SF Chronicle: Democrats fail to pin Alito down in final questioning

[Bush_Eats_Beef]

Democrats fail to pin Alito down in final questioning
Nominee expected to be confirmed to Supreme Court
Carolyn Lochhead, Chronicle Washington Bureau

Friday, January 13, 2006

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2006/01/13/MNG7CGMQ2O1.DTL

Washington -- Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee made their last efforts Thursday to pin down Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito on abortion, presidential power and even whether the Constitution bans immigrants such as Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger from the presidency.

But their parting volleys began to resemble hortatory pleas for the nominee to heed their concerns once on the high court, implicitly acknowledging Alito's likely confirmation as the nation's 110th Supreme Court justice.

The 55-year-old judge who serves on the Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals based in Philadelphia was nominated by President Bush in October after conservatives killed the nomination of White House counsel Harriett Miers. Alito would replace centrist Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, a pivotal vote on many of the nation's most burning controversies from abortion to affirmative action. Fearing Alito could undo O'Connor's legacy, Democrats threw everything they had into his defeat. Their questions grew sharper and more specific as they focused on key areas where Alito's long record, including a stint in the Justice Department during the Reagan administration, most worries them.

Yet Alito's answers remained consistent over 18 grueling hours of testimony and more than 700 questions: a cautious recitation of case law, a careful outline of the issues to be weighed, a description of how he would approach a legal question, but seldom a yes or a no. Alito again demonstrated the effectiveness of the bland, methodical approach that ferried him safely through a minefield of traps that could have sunk his fate in the face of determined Democratic opposition: no flash, no fire, a little bit geeky, a little bit nervous, but steadfastly answering each query, often at length, politely defending his positions while refusing to wander into legal box canyons.

[budkin]

1. We are f***ed

The consequenses of the election theft of 2000 and again in 2004 get worse every day...

:scared: