Thursday, January 12, 2006


I was talking with Prof. Justice last night, and he noted an important point, which echoed something I believe David Corn wrote yesterday, though in a different vein. The Democrats messed up, if they were trying to bring anything substantial against Alito: They left the really good questions and questioners, such as Russ Feingold, for the end, and put Kennedy and Schumer up the first couple of days.

This was a mistake: By the time Kennedy and Schumer were done with their partisan rants, everyone had made up their mind that there was little substance against Alito and he was perfectly qualified to be a Supreme Court Justice, unless they thought the opposite to start. Nobody was convinced by either of those Senators. Had Feingold or someone similar been up first, they might have placed doubt with good questions to start. As that didn't happen, it would require a filibuster to stop Alito, and that would be a big tactical mistake for Democrats, which I think they recognize.

Sorry for the light blogging today, Nephtuli & I had a wonderful debate with DovBear at DB's. Read this post first, then see DB's, then read the comments there. Later I may post some of the highlights.

Technorati tags: , , , , , .


  1. NOOOO! and of course alren specter wasn ot being partisan at all! not in the slightest - he was a fair and partial not one sided arbitrator who did not get adversarial with senator kennedy when he asked a simple question!

    double standatrd my friwend, you see what you want to see and block out everything else. who can blame anyone for being so frustrated when they get stonewalled and no direct answers to simple questions?

  2. Examples?

    I'm not saying that the Republicans weren't partisan in favor of Alito. They were. As I pointed out by you (or DovBear), there is a far cry between below-the-belt partisan attacks and partisan defenses on merits.