Judge Samuel Alito's confirmation hearing

[NorthSideSox72]

Um... Alito pretty much said the same thing - and that he knew that he had to "have an open mind" about any case that came before him.

 

His words were different in a sutble, but in my view important, way. He did say he'd be open-minded, but his statement also seemed to indicate he didn't want to say anything about his opinion of Roe's standing. Roberts did. That's a key difference, to me.

[NorthSideSox72]

I don't think he's complaining, I think he's saying what definitely appears to be the case in the leftist's eyes.

 

To me, that argument is a cop-out. Paint the other side of an argument as extremist, thus they can be dismissed as being unbelievable. Sure, I see a few people here and elsewhere who think everything is Bush's fault. And I see a lot of people who think Bush can do no wrong. But I don't use either fact as a block, throwing it at people here as if to say "see, you are an extremist, so I win."

[kapkomet]

His words were different in a sutble, but in my view important, way.  He did say he'd be open-minded, but his statement also seemed to indicate he didn't want to say anything about his opinion of Roe's standing.  Roberts did.  That's a key difference, to me.

I don't think he did, for the very same reasons we're talking about here. He was just as allusive... and quite on purpose.

[kapkomet]

To me, that argument is a cop-out.  Paint the other side of an argument as extremist, thus they can be dismissed as being unbelievable.  Sure, I see a few people here and elsewhere who think everything is Bush's fault.  And I see a lot of people who think Bush can do no wrong.  But I don't use either fact as a block, throwing it at people here as if to say "see, you are an extremist, so I win."

Personally, I really don't care all that much for George W. Bush as president, but he was the far better choice in the last two elections, IMO. But I will certainly defend him from all the stupidity that seems to be rampant across many areas of the media now.

[NorthSideSox72]

I don't think he did, for the very same reasons we're talking about here.  He was just as allusive... and quite on purpose.

 

Well, fair enough. When it comes to subtle differences in speech like that, there is certainly some interperetation to be had. I saw a difference; you did not. I guess we can't get much further on this subject.

[YASNY]

Personally, I really don't care all that much for George W. Bush as president, but he was the far better choice in the last two elections, IMO.  But I will certainly defend him from all the stupidity that seems to be rampant across many areas of the media now.

 

That is so very well said. Bush leaves a lot to be desired, but the Bush bashing is almost laughable.

[samclemens]

I think that comes about because of this stupid rule where the nominee is allowed to claim that he won't talk about business that might come before the court while he's on it.  If you could just come out and ask a guy how he would rule on a hypothetical, that would make this vastly easier, but instead, we're left with all these little word games which try to get answers to exactly those sorts of questions without really asking them.

 

It's not a stupid rule- it protects the judges. Were a nominee to commit to overturning or affirming roe v. wade, and be confirmed, then if an abortion case came up at a later time that the judge thought merited choosing the opposite of what they claimed earlier because of a few facts that were different or what have you, they would be f***ed, since if they rule how they feel they will be called a liar, and if they go along with the ruling as they called it during their nomination it will not be the way they feel the case should go.

 

the entire nomination proceeding is very delicate and above all...well, worthless, unless the nominee commits some kind of taboo that will get him censured. A good nominee will not let you know anything about their personal ideals, and will cite stare decisis at every chance possible. just like ginsburg, bork (he got shafted), roberts (the master)...

[G&T]

Does anyone actually know what standards the ABA uses to judge a candidate as well-qualified?  I honestly don't, and without that, for all I know is that means he passed the bar exam.

 

This might help

Or this

Also, I'm fairly certain that trial lawyers are generally democrat because they love any action against corporations. Furthermore, in that article, it says that Bush doesn't like working with the ABA generally. I really doubt any "cabal." Maybe I missed the sarcasm.

Edited January 14, 2006 by G&T

[EvilMonkey]

I would think its a real big deal if someone claimed membership to a group who's sole purpose was keeping his alma mater white and male -

The supposed all male and white club had female and minority members. Its stated goals were to bring ROTC back to the campus (their building was burned by some protestors, and they weren't given a new or substitute building to use),and to end the LOWERING of admission standards to meet an informal quota system set up by some more liberal members of the administration. Wanting to make sure people don't get in BECAUSE they are black or women is alot different that not wanting them in at all.

[FlaSoxxJim]

The supposed all male and white club had female and minority members.  Its stated goals were to bring ROTC back to the campus (their building was burned by some protestors, and they weren't given a new or substitute building to use),and to end the LOWERING of admission standards to meet an informal quota system set up by some more liberal members of the administration.  Wanting to make sure people don't get in BECAUSE they are black or women is alot different that not wanting them in at all.

And outing a co-ed using birth control to the campus and to her mother did what exactly to help the ROTC or admissions situations?

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

And outing a co-ed using birth control to the campus and to her mother did what exactly to help the ROTC or admissions situations?

 

 

Dude, you're grasping for straws here.

[FlaSoxxJim]

Dude,  you're grasping for straws here.

