# You lost on Alito, what next? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 31, 2006, 11:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-lost-on-alito-what-next/342332 "2006-01-31T11:41:57Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**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:** [January 31, 2006, 11:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-lost-on-alito-what-next/342332/1 "2006-01-31T11:41:57Z")
Unless GWB picks someone on the left side of the real mainstream… and the conservatives let him get away with it, the Dems will definately fillibuster the next nominee. 1. They like being the whining victim party. 2. If a Dem president gets to pick a justice in the next 50 years, they want to be able to get him/her confirmed with only 50 votes themselves. On the other hand, they don’t really need the Pubs to pull the nucular trigger because they could do it themselves without the risk of being labeled hypocrites by their favored media. Surely there is a debate or two in there… ---
**Author:** ![Martin\_Hyde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Martin\_Hyde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martin_Hyde)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2006, 12:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-lost-on-alito-what-next/342332/2 "2006-01-31T12:02:19Z")
> [@What the .... ?!?!](#): > > Unless GWB picks someone on the left side of the real mainstream… and the conservatives let him get away with it, the Dems will definately fillibuster the next nominee. > > 1. They like being the whining victim party. > > 2. If a Dem president gets to pick a justice in the next 50 years, they want to be able to get him/her confirmed with only 50 votes themselves. > > On the other hand, they don’t really need the Pubs to pull the nucular trigger because they could do it themselves without the risk of being labeled hypocrites by their favored media. > > Surely there is a debate or two in there… Maybe I’m just confused as it’s early in the morning, but I can’t really tell what you’re saying. You’re saying that because the Democrats are unable (unwilling actually) to block Alito’s nomination that they will definitely filibuster the next nominee? We have no idea if there will be another nominee during this Presidential term. And how would their wanting to filibuster the next GOP nominee lead to your number two?? ---
**Author:** ![bizzwire](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/958977/32.png) [@bizzwire](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bizzwire)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2006, 12:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-lost-on-alito-what-next/342332/3 "2006-01-31T12:44:49Z")
> [@What the .... ?!?!](#): > > Unless GWB picks someone on the left side of the real mainstream… and the conservatives let him get away with it, the Dems will definately fillibuster the next nominee. > > 1. They like being the whining victim party. I expect to see this kind of shallow attitude and quotation on the aptly-named Yahoo message boards, and am disappointed to see it here. You call it “whining,” others might call it a disciplined political stance. They “whined” about the wisdom of Invading Iraq. They “whined” about trumped-up “proof” of WMDs. They “whined” about someone in the White House leaking the name of an undercover CIA operative for petty political revenge, and now they’re “whining” about a Supreme Court nominee who believes that the President has godlike powers. Do you actually like taking it in the caboose, or has your hatred of “them” trumped your desire for self-preservation? ---
**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:** [January 31, 2006, 12:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-lost-on-alito-what-next/342332/4 "2006-01-31T12:57:04Z")
[QUOTE=bizzwire] I expect to see this kind of shallow attitude and quotation on the aptly-named Yahoo message boards, and am disappointed to see it here. You call it “whining,” others might call it a disciplined political stance. [QUOTE] I call Teddy’s performance yesterday “Whining”. Did you hear it? ---
**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:** [January 31, 2006, 1:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-lost-on-alito-what-next/342332/5 "2006-01-31T13:00:09Z")
> [@Martin Hyde](#): > > And how would their wanting to filibuster the next GOP nominee lead to your number two?? If the rules are changed to prevent fillibusters on judicial nominees, then they could possibly put someone on the bench in the future who is lefter than otherwise. ---
**Author:** ![Martin\_Hyde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Martin\_Hyde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martin_Hyde)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2006, 1:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-lost-on-alito-what-next/342332/6 "2006-01-31T13:11:35Z")
> [@What the .... ?!?!](#): > > If the rules are changed to prevent fillibusters on judicial nominees, then they could possibly put someone on the bench in the future who is lefter than otherwise. Those rules aren’t going to be changed, Senate Republicans and Democrats came to an agreement that more or less precludes that from happening anytime soon imo. ---
