[haus]

Hi All,

I'm trying to wrap my head around the Alito nomination and am curious what thers think. I let the Roberts confirmation slip by me and intend to make up for it on this one. I think we might all be heaving a sigh of relief that W didn't nominate Pat Robertson (who "called the pick 'a grand-slam home run.'" see http://msnbc.msn.com/id/9874588/page/2/) or a Klansman or something. But eternal vigilence is the price of freedom, right?

Here's where I am so far:

1) O'Connor is a Reagan appointee and is generally viewed as a moderate conservative (see eg, http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2005/07/01/MNoconnor01.DTL).

2) O'Connor did not necessarily vote "party-line." She wrote opinions supporting a woman's right to choose and affirmative action. On the other hand, she also helped give the 2000 election to Bush. Some more information on where she's been pivotal is available at http://www.aclu.org/court/court.cfm?ID=18623&c=286 .

I have a sense that the composition of the court "should" mirror that of the population in matters of ideology, gender, race, religion, etc. There's nothing in the constitution about this.

3) O'Connor is a woman. There are currently two women (22%) on the court. If Alito is confirmed, there will only be one (11%). In a perfect world, there'd be 4 or 5 women on the court (50-ish%).

4) Alito would be the first Latino justice. Latinos make up 12.5% of the population (http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/00000.html), his appointment would make Latinos 11% of the Supreme Court. This is one thing that seems about right to me. Although the choice of a neopagan Mexican lesbian would seem righter. :)

5) A discussion of religious backgrounds of the Justices, and the subsequent over- and under-representation can be found at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_Supreme_Court_of_the_United_St ates.

6) Party affiliation and leanings. From http://www.oyez.org/oyez/portlet/justices/ and http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/longterm/supcourt/stories/070397.htm we can _attempt_ to group the justices politically. Here they are by name, party affiliation, who appointed them, and approximate age:

Liberal:
----------
Stevens, Republican, Ford, 85
Ginsburg, Democrat, Clinton, 72
Breyer, Democrat, Clinton, 67
Souter, Republican, Bush I, 66

Moderate:
--------------
O'Connor, Republican, Reagan, 75
Kennedy, Republican, Reagan, 69

Conservative:
-------------------
Roberts, Republican, Bush II, 50 [this is based on assumption, I don't think he's voted on anything yet]
Thomas, Republican, Bush I, 57
Scalia, Republican, Reagan, 69

I can only draw two conclusions from this: a) sadly, a 4-1-4 breakdown is probably more in synch with the country's current demographics than the current 4-2-3 is, and b) Alito replacing O'Connor is less of a disaster for us than if he replaced Stevens.

7) Is there a reasonable strategy to fight the appointment?

It's certainly a possibility that Alito will go down in flames, but the fact we have to live with is that there will be another Bush appointment to the Supreme Court. Nothing I've seen so far (except perhaps the Robertson quote above) makes me think this guy is another Bork, Thomas, or Scalia. (Convince me otherwise!)

To block any Bush appointees to the Supreme Court, we'd have to drag things out for three years, at least 15 months of which we'll be in a minority in congress. The average confirmation (http://www.constitutioncenter.org/education/ForEducators/SupremeCourtConfirmationFAQ.shtml) is about two months and the longest ever was five months. That's a whole lot of dragging.

Short of a French-style general strike, I don't see how it could be done.

8) What am I going to do about it?

I'm going to watch this guy like a hawk and see if any skeletons jump out of his closet. If something bad enough shows up, I'll raise a ruckus with my "elected" officeholders. If not, I'll probably just concentrate my energies on the '06 elections. As skeletons pop up, I'll post them here if there seems to be any interest.

What do you think?

[-V-]

thanks for the breakdown, haus. You are now our official Supreme Court nominee watchdog.

[haus]

His ethnic background is Italian-American not Latino. Not quite sure where I got that from. Mea culpa.

[haus]

People For The American Way was apparently ready for this nomination. They have a whole site devoted to it at http://www.savethecourt.org. The site contains a 24-page report about his past rulings, a form-letter to send to your representatives, and a donation system.

Their four basic contentions are that he:

- Is Hostile to basic reproductive privacy rights
- Rejects basic protections for workers
- Leads revolution against federal laws protecting individual and other rights
- Fails to consider racial discrimination in capital punishment

There's also a story I've seen reported elsewhere that he didn't see any problem in strip-searching a 10-year-old girl on a site warrant.

On the other hand, google "alito not conservative enough" and you'll see some scary, scary shizzle.

Cheers & Thanks -V- :)

[haus]

Some more Alito related items:

1) CBS polls on Wednesday report (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/11/02/opinion/polls/main1005327_page2.shtml)

Opionion of [...] Alito
Favorable 11%
Unfavorable 7%
Undecided/haven't heard enough 81%

Should Alito Be Confirmed?
Yes 15%
No 7%
Can't say 75%

[although...]

Do You Believe In Ghosts?
Yes: 48%
No: 45%

*snicker*

2) 514,515 (well, 514,516 now) people have signed a MoveOn anti-Alito petition at http://political.moveon.org/stopalito/. This campaign is around 50 hours old, so that's, what -- around 10,000 people per hour. On the other hand, assuming they're all voters (which I'm sure they're not) it only represents 1/2% of the electorate. On the, er, third hand, it's about 12% of the size bloc of 4 million voters that swayed the '04 election.

3) There's a presumably neutralish article about Alito at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sam_Alito and the behind-the-scenes arguing about how neutral it is at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Samuel_Alito

Cheers!

[MAGI]

Thanks, haus :)

[Lionhearted]

Greetings haus!
Since you are now the Official SCOTUS Nominee Watchdog, may I offer this to your list of sites?

Blue Mass. Group (http://bluemassgroup.typepad.com/blue_mass_group/2005/11/the_alito_that_.html)

Welcome to the forum and hope you find the above link of some help.

[haus]

thanks lion :)

There hasn't been a great deal of new information on this nominee in the past day. Here's some food for thought:

1) Poll: Early Public Support for Alito Weak
.
Early support ... is considerably weaker among such key groups as evangelicals, Republicans and the wealthy than it was for John Roberts... The survey put public sentiment for Alito closer to the level of early backing for the failed nomination of Harriet Miers....

One in five Democrats say Alito should be confirmed to the court, and twice as many, 41 percent, say he should not be.

from http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051105/ap_on_go_su_co/alito_ap_poll;_ylt=Aox7WKfbPrOX87dcpWkf8LmMwfIE;_y lu=X3oDMTA4NGRzMjRtBHNlYwMxNjk5

2) Sen. Chuck Shumer says

"A preliminary review of his record raises real questions about his judicial philosophy and his commitment to civil rights, women's rights, the rights of average Americans which the courts have always looked out for," Schumer said in news conference at the Capitol... "I am saying that I find significant portions of his record very troubling in terms of him turning back the clock," Schumer said. "There's a real chance that he will, like Justice (Antonin) Scalia, choose to make law rather than interpret law and move the court in a direction quite different than it has gone."


3) "I believe this nomination is aimed at appeasing the most right-wing elements of the president's political base," said Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif.

4) Sen. Pat Leahey: "This is a needlessly provocative nomination. Instead of uniting the country through his choice, the President has chosen to reward one faction of his party, at the risk of dividing the country. Instead he should have rewarded the American people. America could have done better through consultation to select one of the many consensus conservative Republican candidates who could have been overwhelmingly approved by the Senate."

Cheers

[snowdog]

thanks lion :)

There hasn't been a great deal of new information on this nominee in the past day. Here's some food for thought:

1) Poll: Early Public Support for Alito Weak
.
Early support ... is considerably weaker among such key groups as evangelicals, Republicans and the wealthy than it was for John Roberts... The survey put public sentiment for Alito closer to the level of early backing for the failed nomination of Harriet Miers....

One in five Democrats say Alito should be confirmed to the court, and twice as many, 41 percent, say he should not be.

from http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051105/ap_on_go_su_co/alito_ap_poll;_ylt=Aox7WKfbPrOX87dcpWkf8LmMwfIE;_y lu=X3oDMTA4NGRzMjRtBHNlYwMxNjk5

2) Sen. Chuck Shumer says

"A preliminary review of his record raises real questions about his judicial philosophy and his commitment to civil rights, women's rights, the rights of average Americans which the courts have always looked out for," Schumer said in news conference at the Capitol... "I am saying that I find significant portions of his record very troubling in terms of him turning back the clock," Schumer said. "There's a real chance that he will, like Justice (Antonin) Scalia, choose to make law rather than interpret law and move the court in a direction quite different than it has gone."


3) "I believe this nomination is aimed at appeasing the most right-wing elements of the president's political base," said Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif.

4) Sen. Pat Leahey: "This is a needlessly provocative nomination. Instead of uniting the country through his choice, the President has chosen to reward one faction of his party, at the risk of dividing the country. Instead he should have rewarded the American people. America could have done better through consultation to select one of the many consensus conservative Republican candidates who could have been overwhelmingly approved by the Senate."

Cheers


WELL DAH......Perhaps it will all be better if GWB asks Sen. Leahey who he wants in the Supreme court. Someone with a more liberal Slant to them, Someone
who will not be a threat to overturn Roe.... If republican Pres Bush does this
and nominates a person that makes the Dems happy, will that make it all better?

[sweetpea]

Bottom Line.

Elections have consequences.
And republicans won the White House and control the Senate and House.....i.e. there is not a whole lot Democrats can do on this nomination short of stalling tactics or digging up an Anita Hill like person.

The statements made by Dems on Alito are essentially just to appease their base and to try and justify their vote.

I'll bet anyone a dozen donuts that Alito gets confirmed.

[haus]

This has been floating around for a while. Might have legs, might not... We'll see.

