Skip to main content

View Diary: NYTimes: Oppose Alito (178 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Losing Battles to Win Wars (none)
    Lets be clear, my only objective is for Democrats to win.  Winning more elections is the only way to advance the underlying principles that bind us together.  Sometimes it is better to lose a battle strategically in order to win the war decisively.  This is easier said than done primarily because most of our soldiers are principled warriors.  The women's rights groups have their own agenda and strategy which is wholly disconnected from the environmentalists, labor, and anti-war etc..  Again, my agenda is for Democrats to win above all else.  I may agree with much of the agenda of these groups, but I think the world of politics demands a more coordinated battle plan.

    You see, I look at the nomination of Samuel Alito for the Supreme Court as a unique opportunity borne out of an enormous political blunder by the White House.  The Harriet Miers nomination disrupted the equilibrium on the Republican side.  They had pretty much mastered the coordination of the disparate groups in allegiance to the interests of the party.  The party strategists, I believe, had no actual interest in overturning Roe v. Wade.  Abortion and Homophobia are two of their most effective fundraising and electoral tools (cutting taxes can only go far. Especially given the way they like to spend.).

    Pat Buchanan, Meet The Press - 10/9/05:

    Tim, on abortion, I am not sure the president the United States wants to see Roe v. Wade overturned.  His wife does not, his mother does not.  He refuses to say whether he wants to say whether he wants to see Roe v. Wade overturned.  There are a number of Republicans, moderate Republicans, who say, "Well this would be a political disaster."  I'm not sure the president of the United States wants the Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade.

    You have never been more right Pat.  Political disaster is indeed the future of the Republican power if the right wing dreams are realized.  And the electoral response will be devastating for at least a generation.  Just think about it. WTF are they going to whine and moan about?  What is going to motivate their rank and file to send in the money?

    Yes, I see a long term victory in this short term defeat.  However, it can only be realized if we work hard to expose the truth.  A filibuster is just silly in this case because we will lose more than we can possibly gain. (how? we filibuster. they invoke nuclear option. we lose filibuster altogether. Bush either renominates Alito or someone even worse.)  We should vote no and vote no loudly.  Give voice to Alito's quiet extremism.  Force all those weak-kneed "moderate", "pro-choice" Republicans in to a corner.  I would love to hear Chaffee, Snowe, Collins, etc explain how they can call themselves pro-choice and still vote for Alito.  Even just for kicks.

    The hard part, of course, is that the Court will shift sharply to the right and we do have to live through that.  Who am I to tell the women's rights groups or the civil liberties groups to suck it up because we will prevail in the long-run?  I'm merely someone who wants Democrats to win so that we don't have to worry about these issues so much.  I think that we will be in a much better place on the other side of this battle.  Once America actually has to live under the Republican scheme America will reject it wholly and completely.  In the end I have ultimate faith in our ideas. Republicans don't seem to.  If they really believed in their principles Sam Alito would proudly say that he wanted to overturn Roe.

    blah, blah, blah ramble, ramble.  What do you guys think?

    Cross-posted on my new/developing blog -

    Reclaiming America One Blog At A Time -

    by BRockNYLA on Sun Jan 22, 2006 at 10:03:37 PM PST

      I agree that Roe will not be overturned.  It will just be gutted just like Alito recommended when he worked for Regan.  Each year the Republicans can keep it as a issue and up the restrictions and reduce the rights.  The effects of this step by step diminishing of access will take years to become apparent to the general public.

      The main objection to Alito in my view is his deference to executive power.  By all indications, he will support Bush in his warrantless spying and interpret the Constitution as giving Bush unlimited powers.  This will have an immediate effect if King George doen't think he will be restrained by the court.  How long it takes the American public to fully realize what this means, is anybody's quess.

    •  I think youre playing politics (none)
      with civil liberties and peoples rights.

      And you don't know how it'll turn out if Roe is overturned, and if we lose other rights. The whole point of the BORs is to protect the rights of the minority against majority rule. People seem to think that abortion (or other liberal issues) will automatically become a winner for democrats then if its in the states, but we have no idea whether thats true or not. And youre taking Pat Buchanan's word for it? I think the strategy of conservatives is to play down the abortion issue now and just watch while their judges chip away at it. I assure you that its not just an political issue to most of them, they literally believe its murder.

      Your plan seems like just giving up to me. The solution is not to give up your principles for a chance at winning in future elections. You have no idea the impact a conservative court could have on politics, democrats/liberals could even be in a worse position by having to go against the majority on issues that the court once handled. I think youre just resisting change thats needed if the democratic party is to be sucessful in the future. A conservative court is not going to solve that problem. There will still be "taxes and spending, national defense, gun rights, etc...."

    •  Faulty logic (none)
      Maybe I should have my tin foil hat lined with lead but I believe the SCOTUS has already swiped one election from us. You assume that with scAlito on the bench fairplay would still be the order of the day. I, otoh, think that not only would the rules change but we may not even get to hit. This IS the battle worth fighting. Unless we get enough Rs to give signed-in-blood NOs with title liens on their organs as collateral, I say "It's Fili-time"!

      "I don't have the patience to wait for an afterlife to show how wrong the christian Right is"

      by TheWriter on Mon Jan 23, 2006 at 01:50:02 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  where lead goes (none)
        tin foil hat, lead underoos...that's what you need to survive in this day and age.

        And I agree with you.

        This is the fight. Anything, everything we can do legally needs to happen to stop this guy from getting on the court.

    •  Nuclear Option = Mutually Assured Destruction (none)
      For forty years the US and the former Soviet Union had enough missiles to kill everyone on the planet fifty times over pointed at each other. Yet they were never fired (thank God.) Part of the reason for that is the doctrine of "MAD" or Mutually Assured Destruction.

      I say filibuster Alito. If we cannot sustain it, well, too bad. If we can, and if Dr. Frist pulls the nuclear trigger, not only do we lose the filibuster, they lose the filibuster. One day, maybe as soon as 2007, the Democrats will be in the majority in the Senate. And then, the poor little Republicans will not be able to filibuster our nominees.

      I do not believe that the Republicans can sustain their "nuclear winter" vote. We may not be able to make the filibuster work, but we should not fear Frist or any attempt to destroy the filibuster. They need it, too, and may need it very soon.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site