# Now serving #3... Samuel Alito **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 31, 2005, 12:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-serving-3-samuel-alito/328702 "2005-10-31T12:46:56Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![ShibbOleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/848f3c/32.png) [@ShibbOleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ShibbOleth)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2005, 12:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-serving-3-samuel-alito/328702/1 "2005-10-31T12:46:56Z")
Bush is expected to nominate his third choice candidate to replace Sandra Day O’Connor on the Supreme Court: [Samuel Alito](http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-10-31-alito-profile_x.htm). ---
**Author:** ![AncientHumanoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ancienthumanoid/32/278_2.png) [@AncientHumanoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AncientHumanoid)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2005, 1:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-serving-3-samuel-alito/328702/2 "2005-10-31T13:27:04Z")
Scalia-lite? Interesting… Is he really that conservative, or does he just look ultra conservative compared to the rest of the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals? ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2005, 1:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-serving-3-samuel-alito/328702/3 "2005-10-31T13:29:12Z")
They nicknamed him “Scalito” and for good reason. The Dems so far have been “keeping their powder dry” but by all accounts, this is one guy we need to use whatever powder we have. This will be an interesting test of the Dem Congressional leadership … do they have any powder to use and are they willing to use it? Oh, yeah, and nominating a hard-core conservative at this point in time is an obvious attempt at wagging the dog by the White House. Gotta stay focused on Plamegate and all the other shit the White House has been up to. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2005, 1:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-serving-3-samuel-alito/328702/4 "2005-10-31T13:32:10Z")
> [@NoClueBoy](#): > > Scalia-lite? Interesting… > > Is he really that conservative, or does he just look ultra conservative compared to the rest of the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals? He’s not Scalia-lite, he is the same or as bad as Scalia. Frex, he was the lone dissenter on an abortion-related decision because he felt that a provision that mandated spousal notification should be included when the rest of the Court of Appeals wanted it thrown out. They were concerned that battered women who were required to notify spouses of an abortion wouldn’t do it, due to a well-founded far that they’d get the shit beaten out of them. Alito didn’t care. He’s scum. ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2005, 1:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-serving-3-samuel-alito/328702/5 "2005-10-31T13:40:04Z")
Gentlemen, start your filibusters. [Think Progress,](http://thinkprogress.org/2005/10/31/samuel-alitos-america) , while not the most unbiased source in the world, gives us some insight into Alito’s mindset. ---
**Author:** ![ShibbOleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/848f3c/32.png) [@ShibbOleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ShibbOleth)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2005, 1:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-serving-3-samuel-alito/328702/6 "2005-10-31T13:52:11Z")
He’s been described, on NPR, by colleagues as being driven by points of law and not ideology. This includes people who would not always agree with his POV. They say he’s experienced, careful, yadda yadda. Like Roberts but with more of a record to look at. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2005, 2:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-serving-3-samuel-alito/328702/7 "2005-10-31T14:00:55Z")
What would be the justification for filibustering Alito? ---
**Author:** ![What\_the](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/f4b2a3/32.png) [@What\_the](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/What_the)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2005, 2:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-serving-3-samuel-alito/328702/8 "2005-10-31T14:06:06Z")
> [@Mr. Moto](#): > > What would be the justification for filibustering Alito? Uh … because he won’t let the libs legislate from the bench? They won’t fillibuster because they need to save it for when they really need it … when Ginsburg and Stevens leave. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2005, 2:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-serving-3-samuel-alito/328702/9 "2005-10-31T14:08:09Z")
> [@Mr. Moto](#): > > What would be the justification for filibustering Alito? Whyncha go to the Think Progress link BobLibDem provided and read the headers and come back with some reason he SHOULDN’T be filibustered? ---
**Author:** ![ShibbOleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/848f3c/32.png) [@ShibbOleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ShibbOleth)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2005, 2:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-serving-3-samuel-alito/328702/10 "2005-10-31T14:16:44Z")
> [@Evil Captor](#): > > Whyncha go to the Think Progress link BobLibDem provided and read the headers and come back with some reason he SHOULDN’T be filibustered? I’m on your side of the fence, generally, but that site seems somewhat slanted. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2005, 2:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-serving-3-samuel-alito/328702/11 "2005-10-31T14:19:40Z")
