On Samuel Alito

Link

Rear Admiral
Joined
Apr 13, 2003
Messages
4,221
Re: On Samuel Alito

Originally posted by 18R:<br /> Never before in my life have I ever had such a bad feeling about someone as I do with Alito. Look past the demo/repub angle and consider the man on his own merits in the hearings. He is trying way too hard, comes across as someone that “needs” the job as a Supreme Court justice. Have to wonder why he felt the need to lie thru his teeth about his club affiliations while in college. Who cares about them!?! Thinking we would have been better off with that other lady Bush had up there before Alito.
I disagree with you compliantly.<br />But thats what makes America Great!<br />We can disagree and don't have to worry about having our heads chopped off! :) <br /><br />Link
 

oddjob

Commander
Joined
Jun 19, 2002
Messages
2,723
Re: On Samuel Alito

Alito's running rings around the stouges..lol<br /><br />Schumer:<br /> "Judge Alito, in '85 you wrote that the Constitution -- and these are your words -- does not protect the right to an abortion, and you said to Senator Specter a long time ago. I think it was about 9:30 this morning, 9:45, that those words accurately reflected your views at the time. Now, let me ask you, do they accurately reflect your view today?" <br /><br /> ALITO: It was an accurate statement of my views at the time, that was in 1985, and I made it from my vantage point as an attorney in the solicitor general's office, but it was an expression of what I thought at that time. If the issue were to come before me as a judge, if I'm confirmed, and if this issue were to come up, the first question that would have to be addressed is the question of stare decisis, which I discussed earlier, and it's a very important doctrine, and that was the starting point and the ending point of the joint opinion in Casey -- and then if I were to get beyond that, if the court were to get beyond the issue of stare decisis, then I would have to go through the whole judicial decision-making process before reaching a conclusion. <br /><br />SCHUMER: But, sir, I am not asking you about stare decisis. I'm not asking you about cases. I'm asking you about this. The United States Constitution. <br /><br />ALITO: The answer to the question is that I would address that issue in accordance with the judicial process as I understand it, and as I have practiced it. That's the only way I can answer that question. <br /><br />Schumer:<br /> "You keep talking about what's in the Constitution, and I want to know what you think is in the Constitution. I don't care about your process. So you still believe that statement, right?" <br /> <br /> <br />ALITO: And, senator, I would make up my mind on that question, if I got to it, if I got past the issue of stare decisis, after going through the whole process that I've described, I would need to know the case that is before me, and I would have to consider the arguments, and they might be different arguments from the arguments that were available in 1985. <br /><br />Schumer:<br /> "Judge Alito, does the Constitution protect the right to free speech?" <br /><br />ALITO: Certainly it does. <br /><br /> SCHUMER: Well, why can't you answer that -- the question of does the Constitution protect the right to an abortion the same way, without talking about stare decisis, without talking about cases, et cetera? <br /><br />ALITO: Because answering the question of whether the Constitution provides a right to free speech is simply responding to whether there is language in the First Amendment that says that the freedom of speech and freedom of the press can't be abridged. Asking about the issue of abortion has to do with the interpretation of certain provisions of the Constitution.
 

Haut Medoc

Supreme Mariner
Joined
Jun 29, 2004
Messages
10,645
Re: On Samuel Alito

So what he is saying is: "Yes I am against abortion, & I will dance around giving you a truthful answer, because if I said what I really think, I would be crucified by the dems..... I want that cushy co-emperor job for life & I will dance around any issue that stands in the way of that end" ;) .... After 32 years, I can't believe that this is still an issue....Though it is not the law of the land, (technically), it should be.....& shame on the lawmakers for not doing anything sooner about it....It should be an amendment to the constitution.....JK
 

RubberFrog

Rear Admiral
Joined
Apr 9, 2005
Messages
4,268
Re: On Samuel Alito

Interesting take. I thought what he said was that he would decide each individual case on it's merits and not on preconceived political ideas.
 

