not be as loud and ugly sounding as Scalia (who is?), but any man who presumes to dictate to women whether they shall have control over their personal lives is not only arrogant by definition, he is also anything but modest!