Wait. what am I not following here? Part of what led to the demise of the group was the public and legal pressuere brought upon the group and it's publication during Dinesh D'Souza's editorship over calling a girl's mother (she happened to be hispanic) and telling her that her daughter was using birth control, and then publishing that same information along with the girl's identity in their campus rag. The story made national news at the time, either in a story in Newsweek or Time (I can't remember which).

 

Evil, do you know the year ROTC was banned from campus? I don't. But while saving the ROTC program may be Alitos; stated goal in interacting with the group, it is not even a blip on the radar in their first decade of activity.

[EvilMonkey]

Wait.  what am I not following here?  Part of what led to the demise of the group was the public and legal pressuere brought upon the group and it's publication during Dinesh D'Souza's editorship over calling a girl's mother (she happened to be hispanic) and telling her that her daughter was using birth control, and then publishing that same information along with the girl's identity in their campus rag.  The story made national news at the time, either in a story in Newsweek or Time (I can't remember which).

 

Evil, do you know the year ROTC was banned from campus?  I don't.  But while saving the ROTC program may be Alitos; stated goal in interacting with the group, it is not even a blip on the radar in their first decade of activity.

ROTC wasn't banned outright, but when their building was burned down by peace protestors, the admin took its time to try and find them a new place. If it had been a minority student association building burned down, there would have been new quarters almost the next day. But for the ROTC? Nothing. Just delays, excuses, etc. So, when the protestors in effect 'kicked them out', the admin did not help them to get back in.

 

As for what you are not following, you are making a common mistake you make in these discussions, in that you take everything as black or white. Everything except evil (not me) that is. Just because one editor did something wrong does not paint the whole group as wrong. I mean, just because there were a few really bad apples in that anti-war group Kerry belonged to, doesn't mean that EVERYBODY that was in that group was bad, does it?

[FlaSoxxJim]

For my part, I really don't care one wit about CAP any more than I care about any other discriminatory college campus organizations. They are going to continue to exist regardless, and as long as they are not infringing on the rights of others they have a right to exist.

 

The whole point has been that it has been hard to follow why Sam Alito flaunts his association with te organization while brown-nosing Ed Meese, then completely forgets he was ever associated with the organization, and then when pressed selectively recalls that for him it was all about getting ROTC reinstated at Yale.

 

There is still a chance that Alito's mentioning CAP in the application with Meese in 1985 reflects a rekindled relationship with teh organization beyond that from the 1970s. Maybe he in fact was giving CAP and D'Souza some legal counsel over the outing of the coed and/or other matters. Do I think that this, if true (and it's just conjecture) is even close to being enough to scuttle the nomination? No. But if it turns out that this - or something like it - is why he's been evasive on the issue, then it continues to say a lot about what the guy is all about. He's very likely on the road to teh SCOTUS, but it doesn't make him any less of a mealy-mouth who has a history of saying anything to land a gig.

 

Until now, of course, when it's hard to get him to say anything.

Edited January 14, 2006 by FlaSoxxJim

[EvilMonkey]

 

 

courtesy of CoxandForkum.com

[FlaSoxxJim]

Heh, the umbrella drink in front of Teddy is cute.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060115/ap_on_...HNlYwMlJVRPUCUl

 

 

Fienstien says dont filibuster.

 

 

One liberal Democrat with some sense anyhow.

[YASNY]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060115/ap_on_...HNlYwMlJVRPUCUl

Fienstien says dont filibuster.

One liberal Democrat with some sense anyhow.

 

She knows the "gang of 14" won't let the filibuster work. If she tthought she could knock down Bush's nominee, she'd do it in a heartbeat.

[Rex Kickass]

The filibuster probably won't happen. Not because the Dems don't think it couldn't work, but more because there was nothing that came out in the wash to justify it.

[LowerCaseRepublican]

Flaxx, Evil, etc.

 

Not really a commentary about the Alito hearing but just wanting to make the statement that Dinesh D'Souza is a douchbag. David Brock worked with him at Dartmouth and they routinely infiltrated organizations (IIRC, gay/lesbian rights groups...It has been a while since I read Brock's book) and then outed them in their paper. Not to mention -- As writer and editor-in-chief for Prospect, the organization's magazine, D'Souza wrote a March 1984 cover story identifying a Freshman undergraduate who had begun a sexual relationship with another student against her mother's wishes. D'Souza offered details of the woman's sex life, and criticized Princeton University for paying the student's tuition fees after the student's mother withdrew financial support. The ensuing scandal was reported in The New York Times. D'Souza claimed that the woman's name had been published as the result of a "proofreading error". Proofreading error, my ass.

