MAKE MY DAY

Great minds think alike.

Apparently, warped, frustrated minds think alike, too.

In terms of the Samuel Alito nomination, John Kerry and the New York Times Editorial Board are on the same page.

On Thursday, the Times' lead editorial, "Senators in Need of a Spine," called for Senate Democrats to filibuster Judge Alito. The piece seems like a compilation of ramblings overheard at Barbra Streisand's last dinner party.

(Excerpts)Judge Samuel Alito Jr., whose entire history suggests that he holds extreme views about the expansive powers of the presidency and the limited role of Congress, will almost certainly be a Supreme Court justice soon. His elevation will come courtesy of a president whose grandiose vision of his own powers threatens to undermine the nation's basic philosophy of government — and a Senate that seems eager to cooperate by rolling over and playing dead.

It is hard to imagine a moment when it would be more appropriate for senators to fight for a principle. Even a losing battle would draw the public's attention to the import of this nomination.

Good Lord, these libs are really cracking up.

This "Bush is overthrowing the government" crud is crazy. I agree with the notion that a filibuster fight would draw the public's attention. However, that attention will be focused on the Dems' implosion.

The Dems and the Leftist organizations failed to convince Americans that Alito is demonic and a danger to democracy. They tried to Bork him and they crashed and burned.

Explain to me how a filibuster battle would change the American people's opinion of Alito. The Dems verbally crucified the man and his popularity grew. Americans weren't frightened by the thought of Justice Alito, nor did they heed the Dems' silly warnings of dire consequences for the country with Alito on the Court.
...There was nothing that Judge Alito said in his hearings that gave any comfort to those of us who wonder whether the new Roberts court will follow precedent and continue to affirm, for instance, that a man the president labels an "unlawful enemy combatant" has the basic right to challenge the government's ability to hold him in detention forever without explanation. His much-quoted statement that the president is not above the law is meaningless unless he also believes that the law requires the chief executive to defer to Congress and the courts.

Judge Alito's refusal to even pretend to sound like a moderate was telling because it would have cost him so little. Chief Justice John Roberts Jr., who was far more skillful at appearing mainstream at the hearings, has already given indications that whatever he said about the limits of executive power when he was questioned by the Senate has little practical impact on how he will rule now that he has a lifetime appointment.

Senate Democrats, who presented a united front against the nomination of Judge Alito in the Judiciary Committee, seem unwilling to risk the public criticism that might come with a filibuster — particularly since there is very little chance it would work. Judge Alito's supporters would almost certainly be able to muster the 60 senators necessary to put the nomination to a final vote.

Why would there be "public criticism" with a filibuster attempt?

Simple.
Americans support Judge Alito because he is clearly qualified. Mainstream America would view a filibuster as just more obstruction from the radical Left. It would push the Dems further into their ultra-liberal corner.

The people voted Bush into office knowing that he would likely have the opportunity to fill Supreme Court vacancies. The President is fulfilling his campaign promise to select nominees that do not intend to legislate from the bench. He vowed to choose individuals that would respect the separation of powers and he has.

Americans are happy with the Alito nomination. Dragging the Senate vote out with a filibuster stunt that is guaranteed to be unsuccessful would not be a principled move by the Dems. It would be another tactical error, highlighting their weakness.
A filibuster is a radical tool. It's easy to see why Democrats are frightened of it. But from our perspective, there are some things far more frightening. One of them is Samuel Alito on the Supreme Court.

The libs keep plugging away with the fear mongering.

Note to the libs: IT DOESN'T WORK!

On Thursday, John Kerry took a cue from the Times editorial. Big mistake.
He solidified his image as an out of the mainstream extremist by calling for his fellow Dems to join him in the filibuster of the Alito nomination.

Even the Times had to admit that Kerry's rallying cry fell on deaf ears.

David D. Kirkpatrick was assigned the difficult task of administering a dose of reality to the desperate libs in his article "Kerry Urges Alito Filibuster, but His Reception is Cool."

Kirkpatrick writes:

Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts could not attend the Senate debate on the Supreme Court nomination of Judge Samuel A. Alito Jr. on Thursday. He was in Davos, Switzerland, mingling with international business and political leaders at the World Economic Forum.

But late Thursday afternoon, Mr. Kerry began calling fellow Democratic senators in a quixotic, last-minute effort for a filibuster to stop the nomination.

Democrats cringed and Republicans jeered at the awkwardness of his gesture, which almost no one in the Senate expects to succeed.

"God bless John Kerry," said Don Stewart, a spokesman for Senator John Cornyn, a Texas Republican on the Judiciary Committee. "He just cinched this whole nomination. With Senator Kerry, it is Christmas every day."

Merry Christmas! God bless us, everyone!

Steve Schmidt, a White House spokesman working on the nomination, said Mr. Kerry's move "says a lot less about Alito than it does about the Iowa primary in 2008," suggesting that Mr. Kerry, who lost the presidential race in 2004, was playing to his party's liberal base in a bid to recapture its nomination.

That was my reaction. Kerry knows he has to out-lib the other libs in the primaries if he has any hope of getting the nomination again.
Senator Harry Reid, the Democratic leader, sounded almost apologetic about Mr. Kerry's statements.

