Let the Dems defeat Alito

Who is withholding information and about what?

 

well in the past other two nominees they said the gov't was witholding information from the hearings...that had to do with their opinions or something?

 

US,

I don't know about withholding opinions, because those are public record but there is sometimes other documentary evidence that have been objects of dispute as that "anti-elitist" Teddy Kennedy made a big deal of today. BTW, I just finished watching his exchange with Specter about some records--I thought Arlen would throw his shoe at Kennedy. I'm not a huge fan of Specter but I was frankly tickled to watch it.

 

...they were documented decisions, I'm pretty sure of, but they wern't allowed into the court.

 

These hearings have been excellent. There are quite often questions where I wish a nominee could answer without impinging on a future decision. There have been several questions where Alito understandably couldn't answer head on, such as the exceptions clause and eminent domain.

Also, I was intrigued to hear Specter, who was quite exercised about the issue, talk about Supreme Court decisions in which he said the Court treated Congress's "rational basis" with less than due respect. Specter said that SCOTUS should be aware that legislation has been considered (or perhaps he said actually introduced) which would give Congress itself standing before the Supreme Court, which they certainly have authority to do. At present, the Solicitor General represents the United States government, but the SG is part of the executive branch. An intriguing discussion.

 

Court decisions are available to the public.

 

okay, I forgot what was the problem was then...nevermind

 

I find this offensive, cmg. You have presented no evidence, other than your dislike for Catholics, as to why this man shouldn't be chosen for the Supreme Court. You state that somehow his religious affiliation means that he will start torturing and killing the rest of us, or something like that. I really couldn't figure out what your point was. If a Southern Baptist was nominated, should we assume that he would bring back slavery, as that was once a position held by the Southern Baptist church?

Not only do you castigate him because of his religion, but then you go further and state that "he is worthless". That is a very cruel and unChristian statement to make about anyone, even someone with whom you may disagree, although you haven't said that you disagree with any of Judge Alito's judicial ideas.

Personally, I think he's exactly the type of person we need on the court, and I hope the next nomination, whenever that may happen, will be as constitutionally sophisticated and sound in philosophy as soon-to-be Justice Alito.

 

I know quite a few Catholics and they are all pro-life!

 

Exactly, LE.

 

He is conservative. He is pro-life. I don't care what religion he is or is not. I am happy with this nomination for the secular Supreme Court.

Joseph Botwinick

 

"There were very few Catholics here in 1776 but now they are on the verge of taking over the nation, which will only drag it down, as no Catholic country has ever had lasting prosperity."
"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G8
France and Italy are RC.
Canada, Germany and the US are partly RC.

 

Aren't Ted Kennedy, John Kerry and Nancy Pelosi Catholic?

 

Oh yes. It's the crusades all over again.

Those evil Catholic Justices will be starting the fires to burn us all alive.

Get real, cmg. This is just silly.

Their religion is a non-issue. What is important is their judicial philosophy, and I would think that you would be in favor of conservative, constructionist justices on the court.

Do you disqualify every non-Baptist candidate?

 

cmg
"I don't see anyone saying that he wants to live in a Catholic country."
"
Florence here I come!
Avignon here I come!
Ghent here I come!
Bayern here I come!
Buenos Aires here I come!
Dublin here I come!
Barcelona here I come!

With such options available why live in a non-catholic country?

Speaking from personal experience, I rather liked living in Rome.

 

I am more interested in Alito's political than his Church. We don't elect or appoint people based on their Church. Roman Catholics are a very diverse people in their thinking much like Baptists.

That being said, I think Alito looks like a good choice. The majority of Democrats are not going to support any GOP choice because they have became an extreme leftist party.

These hearings have been a disastor for the Democrats.

 

Alito will most likely be confirmed, despite the fact that some of us are not impressed with him at all, and feel that he is a bad choice.

So, do you really think he would vote to repeal Roe v. Wade, especially from that "vantage point?" He really didn't give a clear answer on that now, did he? Amazing that he would not do that, especially given the support he is receiving from those who seek to repeal that decision. Since he is most likely going to be confirmed, why wouldn't he be clear as to his position?

Regards,
BiR

 

An astute point, that had not occurred to me prior. Yes, there's been, in the past, more than a few people who say that a Catholic is not fit to be a judge.