Going nuclear on Alito--Strategies.

[longship]

This thread is for discussing strategies on the Alito nomination.

* is clearly pushing the envelope on the Alito nomination. He just does not care about anything but his ideological agenda. In spite of collapsing public opinion and all the Repug investigations and indictments he has not moved one inch on any issue.

Now he has slapped the Dems in the face with Alito, yet another religious ideologue SCOTUS nomination. Does anybody wonder if there was a litmus test for this nomination?

So, the Dems will filibuster this one. They *have* to. The result will be the nuclear option. The only response the Dems have to that is their own nuclear weapon, removing "consent" from the Senate floor. This will grind the Senate to a slow crawl as most of its business is accomplished via "unanimous consent". All votes will then be roll calls, requiring members to be at their desks throughout much of the Senate's business day.

I am very afraid that the Dems may lose the battle of words with this scenerio. It is very important that we frame this properly.

My suggestion is that we oppose Alito because he is another white male. Certainly nobody's going to try and pull a "poor white guy" argument on that. They'll call it affirmative action. We respond with the fact that there are many qualified minority judges. * nominated another white male because he didn't look seriously at minorities.

Could this kind of framing backfire on us?

Is there any other way we can frame the nuclear meltdown which is about to happen so it ends up in our favor?

[bowens43]

1. I think that the we already have the best framing for this.

That this was the action of a weak president. That he has allowed himself to be controlled by a very small, but vocal group of extremists and that Alito is very much out of the mainstream .

[BillZBubb]

2. Claiming Bush should have nominated a minority is a loser.

Face it, most of this country is racist (and sexist). There would be a backlash against us for making this into a racial issue. Arguing against "white males" is a surefire losing position.

We need to frame it that Bush is so weak he appointed the most fanatical right wing judge available. ScAlito would roll back years of social progress in areas like Family Leave, the right to abortion, privacy rights, civil rights, and employee rights.

We need to drive home to people to ignore ScAlito's demeanor and pay attention to his decisions. The selection isn't about whether he sounds reasonable at the hearings, it's about the positions he's taken against the interests of liberty.

[crispini]

3. I think we need to harp on the Family and Medical Leave Act

decision. This is one of the most popular pieces of legislation EVER. Alito believes that Congress did not have the authority to pass it.

ALITO WOULD STRIKE DOWN THE FAMILY AND MEDICAL LEAVE ACT: The Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) “guarantees most workers up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave to care for a loved one.” The 2003 Supreme Court ruling upholding FMLA essentially reversed a 2000 decision by Alito which found that Congress exceeded its power in passing the law.

http://thinkprogress.org/2005/10/31/samuel-alitos-america/

I don't even understand what this means, BTW. How can congress not have the authority to pass a law? Can someone explain?