Hardball
Thursday, January 12, 2006
So the Senate Judiciary Committee is wrapping up the hearings for Judge Samuel Alito's nomination for the Supreme Court. I enjoy listening to them because I like the way Chairman Arlen Specter works and I also respect the work of Senator Patrick Leahy.
I'm finding myself more and more on the side of the Democrats in these hearings. The position Judge Alito would be assuming is a crucial one in the Supreme Court and - let us not forget - it's a lifetime appointment. I guess we need to examine each side. The Republicans definitely have an agenda; they're throwing the softball questions because they feel that Judge Alito is going to be on "their side" when an issue goes to court so it's in their best interest to make sure he agrees with them. The Democrats are suspicious of Judge Alito because we WAS nominated by a member of the other party. They're trying to discover where he disagrees with them by asking the hardball questions. Each side has an agenda, you see?
I don't know enough about his body of work to have an opinion myself. Most of what I've heard is apocryphal so I'm not even sure of the source. I do know this: listening to pieces of the hearings on NPR, I respect the fact that he's a very intelligent man and a very competent judge. I don't think there can be any dispute on that matter. The big question, and the one that only time will answer, is how he will rule if he's on the bench.
I'm finding myself more and more on the side of the Democrats in these hearings. The position Judge Alito would be assuming is a crucial one in the Supreme Court and - let us not forget - it's a lifetime appointment. I guess we need to examine each side. The Republicans definitely have an agenda; they're throwing the softball questions because they feel that Judge Alito is going to be on "their side" when an issue goes to court so it's in their best interest to make sure he agrees with them. The Democrats are suspicious of Judge Alito because we WAS nominated by a member of the other party. They're trying to discover where he disagrees with them by asking the hardball questions. Each side has an agenda, you see?
I don't know enough about his body of work to have an opinion myself. Most of what I've heard is apocryphal so I'm not even sure of the source. I do know this: listening to pieces of the hearings on NPR, I respect the fact that he's a very intelligent man and a very competent judge. I don't think there can be any dispute on that matter. The big question, and the one that only time will answer, is how he will rule if he's on the bench.
posted by Burton at 2:57 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home