"No one can complain on this matter that there hasn't been sufficient time to talk about Judge Alito, pro and con," Mr. Reid said on the Senate floor. "I hope that this matter will be resolved without too much more talking."

Reid's been doing a lot of apologizing lately. I guess he's one of the Dems that the Times believes lacks a spine.
Mr. Kerry's call for a filibuster, an effort to stop confirmation by refusing to close debate and hold a vote, was joined by his fellow Democratic senator from Massachusetts, Edward M. Kennedy.

Wow. What a surprise!
...Mr. Kerry offered an explanation for his position in a post on a liberal blog, the Daily Kos.

"People can say all they want that 'elections have consequences,' " he wrote. "Trust me, more than anyone I understand that. But that seems like an awfully convoluted rationale for me to stay silent about Judge Alito's nomination."

Mr. Kerry was celebrated by leaders of the coalition of liberal groups opposing Judge Alito's nomination.

"Senator John Kerry has called for a filibuster of the Alito nomination, heeding your calls to do everything possible to defeat it," People for the American Way cheered in an e-mail message to its supporters.

There is no question that Kerry has definitely jumped the mainstream swimming shark. He has given up on the moderate act that he tried to pull off in the 2004 election.
Kerry has fallen so far since he lost to President Bush. It really has been quite dramatic. He's fallen so fast and hard, like an anvil on the coyote. His pandering to the likes of Daily Kos and People for the American Way is pathetic.

Kerry is morphing into Dennis Kucinich, albeit a taller version.Mr. Kennedy said a filibuster might help focus attention on the nomination and give its opponents a last chance to sway the public and the Senate.

He acknowledged some "divisions in the caucus" over the advisability of a filibuster, but he said the effort had the support of a few others, including Senator Richard J. Durbin of Illinois, the Democratic whip.

A spokesman for Mr. Durbin confirmed that he would vote against closing debate.

It's amazing how the once stauch pro-lifer and moderate Durbin has swung to the Left's outer limits.

Why, Little Dick? Why?
"It is an uphill climb at this point," Mr. Kennedy said of a filibuster. "But it is achievable."

No, it's not achievable.
...Mr. Kerry has been rallying his supporters against the nomination for weeks in mass e-mail messages and on his Web site.

Here's a sample of one those e-mail messages:
If you want to understand why Americans don't want Judge Alito on the Supreme Court, just take a look at his record. It paints a disturbing picture.

When it comes to standing up to the abuse of executive power and protecting our right to privacy, he barely has a record. Judge Alito refused to hold the government accountable for excessive force when an unarmed boy was shot and killed, or when an innocent 10 year old girl was strip-searched.

In a speech in 2000, Judge Alito even endorsed a theory suggesting that independent agencies like the Consumer Product Safety Commission, which holds companies responsible for making products safe for kids, and the Securities and Exchange Commission, which stands up to corporate abusers like Enron, are unconstitutional infringements on the President's power.

With this record, how can we expect Alito to stand up to the President when he breaks the law to eavesdrop on American citizens or authorizes the torture of detainees?

Judge Alito's record on civil rights is no better. He saw no legitimate question of discrimination in allowing an all-white jury to sentence a black man to death for killing a white man. His own colleagues have criticized him for ignoring employees' rights to be free from job discrimination. Judge Alito's clear bias is to keep victims of discrimination out of the court system - and to rule in favor of corporate interests.
Nuts, isn't it?

Absolutely nuts!
And when the Democratic caucus met Wednesday to discuss the nomination, he gave an impassioned plea that the party should try to stage a filibuster even if it failed, people present said, speaking only if granted anonymity because the meeting was private. Some senators at the meeting said an unsuccessful filibuster would leave the party weakened for future battles.

...In the end the party leaders were not persuaded by Mr. Kerry's appeal.

I guess the electrifying Kerry's appeal wasn't "impassioned" enough.
Judge Alito's confirmation was looking increasingly certain Thursday. Two more Democrats, Senator Tim Johnson of South Dakota and Senator Robert C. Byrd of West Virginia, said they would break party ranks to vote for confirmation.

Mr. Byrd said his constituents had told him they were "appalled" by the harsh questioning Judge Alito received from the Senate Judiciary Committee at his confirmation hearings, calling them "an outrage and a disgrace."

Byrd is running scared. With a tough election ahead, he knows he actually has to listen to his constituents on this one.
...Shortly after 7 p.m. [Thursday], Mr. Kerry issued a statement saying, "Judge Alito's confirmation would be an ideological coup on the Supreme Court."

"The president has every right to nominate Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court," Mr. Kerry said. "It's our right and our responsibility to oppose him vigorously."

A few moments later, April Boyd, a spokeswoman for Mr. Kerry, sent a postscript saying that "as things played out over the course of the day today" he had decided to fly home. "Kerry will be back in Washington tomorrow," Ms. Boyd said.

Maybe Kerry's supporters at Daily Kos and People for the American Way begged their knight in shining armor to return and report for duty.

In a way, I hope the Dems do try to filibuster Alito.

As Senator George Allen said, "My reaction is, if they move forward with such a filibuster, 'Make my day.' We will enjoy pulling the constitutional trigger to allow Judge Alito a fair up-or-down vote."