Did I take nap and miss the draft being re-instated?
Because if there is one thing the majority in the senate cares about it is competence in appointed officials. It’s not like they will just rubberstamp any buffoon of a candidate for FEMA or DHS that the president wants. Why look at their entirely competence - based rejection of Harriet Myers, solely on her lack of experience and having nothing to do with the shitstorm of voices from the Right.
It’s unclear to me if you’re suggesting that Harriet Miers was competent or incompetent. If she was incompetent, then the Senate reached the right result.
If you are suggesting she was competent… I disagree.
Not at all. The senate never reached a result on Harriet Meirs. There was no up or down vote, there was no senatorial decision, Meirs withdrew.
Don’t you live in Pennsylvania? Aren’t you represented by the honourable Rick Santorum?
Sometimes, lost causes are the only causes worth fighting for.
We’re talking about men (such as Kerry and W) who were of draft age during Vietnam.
I wish he were, instead of posturing for the cameras and making an ass of himself.
Alito is more than qualified for the position. This entire process should not have taken more than a day or two, which is a good argument for keeping cameras out of the committee room. And keeping the booze away from Kennedy, but that will never happen.
No one ever suggested she was competent. 
(Except the President and Senator Reid)
I was trying to say that for many of Mr. Bush’s nominees for appointed government positions in general, competence and/or qualifications has not been required. It may be that the majority feel much more strongly about judicial nominees than others - willing to be more advise, less consent if you will. Given that the rejection (or rather de-nomination) of Ms. Miers on grounds of her lack of qualifications was preceded by ideological-based rejection by the Republican base, I am somewhat dubious that competence and qualifications are the sole vetting criteria used by the majority.
I would additionally argue that the SCOTUS nominee’s views on the balance of power between judicial, executive and legislative branches are entirely ideological and absolutely as important a criterion for approving/rejecting/filibustering as are the nominee’s qualifications and competence.
Well, that’s why this conservative voted libertarian last year. (Well, there was a lasagna dinner thrown in if I didn’t vote for Bush…) I didn’t like either major candidate. If the Dems had thrown up a Bill Clintonesque type, I might have voted for him. Hell, I voted for Obama.
Oddly enough (but thankfully for the sake of the nation), your opinion, Clothahump, is not the one which matters, but rather that of the President and a majority of Senators.
I will have to defer to you about posturing and making an ass of oneself, though; I do respect expertise in a field.
Any lingering doubts I had that Alito might be a competent Supreme Court Justice have just been erased by that statement. Thanks!
Tough shit. He’s going to be sworn in tomorrow. Tell us how you feel about that, rjung! 
Another triumph for party over country.
While I’m quite certain that I will have strong disagreements w/Alito, that in and of itself does not mean he’s not qualified for the position. IIRC, didn’t he American Bar Association rank him as qualified? ideology does not trump qualifications.
He got the highest rating the ABA gives (“well qualified”) in every category-- integrity, professional competence and judicial temperament.
25 nays. 72 Ayes.
???
Cloture passed. Good luck with your new judge.
If he rules the way it looks like he’s going to, limiting the unbridled power of big government, we’ll all have good luck with our new judge.
You haven’t paid the least bit of attention to this process, have you?