The Captain and I agree - this NY Times profile of Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito is very calm and reasonable, apparently like Alito himself. And we can file under this under "Off-message, not exactly killer quotes":
J. L. Pottenger Jr., a friend of Judge Alito's at Princeton and Yale who is now a professor at Yale, said: "The reason I'm hoping he gets confirmed, even though I am a liberal, maybe an ultraliberal, is because I think he's an honest, well-intentioned guy who believes in judicial restraint in the model of Supreme Court Justice John Harlan and I can't really argue with that as a judicial philosophy. I don't think he's an ideologue. I don't think he's going to be out there trying to roll back the clock."
Watching the Dems fear-monger this nominee with the Times on the sidelines is going to be fun.
Heck I'm a liberal and I really don't mind Alito that much, he sounds like another disappointment for the fire breathers. It cracks me up that Bush has to pick another North East Catholic, he must not think too much about the intelligence of his Southern WASP base eh?
Posted by: Amok92 | November 07, 2005 at 10:21 AM
When it comes to civil right, civil liberties, and the restraint of executive power, count me among those who oppose Alito because I "don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud".
The evidence that putting Alito on the court represents a threat to our freedoms is, of course, not conclusive. But it is a HELL of a lot more compelling than the evidence that Saddam was developing nuclear weapons.
If the court was dominated by the likes of Souter and Ginsberg, I'd find Alito acceptable --- his "contrarian" viewpoints would help keep the court honest. But with whackjobs like Scalia and Thomas on the court, and with Roberts (at best) a big question mark, we can't afford to take the risk that Alito represents.
(I'll tell you what....get Alito to denounce Bush v. Gore as the abomination that it was, and I'll support him.)
Posted by: p.lukasiak | November 07, 2005 at 10:38 AM
"Southern WASP" ??? "Southern WASP" ?!?
My, my, you are a liberal, aren't you... In the south the number of Episcopalians is easily matched by the number of Catholics and the number of Jews. Which is to say a tiny blip unnoticed in a great sea of evangelical rednecks.
cathy :-)
Posted by: cathyf | November 07, 2005 at 10:44 AM
"If the court was dominated by the likes of Souter and Ginsberg" P
Halloween is over buddy, so stop with the scary stuff.
Posted by: Gary Maxwell | November 07, 2005 at 11:07 AM
Gary,
I'm concerned about the seating arrangements when Luttwig is appointed. What if both he and Alito want to sit between Thomas and Scalia? Will Roberts have to decide?
Posted by: Rick Ballard | November 07, 2005 at 11:38 AM
Well Rick none of the Catholics will want to sit with McConnell so maybe that is a solution to your dilemma!
Posted by: Gary Maxwell | November 07, 2005 at 12:19 PM
Gary,
No, McConnell will sit on the other side of Roberts - between Brown and Owen. Luttwig is the problem.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | November 07, 2005 at 12:39 PM
Rick
In TopGun there is a scence where Goose says" oh I crack myself up."
Just seems appropriate here.
Posted by: Gary Maxwell | November 07, 2005 at 12:54 PM
Question for Tom Maguire: What is your personal position on stem-cell research and abortion rights?
Posted by: depressed (formerly obsessed) | November 07, 2005 at 01:11 PM
Stem cell research - I reflexively deplore the Dem hysteria and exploitation of this issue, and I think Bush's position (banning federal funding except for designated lines / silent on private or state funding) represented a plausible compromise that is going to require adjustment with the march of science. If I have an official editorial position, it is is probably here.
On abortion, I am in the limited abortion rights camp. So, for example, neither the the Partial Birth ban nor parental notofication troubles me, but I am not pining for (or expecting) the outright overturn of Roe v Wade.
Posted by: TM | November 07, 2005 at 01:59 PM
cathyf:
Where do you see an "E" for "Episcopalian" in the word "WASP?" The "P" however is for Protestants. Are you saying there are more Jews than Protestants in the South? More Catholics than Protestants in the South? Would you share some of whatever it is you are drinking with me?
bbbustard
Posted by: bbbustard | November 07, 2005 at 07:31 PM
Stuart Taylor, Jr is all for Alito:
http://nationaljournal.com/taylor.htm
Posted by: Patrick R. Sullivan | November 07, 2005 at 08:15 PM
As most understand the term, Protestant is of the Christian faith but "protesting" The Catholic orthodoxy. As I was growing up this surely included the Episcopalians. Since King Henry VIII broke the Church of England away from the Roman Catholic church, which is the genesis of the Episcopalian it would seem to me that BBustard owes Cathy an apology. Dont hold your breathe Cathy.
Posted by: Gary Maxwell | November 08, 2005 at 09:12 AM
Being 100% cracker I can tell you WASP don't mean us.
Posted by: spongeworthy | November 08, 2005 at 11:18 AM
Did Bush promise to appoint SCOTUS justices in the mold of Scalia/Thomas or Harlan?
Posted by: Geek, Esq. | November 08, 2005 at 11:21 AM