Alito on the "irresponsible" 1960's-70's era.

[happydreams]

Yesterday I listened to Alito’s opening statements in his confirmation hearings. He said that in the early 70’s when he was starting out in his career he was disenchanted with the “irresponsibility” exhibited in that era.

I was confused by his lack of specificity. Was he talking about the police killing student protesters at Kent State and other acts of violence by law enforcement as irresponsible? Or the government’s COINTELPRO? Or Nixon’s corruptions? Or was he referring to the student activists who protested the Vietnam War?

If I were cross-examining this con (short for conservative) I would get a clarification on who Alito was referring to as irresponsible . It could reveal alot about his mental machinations. Now that he is in the ironic position of being nominated for his integrity by what is increasing viewed as the most corrupt presidential adminstration in the most corrupt era in politics this country has ever experienced it might be good to ask him what he believes are some of the underlying causes of this corruption.

Then ask his views on the NSA spying scandal as compared to COINTELPRO.

Just some thoughts.




Religion:

Why is it that the more religious fervor we see in politics the more corruption we have? Is their a correlation? I listened to Norm Ornstein, a conservative, on the McNeil Lehrer snooze hour last night and he classified this era of politics as the most corrupt he has ever seen in his 36 years in politics. The mobster hatted Abramof invoking god in the courtroom should be a hint that anybody can use religion as a trump card when the chips are down.
It is, or should be if religion is the elixir that cures our moral ills, ironic that the near hysterical obsession with god coincides with this rampant corruption; corruption largely attributed to the cons who are considered the closest to god. That Bush, who invokes god like no other president, has shredded the Constitution using every imaginable excuse for doing so.

But this is really to be expected when we understand the guru of neo-conservatism and PNAC Leo Strauss specifically stated that religion should be used by leaders to pacify the the people.

Here are some of Strauss’s more flavorful takes on how to govern contained in a 1998 book by Calgary University Professor Shalia Drury: :

Perpetual deception of the citizens by those in power is critical because they need to be led, and they need strong rulers to tell them what's good for them.

those who are fit to rule are those who realize there is no morality and that there is only one natural right, the right of the superior to rule over the inferior".
For Strauss: "religion is the glue that holds society together.


Marx and Strauss agree it seems.

He specifically and repeatedly states in his teachings that religion is merely a tool to manipulate and pacify people. Karl Marx’s well known quote: “Religion is the opiate of the masses” is not contested by Strauss. While Marx was meant to be taken descriptively if not proscriptively Strauss saw the mentally pacifying effects of religion as a prescriptive—a useful tool for the “superior”. Strauss also stated that the leaders need not be, indeed should not be, true believers in religion only appear that way for their public, or “exoteric” image. What better philosophy for crooks who aspire to high political office than to hold their flock/subjects to a higher standard of morality than they are willing to meet. This largely explains how the ’’big lie” committed by our modern day Robber Barons are treated with such short shrift, will office intern peccadilloes can cause the impeachment of a President.

Here is a quote from Strauss on how to govern:
"Because mankind is intrinsically wicked, he has to be governed,…………... "Such governance can only be established, however, when men are united - and they can only be united against other people."

[blm]

1. Hmmm....so he responsibly volunteered to serve his country in Vietnam?

.

[happydreams]

7. Is he a chickenhawk? That could be another question.

:hi:

[Bridget Burke]

15. Yes.

He supported the War. But when he got a low draft number, he enlisted in the Army Reserve. I believe he had 3 months active duty--in Georgia.

Textbook case.

(I looked this up earlier today. Links are somewhere....)

[happydreams]

30. Thanks for looking that up. It looks

like chickenhawk status is the norm among these whackos

[kcass1954]

12. To be fair, he wasn't old enough.

I don't like him any more than anyone else here. But the draft ended in 73, when he would have been what - 15?

[happydreams]

16. Alito was born in 1950. He would have been of draft age in 1968-9

[kcass1954]

26. My mistake - I was thinking that he's 4 years YOUNGER than me -

he's 4 years older.

So why the hell didn't he go take his turn? Oh yeah, other priorities...

[ProfessorGAC]

21. Your Research Is Flawed

He would have been 23 in 1973.
The Professor

[blm]

22. 23 is old enough - and he sure judged others during that time - way more

than one would expect from a "youngster" facing military service himself.

[leftchick]

24. He would have been 23 years old in 1973

how did he avoid the draft? I have a 55yr old friend who was drafted at 18, served a grueling tour in Vietnam and has suffered from PTSD for all of these years. He is a mess.

[bunkerbuster1]

2. Nominated and kicked.

I've wanted to stir up some shit about this topic myself. I'm infuriated that he hasn't been hammered about this.

What was irresponsible, Sammy? That wimmen and negroes got all uppity? Or was it, as I suspect, that your paranoia made it hellishly difficult to make friends, so you had to resort to taking up with whatever racist right-wing scum were willing to share dope with you?

(And don't even pretend that you didn't get high back then, Sammy. Everyone did.)

Out with it, bitch!

[JohnnyRingo]

19. I doubt this guy ever got high....

Take another look at his face and take 30 years off, he's the type that would have gone to the Dean's office with a complaint about the other students.

I bet he was a sissy little tattletale who always had key scratches on his car.
Probably why he has such a hard-on for those at a lower social station than Fed judge.

[WI_DEM]

3. How irresponsible of 60's youth to protest Vietnam and stand up

for civil rights. Shame on them!

[happydreams]

8. I'm sure this is what Alito is thinking. I would LOVE to see

his reaction to this question.

[Spinzonner]

4. It was the National Guard at Kent State

not police

[happydreams]

5. You mean there's a difference?

Just joking. Thanks for the correction.