From http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/11/10/alito/index.html
Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito said Thursday that there was no conflict of interest over his role in a 2003 ruling involving a financial giant where he had large amounts of money invested...

Asked whether Vanguard issue could endanger Alito's nomination, Specter [R-PA]said, "I'm concerned that it has potential. It may."

[haus]

Alito's nomination is going to the Senate in less than a month. I put together a list of online actions campaigns to oppose the nomination at http://www.headstrong-america.org/p2/phpLD/index.php?c=21

[MAGI]

I like the way Moveon handles issues..... O.K., it's finished. :)

[haus]

I think every progressive organization in the U.S. sent me an email today about the Alito nomination. I even got one from "East Boulder (Co.) Paralegals Against Monkey Mistreatment and Starbucks Prices." Well, no, not really...

Anyway, MoveOn sent out an email listing some of the bigger organizations peeves with Alito:


In the past two months, dozens of organizations across the political spectrum, representing millions of Americans, have publicly opposed Alito's nomination. Here's just a few, and what they had to say:

AFL-CIO

"We are compelled to oppose [Alito's] nomination to be an Associate Justice on the United States Supreme Court. ...Judge Alito's decisions and dissents show a disturbing tendency to take an extremely narrow and restrictive view of laws passed by Congress to protect workers' rights, resulting in workers being deprived of wage and hour, health and safety, anti-discrimination, pension and other important protections."

NAACP

"We have undertaken an extensive review of Judge Alito's civil rights record spanning his career as a lawyer and a judge...As a result we have concluded that Judge Alito's confirmation would cause a substantial shift in the Supreme Court's jurisprudence on civil rights and that his confirmation would be to the detriment of the nation. Thus, we are compelled to oppose his nomination."

Sierra Club

In the first such move since the Bork nomination of 1987, on December 20 the Sierra Club joined with other national environmental groups to urge Senators to oppose the confirmation of Samuel Alito to the U.S. Supreme Court. Americans deserve mainstream, independent Justices, with unassailable integrity, who will protect individual rights and freedoms. Unfortunately, Judge Alito's opinions and other statements, combined with a disturbing lack of candor since being nominated, show that Judge Alito cannot be trusted to protect those rights and freedoms.

NARAL Pro-Choice America

Samuel Alito, Jr. of the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit is an anti-choice jurist. As a member of the three-judge panel that heard Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey before the case went to the Supreme Court, Alito wrote a dissent in which he argued to uphold even more abortion restrictions than the Supreme Court eventually upheld in its now-famous decision. Alito, who has been called "a favorite son of the political right," would likely vote to eviscerate or eliminate the protections of Roe as a member of the Supreme Court.

Americans United for Separation of Church and State

According to Judge Samuel A. Alito Jr., the First Amendment puts
few limitations on politically powerful majorities' ability to use the
machinery of government to advance their religious views, even at
the expense of the religious freedom of minorities. Replacing Justice
Sandra Day O'Connor with Judge Alito would fundamentally alter
First Amendment law and immediately put at risk many of the crucial
protections for religious minorities that the Supreme Court has
recognized and consistently enforced over the past sixty years.12


The Human Rights Campaign

As a Judge, Samuel Alito struck down a school policy that protected gay students from harassment. He is far to the right of Justice O'Connor on due process and reproductive rights. Judge Alito's narrow view of Congress would dangerously threaten Congress' power to enact non-discrimination legislation protecting citizens and has failed to distance himself from a group that advocated discrimination of which he was a member. In short, Judge Alito is the wrong choice for the Supreme Court.


People for the American Way

Samuel Alito has been a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit since his appointment by the first President Bush in 1990. In that time, Alito has compiled an extensive, extreme right-wing judicial record on numerous matters of importance to the protection of the rights and interests of ordinary Americans—a record that has earned him the nickname "Scalito" for his ideological resemblance to Justice Antonin Scalia. Alito's judicial opinions demonstrate that he is an out of the mainstream opponent of fundamental legal rights and protections for all Americans and must not be confirmed to the Supreme Court.


MoveOn's current anti-Alito campaign is at http://www.political.moveon.org/alitoletters?+%3d%26id%3d6603-6695364-CYsAT0f9Pq5jKEOe4oaU6A%26t%3d3

It's kind of an interesting approach -- if I'm reading it right, you have to write a personal letter and MoveOn will print it out and deliver it to your senators. They've had 13,000 submissions in just a few hours.

[snowdog]

:D Oh my goodness, can't forget that Mr. Alito believes in GOD !!
we can't have someone like that on our Supreme Court ! I just
seen a news bleep today that said the the ABA unaminously voted
that Mr. Alito. is more than qualified to be on the Supreme Court.

[haus]

I'm not saying he's a bad lawyer, I'm saying he's a Taliban.

[sweetpea]

This bears repeating.
-----------------------
Bottom Line.

Elections have consequences.
And republicans won the White House and control the Senate and House.....i.e. there is not a whole lot Democrats can do on this nomination short of stalling tactics or digging up an Anita Hill like person.

The statements made by Dems on Alito are essentially just to appease their base and to try and justify their vote.

I'll bet anyone a dozen donuts that Alito gets confirmed.
--------------

Anyone want to bet?

[haus]

freep, freep, freep


Yawn. ANWR. USA-PATRIOT Act. Wiretapping. Abramoff. The times, they are a changin'.

In short: read a newspaper.

[sweetpea]

Haus,

That was pretty classless of you to edit a quote.

What is freep, by the way. Since I didn't type it and you attributed it to me; the least you could do is tell me what it means.

Now as to your non-answer.....I take it that you are not betting me.

Why don't you try to understand that elections have consequences. Theuccess of Democrats in national elections have been worse and worse since '94. In my opinion, it is because many voters correlate most of the media to liberal bias and do not vote on journalists opinions. Th days of ABC, NBC, ABC, and CNN dominating and framing the issues are over. Keep thinking that Michael Moore, Dan Rather, bill Maher, and the NY Times has a large influence over elections and keep watching more and more election losses for the Dems.

[haus]

Want to talk about classless: how about joining a group of people you fundamentally disagree with and spewing worthless crap all over their discussions.

Go back to free republic.

And to get back on topic: Alito nominations begin in 5 days. All the Progressives at progressivesonline need to gear up. I'll repeat the URL, since it's been buried in neocon propegandist BS: http://www.political.moveon.org/alitoletters?+%3d%26id%3d6603-6695364-CYsAT0f9Pq5jKEOe4oaU6A%26t%3d3

[sweetpea]

Well, well, well. Looks like we have a "progressive" that wants to hear only one point of view.

How can you be a "progressive" when you choose to listen to only like minded opinion? Are you scared of others' opinions that are not ht esame as yours? If conservatives jsut talked amongst themselves and didn't listent to others' opinions wouldn't you call them closed minded? Seems to me that is exactly what you are doing....being closed minded.

If the only way you can get your point accross is by attributing false quotes to others then your arguments are worthless.

Do you or do you not think elections have consequences?

[haus]

Ladies and gentlemen, another play straight from the freeper's handbook.

You're very good at following your controller's instructions. I'm sure they're proud of you.

Anyway, I'd ask you to point out a single contribution you've made to the progressive goals of this site. But there's no reason to. There hasn't been one.

But, back to the topic of this thread: the Alito Nomination is in 5 days, folks. Check out MoveOn's letter-writing campaign on Alito at http://www.political.moveon.org/alitoletters?+%3d%26id%3d6603-6695364-CYsAT0f9Pq5jKEOe4oaU6A%26t%3d3

[MAGI]

Ladies and gentlemen, another play straight from the freeper's handbook.

You're very good at following your controller's instructions. I'm sure they're proud of you.

Anyway, I'd ask you to point out a single contribution you've made to the progressive goals of this site. But there's no reason to. There hasn't been one.

But, back to the topic of this thread: the Alito Nomination is in 5 days, folks. Check out MoveOn's letter-writing campaign on Alito at http://www.political.moveon.org/alitoletters?+%3d%26id%3d6603-6695364-CYsAT0f9Pq5jKEOe4oaU6A%26t%3d3

Done! :D

[sweetpea]

Ladies and gentlemen, another play straight from the freeper's handbook.

You're very good at following your controller's instructions. I'm sure they're proud of you.

Anyway, I'd ask you to point out a single contribution you've made to the progressive goals of this site. But there's no reason to. There hasn't been one.

But, back to the topic of this thread: the Alito Nomination is in 5 days, folks. Check out MoveOn's letter-writing campaign on Alito at http://www.political.moveon.org/alitoletters?+%3d%26id%3d6603-6695364-CYsAT0f9Pq5jKEOe4oaU6A%26t%3d3

Pogressive: Promoting or favoring progress toward better conditions or new policies, ideas, or methods: a progressive politician; progressive business leadership.
Progressive people are thought to be open minded and respect opinion's of others. You have demonstrated quite well that you do neither when that opinion differs from yours. i.e. you are closed minded and hypocritical.

[haus]

You had 71 opportunities in 71 posts to make a useful contribution to this forum. You have made none.

Being progressive doesn't require having endless patience with windbags pushing a conservative agenda.

[sweetpea]

You had 71 opportunities in 71 posts to make a useful contribution to this forum. You have made none.

Being progressive doesn't require having endless patience with windbags pushing a conservative agenda.
--------

Wow. thanks for taking the time to read them all.

I could say you have had 175 opportunities to make a useful contribution but have not.

Being progressive doesn't require one to be closed minded and dismiss other opinions. In fact it requires teh opposite.

Being progressive doesn't mean being conservative, liberal, Dem or Rep.. It requores trying to find better policies and ideas. Problem is for you, that means only if those ideas meet your narrow viewpoints...i.e. you are not a progressive.

[haus]

Hey look everybody, sweetpea shows its ignorance with another progressive-baiting post. Imagine that. 80 in a row and still going strong. Strewing red herrings hither and yon.

