.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

John Adams Blog

The blog of The Antient and Honourable John Adams Society, Minnesota's Conservative Debating Society www.johnadamssociety.org

Monday, November 21, 2005

How They'll Go After Alito

It seems that the Supreme Court issue that concerns Liberals most - keeping abortions legal, easy, and funded by taxpayers - is not one on which they feel they can win elections, nor one on which they believe they can defeat Alito. It makes sense - the vast majority of Americans have a position to the right of elected Democrats on abortion, and half or more are completely opposed to abortion. So what will their strategery be? I believe there is a chapter in the Democratic Party's political strategy handbook called "When All Else Fails, Try Racism."

Joe Biden may have been floating a Democratic trial balloon yesterday when he said the following: "The part that jeopardizes it (Alito's nomination) more is his quotes in there saying that he had strong disagreement with the Warren Court particularly on reapportionment, one man, one vote...The fact that he questioned abortion and the idea of quotas is one thing. The fact that he questioned the idea of the legitimacy of the reapportionment decisions of the Warren Court is even something well beyond that...If he really believes that reapportionment is a questionable decision that is, the idea of Baker v. Carr, one man, one vote, then clearly, clearly, you'll find a lot of people, including me, willing to do whatever they can to keep him off the court. ... That would include a filibuster, if need be..."

My impression is that Alito's disagreement likely had to do with the issue of federal control over state or local matters, but surely that won't stop the Democrats. Instead, I suspect they're trying to determine if they can claim Alito is opposed to "one man, one vote" and use this to rekindle some of the disenfranchisement (whatever that is) hysteria they generated following their failed 2000 and 2004 election efforts when they claimed the Republicans were preventing minorities (blacks) from voting. I mean, who could be opposed to one man, one vote? You'd have to be a racist right? Well surely Republicans were when they stole the election in 2000; they showed it again when they prevented blacks in Ohio from voting in 2004, and now they want to appoint Alito to the Supreme Court to further ensure their ability to disenfranchise black voters for years to come.

Maybe they won't get any traction, but you can believe that Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, and a whole lot of Dems are out there right now waiting for marching orders, practicing the pronunciationion of the word "reapportionment" and looking for an opportunity to throw a white sheet over the Alito nomination.

Blogger Scribbler de Stebbing said...

Disenfranchisement. I believe this refers to the practice of not allowing blacks to own McDonald's, particularly in Florida, I'm fairly certain.

9:19 AM, November 22, 2005  
Blogger Harsh Pencil said...

The market still puts Alito being confirmed at 86% probability. (A security which pays one dollar if he is confirmed is selling for 86 cents.) This price has moved very little in the last two weeks.

3:37 PM, November 22, 2005  

Post a Comment