The questioning sucks.
As a matter of form, a lot of wind is wasted pontificating, and engaging in meta debates, instead of asking probing questions designed to make Alito look bad. When questions are asked, they are often rambling. Worse, it is clear to me that each Senator prepared his questions without consulting his colleagues. There does not appear to have been any coordination between the Senators. They should have divided up topics. Instead they EACH ask the same questions. I see no evidence of teamwork.
It's extremely disappointing. The preparation here is horrible.
Is anyone else disappointed?
Further, the tone of the questioning, rhetorically, concedes that Alito will be nominated. For example, Feingold lets Alito off the hook saying that Alito gave a "serious answer" when he was avoiding the wiretaps issue, and concedes that Alito need not answer because the issue will come up before the S.Ct. Biden tells Alito that with regard to Vanguard he doesn't thinks he's unethical, amongst many other self-deprecating pro-Alito comments.
Substantively, many of the questions do not appear to be aimed at influencing the general public (and through the public Republican Senators) because the terminology used is comprehensible only to people familiar with the arcane catch phrases, cases or concepts discussed. These questions do nothing to draw a stark contrast between the basic differences between the Republican and Democratic views of the Constitution and the Judiciary. No case is being made. It's just haphazard questioning.
We saw this same ineffectiveness with Roberts. Alito is a lot more vulnerable than Roberts. The opportunity to score points is much greater. Still, even with the Roberts debacle to guide their preparation, the Dem Senators have not changed their tactics one bit.
The press reports reflect the lack of effectiveness of the questioning. The headlines today generally portray Alito in a good light (e.g. "Alito says President not above the law" etc.).
I and others diaried on the questioning tactics before the Roberts hearings, and we diaried our critiques and recommendations after the hearings, and we were clearly not heard by anyone.
Various people diaried on these topics back during the Roberts nomination. Clearly, the Senators don't read the diaries. Perhaps they read Armando's FP posts, but Armando's posts only raise various issues that may or may not be useful if incorporated into a questioning strategy. Neither Armando nor any of the special interest groups floating proposed questions discuss questioning tactics (as opposed to topics) or broad rhetorical strategy and teamwork necessary to achieve the end goal. In sum, the Senators questioning is haphazard, repetitive and lacks any thematic coherence.
Frankly, I think its time the Dem Senators realized that just like lawyers they may need some continuing education. They could all use some seminars on teamwork, strategy and cross-examination tactics. These confirmation hearings are a complete waste of time. Confirmation hearings are nothing more than a show trial for the public by which the competing parties try to make their case.
But, without any tactics or coordination, the Dems are fighting these show trial unarmed.