Monday, November 07, 2005

NY Times: Court Choice Is Conservative by Nature, Not Ideology

Also see: On Trenton visit, Nader challenges Senate to confront Alito

New York Times article is a puff piece as another person jostles into the line to replace Judith Miller as one of the prime passers of the Republican talking points.

The point those types don't get is what does it matter? If the man hates women, what does it really matter? If he is out to destroy worker's rights, it really doesn't mean a thing if the man is a elitist who found that by siding for the religious right and big busines he could go far, but he's not going to blindly follow the Pope.

Do we need another one of these elistist Supreme Court Justices?

Reagan and Bush 41 chose the majority of the SC people. Nixon and Ford chose 2 others.

Only 2 justices were chosen by a Democratic president. When the right wing complains about the Supreme Court being too liberal they really don't have a leg to stand on.

We need a balanced Supreme Court.

And we certainly don't need another Judith Miller at the Times.

Excerpt:
Mr. Alito, the analytical, circumspect son of an analytical, circumspect father, who rose to become a federal appeals court judge and is now President Bush's nominee to become the next justice of the Supreme Court, is remembered from those days in the Office of Legal Counsel for his superior research powers, his probing brain, his wrestling with the questions and his disinclination to see any issue as a slam dunk.


Cream puffs anyone? Remember, they make you fat and unhealthy if you put anything you really would want to eat on them.

Court Choice Is Conservative by Nature, Not Ideology

Nore about Samuel Alito starts here: Credentials vs Values

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home

Links to this post:

Create a Link