Your "contributions" here are absolutely and uniformly worthless. Except inasmuch as they waste other people's time. This promotes your conservative agenda.

I wouldn't expect someone who can't spell "the" to have a dictionary, but you should invest in one. They're wonderful tools. Look up "progressivism" -- nowhere in the definition does it state that a progressive has infinite patience for neocon baiting.

Go ahead, post your 81st waste of all of our time.

To everybody else: I encourage you scroll down through this crap discussion to find information on the upcoming Alito confirmation hearings.

[Jane of Arc]

I scrolled down and read the thread. Snore.

Here's another petition to sign:

http://www.democrats.org/page/petition/rejectalito

[Jane of Arc]

I meant snore to all the freeper crap.
;)

[sweetpea]

Hey look everybody, sweetpea shows its ignorance with another progressive-baiting post. Imagine that. 80 in a row and still going strong. Strewing red herrings hither and yon.

Your "contributions" here are absolutely and uniformly worthless. Except inasmuch as they waste other people's time. This promotes your conservative agenda.

I wouldn't expect someone who can't spell "the" to have a dictionary, but you should invest in one. They're wonderful tools. Look up "progressivism" -- nowhere in the definition does it state that a progressive has infinite patience for neocon baiting.

Go ahead, post your 81st waste of all of our time.

To everybody else: I encourage you scroll down through this crap discussion to find information on the upcoming Alito confirmation hearings.

Hey look everybody, Haus considers himself to be aprogressive until it's time to practice the (Did I spell it right, oh condescending one?) art of respect and open mindedness.

Thanks for continuing to point out your hypocrisy. I also love it when you atack me instead of my ideas. Classic exmple of being intellectually incapable of defending your arguments and stooping to insults and condescencion. You even stooped to editing a quote.

It bears repeating. Elections have consquences and all of this fringe nonsense does nothing for your progessive cause except to give undecideds more reasons to vote Republican. Keep it up.

[haus]

I repeat, since your ability to read seems to rival your ability to write:

Look up "progressivism" -- nowhere in the definition does it state that a progressive has infinite patience for neocon baiting.

[sweetpea]

I repeat, since your ability to read seems to rival your ability to write:

Elections have consquences.

Progressivism, like progressive, means you are looking for changes for the better. Only in your case "better" can only be defined by you and like minded people. That sound about right?

Open your mind. Turn off the knee jerk. You are beating your head against the proverbial wall if you don't. Try to learn a little respect for others' opinions. Try to turn off the personal insults and srawman attacks and you will be a better person for it.

My statement that elections have consequences should not be that offensive to you, but yet you react so harshly. why?

[haus]

For the nth time, you've avoided the entire point.

Being a progressive does not imply a responsibility to politely listen to purposeful and sustained baiting from neocons. It's nowhere at all in the definition.

Since you seem constitutionally unable to look a word up, I'll do it for you:


United States
See main article - Progressivism in the United States

Progressives in the US were strong in the early parts of the 20th century. Today it is equated to movements on the left ranging from liberal to democratic socialist.

Early in the twentieth century, progressives worked to reform the political process in the US. In several states, they succeeded in reducing the power of political bosses by instituting presidential primaries and non-partisan elections. They exposed corruption, and established public control of the existing monopolies over public resources, such as water and gas works. They were the driving force behind the reform and regulation of child labor, the institution of public education, and the right of women to vote. Their efforts contributed to the writing and ratification of the 17th Amendment (the direct election of Senators) in 1913, and the 19th Amendment (right of women to vote in federal elections) in 1920. They sought to improve transportation for the public. They also pressured state legislatures to raise the property tax in order to spend more money on schools, parks and other public facilities. They usually worked at the state level to make changes. (more...) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressivism)


Where in that history of Progressivism does it state that "Progressives must listen politely to rambling neocons?" Nowhere.

You lose. Deal with it.

[sweetpea]

For the nth time, you've avoided the entire point.

Being a progressive does not imply a responsibility to politely listen to purposeful and sustained baiting from neocons. It's nowhere at all in the definition.

Since you seem constitutionally unable to look a word up, I'll do it for you:



Where in that history of Progressivism does it state that "Progressives must listen politely to rambling neocons?" Nowhere.

You lose. Deal with it.

-- I lose what? Elections still have consequences. Until you admit that and understand that you lose. Deal with it.

[haus]

Yeah, the republicans really have congress in their iron grip, don't they?

That's why Ted Stevens is hyperventilating about having lost on ANWR.

[sweetpea]

Yeah, the republicans really have congress in their iron grip, don't they?

That's why Ted Stevens is hyperventilating about having lost on ANWR.
---
Who is talking about an iron grip or ANWR.

The fact is that Rep.s' are teh majority in the House Senate adn in the white House. Therefore, all of this hyperventilating about alito is for naught unless the Dems want to dig up another Anita hill type person or risk using stall tactics.

[sweetpea]

If anyone is still interested I have some transcripts from the Alito confirmation hearings.

Here is the best so far, in my opinion. Joe (Mr. Plagarism) Biden gets taken out behind the woodshed, so to speak. I believe after this answer you can see ole Joe with head in hands. :D

Biden: "Sheer personal antipathy is okay even when the employer's reason for not hiring the person toward whom they showed sheer personal antipathy weren't true. How do you distinguish that from discrimination, subtle discrimination, sheer antipathy, subtle discrimination, that's a tough one for me, judge. How do you draw a difference?"

Alito: " It gets into a fairly technical question involving a Supreme Court case called the McDonnell Douglas case. But to put it in simple terms, courts of appeals have divided into three camps on this. There was the pretext-plus camp, which was the one that was the least hospitable to claims by employees. There was the pretext-only camp, which was the camp that was most favorable to employees, and there was the middle camp. And my position was in the middle camp, and when the issue went to the Supreme Court, and it did, a couple of years later, in Reeves vs. Sanderson Plumbing, Justice O'Connor wrote the opinion for the Supreme Court, and she agreed with my analysis of this legal issue, that in most instances, pretext is sufficient."

Poor Joe. He just mnows he's smarter than any conservative. Maybe he'll get another chance to show how any lawyer/judge that happens to be a Republican HAS to be a homophobe, discriminator, racist, etc. etc.

anybody wana take me up on my bet? alito is gettting in.....it is just a matter of how big is the vote and possibly how many times Ted Kennedy preaches about morals and ethics.

[haus]

Dear Friend,

I just urged my senators to oppose Alito's nomination at:

http://action.aclu.org/alito

Judge Alito has repeatedly shown deference to authority, taking a hostile position towards women's rights, the rights of minorities, and the Fourth Amendment's protection against unwarranted searches and seizures.

Over the past 25 years - as a federal prosecutor, Justice Department attorney in the Reagan White House, and federal judge on the Third Circuit Court of Appeals - Judge Alito has consistently advocated against civil rights and civil liberties.

I hope you'll to join me and the ACLU in in urging your senators to reject the his nomination.

To quickly and easily email your Senators about the nomination, visit:

http://action.aclu.org/alito

[sweetpea]

Dear Friend,

I just urged my senators to oppose Alito's nomination at:

http://action.aclu.org/alito

Judge Alito has repeatedly shown deference to authority, taking a hostile position towards women's rights, the rights of minorities, and the Fourth Amendment's protection against unwarranted searches and seizures.

Over the past 25 years - as a federal prosecutor, Justice Department attorney in the Reagan White House, and federal judge on the Third Circuit Court of Appeals - Judge Alito has consistently advocated against civil rights and civil liberties.

I hope you'll to join me and the ACLU in in urging your senators to reject the his nomination.

To quickly and easily email your Senators about the nomination, visit:

http://action.aclu.org/alito

-----

While you are in lock step with the ACLU you can throw your support behind NAMBLA.

[MAGI]

Dear Friend,

I just urged my senators to oppose Alito's nomination at:

http://action.aclu.org/alito

Judge Alito has repeatedly shown deference to authority, taking a hostile position towards women's rights, the rights of minorities, and the Fourth Amendment's protection against unwarranted searches and seizures.

Over the past 25 years - as a federal prosecutor, Justice Department attorney in the Reagan White House, and federal judge on the Third Circuit Court of Appeals - Judge Alito has consistently advocated against civil rights and civil liberties.

I hope you'll to join me and the ACLU in in urging your senators to reject the his nomination.

To quickly and easily email your Senators about the nomination, visit:

http://action.aclu.org/alito

"From the moment Judge Alito was nominated, his supporters have tried to present him as a victim of everything from special interest groups to anti-Italian bias. Judge Alito has strong support from the White House, and from the party that controls the Senate. The biggest concern in these proceedings is not whether they will be fair to him, but whether they will be fair to the American people, who will have to live with the results."

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/11/opinion/11wed1.html?th&emc=th

For ALL the TRUTH: read the editorial

Including the quote above, from this NY Times editorial, along with your e mail to your Senators may drive the point home!

[sweetpea]

Anyone care to take me up on my bet that Alito is getting in?

[Jane of Arc]

Anyone care to take me up on my bet that Alito is getting in?
Of course he's getting in! The court has to select the next president!

[haus]

Campus Progress has an interesting site (http://www.alitosamerica.org/) with abstracts on Alito's positions on guns, privacy, strip-searches, workplace issues, healthcare and pollution. The site also has an email-your-senators campaign with a template message that reads:


Samuel Alito's America is not my America. I'm opposed to the confirmation of Judge Alito to the Supreme Court. I believe that President Bush should appoint a mainstream judge in the mold of Sandra Day O'Connor.

Judge Alito's record on the U.S. Third Circuit Court of Appeals clearly shows that he subscribes to a far right wing judicial philosophy. I believe that confirming a judge with such extreme ideological views will endanger our long-standing constitutional rights and legal protections.