QC

Supreme Mariner
Joined
Mar 22, 2005
Messages
22,783
Re: On Samuel Alito

Originally posted by Haut Medoc:<br /> ....It should be an amendment to the constitution.....JK
Ya know, some think we should debate little things like Constitutional amendments when the issue is not clear. So what if it takes even 100 years? Some think we should just amend it whenever we feel like it . . . Hmmmmmm.<br /><br />Mr. Kopec sir, it is now confirmed despite how close you came. Liberals want to amend the constitution for this, that and the other. Conservatives resist amending what many believe is the finest legal document ever written . . .
 

Haut Medoc

Supreme Mariner
Joined
Jun 29, 2004
Messages
10,645
Re: On Samuel Alito

The issue is clear to everyone but right wingers & religious zealots...& Sam Alito ;) ....JK
 

18rabbit

Captain
Joined
Nov 14, 2003
Messages
3,202
Re: On Samuel Alito

I liked the other woman Bush suggested. She wasn’t a judge, no previous experience on the bench, not yet corrupted to the same level as the rest of the judiciary. Kind of ironic it was the repubs that ate her alive.<br /><br />At the time, Bush commented that he wanted to put someone on the bench that was less likely to make law, i.e. legislating form the bench, a.,k.a. the super legislature. Bush was doing the right thing. I get the feeling Alito will have difficulty with impartial decision making, more likely to impose his agenda, i.e. exploit the status of the super legislature. Well, see.<br /><br />Also remember that the Am Bar Asso was pissing their pants that Bush was recommending judges without seeking the ABA’s approval first. Think about it, lawyers want to decide which of their own will be reward with a promotion to judge-ship, then they will go before their recommendation seeking judicial decisions. In any other context, such a conflict of interest would never be permitted. Bush did the right thing to blow off the ABA. <br /><br />What would happen if someone that understood the intent of the constitution, and wasn’t a lawyer or judge, was appt to the SC???
 

QC

Supreme Mariner
Joined
Mar 22, 2005
Messages
22,783
Re: On Samuel Alito

Originally posted by Haut Medoc:<br /> The issue is clear to everyone but right wingers & religious zealots...& Sam Alito ;) ....JK
That is not true. There are many Democrats and liberals that struggle with the abortion issue and despite what you may think, I am pro-choice, but struggle with that position to this minute . . . If it is that clear then you are simply not paying attention.
 

Haut Medoc

Supreme Mariner
Joined
Jun 29, 2004
Messages
10,645
Re: On Samuel Alito

QC, maybe you are a little confused about this.....I'm paying attention just fine....This is one issue that the "party of choice", would seek to remove that choice....You know where I stand so I will not belabor my point.....18R does raise some good questions....JK
 

