Alito Should Not Be Allowed On the Court Unless he will state, unequivocably, that if the President has authorized the NSA to spy on Americans as Bush has admitted to doing, that the President is violating the law and that no President is above the law.
He is not going to give any answers on abortion, or civil rights, or the commerce clause. But so what? We already know his position on those issues. We already know that his positions are contrary to, and generally even offensive to, most Americans.
As frightening as that may be, it is precisely what Bush said he was going to do. I find this deeply disturbing, but if forced to try to find some sliver of a ray of hope, perhaps after a few rulings some of the voters who thought Bush couldn't have been that bad may wake up and see for the first time what we have all been trying to tell them for the last 6 years.
I have to think that are some Republicans who are frightened by this as well. What would it take to make one of them step up and object to Alito? Don't we just need one Senator to object? Just one to start the filibuster and then 40 more to vote in support? Aren't there 44 Democrats in the senate? Should we be pressuring the moderate/pro-choice Republicans instead of the Democrats? Would Frist go nuclear against his own party?
I used to think that the Republican party just wanted to talk about overturning Roe v. Wade, but that they really never intended for it to happen because they would lose a huge part of their base that only votes on that issue. Not that I think these people would vote for Democrats in the future, I just don't think they would be nearly as motivated to vote if that has been their only issue of concern.
Thanks to Karl Rove though, the Republican's will always have some wedge issue waiting in the wings. Gay rights, Gay marriage, immigration, etc.
But we have a President who believes it is criminal to burn a flag, but perfectly okay for him to crumple up the Constitution and the Bill of Rights and toss it into the flames.
It seems that if they can't filibuster because of Alito's views on abortion, the commerce clause, civil rights, etc. why can they not tie confirmation to his position on whether or not the President is allowed to violate the law on a whim. I never even heard them ask about the interplay of Article 2 and the other Articles and the Bill of Rights. Bush says Article 2 trumps them all. I disagree. In fact, I think it is clear that the Bill of Rights trumps everything.
Unfortunately, we have a Republican President who has knowingly and willfully violated the law and the Constitution. He is so blindly arrogant he has admitted it.
In case anyone was still wondering why he didn't nominate Gonzales to the Supreme Court -- I think we have the answer -- Bush needs him as the Attorney General so that there will not be an independent prosecutor appointed.
Rhonda Ross For Congress, MI-09
www.ross4congress.org