Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Usually Lurkin
If Ginsburg was approved by such a majority because she answered in a direct manner, and you draw no distinction between the directness of Ginsburg's and Alito's answers, how do you predict 25-30 votes less for Alito?
|
this spot is a very critical one, it is the swing vote on this court. ginsburg wasn't near as pivital.
and it's an election year...
Quote:
|
You said earlier that a party line vote on Alito would be "business as usual" for Washington, that nothing has changed in 50 years. The votes on Ginsburg and Breyer prove otherwise.
|
no, I said the committee hearings were "business as usual". didn't mention anything about a "party line vote".
Quote:
here's some others. Whatever you want to read of this list, 22 votes against, or 35 votes against such qualified candidates as Alito and Roberts is not the norm.
Roberts 78-22
Thomas was 52-48
Kennedy was 97-0
Bork was Borked 42-58
Scalia was 98-0
O'Connor was 99-0
Stevens was 98-0
Rehnquist was 68-26
|
IMO alito is qualified, he was nominated by the pres and unless there is a critical flaw, a compelling reason, the senate should defer to the pres's selection and confirm.
he isn't what I want to see on the court tho. he is a very narrow thinker in many ways, and he's chosen the wrong course on a couple of occasions. the failure to recuse himself on the vanguard case, after he assured the confirmation committee that he would, reveal a defect IMO. the pandering in his job applications.
so the bottom line is to get similar votes as rehnquist might be about as good as alito (and the pres) should hope for.