^ i agree

they won in 04

and hes not completely crazy. so meh...

11/3/2005 10:38:51 AM

http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/1102/p01s04-usju.html

Quote :

"In 3 of 4 cases, Supreme Court nominee Alito voted on the side of abortion rights. By Warren Richey | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor [...] But the true test of appeals court judges isn't which personal views they hold, but to what extent those personal views may influence how they rule in a particular case. On this issue, legal analysts disagree in their assessments of Judge Alito. Some say he is a conservative ideologue. Others say he is a smart, careful jurist who leaves personal views behind when he dons his black robes. The best evidence of his work as a judge are his published opinions. They contain a few surprises and some ammunition - for both the left and the right. For example, of the four abortion cases in which he participated as an appeals court judge, he voted on the pro-choice side in all but one. "

Anybody starting to see that the left/right, republican/democrat paradigm is a scam?

Just another supposed "conservative" republican appointee who turns out to be "liberal" on social issues, in the mold of Souter, Stevens, O'Connor, Kennedy, etc.

11/3/2005 11:56:56 AM

If you want to look at abortion from a point of view of fairness than if a man has no rights concerning a child when it is in the mother's womb than why should he have to take responsibility when the child comes out, i.e. child support? I am speaking of being forced to take responsibilty by law not because it is the right thing to do, which in my opinion it is.

11/3/2005 3:40:27 PM

Quote :

"Just another supposed "conservative" republican appointee who turns out to be "liberal" on social issues"

I know many conservatives who are liberal about social issues. I'm the same way.

It doesn't mean that it is a scam.

11/3/2005 3:48:27 PM

I think abortion is wrong (I'll save the debate for another thread - if you really wanna hear what I have to say on the issue, send me a pm and we'll discuss), but I'm not comfortable with the legal arguments that would be necessary to challenge it. Remember that Roe V. Wade was based on the Right to Privacy. A right I find very important, and a right that is in danger. Especially when ULTRA strict constructionists will argue that the right doesn't exist in the constitution in the first place.

11/3/2005 3:55:39 PM

Does anybody else see a problem with his reasoning behind the whole wife getting an abortion situation? He said that it wasn't unconstitutional or whatever because such a small number of married women have abortions and choose not to tell their husbands. Therefore, while the undue burden on the women it affects is great, since the average burden per person is so small it doesn't matter.

Using the same reasoning it would be acceptible to make a law making it legal to slap Supreme Court nominees named Samuel Alito on the ass as one sees fit. Since such a small percentage of the population would be affected, there's no overall harm!

11/3/2005 3:55:39 PM

If you wanna talk about ass slap'n than start an S&M thread.

11/3/2005 4:21:12 PM

MathFreak, I can't understand the first sentence of your last post...

11/3/2005 8:01:22 PM

I was referring to a case where Alito dissented from the majority. The majority said that the search warrant said what it said. Alito said that common sense told him that other documents that had never officially become a part of the warrant, should have been included.

11/3/2005 8:31:52 PM

aight. I'll agree that, if that is actually what happened, that that is likely pretty fucked up, except in maybe an extreme circumstance. That having been said, isn't such a thing usually typical of liberals, who like to claim that the Constitution is a "living, breathing document?" Granted, there is a radical difference between a search warrant written yesterday and a framework of gov't written 230 years ago, but still. The similarities are uncanny

11/3/2005 10:26:44 PM

I favor a true conservative on the court. Precisely because I'd rather courts stick with interpreting the Constitution. Unfortunately modern "conservatives" are just as much judicial activists as they claim the liberals are.

11/3/2005 10:55:58 PM

^

Mathfreak, I told you that Bush was going to pick a strong Conservative. And I believe that you are going to get your wish because I think that Alito is the very kind of justice that you prefer, a strict interpretor of the Constitution and not one that will legislate from the bench.

11/5/2005 10:41:35 AM

Alito: Roe v. Wade deserves 'great respect
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20051108-112955-2303r.htm

Quote :

"Alito tells senators he respects precedent By Charles Hurt THE WASHINGTON TIMES November 9, 2005 Federal Judge Samuel A. Alito Jr. told senators yesterday that he has great respect for Supreme Court precedent, which some suggested meant he would be reluctant to reverse federal abortion rights. Sen. Joe Lieberman, Connecticut Democrat, met privately with the Supreme Court nominee and asked him about the importance of precedent, such as Roe v. Wade, the 1973 case guaranteeing abortion rights. Mr. Lieberman said that Judge Alito replied: "Roe was a precedent on which people -- a lot of people -- relied, and had been precedent now for decades and therefore deserved great respect.""

Yep, looks like another "conservative" to me.

[Edited on November 9, 2005 at 10:45 AM. Reason : 1]

11/9/2005 10:45:31 AM

Oh no! He's not a staunch conservative!?!?

I would rather have a supreme court justice who thinks for himself instead of blindly following the party line.

11/9/2005 1:28:33 PM

Quote :

"He's not a staunch conservative"

He's not a conservative AT ALL. He's voted in favor of abortion in 3 of 4 cases, and now he goes on the record as saying Rov v. Wade "deserves great respect."

[Edited on November 9, 2005 at 4:42 PM. Reason : 1]

11/9/2005 4:41:51 PM

This may blow your mind, but abortion is not the deciding factor in determining one's political viewpoint.

There is no reason that a person can't be a pro-choice conservative, little buddy.

11/9/2005 4:51:43 PM

and if you look at why he made those decisions
its actually conservative

11/9/2005 4:53:53 PM

bttt

Shits gonna get interesting now that Alito has been outed as a pro-lifer:

http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/11/14/alito/index.html

11/15/2005 1:18:37 AM

ha, outed!

[Edited on November 15, 2005 at 1:22 AM. Reason : i think though we kinda knew that 99%...but now its 100]

11/15/2005 1:22:35 AM

Well, he ruled in favor of abortion rights in 3 of 4 cases that he presided over, so your 99% was bullshit unless you had inside info.

But yeah, its the paper trail that makes this one interesting. Roberts didn't have a smoking gun like Alito, where he brags about being proud of fighting against abortion rights.

This will likely explode over the next few days. Dems will try to demonize him, and Republicans will bitch about them using this issue as a litmus test. The filibuster may be back on the table now

11/15/2005 1:28:42 AM

Quote :

" unless you had inside info"

lets see....the same people who kicked miers embraced alito. ergo, insiders were obviously given information.

11/15/2005 1:38:58 AM

SUP ALLEYOTO!

1/10/2006 1:49:27 AM