Judge Alito's record shows: that he holds a very narrow and harmful conception of the role of the federal government in protecting our health and safety; that he believes in restricting a women's right to obtain an abortion; that he finds no constitutional violation in the strip search of a ten-year-old child not covered by a search warrant; and that he regularly sides with big corporations against workers and environmental protections, even when his mainstream colleagues do not.

The advice and consent clause of the Constitution gives the Senate the vital role of asking the hard questions and, where necessary, withholding confirmation. Judge Alito's record is too extreme. That is why I am taking action to oppose Judge Alito's nomination.

[sweetpea]

Allow me to translate.

Samuel Alito's America is not my America. I'm opposed to the confirmation of Judge Alito to the Supreme Court. I believe that President Bush should appoint a mainstream judge in the mold of Sandra Day O'Connor.
---Mainstream meaning they agree with my left wing views; like Ruth Bader.
--This whole notion that judges should be mainstream is ridiculous. Judges should judge based on the Constitution. The 'mainstream' is nebulus and cannot be defined.

Judge Alito's record on the U.S. Third Circuit Court of Appeals clearly shows that he subscribes to a far right wing judicial philosophy.
---i.e. he upholds the part of the Constituiopn that the author doens't like.

I believe that confirming a judge with such extreme ideological views will endanger our long-standing constitutional rights and legal protections.
--See above. Still would like to know his extreme idealogicval views.

Judge Alito's record shows: that he holds a very narrow and harmful conception of the role of the federal government in protecting our health and safety;
--i.e. he should allow partial birth abortion for 14 year olds without parental consent.

that he believes in restricting a women's right to obtain an abortion;
---See above.
that he finds no constitutional violation in the strip search of a ten-year-old child not covered by a search warrant;
i.e. the author is going to wear this onwe out. Even though the case merited. Even though the so-called parents had a history of hiding drugs on others and on themselves. If Teddy and crew are so much agaisnt this why don't they put in legislation to outlaw it? It isn't a new case. The reason is that it would be bad law and they know it.
and that he regularly sides with big corporations against workers and environmental protections,
i.e. he doesn't side with trial lawyers on every case and he thinks teh burden of proof falls on the plaintiff in all cases not just ones where socialists want to stick it to those mean ole corporations.
even when his mainstream colleagues do not.
--More 'mainstream' nonsense. Please define this nebulus 'mainstream'? Further, Sandra Day O'Connor happened to agree with alito's decision that Biden (Mr. plagarism) thought he had a gotcha on.

The advice and consent clause of the Constitution gives the Senate the vital role of asking the hard questions and, where necessary, withholding confirmation. Judge Alito's record is too extreme.
---i.e. he upholds the Constitution and doesn't agree with liberals/socialists on every case.
That is why I am taking action to oppose Judge Alito's nomination.
--Have fun wasting your time.

[snowdog]

..........well, it appears that Judge Alito, will get thru the hearings. and
will become the newest member of the "club". I believe one can thank
Mr. Kennedy for this. I believe that he (Kennedy) and 2 or three others
"attacked" Judge Alito, and then his wife started crying and left the room...
I feel that will weigh heavily on the out come. The Dems Blew it again!

[MAGI]

"From the moment Judge Alito was nominated, his supporters have tried to present him as a victim of everything from special interest groups to anti-Italian bias. Judge Alito has strong support from the White House, and from the party that controls the Senate. The biggest concern in these proceedings is not whether they will be fair to him, but whether they will be fair to the American people, who will have to live with the results."

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/11/opinion/11wed1.html?th&emc=th

For ALL the TRUTH: read the editorial

Including the quote above, from this NY Times editorial, along with your e mail to your Senators may drive the point home!

"The biggest concern in these procedings is not whether they will be fair to him, but whether they will be fair to the American people, who will have to live with the results."

[MAGI]

"EXCLUSIVE: List of Alito “Murder Board” Participants; Includes Lawyers Who Approved Warrantless Surveillance
During this morning’s hearing, Sen. Russ Feingold noted that the same lawyers who created the legal justifications for Bush’s warrantless domestic spying program coached Alito about how to answer questions during the confirmation hearings:

I’m going to say that I am still somewhat troubled by the idea that you were prepared for this hearing by some lawyers who were very much involved in promoting the purported legal justification for the NSA wiretapping program….

I note, for example, that one of the people who participated in these sessions was Benjamin Powell. He recently advised President Bush on intelligence matters and was just given a recess appointment as general counsel to the national intelligence director.

I also see the name of White House Counsel Harriet Miers on the list. And she, obviously, is involved in the president’s position on this matter.

This a serious ethical issue.

Miers personally approved Bush’s warrantless domestic surveillance program as White House Counsel. The evidence suggests that Powell is also a strong proponent of the program. In July, before Bush’s illegal warrantless wiretapping program was revealed by the New York Times, Powell testified before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence to indicate that he wanted to expand the rules that limited intelligence agencies’ authorities to collect and share intelligence about U.S. citizens.

Bush’s warrantless surveillance program may soon come before the Supreme Court. Now we have key lawyers who created legal justifications for the program, such as Powell and White House counsel Harriet Miers, suggesting to Alito how he should respond to senators who ask questions about it. It is hard to imagine that these recommendations were not highly suggestive of how he should adjudicate the issue.

ThinkProgress has obtained a full list of everyone who attended Alito’s “murder boards.” You can check it out here."

http://thinkprogress.org/2006/01/12/alito-murder-board/

[sweetpea]

"EXCLUSIVE: List of Alito “Murder Board” Participants; Includes Lawyers Who Approved Warrantless Surveillance
During this morning’s hearing, Sen. Russ Feingold noted that the same lawyers who created the legal justifications for Bush’s warrantless domestic spying program coached Alito about how to answer questions during the confirmation hearings:

I’m going to say that I am still somewhat troubled by the idea that you were prepared for this hearing by some lawyers who were very much involved in promoting the purported legal justification for the NSA wiretapping program….

I note, for example, that one of the people who participated in these sessions was Benjamin Powell. He recently advised President Bush on intelligence matters and was just given a recess appointment as general counsel to the national intelligence director.

I also see the name of White House Counsel Harriet Miers on the list. And she, obviously, is involved in the president’s position on this matter.

This a serious ethical issue.

Miers personally approved Bush’s warrantless domestic surveillance program as White House Counsel. The evidence suggests that Powell is also a strong proponent of the program. In July, before Bush’s illegal warrantless wiretapping program was revealed by the New York Times, Powell testified before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence to indicate that he wanted to expand the rules that limited intelligence agencies’ authorities to collect and share intelligence about U.S. citizens.

Bush’s warrantless surveillance program may soon come before the Supreme Court. Now we have key lawyers who created legal justifications for the program, such as Powell and White House counsel Harriet Miers, suggesting to Alito how he should respond to senators who ask questions about it. It is hard to imagine that these recommendations were not highly suggestive of how he should adjudicate the issue.

ThinkProgress has obtained a full list of everyone who attended Alito’s “murder boards.” You can check it out here."

http://thinkprogress.org/2006/01/12/alito-murder-board/
--

Yeah dude. check it out, if you want to waste time. Alito is getting in.
The notion that White House lawyers advising nominees on how to respond to hearing questions as being something new is absoulutely laughable. That is their job.!!! Please tell me that is not lost on you.

[sweetpea]

Teddy, Patrick, Joe and crew made a hasty demand to get the Princeton CAP documents / they were delivered AND.......drumroll.......





Nothing.

[Jane of Arc]

I'll say it again ... of course he's getting in! They need a right wing court in case they have to SELECT our next Commander-in-Cheif. We can't have votes actually counted in a presidential election in the good ol' US of A! Hell no.

[JamesP]

Pea, Snow: I understand that you support Alito because he was selected by your tribe and he will advance your social agenda: i.e. abortion, gays, religion in the public square, etc.

Have you no concerns, however, about:
- putting yet another extreme "corporatist" on the supreme court
- the continuing shift of power from the people to the Bush administration's main constituency: the "haves & have-mores" (in his own words)
- are you really so comfortable with America moving toward being just another country where the rich and powerful rule all?

He will be confirmed, I agree, and the shift will continue. When will the absolute dominance of corporations in American politics become too much for you? Are we getting anywhere close?

[sweetpea]

Pea, Snow: I understand that you support Alito because he was selected by your tribe and he will advance your social agenda: i.e. abortion, gays, religion in the public square, etc.

Have you no concerns, however, about:
- putting yet another extreme "corporatist" on the supreme court
- the continuing shift of power from the people to the Bush administration's main constituency: the "haves & have-mores" (in his own words)
- are you really so comfortable with America moving toward being just another country where the rich and powerful rule all?

He will be confirmed, I agree, and the shift will continue. When will the absolute dominance of corporations in American politics become too much for you? Are we getting anywhere close?

JP,
Don't tell me why I support Alito. Don't use strawman arguments and try to tell me why I beleive soemthing.

For the record I support Alito because he said he would not confuse legislating with judicial rulings.

Are makng up these extreme + name as you go along? Extreme corporatist? What the hell is that?
You may fail to recognize, but Bush will be gone in a few years. Alito will still be there. Trying to make this Alito nomination about current issues regardignt eh current President is silly.
Rich and powerful rule all, huh? This is the freest country on earth. Feel free to go to the country ruled by the liberla dictator of the day (Venezuela) adn see how you like it. You could also try the other liberal cause celeb and try out Cuba.
For me, I'm quite happy here and do not think that the 'rich and powerful' make or break me. I don't try to find some conspiracy or nebuklus group to blame for my failures or do not give tehm credit for my succeses./ You should try the same.

[JamesP]

Pea: Take a chill pill, my right-wing friend.

I just asked a friendly question.