**Author:** ![bizzwire](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/958977/32.png) [@bizzwire](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bizzwire)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2006, 1:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-lost-on-alito-what-next/342332/7 "2006-01-31T13:19:02Z")
[QUOTE=What the … !!!] [QUOTE=bizzwire] I expect to see this kind of shallow attitude and quotation on the aptly-named Yahoo message boards, and am disappointed to see it here. You call it “whining,” others might call it a disciplined political stance. > [@](#): > > I call Teddy’s performance yesterday “Whining”. Did you hear it? Only excerpts. You say potato, I say potatah… You seem to have ignored they rest of the quote, I notice. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2006, 1:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-lost-on-alito-what-next/342332/8 "2006-01-31T13:20:27Z")
> [@bizzwire](#): > > I expect to see this kind of shallow attitude and quotation on the aptly-named Yahoo message boards, and am disappointed to see it here. You call it “whining,” others might call it a disciplined political stance. > > They “whined” about the wisdom of Invading Iraq. They “whined” about trumped-up “proof” of WMDs. They “whined” about someone in the White House leaking the name of an undercover CIA operative for petty political revenge, and now they’re “whining” about a Supreme Court nominee who believes that the President has godlike powers. > > Do you actually like taking it in the caboose, or has your hatred of “them” trumped your desire for self-preservation? I’m not going to say that anyone is whining, but I will also point out that your act as though every correctly-reasoning person in the country agrees with you. The WMD issue is troubling, but I - and many others - believe a case can be made that even without the WMD issue on the table, it was the right thing to do to go into Iraq and take out Saddam. While it’s true that someone in the White House leaked the name, it wasn’t an official policy of the administration, and the person involved has been fired. And if this were only a failure of Republicans, I might worry – but because both Republicans and Democrats are willing to reveal classified information in order to further political gains, I cannot select one party over the other on this criteria. Samuel Alito does not believe the President should have Godlike powers. But I, and many others, share his belief that the President is THE Executive, unique among the three branches in that it’s the only one embodied by a single individual rather than a group. And of more interest to me: it appears that Judge Alito agrees with me concerning the value of interpreting the law based on what it says, rather than the “emnations” and “penumbras” method of what he’d like it to say. In short, this laundry list of doom you reel off, confidently expecting others to nod their heads at how awful it is… I read and think, “Good! Things are going in the right direction!” Nor am I alone. My advice would be to go have a cup of coffee with Pauline Kael. I bet you guys know some of the same people! ---
**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:** [January 31, 2006, 1:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-lost-on-alito-what-next/342332/9 "2006-01-31T13:21:17Z")
> [@bizzwire](#): > > I expect to see this kind of shallow attitude and quotation on the aptly-named Yahoo message boards, and am disappointed to see it here. You call it “whining,” others might call it a disciplined political stance. > > They “whined” about the wisdom of Invading Iraq. They “whined” about trumped-up “proof” of WMDs. They “whined” about someone in the White House leaking the name of an undercover CIA operative for petty political revenge, and now they’re “whining” about a Supreme Court nominee who believes that the President has godlike powers. > > Do you actually like taking it in the caboose, or has your hatred of “them” trumped your desire for self-preservation? No they whine after they vote for something when it is politically expediant. Oh ya, they got hood-winked, I forgot! “Hatred” and “self-preservation” … are you blind? ---
**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:** [January 31, 2006, 1:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-lost-on-alito-what-next/342332/10 "2006-01-31T13:27:36Z")
> [@What the .... ?!?!](#): > > Unless GWB picks someone on the left side of the real mainstream… and the conservatives let him get away with it, the Dems will definately fillibuster the next nominee. We’ve heard this before: [Sandra O’Connor Resigns - Democrats Will Find “Extraordinary Circumstances”](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=323677) > [@](#): > > I predict that the Democrats - specifically, the seven Democrats that signed the accord concerning judicial nominations - will find “extraordinary circumstances” in President Bush’s nominee, no matter who it is. Do Republicans never tire of being proven wrong? ---
**Author:** ![Gadarene](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e47c2d/32.png) [@Gadarene](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gadarene)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2006, 2:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-lost-on-alito-what-next/342332/11 "2006-01-31T14:21:55Z")
**Bricker:** > [@](#): > > While it’s true that someone in the White House leaked the name, it wasn’t an official policy of the administration, and the person involved has been fired. Awful conclusory, counselor. Do you know something about the Libby case and the Fitzgerald investigation that we don’t? ---
**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:** [January 31, 2006, 2:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-lost-on-alito-what-next/342332/12 "2006-01-31T14:38:56Z")
[QUOTE=bizzwire] [QUOTE=What the … !!!] > [@bizzwire](#): > > I expect to see this kind of shallow attitude and quotation on the aptly-named Yahoo message boards, and am disappointed to see it here. You call it “whining,” others might call it a disciplined political stance. > > Only excerpts. You say potato, I say potatah… You seem to have ignored they rest of the quote, I notice. Nope… I answered it separately. And I probably shouldn’t have suggested you were blind. Sorry. ---