[shance]

6. Wonderful points HD**

Thank you for posting.

[happydreams]

27. Your're welcome.

:hi:

[bettyellen]

9. he used the words irrational and radical, thatwouldbe women, blacks, jews

that's always been the code, hasn't it?

[happydreams]

11. Yes. The cons have always been bitter about

this era for exactly those reasons.

I am pumped about the possibility of somebody asking him about this. :bounce:

[Jacobin]

10. He's forking whack job. Bush* gets to appoint him

Dems are in the minority. They can either filibuster or let it go. Since Bush* claimed the WH its one of the awful consequences of Ohio.

[Burried News]

13. How about these men and women - were they irresponsible Scalito?

http://www.virtualwall.org/

[Armstead]

14. That sttenebt jarred me too

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=96196&mesg_id=96196

[JohnnyRingo]

17. I thought he was refering to student protests against a war that he

wholeheartedly approved of.

Why he didn't put off his education for a couple quick years and enlist is a mystery. He could have picked up money for college and maybe a few extra bucks to buy a second "business suit".

He's a lying, self serving, hipocritic, pro-corporate, shill for the right wing.... That's why.

on edit
I see from a previous post that he opted for Natl Guard duty. My last sentence stands however

[klook]

18. Does he mean when the Voting Rights bill passed?

Yes, that was so irresponsible for America to guarantee the right of its Black citizens to vote.

Or was he talking about the refusal of millions of Americans to support a war against a tiny, poor country on the other side of the world? That was certainly immature!

Or is he talking about women asserting their rights as equal human beings? Talk about irrational! Everybody knows they just came from Adam's rib (we're still working out the details of how that might have occurred) and therefore have no God-given equality!

Natural healing, independent thinking, environmental consciousness, community-based organizations, racial diversity and understanding--why, it's all enough to make a conservative puke, isn't it, Sammy?

[rucky]

20. I suspect he's talking about the ERA/Feminist Movement:

check this out:

THE ALITO NOMINATION
Wednesday, November 30, 2005
On the wrong side of history for women


What do the admission of women to Princeton, my wife and President Bush's nomination of Judge Samuel Alito to the U.S. Supreme Court have in common? In my family, everything.

In 1969, the board of trustees of Princeton voted to admit women, ending two centuries of exclusion. As former Princeton President Robert Goheen recalled, "The claims of American women to equal treatment and the ability of many of them to play active, shaping roles in education, business, the professions and public affairs were at last gaining wide recognition and acceptance."

Not everyone agreed.

Sam Alito, class of 1972, was one of the first Princeton men to share his college experience with women. How did this experience affect him? Upon graduation, he joined Concerned Alumni of Princeton, a conservative organization formed to oppose Princeton's decision to admit women.

This was no youthful indiscretion. In 1985, as a 35-year-old lawyer, Alito listed his membership in the alumni organization in an application for a promotion within the Reagan administration's Justice Department.

The irony of the man nominated to replace Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, the first woman on the U.S. Supreme Court, joining an organization opposed to the admission of women to Princeton is self-evident. But irony gives way to dismay when you consider the historical context of Alito's advocacy.

In 1972, the Senate passed the Equal Rights Amendment by a vote of 84-8 and President Nixon signed into law Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, prohibiting sex discrimination in any education program or activity receiving federal assistance.

At a historic time of bipartisan support for eliminating barriers to equal opportunity for women, Concerned Alumni of Princeton wanted to turn back the clock on coeducation. A forward-looking board of trustees rejected the views of this fringe group, but what if they had prevailed? How would history be different? ...

http://www.oregonlive.com/commentary/oregonian/index.ssf?/base/editorial/113330852481971.xml&coll=7

[happydreams]

23. Nice find. Thanks. I like this part:

At a historic time of bipartisan support for eliminating barriers to equal opportunity for women, Concerned Alumni of Princeton wanted to turn back the clock on coeducation. A forward-looking board of trustees rejected the views of this fringe group, but what if they had prevailed? How would history be different? ...


I just hope somebody asks him about this.

[DoYouEverWonder]

25. But he was very committed to his college ROTC

but he can't decide whether or not it's okay to torture people.

[Kurovski]

28. K&R. Interesting read with excellent points.

Alito--like every other Republican who makes it to a high place these days--is full of hypocrisy and utterly contemptible bullshit.

[Tsiyu]

29. So he knows ** was an AWOL drunk?

Why would he be friends with such an irresponsible person?

[happydreams]

31. YES, YES YES!! Feingold makes Alito squirm with

the very similar questions to the one I suggested!!!

Finally!! I feel like writing and thinking have some purpose other than catharsis.

Of course its probably just a coincidence that Feingold and I are on the same page, but its still nice to know that my ideas are being put to some practical use.

:bounce: :bounce:


Here is what I suggested:

Then ask his views on the NSA spying scandal as compared to COINTELPRO.


Here is Feingold questioning:

http://blogs.washingtonpost.com/campaignforthecourt/200...

<snip>

In the process, however, he pursued an unusual line of questioning that made Alito visibly uncomfortable. He asked Alito whether the subject of the eavesdropping and its legality came up during his rehearsals for the nomination.

After some hesitation, Alito, who was taken aback, said that the general area of wiretapping and foreign intelligence did come up.

Who was present during these practice sessions, asked Feingold.

"Nobody at these practice sessions has ever told me what to say," Alito stated, answering an unasked question, somewhat defensively.

[stop the bleeding]

32. Yes I remember now reading this line of questioning being discussed here

in the last few days, this is great that people can really have their voices heard.