I gather from your long & excessively hostile response that you are unconcerned about the escalation of power & wealth consolidating at the top of the American pyramid. So be it.

No need for a pompous, overly defensive lecture on how wonderful America is. Of course, you and yours have no monopoly on affection for this country. None of us would be on this forum if we didn't care about the USA.

Talk about "straw":
- comparing America to Venezuela & Cuba is downright childish
- as is your invitation for liberals to go there
- and your "confusing legislating with judicial rulings" line of Limbaughian nonsense is just that (both sides can lay equal claim to this). You're speaking about social issues when you refer to "legislating from the bench", why not just say so.

No need to respond. Let's agree to disagree. I'll avoid addressing you in future. Please do the same - & relax.

and.... sorry about your "failures" (not an issue for me :D ). You're to be commended for owning up to them & not looking for a "conspiracy theory".

[gratelady1]

Anyone who truely believes Roberts and Alito, are typical "Conservatives", better take a class in basic Human Psychology and the area regarding "Societies' influence on cognitive dissonance, and basic decision making". These guys are young (by Repub standards), and married, and speak to a higher power than God- Thier wives!

These guys are not of the typical "Baby-Boomer crowd" and they are well educated, and only they know- what they will decide on.

To date we can all agree they have been playing to thier "Choir"/ constinuency- and they got where they needed to go- Now they are free to think as they want, and thier power is thiers till they decide to give it up!

I have not opined on this thread much, because I am not worried- Repubs, and Conservatives and the two-party system, can not match against "Nature vs. Nuture"- "Genetics versus Environment", and a good education- I believe the American people are well served by this particular process of our government.

[JamesP]

A consoling post, Lady. Well-said.

[sweetpea]

Pea: Take a chill pill, my right-wing friend.

I just asked a friendly question.

I gather from your long & excessively hostile response that you are unconcerned about the escalation of power & wealth consolidating at the top of the American pyramid. So be it.

No need for a pompous, overly defensive lecture on how wonderful America is. Of course, you and yours have no monopoly on affection for this country. None of us would be on this forum if we didn't care about the USA.

Talk about "straw":
- comparing America to Venezuela & Cuba is downright childish
- as is your invitation for liberals to go there
- and your "confusing legislating with judicial rulings" line of Limbaughian nonsense is just that (both sides can lay equal claim to this). You're speaking about social issues when you refer to "legislating from the bench", why not just say so.

No need to respond. Let's agree to disagree. I'll avoid addressing you in future. Please do the same - & relax.

and.... sorry about your "failures" (not an issue for me :D ). You're to be commended for owning up to them & not looking for a "conspiracy theory".

My reply was of the same tone of yours. Take a look in the mirror if you want to be rid of popmpous retorts.

I never compared the US to Ven. or Cuba. I pointed out using your term 'rich and powerful' two countries where the rich and powerful truly influence the daily lives of the citizens. I used your term to point out your folly. I only invited you to go there so you could see the true meaning of rich and powerful influencing citizens. In this country you still have abundant feedoms that seem to be lost on you with your 'rich and powerful' mantra.
No confusion. on legislating vs. judicial decisions. they are my words. Do you believe judges should legislate from the bench? I am not speaking about social issues. Quit telling me what I'm speaking about.
I know it's painful for liberals to realize that recent reuslts in elections have brought failure. It is coming to fruition with Alito and Roberts. Dems. don't have the votes and tere is not a damned thing you can do in the short term unless they choose a suicidal filibuster. In the long term if Dems. continue to lose elections by being losing the issues debates ther estill isn't much to do about it.
However, Republicans keep pissing away goodwill in Congress then you have a chance.

I take it you have never failed.

[Jane of Arc]

I know it's painful for liberals to realize that recent reuslts in elections have brought failure. It is coming to fruition with Alito and Roberts. Dems. don't have the votes and tere is not a damned thing you can do in the short term unless they choose a suicidal filibuster. In the long term if Dems. continue to lose elections by being losing the issues debates ther estill isn't much to do about it.
Sweatpea~
Does it ever occur to you that half of America or more is in pain at what has become of their country? Does it ever occur to you that we do not consider the selection by the "Supreme" Court of George W. Bush to be valid? Does it ever occur to you that we do not have honest, verifiable elections in this country? Does that matter to you? Because if the elections were open and honest and fair we would be not be considering an Alito nomination.

Consider this.

We will not watch democracy be destroyed without a fight.

We will not watch our economy be destroyed without a fight.

We will not have our country torture without a fight.

We will not have our country invade and destroy other nations without a fight.

We will not watch our country spy on Americans without a fight.

We will not watch the strugglling middle class and poor sink deeper into debt.

We will not watch the sick have no health care.

We will not.

We will not.

We will not.

[FDRfollower]

In case anyone gets suckered in by the lying b.s. propaganda, let me warn everyone.

Alitos nomination is NOT a done deal. Repeat, the Alito nomination is not a done deal. Thanks to Sen. Leahy (D-VT), the nomination has been postponed one week. That's one week to pressure the Sen. to tell the truth. Alito is a fascist. Repeat, Alito is a honest to goodness fascist. Cheney needs him on the court to make him dictator after the next 9/11 he and his friends will run.

[gratelady1]

Anyone who truely believes Roberts and Alito, are typical "Conservatives", better take a class in basic Human Psychology and the area regarding "Societies' influence on cognitive dissonance, and basic decision making". These guys are young (by Repub standards), and married, and speak to a higher power than God- Thier wives!

These guys are not of the typical "Baby-Boomer crowd" and they are well educated, and only they know- what they will decide on.

To date we can all agree they have been playing to thier "Choir"/ constinuency- and they got where they needed to go- Now they are free to think as they want, and thier power is thiers till they decide to give it up!

I have not opined on this thread much, because I am not worried- Repubs, and Conservatives and the two-party system, can not match against "Nature vs. Nuture"- "Genetics versus Environment", and a good education- I believe the American people are well served by this particular process of our government.

Oh-oh- I think someone on the right read my post.....darn we almost snuck our plant in :mad:

[Jane of Arc]

In case anyone gets suckered in by the lying b.s. propaganda, let me warn everyone.

Alitos nomination is NOT a done deal. Repeat, the Alito nomination is not a done deal. Thanks to Sen. Leahy (D-VT), the nomination has been postponed one week. That's one week to pressure the Sen. to tell the truth. Alito is a fascist. Repeat, Alito is a honest to goodness fascist. Cheney needs him on the court to make him dictator after the next 9/11 he and his friends will run.
Well-said sir, well-said indeed!

[JamesP]

What? On the mark, as usual in both of your most recent posts.

We can take heart that the country is turning and what is good in America is starting to show. The dark side has seen some good years recently - Fear has turned many that greed failed to. The dark ones always play to the basest of human instincts. But it won't be long now thanks to so many heroic Americans like you.

[FDRfollower]

It appears that the Christmas vaction period made our Senators a little muddle-headed. They were in pretty good fighting form before, but we'll whip 'em into shape.

The hearings were pretty disgusting. About the only thing Alito said that was truthfull was his name and his wife' name. Everything else was evasions and lies. If the committee can't get answers, they shouldn't vote. It's a good thing the Democrats are going to Caucus before the vote, Harry Reed is a real tough cookie. I hope they recruit enough moderate Republicans to make a filabuster stick.

To snowdog and sweetpea and any other lurker, who seem to be on the 'other' side, I would warn you, do not defend Alito. He wants to abort the Constitution. The other issues aren't very important in comparision. The man has endorsed the legal theories of the Nazi "crown jurist" Carl Schmidt, the guy who made Hitler a dictator. Through the Federalist Society which was set up to create judges who share the legal beliefs of Schmidt, we have our fool President spouting his "Unitary Executive" rights, which are taken from Schmidt. Of course, he comes out of the University of Chicago, where his protege Leo Straus taught, the 'godfather' of our current group of warmongering Neo-Con looters. So if you defend Alito, you are defending an honest-to-goodness (or should that be badness) FASCIST. In the legal sense. That's what everyone should tell their Senator to say. Alito is a FASCIST. Got that?

[snowdog]

well FDR, I am actually neither for or against Judge Alito. I don't feel
I can fairly interject my opinion as I do not as probably 99.9% of the people
here, know the real deal. But the fact is whether Judge Alito is good or
bad for our constitution, He will be nominated that is a fact.

[haus]

Er, I'll bet you a buzillion dollars he won't be nominated anytime soon...

(He was nominated, like, 3 months ago.)

The real burning question is whether he'll be constipated. :)

[MAGI]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/17/AR2006011700435.htmlSupreme

"Court Upholds Oregon Suicide Law

By GINA HOLLAND
The Associated Press
Tuesday, January 17, 2006; 10:23 AM

WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court, with Chief Justice John Roberts dissenting, upheld Oregon's one-of-a-kind physician-assisted suicide law Tuesday, rejecting a Bush administration attempt to punish doctors who help terminally ill patients die."

I hope "The PEOPLE" are watching.................. especially our LAWMAKERS and Senate committee pondering Alito....................
For transcript and comments: http://www.washingtonpost.com/?referrer=email

[MAGI]

I e mailed my Senators yesterday citing Gore's speech and pleaded with them to STAND UP FOR "We The People" & coincidently received a notice from Move On to contact my Senators. If our Senators hear from enough of "the people" they MAY do the correct thing............FILIBUSTER for The Truth!

[haus]

from http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/afloor


Nothing is over until it's over," says Marcia Greenberger, copresident and founder of the National Women's Law Center, which opposes Judge Alito. "What's really important is to let the dust settle a little and to let the implications of these hearings settle in."

Anti-Alito activists say they can pick up another million signatures in the run-up to a delayed vote, in a bid to focus senators' attention on the threat they say he poses to abortion rights, protection from discrimination on the job, and curbs on the abuse of executive power.

