We can stop them!

[lonestarnot]

http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Supreme_test_for_Democrats_0112.html

[chimpymustgo]

1. Excellent piece. Here's more...

-snip-

If the nomination of Alito is blocked there may only be time for one more nomination to be considered before the 2006 Congressional election. President Bush will realize that if he wants to get a conservative nominee through he will need to pick someone no less conservative that Justice O'Connor. The president will realize that if he misplays this next nominee there is a good chance he will have to deal with a more Democratic Senate when he puts forward his next choice.

The Democrats need to learn from their past failure to block Supreme Court nominees. Remember, Justice Antonin Scalia, the leader of the partisan conservative wing of the court was approved by a unanimous Senate controlled by the Democrats. And, Justice Clarence Thomas was approved by a Democratic Senate despite a lack luster record in the law and strong allegations of sexual harassment. These two nominations are the reason why the vote count was stopped in 2000 and President Bush was selected as president in a closely divided 5-4 decision.

Too often in recent years the Democrats have played their role of "loyal opposition" with too much loyalty and not enough opposition. Their approval of broad language for the use of force resolution has resulted in Condoleezza Rice testifying that no further Congressional mandate is needed to attack Syria or other countries. And, the approval of the Patriot Act, with near unanimous Democratic support, has broadened the powers of the president, police and prosecutors. The Democrats disdain Bush's 'imperial presidency' but they have helped created the new King George by ceding power to him and not taking responsibility themselves.

It is time for the Democrats to stand up and use their power. Stopping Alito is an opportunity to show that they believe in three equal branches of government that provide a check and balance on the actions of the others. Americans support the framework of the Constitution. It is a chance to show they represent the people against the powerful and want a court that reflects that reality.

- snip -

http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Supreme_test_for_Democrats_0112.html

[lonestarnot]

4. Yes!

[Loge23]

11. an opportunity lost

Do you really think that the Democrats will do anything about Alito or the "Patriot" Act?
If you do, you're drinking the same Koolaid that the righties drink.
A filibuster IS THE ONLY SOLUTION or stopgap that we have available at this point. However, based upon the weak oratory displayed at the hearings - and the very effective righty spin resulting from the hearings - we have been effectively neutered. This is a golden opportunity for an alternate party to stand up for a free America. The Democrats are, for whatever reason, simply unable to represent an effective opposition strategy.
Sadly, the America we know and love is gone. It's Red America now. It will take decades to reverse the damage.

[RC]

2. And when king george just appoints the next Supreme Court Justice,

without the need of Congress? He is already on the record, by his own word, of ignoring laws he does not like. If we let him get away with that, what is to stop him from appointing who ever he likes without any confirmation needed from Congress? The Constitution is rapidly becoming just a scrap of worthless paper. A relic of a grander age.

"If the nomination of Alito is blocked there may only be time for one more nomination to be considered before the 2006 Congressional election. President Bush will realize that if he wants to get a conservative nominee through he will need to pick someone no less conservative that Justice O'Connor. The president will realize that if he misplays this next nominee there is a good chance he will have to deal with a more Democratic Senate when he puts forward his next choice."

[lonestarnot]

5. Yes!

[bowens43]

3. What the author fails to mention

is that there is no way to block it. The only way to stop this nomination is to get enough republicans on board to defeat the nomination in an up/down vote on the floor of the Senate.

[lonestarnot]

6. Boooo no!

[neoblues]

7. Even if we can, I don't see us doing it...

There just isn't the outcry (the case of the missing outrage?) that would be necessary to energize our elected Democratic representatives. I've begun to wonder what, if anything, would actually light a fire under these people.

Sure, they're politicians and far more familiar with their capabilities, or at least their obstacles, than I am... but I'm still feeling a certain frustration in not seeing them... well... do more. Alas, what is probably a majority of regular, grass-roots Democrats out there seem inactivated as well.

We're going down the tubes and scarcely resisting. Perhaps we just need a leader to organize and lead us; but even if we had one--how would he "reach" most people? We have no real access to the media... Somehow we have to find a work-around for this lack of communications infrastructure, or we have to get our own network... (every Democratic voter should have a means to invest in a start-up D-TV/Democrat-TV network--50 million people each investing and/or donating whatever they can... $10/year would be 500 million, $100/yr would be 5 Billion, $200/yr is 10 Billion and so on... Why can't we do this?)

With it, we would even stand a chance at reaching some of those who've fallen for the Republican Delusion. Without it, we stand no chance of reaching them--and precious little hope of affecting pubic opinion on any issue.

[lonestarnot]

9. Bullshit! We are going to impeach the bastard! Alito or no Alito!

[neoblues]

15. Good, the sooner the better.

[kliljedahl]

8. Good article, but there are a lot of "ifs" there

I personally don't think there are any Dems with the "balls" to do it. I have no faith in them anymore, particularly the DLC corporatist shills.

"Of course these are challenges but it is out of challenges where we find our opportunities. And, the Alito nomination and the revised Patriot Act are excellent opportunities for Democrats to rise to the challenge and defend the noble purpose and moral vision of America. They are a chance for Democrats to show voters they stand for something."

I don't think they do "stand for something" except gettin re-elected.



Keith’s Barbeque Central

[lonestarnot]

10. I still believe bushitler broke the LAW and will be impeached Alito or no

Alito!

[Emit]

12. In the first paragraph

the article sites the "4 horses"...

The Supreme Court will once again have "four horses of the apocalypse" -- four partisan justices who favor executive power, corporate power, expansive law enforcement authority, co-mingling of religion and government, and minimal individual rights. Justices Roberts, Scalia, Thomas and Alito will provide the foundation for right wing extremism for decades to come.

But, what they leave out is a fifth SC Justice, Kennedy, who might vote in favor of unitary executive if it ever comes to that:

~snip~
The “unitary” theory of presidential power sounds too wonkish for Americans to care about, but the confirmation of Samuel Alito to the U.S. Supreme Court could push this radical notion of almost unlimited Executive authority close to becoming a reality.

~snip~

...The “unitary” theory asserts that all executive authority must be in the President’s hands, without exception.

The Supreme Court's embrace of the “unitary executive” would sound the death knell for independent regulatory agencies as they have existed since the Great Depression, when they were structured with shared control between the Congress and the President. Putting the agencies under the President’s thumb would tip the balance of Washington power to the White House and invite abuses by letting the Executive turn on and off enforcement investigations.

~snip~

...So, when Alito assured the Senate Judiciary Committee that no one, not even the President, is “above the law,” that palliative answer had little meaning since under the “unitary” theory favored by Alito the President effectively is the law.

~snip~

So, how far the court’s right wing can go in implementing its concept of the “unitary executive” may depend on how Justice Anthony Kennedy votes. Kennedy, who drafted the opinion in the Bush v. Gore case that handed the White House to George W. Bush, is considered a less ideological conservative than Scalia, Thomas, Roberts and Alito.

But it is unclear whether Kennedy has the strength of will to resist the rip tide that is pulling the U.S. Supreme Court toward a historic surrender of political power to the “unitary executive.”

http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:CTduBFTNpSoJ:www.consortiumnews.com/2006/011106.html+Judge+Kennedy+unitary+executive&hl=en

[chimpymustgo]

13. And if we don't fight this - what the heck DO we fight.

nt

[Emit]

14. It seems so basic and obvious...

Am I missing something, or are these folks in the senate and congress that obtuse?

Perhaps, even though they recognize that this is a dangerous position for the balance of powers in our government (i.e., Judiciary support of unitary executive theory coupled with a wannabe dictator as President who has no regard for the rule of law) I sometimes think that they are so fearful as coming off as reactionary or alarmist, that they hold back. Also, I think they make the mistake of making decisions based on their own ethics and values and can't get into the mind of the enemy (Bush & Co.). I'm not necessarily even talking about Feinstein here, just in general.

[lonestarnot]

16. Basic as the primary colors!

[chimpymustgo]

17. Kick for the fight.

nt