> [@Mr. Moto](#): > > What would be the justification for filibustering Alito? Because he is too conservative. Hey, you guys opened that door by shooting down Miers for being to liberal. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2005, 2:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-serving-3-samuel-alito/328702/12 "2005-10-31T14:20:06Z")
One can have little doubt that the President nominated a person who, in his opinion, is the most qualified. Next to Harriet Meiers, of course. ---
**Author:** ![Debaser](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/3da27b/32.png) [@Debaser](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Debaser)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2005, 2:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-serving-3-samuel-alito/328702/13 "2005-10-31T14:22:38Z")
> [@Fear Itself](#): > > Because he is too conservative. Hey, you guys opened that door by shooting down Miers for being to liberal. What? 1. Conservatives didn’t filibuster her. 2. Conservative objections to her weren’t ideology driven. She wasn’t qualified. ---
**Author:** ![samclem](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a9a28c/32.png) [@samclem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/samclem)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2005, 2:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-serving-3-samuel-alito/328702/14 "2005-10-31T14:25:35Z")
> [@Evil Captor](#): > > Whyncha go to the Think Progress link BobLibDem provided and read the headers and come back with some reason he SHOULDN’T be filibustered? Or, you could actually read the cases rather than the headers and make up your own mind. I’m in the middle of doing this, and haven’t formed an opinion yet. ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2005, 2:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-serving-3-samuel-alito/328702/15 "2005-10-31T14:26:09Z")
> [@ShibbOleth](#): > > I’m on your side of the fence, generally, but that site seems somewhat slanted. Admittedly so. But in any event, the cases cited therein can be referenced in more impartial cites. Why filibuster? Because his philosophy is far outside the acceptable mainstream of modern political thought. ---
**Author:** ![samclem](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a9a28c/32.png) [@samclem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/samclem)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2005, 2:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-serving-3-samuel-alito/328702/16 "2005-10-31T14:26:38Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > One can have little doubt that the President nominated a person who, in his opinion, is the most qualified. Next to Harriet Meiers, of course. Blind squirrel, etc. etc. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2005, 2:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-serving-3-samuel-alito/328702/17 "2005-10-31T14:31:02Z")
> [@Debaser](#): > > What? > > 1. Conservatives didn’t filibuster her. They didn’t have to, Bush folded like a cheap lawn chair. > [@](#): > > 1. Conservative objections to her weren’t ideology driven. She wasn’t qualified. _Haw haw haw_, just keep repeating that over and over, and maybe someday it will be true! ---
**Author:** ![Patty\_O\_Furniture](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/96bed5/32.png) [@Patty\_O\_Furniture](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Patty_O_Furniture)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2005, 2:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-serving-3-samuel-alito/328702/18 "2005-10-31T14:31:56Z")
(Reflexively reaches to protect nuts) ---
**Author:** ![Cliffy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/59ef9b/32.png) [@Cliffy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cliffy)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2005, 2:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-serving-3-samuel-alito/328702/19 "2005-10-31T14:36:43Z")
We’ve got a case before him right now. So if he rules for our client, he’s obviously a model of restraint and a sober jurist with a deep and abiding respect for the law and the traditional of American society. If he rules against us, though, well, it goes without saying that he’s a unshackled movement conservative that has no business on the bench. Just kidding! I don’t know too much about him because others on the team are on that side of it, but I’ve been told that they were impressed by how tough he was on both sides during oral argument. –Cliffy ---
**Author:** ![Cliffy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/59ef9b/32.png) [@Cliffy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cliffy)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2005, 2:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-serving-3-samuel-alito/328702/20 "2005-10-31T14:40:08Z")
> [@Debaser](#): > > 1. Conservative objections to her weren’t ideology driven. She wasn’t qualified. Tain’t so, McGee. Yes, she was unqualified, which is why the moderates on the judiciary committee came around to the view that she shouldn’t be confirmed, but from day one (OK, maybe day two), the right-wing of the GOP decried her nomination on idealogical grounds, and then was happy that she truly didn’t have the chops. –Cliffy [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-serving-3-samuel-alito/328702.md?page=2)