"We hope to go from 1 million [anti-Alito] petitions to a couple of million by the time the committee votes," says Ralph Neas, president of People for the American Way, which is also launching new TV and radio ads "to express to the American people the magnitude of what is at stake."


as far as I know, the committee vote's moved back a week. Next Tuesday, I think.

[JamesP]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/17/AR2006011700435.htmlSupreme

"Court Upholds Oregon Suicide Law

WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court, with Chief Justice John Roberts dissenting, upheld Oregon's one-of-a-kind physician-assisted suicide law Tuesday, rejecting a Bush administration attempt to punish doctors who help terminally ill patients die."

I hope "The PEOPLE" are watching.................. especially our LAWMAKERS and Senate committee pondering Alito....................
referrer=email[/url]

Freedom isn't just an empty word used to justify invading other countries & "shock & awe" bombing campaigns.
It means, among other things, freedom for individuals to make choices regarding their own lives and welfare.
Alito is a threat to such freedom. Solid indications are that he would imbue the Presidency with even more power to make choices for the people.

[snowdog]

I e mailed my Senators yesterday citing Gore's speech and pleaded with them to STAND UP FOR "We The People" & coincidently received a notice from Move On to contact my Senators. If our Senators hear from enough of "the people" they MAY do the correct thing............FILIBUSTER for The Truth!

I seen Gores Speech, I have to admit that he was pretty good, curious
as to why he failed to Mention that Mr. Clinton did the same thing with
wiretapping? Ya noticed how he sounded like batman (adam West)
with the way he went into each sentence. got the ol bottom lip biting
thing going on too. he got that from Mr. Clinton, who I think was a
great speech giver

[Jane of Arc]

curious as to why he failed to Mention that Mr. Clinton did the same thing with wiretapping?
Wrong snowdog. President Clinton got court orders for wiretapping. He followed the law. Bush is breaking the law and weakening our democratic process. You have to understand that Bush is side-stepping the checks and balances of our judicial system and our Congress. When you have an unchecked executive branch you have a dictorship than can do whatever it pleases with no oversight. Don't you appreciate the seriousness of this?

[jD_Empath]

Ok here's my first post.

I have more or less stumbled upon this site and have been following the Alito situation with great interest so I will jump into the fray.

1. I do not respond to trolls and suggest that anyone who does not care for trolls to simply ignore them. Trolls are hereby informed.

2. I strongly feel that the most important issues at stake in the Supreme Court nomination and confirmation process are the ones that are not spoken of. Wedge issues are manufactured for the purpose of arousing strong emotions in people, and have a side-effect of diverting one's attention away from issues which would affect them personally and to a great degree.

3. I was glad to see at least a mention of the 2000 "Election" in this thread. We did not have an election in 2000. The United States Supreme Court appointed a person who did not meet the criteria for winning an election. The Republic ended at that moment in time, but many vestiges of it still do exist, and we still have a modicum of our Democratic-Republican (in the Jeffersonian sense) State left, but are clearly losing pieces of it. This "Election" debacle has not been mentioned at all, to my knowledge, by any Senator involved in the confirmation process. I do not have any confidence that it will.

4. Perhaps of even greater importance is this: Regardless of how the Supreme Court might vote on a particular case involving one of the wedge issues, I would like to submit a theoretical future scenario for consideration...

[As some of us know already, two lawsuits have been filed against Mr. Bush for his unlawful and unconstitutional activities regarding surveillance. There can be no debate about the legal status of these actions. The law is clear. If these cases appear in federal court, and are awarded to the plaintiff, would the defendant not appeal the case? Is it not likely that the case would finally reach the US Supreme Court? How much confidence can we have that the decisions of the court would then follow "Stare Decisis" given what we know from experience in 2000?

5. I do not recall much (if any) talk about the current wave of scandal facing the Congress and Senate in the recent hearings. If Abramoff's testimony were to produce indictments of many who serve on our legislative bodies, would it be sealed until Alito took office? How would a final appeal in a criminal case against a legislator be heard by a Supreme Court which contains Alito? Would he give "favors"? Did Scalia give a "favor" when he stopped the recount? (exceeded his constitutional authority in so doing?) Does that now count as "Stare Decisis" too?

I called both of my senators and strongly urged them to block this confirmation by any means necessary.

[haus]

Hi JD,

Welcome to POL. Impressive first post, and I look forward to reading the second. If you feel you're being trolled at any point, click the little red exclamation point on the offending post to give us a heads-up. Other than that, make yourself at home and please join us in tearing some fascist ass. :)

[Jane of Arc]

jD_Empath,

I am thrilled you "stumbled" across this forum. Your post was extremely thoughtful and well-stated. I feel you have a home here and I look forward to more of your clear insights and ideas. This forum has many good people and we all have a lot of work to do in the coming days if we are to save our democratic Republic.

Welcome!!!

[MAGI]

Welcome jD!
I use a handy dandy tool at times which eliminates useless nuisance chatter. There are a few instances in which I engaged and regret it.

If need be, Click onto CP, first listed on the left in the dark blue bar under Main Forum. Again under CP, scroll down to buddies/ Ignore List (under Miscellaneous), click, and enter name(s). You will see when that person makes a statement & have the option of reading that post an responding ........if you wish.

Since I take MOST issues on our forum very seriously, and have little patience with silly proposals, outright lies and other diversional tactics, it is clearly a means of doing away with all that. Not even worth more than a minute of thought on such tactics.

I think it would be a good idea to have a sign next to the scales which acknowlegdes..........read, but so useless it doesn't deserve response, and the sign appears as the next post..........

Again, Welcome!

[snowdog]

Yea, jD the ignore button works pretty good, then you can say whatever
you want, and not have to explain it to any body that questions it. kinda........yea, like
the Democratic party.

[MAGI]

NY Times today:

"As senators prepare to vote on the nomination, they should ask themselves only one question: will replacing Sandra Day O'Connor with Judge Alito be a step forward for the nation, or a step backward? Instead of Justice O'Connor's pragmatic centrism, which has kept American law on a steady and well-respected path, Judge Alito is likely to bring a movement conservative's approach to his role and to the Constitution.

Judge Alito may be a fine man, but he is not the kind of justice the country needs right now. Senators from both parties should oppose his nomination."

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/23/opinion/23mon1.html?th&emc=th

[sweetpea]

Op- ed.
http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20060108-102310-8693r.htm

You got your op-ed....I got mine.

The difference is I happen to tell others it is an op-ed when posting.

[FDRfollower]

Why argue about opinions, here's a statement by legislators. :)

Documentation
Legislators Go on Record Against Alito Nomination
Missouri State Rep. Juanita Head Walton (D-81), joined by a group of other legislators and elected officials, issued the following statement on Jan. 19, 2006:

We call upon the Senate of the United States to reject the nomination of Federal Judge Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court. If need be, we call upon the Senate to conduct a filibuster to block his nomination. Mr. Alito is unfit to be a member of our nation's highest court in these "times that try men's souls."

Mr. Alito's views on race and women's rights are antagonistic to both the highest value of this nation, and to already existing Supreme Court rulings that guarantee protection of these basic constitutional rights.

Mr. Alito further disqualifies himself with his egregious support of the views of the Federalist Society, an institution with which he is publicly identified. The Federalist Society was created twenty years ago under the direct influence of ideas promulgated by Carl Schmitt, the Crown Jurist of the Nazi regime.

Mr. Alito openly supports the idea of the "unitary executive," which is the core dogma of the Federalist Society. This idea was originally known as the "Fuehrerprinzip" under the Hitler regime, and stated that the head of state can assert absolute power during periods of so-called emergency. The policies of the executive do not have to withstand the scrutiny of the Congress or the Supreme Court, and simply are the law. This policy has already been adopted wholesale by the Bush/Cheney Administration with their promotion of NSA spying, torture, and other abhorrent policies typical of dictatorships. This has brought our nation to the brink of totalitarian rule.

We stand with Democratic leader Lyndon LaRouche and others who denounce this policy and Mr. Alito. At a recent meeting in Washington, Mr. LaRouche challenged the Senate to reject Mr. Alito's confirmation. "I see strong men and women I've regarded as strong, in the Senate—flinching! When the issue is: Are you willing to defend this nation from a takeover by Nazism? The issue is not opinion, the issue is Hitler. And we can't have him here. Will they capitulate and let this Alito pass? If they do, the existence of this nation is in jeopardy. Everything hangs on it."

Therefore, we call upon the Senate to muster up the courage to reject Mr. Alito's nomination.

Rep. Juanita Walton—St. Louis, Mo.

Rep. John Bowman—St. Louis, Mo.

Rep. LaMar Lemmons III—Detroit, Mich.

Sen. Carlos Cisneros—Santa Fe, N.M.

Rep. Catherine Barrett—Cincinnati, Oh.

Rep. Thomas Jackson—Thomasville, Ala.

Rep. Esther Haywood—St. Louis, Mo.

Rep. Harold James—Philadelphia, Pa.

Rep. Arthur Turner—Chicago, Ill.

Rep. Christine Sinicki—Milwaukee, Wisc.

Sen. Joe Neal (former)—Las Vegas, Nev.

Mark Sweazy—President, UAW local 969, Columbus, Oh.

Rep. Earl Banks, Jackson, Miss.

Rep. Bryant Melton, Tuscaloosa, Ala.

Rep. Virgil Smith, Detroit, Michigan

Councilman Kevin Conwell, Cleveland, Ohio.

Councilman Adam McFadden, Rochester, New York

[MAGI]

NY Times today:

"As senators prepare to vote on the nomination, they should ask themselves only one question: will replacing Sandra Day O'Connor with Judge Alito be a step forward for the nation, or a step backward? Instead of Justice O'Connor's pragmatic centrism, which has kept American law on a steady and well-respected path, Judge Alito is likely to bring a movement conservative's approach to his role and to the Constitution.