 

And with YAS and the mod's current anger re: the Chavez thread stuff, I figured people should know this about Mr. D'Souza: Under D'Souza's editorship, the Dartmouth Review became notorious both for its attacks on alleged liberal bias at the university and for its provocative articles on racial topics. It published a parody titled "Dis Sho Ain't No Jive Bro," which mocked the way African-American students supposedly speak. ("Dese boys be sayin' that we be comin' here to Dartmut an' not takin' the classics. You know, Homa, Shakesphere; but I hea' dey all be co'd in da ground, six feet unda, and whatchu be askin' us to learn from dem?") Also during his tenure as editor, according to a September 22, 1995, article in The Washington Post, the Review "published an interview with a former leader of the Ku Klux Klan, using a mock photograph of a black man hanging from a campus tree."

 

And my personal favorite quote at how much of a jagbag he is: "The American slave was treated like property, which is to say, pretty well."

 

Dinesh D'Souza is a f***ing asshole. /back to regularly scheduled Alito discussion

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

Flaxx, Evil, etc.

 

Not really a commentary about the Alito hearing but just wanting to make the statement that Dinesh D'Souza is a douchbag.  David Brock worked with him at Dartmouth and they routinely infiltrated organizations (IIRC, gay/lesbian rights groups...It has been a while since I read Brock's book) and then outed them in their paper.  Not to mention -- As writer and editor-in-chief for Prospect, the organization's magazine, D'Souza wrote a March 1984 cover story identifying a Freshman undergraduate who had begun a sexual relationship with another student against her mother's wishes. D'Souza offered details of the woman's sex life, and criticized Princeton University for paying the student's tuition fees after the student's mother withdrew financial support. The ensuing scandal was reported in The New York Times.  D'Souza claimed that the woman's name had been published as the result of a "proofreading error".  Proofreading error, my ass.

 

And with YAS and the mod's current anger re: the Chavez thread stuff, I figured people should know this about Mr. D'Souza: Under D'Souza's editorship, the Dartmouth Review became notorious both for its attacks on alleged liberal bias at the university and for its provocative articles on racial topics. It published a parody titled "Dis Sho Ain't No Jive Bro," which mocked the way African-American students supposedly speak. ("Dese boys be sayin' that we be comin' here to Dartmut an' not takin' the classics. You know, Homa, Shakesphere; but I hea' dey all be co'd in da ground, six feet unda, and whatchu be askin' us to learn from dem?") Also during his tenure as editor, according to a September 22, 1995, article in The Washington Post, the Review "published an interview with a former leader of the Ku Klux Klan, using a mock photograph of a black man hanging from a campus tree."

 

And my personal favorite quote at how much of a jagbag he is: "The American slave was treated like property, which is to say, pretty well."

 

 

Dinesh D'Souza is a f***ing asshole.  /back to regularly scheduled Alito discussion

 

 

Aside from the slave quote whats the big deal? If its ok for comedians like Dave Chappelle and that Mind of Mencia guy to do racial satire then why cant anyone else?

[Rex Kickass]

Also during his tenure as editor, according to a September 22, 1995, article in The Washington Post, the Review "published an interview with a former leader of the Ku Klux Klan, using a mock photograph of a black man hanging from a campus tree."

 

That wouldn't be a problem for you?

[LowerCaseRepublican]

Aside from the slave quote whats the big deal?  If its ok for comedians like Dave Chappelle and that Mind of Mencia guy to do racial satire then why cant anyone else?

Except for his slave comment and others, he's attempting to be "scholarly" and not satirical. Therein lies the difference.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

That wouldn't be a problem for you?

 

 

I said satire. Thats not satire.

[EvilMonkey]

It seems Teddyboy is in an exclusive men-only club himself.

 

http://news.bostonherald.com/localPolitics...rticleid=121646

 

Ted K. to quit club that bans women

By Jules Crittenden

Tuesday, January 17, 2006 - Updated: 11:41 AM EST

 

E-mail article  View text version  View most popular

U.S. Sen. Edward M. Kennedy — who ripped Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito for ties to a group that discriminates against women — says he’s going to quit a club notorious for discriminating against women “as fast as I can.”

 

    Kennedy was outed by conservatives late last week as a current member of The Owl Club, a social club for Harvard alumni that bans women from membership.

 

    In an interview with WHDH Channel 7’s Andy Hiller that aired last night, Kennedy said, “I joined when I . . . 52 years ago, I was a member of the Owl Club, which was basically a fraternal organization.”

 

    Asked by Hiller whether he is still a member, Kennedy said, “I’m not a member; I continue to pay about $100.”

 

    He then said of being a member in a club that discriminates against women, “I shouldn’t be and I’m going to get out of it as fast as I can.”

 

    The Harvard Crimson reports that, in 1984, the university severed ties with clubs like the Owl, citing a federal law championed by Kennedy.

 

    Meanwhile, Kennedy admitted to Hiller that he himself probably couldn’t pass Judiciary Committee muster.

 

    “Probably not . . . probably not,” Kennedy said.

 

    The committee will vote on Alito’s nomination on Jan. 24, and the full Senate will begin debate the next day. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., said he looks forward to a “fair up-or-down

 

Hmmm. Not a member, but pays about $100. I guess he just forgot.