oddjob

Commander
Joined
Jun 19, 2002
Messages
2,723
Re: On Samuel Alito

Here are transcripts of Senator Kennedy and Judge Alito, and then Senator Kennedy with Arlen Specter and the argument that they have. This is Kennedy. <br /><br /><br />KENNEDY: The last question is: How long, then -- when you made the promise under oath to the committee that you were going to recuse yourself, and you understand that now to be in your own interpretation just to be the initial time, how long -- did you think that that pledge and promise lasted? <br /><br />ALITO: Senator -- <br /><br />KENNEDY: That's my question. <br /><br />ALITO: And Senator, as I said, I can't tell you 15 years later exactly what I -- what I thought when I read that question. It refers to the initial period of service. And looking at it now, it doesn't seem to me that 12 years later is the initial period of service. <br /><br />KENNEDY: My question to you, which I guess I'm not going to get an answer to, is when did it -- is ten years, is -- how about three years? Is that -- <br /><br />ALITO: Well, I don't know exactly what the time limitation would be, but 12 years does seem to me not to be the initial period. <br /><br />KENNEDY: We'll come back to this. <br /><br /><br />KENNEDY: "The physically handicapped are trying to gain equal representation in professional sports, and homosexuals are demanding the government vouchsafe them the right to bear children." Did you read that article? <br /><br />FEINSTIEN: Finish the last line. <br /><br />KENNEDY: Finish the last line -- is, "and homosexuals are..." <br /> <br /> <br />FEINSTIEN: No, "and now here come women." <br /><br />KENNEDY: If the senator will let me just... <br /><br />FEINSTIEN: Yes, I will... (LAUGHTER) <br /><br />KENNEDY: Can I get two more minutes from my friend from... (LAUGHTER) Just to continue along. I apologize, Judge. <br /><br /><br />SPECTER: Quite candidly, I view the request... If it's really a matter of importance, you and I see each other all the time and you have never mentioned it to me, and I do not ascribe a great deal of weight. We actually didn't get a letter, but -- <br /><br />KENNEDY: You did get a letter, are you saying? <br /><br />SPECTER: Well, now wait a minute. You don't know what I got. I'm about to -- <br /><br />KENNEDY: Yes I do, senator, since I sent it. <br /><br />SPECTER: Well, the sender does not necessarily know what the recipient gets, Senator Kennedy. You are not in a position to say what I receive. <br /><br />KENNEDY: Heh-heh-heh. <br /><br />SPECTER: If you'll bear with me for one minute -- <br /><br />KENNEDY: But, uh, uh, I am in a position to say what I sent to you on December 22. <br /><br />SPECTER: You're in a position to tell me what you sent. <br /><br />KENNEDY: I renew my request, senator, and if I'm going to be denied, then I'd appeal the decision of the chair. <br /><br />SPECTER: Don't be premature, Senator Kennedy. I'm not about to make a ruling on this state of the record. <br /><br />KENNEDY: Mr. Chairman, I'd, uh, appeal the ruling of the chair on this. <br /><br />SPECTER: There has been no ruling of the chair! <br /><br /><br />SPECTER: Quite candidly, I view the request... If it's really a matter of importance, you and I see each other all the time and you have never mentioned it to me, and I do not ascribe a great deal of weight. We actually didn't get a letter, but -- <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />KENNEDY: You did get a letter, are you saying? <br /><br />SPECTER: Well, now wait a minute. You don't know what I got. I'm about to -- <br /><br />KENNEDY: Yes I do, senator, since I sent it. <br /><br />SPECTER: Well, the sender does not necessarily know what the recipient gets, Senator Kennedy. You are not in a position to say what I receive. <br /><br />KENNEDY: Heh-heh-heh. <br /><br />SPECTER: If you'll bear with me for one minute -- <br /><br />KENNEDY: But, uh, uh, I am in a position to say what I sent to you on December 22. <br /><br />SPECTER: You're in a position to tell me what you sent. <br /><br />KENNEDY: I renew my request, senator, and if I'm going to be denied, then I'd appeal the decision of the chair. <br /><br />SPECTER: Don't be premature, Senator Kennedy. I'm not about to make a ruling on this state of the record. <br /><br />KENNEDY: Mr. Chairman, I'd, uh, appeal the ruling of the chair on this. <br /><br />SPECTER: There has been no ruling of the chair! <br /><br />KENNEDY: My request is that we go into the executive session for the sole purpose of voting on a subpoena for these records that are held over at the, uh, Library of Congress. That purpose and that purpose only. If I'm going to be denied that, I'd want to give notice to the chair that you're going to hear -- have it again and again and again and again and we're going to hear votes on this committee and again and again and again until we have a -- <br /><br />SPECTER: Well, Senator Kennedy I'm not concerned about your threats to have votes again, again, and again, and I'm the chairman of this committee, and I have heard your request, and I will consider it, and I'm not going to have you run this committee and decide when we're going to go into executive session. (Bang)<br /><br /> LOLOLOLLOOLLOOLOLOL!......Yep!he,he!
 

dogsdad

Lieutenant
Joined
Aug 8, 2003
Messages
1,293
Re: On Samuel Alito

Ted is the champion buffoon of all time. I wonder if he's a mean drunk or a happy drunk.
 
Top