Judge Alito may be a fine man, but he is not the kind of justice the country needs right now. Senators from both parties should oppose his nomination."

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/23/opinion/23mon1.html?th&emc=th

The above IS an EDITORIAL from the NY Times!

[sweetpea]

Why argue about opinions, here's a statement by legislators. :)

Documentation
Legislators Go on Record Against Alito Nomination
Missouri State Rep. Juanita Head Walton (D-81), joined by a group of other legislators and elected officials, issued the following statement on Jan. 19, 2006:

We call upon the Senate of the United States to reject the nomination of Federal Judge Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court. If need be, we call upon the Senate to conduct a filibuster to block his nomination. Mr. Alito is unfit to be a member of our nation's highest court in these "times that try men's souls."

Mr. Alito's views on race and women's rights are antagonistic to both the highest value of this nation, and to already existing Supreme Court rulings that guarantee protection of these basic constitutional rights.

Mr. Alito further disqualifies himself with his egregious support of the views of the Federalist Society, an institution with which he is publicly identified. The Federalist Society was created twenty years ago under the direct influence of ideas promulgated by Carl Schmitt, the Crown Jurist of the Nazi regime.

Mr. Alito openly supports the idea of the "unitary executive," which is the core dogma of the Federalist Society. This idea was originally known as the "Fuehrerprinzip" under the Hitler regime, and stated that the head of state can assert absolute power during periods of so-called emergency. The policies of the executive do not have to withstand the scrutiny of the Congress or the Supreme Court, and simply are the law. This policy has already been adopted wholesale by the Bush/Cheney Administration with their promotion of NSA spying, torture, and other abhorrent policies typical of dictatorships. This has brought our nation to the brink of totalitarian rule.

We stand with Democratic leader Lyndon LaRouche and others who denounce this policy and Mr. Alito. At a recent meeting in Washington, Mr. LaRouche challenged the Senate to reject Mr. Alito's confirmation. "I see strong men and women I've regarded as strong, in the Senate—flinching! When the issue is: Are you willing to defend this nation from a takeover by Nazism? The issue is not opinion, the issue is Hitler. And we can't have him here. Will they capitulate and let this Alito pass? If they do, the existence of this nation is in jeopardy. Everything hangs on it."

Therefore, we call upon the Senate to muster up the courage to reject Mr. Alito's nomination.

Rep. Juanita Walton—St. Louis, Mo.

Rep. John Bowman—St. Louis, Mo.

Rep. LaMar Lemmons III—Detroit, Mich.

Sen. Carlos Cisneros—Santa Fe, N.M.

Rep. Catherine Barrett—Cincinnati, Oh.

Rep. Thomas Jackson—Thomasville, Ala.

Rep. Esther Haywood—St. Louis, Mo.

Rep. Harold James—Philadelphia, Pa.

Rep. Arthur Turner—Chicago, Ill.

Rep. Christine Sinicki—Milwaukee, Wisc.

Sen. Joe Neal (former)—Las Vegas, Nev.

Mark Sweazy—President, UAW local 969, Columbus, Oh.

Rep. Earl Banks, Jackson, Miss.

Rep. Bryant Melton, Tuscaloosa, Ala.

Rep. Virgil Smith, Detroit, Michigan

Councilman Kevin Conwell, Cleveland, Ohio.

Councilman Adam McFadden, Rochester, New York

I was wondering how long it would take.

Now, Alito is a Nazi. (sarcasm)

Bottom line = Alito is getting in regardless of the all too predictable smear tactics used by Dems.

Wanna know why he's getting in? ........ elections.

[MAGI]

I MUST say I find sweetpea inspirational...........

I e mailed my Senators yesterday and called them today urging them to FILIBUSTER!

"The People" must do ALL they can to uphold OUR Constitution!

[sweetpea]

I MUST say I find sweetpea inspirational...........

I e mailed my Senators yesterday and called them today urging them to FILIBUSTER!

"The People" must do ALL they can to uphold OUR Constitution!


"The People" have spoken. Elections. You heard of them?

Go ahead...try a filibuster....you wil pay dearly in 06 elections.

[Jane of Arc]

"The People" have spoken. Elections. You heard of them?

No, "The People" have not spoken. We do not have honest, verifiable elections with a paper trail in the United States.

The American vote has been privatized. Voting machine companies own the software rights to the machines and do not allow public scutiny. Many electronic voting machines do not provide a receipt and can easily be hacked. The American vote can be completely manipulated and the worst part is there is no oversight. The wolves are watching the chicken coop.

Why does a Republican Congress repeatedly ignore the legislation for true election reform?

Why don't Republicans want honest elections?

[sweetpea]

No, "The People" have not spoken. We do not have honest, verifiable elections with a paper trail in the United States.

The American vote has been privatized. Voting machine companies own the software rights to the machines and do not allow public scutiny. Many electronic voting machines do not provide a receipt and can easily be hacked. The American vote can be completely manipulated and the worst part is there is no oversight. The wolves are watching the chicken coop.

Why does a Republican Congress repeatedly ignore the legislation for true election reform?

Why don't Republicans want honest elections?

Seems you have yourself convinced that when Rep. win it's fraud and when Dems win all is good.

Keep living in fantasy land.

Why do Democrats oppose election reform legislation? Why do Dems have a problem with shouwing a picture ID when voting?

Take a look at he county by county voting for the last election.....Dems keep associating themselves with exteme left wing ideas, the party of NO, the party of SS is broken until a Rep. tries to fix it, the party of George Soros/Michael Moore, the party of Harry Belafonte, the party of Al Sharpton and Robert Byrd....all those things and you keep losing.

Those election losses are real. The longer you ignore them the longer and larger the losses will pile up.

Do you think voters should have a picture ID when voting? Do you beleive dead people should vote? Do you beleive illegal aliens should vote? Do you beleive troops abroad should have their ballots counted?

[Jane of Arc]

Al Gore won the 2000 Presidential Election. If the Supreme Court allowed the counting of the votes of the citizens of the United States of America, Al Gore would be sitting in the Oval Office as we speak.

We would not be in an illegal, aggressive war.

Our country would not be bankrupt.

The world would be a safer place.

And Alito would be a non-issue.

The rest of my repsonse to you about voting is in the appropriate place here Voting Reform.

[sweetpea]

You mean Al Gore may have won if recounts could have been done only in selected counties and US troop ballotts would have been disqualified.

Have you seen all of hte recounts done by the newspapers?

None of them changed teh results.

NONE of them.

News Flash!!!!! Al Gore lost / GWB won.

[FDRfollower]

Mr. Alito further disqualifies himself with his egregious support of the views of the Federalist Society, an institution with which he is publicly identified. The Federalist Society was created twenty years ago under the direct influence of ideas promulgated by Carl Schmitt, the Crown Jurist of the Nazi regime.

Mr. Alito openly supports the idea of the "unitary executive," which is the core dogma of the Federalist Society. This idea was originally known as the "Fuehrerprinzip" under the Hitler regime, and stated that the head of state can assert absolute power during periods of so-called emergency. The policies of the executive do not have to withstand the scrutiny of the Congress or the Supreme Court, and simply are the law. This policy has already been adopted wholesale by the Bush/Cheney Administration with their promotion of NSA spying, torture, and other abhorrent policies typical of dictatorships. This has brought our nation to the brink of totalitarian rule

So now, Alito is a Nazi

Read the statement SourPea, he's been a supporter of Nazi legal theories for quite awhile. It's not a slander. Cheney needs him on the Supreme Court because his ass is going to jail if he doesn't. If he's nominated, there won't BE elections.

Using an editorial from the Moonie Ti...*ahem* I mean Washington Times isn't very helpfull.

Oh, Social Security isn't broken, Cheney/Bush was pushing the Pinochet model for the US population.

The whole story hasn't come out in the court trial currently ongoing with Delay/Abramoff/Ney/organized crime conspiracy that stole the 04 election, that's the real crime.

Face it guys, Gore threw it. If he had been serious, he wouldn't have shut down the congressmen who protested the vote fraud in Florida, and he should never have circumvented the Constitutional process by going to the Supreme Court.

Although, his recent statement wasn't too bad. Kinda weak, but OK.

[sweetpea]

Mr. Alito further disqualifies himself with his egregious support of the views of the Federalist Society, an institution with which he is publicly identified. The Federalist Society was created twenty years ago under the direct influence of ideas promulgated by Carl Schmitt, the Crown Jurist of the Nazi regime.

Mr. Alito openly supports the idea of the "unitary executive," which is the core dogma of the Federalist Society. This idea was originally known as the "Fuehrerprinzip" under the Hitler regime, and stated that the head of state can assert absolute power during periods of so-called emergency. The policies of the executive do not have to withstand the scrutiny of the Congress or the Supreme Court, and simply are the law. This policy has already been adopted wholesale by the Bush/Cheney Administration with their promotion of NSA spying, torture, and other abhorrent policies typical of dictatorships. This has brought our nation to the brink of totalitarian rule

So now, Alito is a Nazi

Read the statement SourPea, he's been a supporter of Nazi legal theories for quite awhile. It's not a slander. Cheney needs him on the Supreme Court because his ass is going to jail if he doesn't. If he's nominated, there won't BE elections.

Using an editorial from the Moonie Ti...*ahem* I mean Washington Times isn't very helpfull.

Oh, Social Security isn't broken, Cheney/Bush was pushing the Pinochet model for the US population.

The whole story hasn't come out in the court trial currently ongoing with Delay/Abramoff/Ney/organized crime conspiracy that stole the 04 election, that's the real crime.

Face it guys, Gore threw it. If he had been serious, he wouldn't have shut down the congressmen who protested the vote fraud in Florida, and he should never have circumvented the Constitutional process by going to the Supreme Court.