**Author:** ![Hamlet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hamlet/32/2818_2.png) [@Hamlet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hamlet)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2006, 2:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-lost-on-alito-what-next/342332/13 "2006-01-31T14:39:37Z")
> [@Gadarene](#): > > **Bricker:** > Awful conclusory, counselor. Do you know something about the Libby case and the Fitzgerald investigation that we don’t? From his carefully worded reponse, I would guess that **Bricker** was referring to the leak about the NSA program rather than the Plame affair. Subtle differences like leaking (if done by a Democrat) potentially illegal and unconstitutional actions by a sitting presidents and attempts to smear the credibility of someone who had the audicity to speak out against the administration may be beyond his grasp, however. ---
**Author:** ![Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/spectre_of_pithecanthropus/32/12343_2.png) [@Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2006, 2:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-lost-on-alito-what-next/342332/14 "2006-01-31T14:43:44Z")
> [@bizzwire](#): > > You call it “whining,” others might call it a disciplined political stance. > > They “whined” about the wisdom of Invading Iraq. They “whined” about trumped-up “proof” of WMDs. They “whined” about someone in the White House leaking the name of an undercover CIA operative for petty political revenge, and now they’re “whining” about a Supreme Court nominee who believes that the President has godlike powers. “Whining” has simply become the favored term used by those who want to dismiss an opposing viewpoint as insignificant. I see this in just about every walk of life, not just politics. ---
**Author:** ![Gadarene](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e47c2d/32.png) [@Gadarene](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gadarene)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2006, 2:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-lost-on-alito-what-next/342332/15 "2006-01-31T14:43:59Z")
What makes you think he was talking about the NSA thing? **bizzwire’s** post, to which **Bricker** was responding, stated in relevant part: > [@](#): > > They “whined” about someone in the White House leaking the name of an undercover CIA operative for petty political revenge **Bricker** replied by saying: > [@](#): > > While it’s true that someone in the White House leaked the name, it wasn’t an official policy of the administration, and the person involved has been fired. It seems patently clear he’s talking about Plame and Libby. Although I’m not sure how he knows that (a) Libby leaked the name (if he did, and knowingly stated otherwise to the grand jury, he’s perjured himself), (b) Libby was the _only_ person who leaked the name (Fitzgerald’s investigation is still ongoing), and © it wasn’t an official policy of the administration (I think I’d have heard if this had been established). ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2006, 2:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-lost-on-alito-what-next/342332/16 "2006-01-31T14:47:46Z")
> [@What the .... ?!?!](#): > > You lost on Alito, what next? Rat poison in his tiramisu? > **[Why I'm not having dessert with Ann Coulter](https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=356136)** > > What a ridiculous bitch. So, it’s only a joke “for you in the media”. This means anyone else is free to take it as good advice? I’m looking for links now to more, but you have to love this gem: Is her time up yet? She’s gone from amusing and... ---
**Author:** ![bizzwire](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/958977/32.png) [@bizzwire](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bizzwire)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2006, 2:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-lost-on-alito-what-next/342332/17 "2006-01-31T14:48:48Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I’m not going to say that anyone is whining, but I will also point out that your act as though every correctly-reasoning person in the country agrees with you. If, by "every correctly-reasoning person in the country " you mean 48% of the electorate, I think you may be right. > [@](#): > > The WMD issue is troubling, but I - and many others - believe a case can be made that even without the WMD issue on the table, it was the right thing to do to go into Iraq and take out Saddam. At the risk of re-hashing what has been debated a thousand times already, the case for invasion was made on false and misleading claims. Post-hoc justifications such as “we had to take out Saddam” were raised only after the whiners pointed out the original claims were false. > [@](#): > > While it’s true that someone in the White House leaked the name, it wasn’t an official policy of the administration, and the person involved has been fired. The point is the President and his spokesperson insisted that the leak didn’t come from the White house. Of course, they might not have known, or thought to…I dunno…ask staffers if they were the source? > [@](#): > > In short, this laundry list of doom you reel off, confidently expecting others to nod their heads at how awful it is… I read and think, “Good! Things are going in the right direction!” > > Nor am I alone. Obviously not. The flip side of that is neither am I. Yet, those who share your values are stalwart, upight Americans, while those who don’t are “whiners?” What is this, third-grade? Your responses above demonstrate that there is indeed substance behind the issues I raised (well, with the exception of the Alito thing). ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2006, 2:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-lost-on-alito-what-next/342332/18 "2006-01-31T14:54:28Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > The WMD issue is troubling You find lying us into a war of aggression merely “troubling”? Wow. > [@](#): > > but I - and many others - believe a case can be made that even without the WMD issue on the table, it was the right thing to do to go into Iraq and take out Saddam. You - and many others - know as well as the Administration did that the majority of the country would never have supported going to war if that was presented as the reason. > [@](#): > > While it’s true that someone in the White House leaked the name, it wasn’t an official policy of the administration So what? They did it. Legal technicalities are simply irrelevant here. > [@](#): > > and the person involved has been fired Only one person? Really? Why, then, do you think Fitzgerald’s investigation is continuing? And why did it take the actual filing of legal charges to force Libby out, when doubtless Bush knew or should have known what he had done right from the start, years earlier, right when he promised the departure of “anyone involved”? Puh-leeze. > [@](#): > > And if this were only a failure of Republicans, I might worry – but because both Republicans and Democrats are willing to reveal classified information in order to further political gains, I cannot select one party over the other on this criteria. Cite for that? Explanation for why it isn’t yet another in the endless stream of partisan _tu quoques_ we see from your side? > [@](#): > > But I, and many others, share his belief that the President is THE Executive, unique among the three branches in that it’s the only one embodied by a single individual rather than a group. So what? We \*do \* have 3 branches, \*none \* of which is supreme. Alito’s views, which you seem to share based on your obsessive attempts to defend Bush’s illegal wiretapping, seem to be that the power to create law and interpret law is ultimately vested in the same branch which has the power to execute law. It’s remarkable that you don’t see any danger in that. > [@](#): > > And of more interest to me: it appears that Judge Alito agrees with me concerning the value of interpreting the law based on what it says, rather than the “emnations” and “penumbras” method of what he’d like it to say. Never mind that neither you nor he nor anyone else has been able to establish that there is any single, agreeable way to decide “what the law says” that is independent of “what the reader would like it to say”. Unless you can make even a start at supporting that one, and you never have, then your constant repetition of it can be dismissed as simple obstinacy. > [@](#): > > In short, this laundry list of doom you reel off, confidently expecting others to nod their heads at how awful it is… I read and think, “Good! Things are going in the right direction!” > > Nor am I alone. Many Frenchmen cheered Napoleon’s declaration of the Empire, as well. Were they right? ---
**Author:** ![Hamlet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hamlet/32/2818_2.png) [@Hamlet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hamlet)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2006, 2:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-lost-on-alito-what-next/342332/19 "2006-01-31T14:58:32Z")
> [@Gadarene](#): > > What makes you think he was talking about the NSA thing? > > It seems patently clear he’s talking about Plame and Libby. Although I’m not sure how he knows that (a) Libby leaked the name (if he did, and knowingly stated otherwise to the grand jury, he’s perjured himself), (b) Libby was the _only_ person who leaked the name (Fitzgerald’s investigation is still ongoing), and (c) it wasn’t an official policy of the administration (I think I’d have heard if this had been established). It’s probably a misunderstanding on my part. I thought you were referring, in part, to his statement: > [@Bricker](#): > > And if this were only a failure of Republicans, I might worry – but because both Republicans and Democrats are willing to reveal classified information in order to further political gains, I cannot select one party over the other on this criteria. On review, however, it seems you were concerned solely with **Bricker’s** assertions regarding the Plame leak, and I apologize. ---
**Author:** ![Hamlet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hamlet/32/2818_2.png) [@Hamlet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hamlet)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2006, 3:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-lost-on-alito-what-next/342332/20 "2006-01-31T15:03:58Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > You - and many others - know as well as the Administration did that the majority of the country would never have supported going to war if that was presented as the reason. More importantly, I think, invading a foreign sovereign for the purpose of affecting regime change violates UN Charter, Article 2(4). The administration needed to build up the idea of self defense and imminent threat to avoid that issue. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-lost-on-alito-what-next/342332.md?page=2)