Although, his recent statement wasn't too bad. Kinda weak, but OK.

-You are living in Fantasy Land.
"If he's nominated, there won't BE elections." You wanna bet? He is going to be confirmed and we will have elections in 2006. Keep it up with the sky is falling hyperbole. It's pretty funny.

[MAGI]

Seems you have yourself convinced that when Rep. win it's fraud and when Dems win all is good.

Keep living in fantasy land.



Take a look at he county by county voting for the last election.....Dems keep associating themselves with exteme left wing ideas, the party of NO, the party of SS is broken until a Rep. tries to fix it, the party of George Soros/Michael Moore, the party of Harry Belafonte, the party of Al Sharpton and Robert Byrd....all those things and you keep losing.

Those election losses are real. The longer you ignore them the longer and larger the losses will pile up.

Do you think voters should have a picture ID when voting? Do you beleive dead people should vote? Do you beleive illegal aliens should vote? Do you beleive troops abroad should have their ballots counted?

"Why do Democrats oppose election reform legislation? Why do Dems have a problem with shouwing a picture ID when voting?"

Unfortunately ALL democrats DON'T! In CT. we have been showing picture ID for YEARS!
---------------------

"Take a look at he county by county voting for the last election.....Dems keep associating themselves with exteme left wing ideas, the party of NO, the party of SS is broken until a Rep. tries to fix it, the party of George Soros/Michael Moore, the party of Harry Belafonte, the party of Al Sharpton and Robert Byrd....all those things and you keep losing."

Do YOU seriously want to FIX S.S.?
SIMPLY .........raise the cap! Obligate EVERYONE: pay that 6.2% to the last earned greenback! Set aside a %age of that 6.2% FICA tax to REMAIN in the SS fund!
Add..............
Thank goodness this country has people who speak out and let the TRUTH be KNOWN! I hope more of "The People" are listening!
---------------

"Do you think voters should have a picture ID when voting? "

YES!
----------------

"Do you beleive dead people should vote?"

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
-------------

"Do you beleive illegal aliens should vote? "

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
---------------------

"Do you beleive troops abroad should have their ballots counted?"

YESSSSSSSSSSSS! ........and they should be verifiable and..........in time!

When I read your statement about RETHUGS wanting STATES RIGHTS......not federal mandates to the states.........I laugh.........sarcastically...........

LOOK what happened when Oregon voted for doctor assistance when a person wanted to die with dignity....TA DA...ASHCROFT brought in the SUPREME COURT, and look how our most recent JUSTICE voted!

[Jane of Arc]

-You are living in Fantasy Land.
"If he's nominated, there won't BE elections." You wanna bet? He is going to be confirmed and we will have elections in 2006. Keep it up with the sky is falling hyperbole. It's pretty funny.I fear you are the one in a "Fantasyland" and FDRfollower can clearly see something is terribly wrong with this failing democracy and it's manipulated elections. You blindly support a president who consistantly abuses and expands his executive powers. You should be concerned that the Supreme Court will be stacked with his men of his ilk. But alas, you are not. Just like in pre-war Germany, the good, patriotic, flag waving, jingoistic German citizens didn't want to see what was happening. It felt too good to be 'in power' rather than to be 'in truth'. You say it can't happen here ... not in the good, ol' US of A. Think again.

[sweetpea]

I fear you are the one in a "Fantasyland" and FDRfollower can clearly see something is terribly wrong with this failing democracy and it's manipulated elections. You blindly support a president who consistantly abuses and expands his executive powers. You should be concerned that the Supreme Court will be stacked with his men of his ilk. But alas, you are not. Just like in pre-war Germany, the good, patriotic, flag waving, jingoistic German citizens didn't want to see what was happening. It felt too good to be 'in power' rather than to be 'in truth'. You say it can't happen here ... not in the good, ol' US of A. Think again.

----
For arguments sake let's say GWB is evil and Hitleresque.......There will still be elcetions in 2006!!!!!!. Why don't you understand that?

These comparisons to pre-war Germany are stupid adn irrelevant by the way.

What part of thsi sentence do you fail to grasp? "Elections have consequences"

And this sentence. "Alito is getting confirmed and will be on his seat far longer than the current President"

[FDRfollower]

-You are living in Fantasy Land.
"If he's nominated, there won't BE elections." You wanna bet? He is going to be confirmed and we will have elections in 2006. Keep it up with the sky is falling hyperbole. It's pretty funny.

The famous statement of the socialist parties in Germany after Hitler was appointed Chancellor and the elections in '32 was, "oh, don't worry. The NSDAP will be discredited in 4 years and they'll get voted out in the next elections." and of course, there were no elections 4 years later. Especially after the Enabling Laws and then the Notverordnung, where all opposition parties were outlawed.

I'm just going on what I know. According to the testimony of Gen. Smedly Butler, J.P. Morgan and other Wall St. types tried to launch a military coup against the FDR government in order to install a FACSIST type government.

More recently, Wall St. interests like George Shultz used ex-Nazis to run a coup against the Chilean Government in 73, and run death squads around the hemisphere.

These guys tend to follow the same pattern, and so do you, it seems. Don't just react like Pavlovian test subject.

[sweetpea]

The famous statement of the socialist parties in Germany after Hitler was appointed Chancellor and the elections in '32 was, "oh, don't worry. The NSDAP will be discredited in 4 years and they'll get voted out in the next elections." and of course, there were no elections 4 years later. Especially after the Enabling Laws and then the Notverordnung, where all opposition parties were outlawed.

I'm just going on what I know. According to the testimony of Gen. Smedly Butler, J.P. Morgan and other Wall St. types tried to launch a military coup against the FDR government in order to install a FACSIST type government.

More recently, Wall St. interests like George Shultz used ex-Nazis to run a coup against the Chilean Government in 73, and run death squads around the hemisphere.

These guys tend to follow the same pattern, and so do you, it seems. Don't just react like Pavlovian test subject.

Yeah dude.

And Mulder and Scully are in on it too. And halliburton, the Carlysle group and wal-Mart are all joining forces to topple us so they can make us all slaves in their mean ole corporations. They are hatching these plans in a Big Boy in the sky as we speak.

[FDRfollower]

Yeah dude.

And Mulder and Scully are in on it too. And halliburton, the Carlysle group and wal-Mart are all joining forces to topple us so they can make us all slaves in their mean ole corporations. They are hatching these plans in a Big Boy in the sky as we speak.

Spoken like a true follower of the most mentally retarded president we've had in our entire history. You have to be retarded to watch X-Files.

Ok boys and girls, it's time to sing!

"Slave Mart" sung to the tune of the Flintstones theme

Wal mart
Boycott Walmart
It's the modern form of slavery.

From the, town of Benton
It's a page right out of history.
That's right, driving all the wages down
Watch as, it'll slowly kill your town.

When you're, at the Wal-mart
They are always anti-union
And anti health care
You'll always be enSLAVED!!

copyright FDRfollower

[Jane of Arc]

Bravo FDR!!!

[MAGI]

Bravo FDR!!!

Ditto

Bravo FDR!!!

[sweetpea]

Spoken like a true follower of the most mentally retarded president we've had in our entire history. You have to be retarded to watch X-Files.

Ok boys and girls, it's time to sing!

"Slave Mart" sung to the tune of the Flintstones theme

Wal mart
Boycott Walmart
It's the modern form of slavery.

From the, town of Benton
It's a page right out of history.
That's right, driving all the wages down
Watch as, it'll slowly kill your town.

When you're, at the Wal-mart
They are always anti-union
And anti health care
You'll always be enSLAVED!!

copyright FDRfollower

I'm gald you caught the silliness of the response.

You post paranoid, ridiculous assertions and I'll respond in kind.

Did you catch the Big Boy in the sky reference or are you inellectually above watching Austin Powers?

[FDRfollower]

I'm gald you caught the silliness of the response.

You post paranoid, ridiculous assertions and I'll respond in kind.

Did you catch the Big Boy in the sky reference or are you inellectually above watching Austin Powers?

I'm too busy reading Aeschylus to go and masterbate in a theatre. No I didn't catch your reference.

The History of the Peloponnesian War by Thucydides is more relevent than anything Mike Meyers will produce in his lifetime. You should read it. See yourself in history as you blindly follow the Sophists down the road to destruction, just like the foolish greeks did, following Pericles.

I think I will nominate SourPea the Sancho Panza of the ProgressivesOnline website. I'm not making any more paranoid assertions, than Abe Lincoln did in accusing President Buchanan, Douglas, & Tawney with a conspiracy to destroy the US. Remember that? Oh, but that would force you to read something above the level of People magazine.

[Jane of Arc]

http://www.austinchronicle.com/issues/dispatch/2005-01-07/cols_ventura-1.jpg

Sancho Panza:"Si, FDR. Todo que digo es absurdo. Miro solamente Fox News. Ahora encendido de usted es mi lider. Mi Don Quixote!"

[FDRfollower]

Sancho Panza:"Si, FDR. Todo que digo es absurdo. Miro solamente Fox News. Ahora encendido de usted es mi lider. Mi Don Quixote!"


:D Ah hahahaha! The paralells are interesting. Cervantes was sharp! He could poeticly describe an entire stupid population (Sancho) following a crazy monarch (Don Quixote). It's too bad there aren't any modern Cervantes, or Jonathan Swifts, or Boccacios around. People like Sourpea need a mirror in order to see how rediculous they are.

If you want PaRaNoId!!!! :eek: Go to the White House. THEY HAVE WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION!!


http://imagecache2.allposters.com/images/pic/32/026_D128~Don-Quixote-in-his-Library-Posters.jpg

Here's Bush, in the bizarre fantasy world Dick Cheney put him in.