History Forum / General / British History / January 2006

"Animal Senate"

"I think that this situation absolutely requires a really futile and stupid
gesture be done on somebody's part," said Eric "Otter" Stratton in the
classic 1978 film "Animal House."  Today's lead editorial in the New York
Times advocates just such an approach. The "situation" in this picture is
the imminent confirmation of Justice-designate Samuel Alito:

Hilarious! -- DSH
---------------------------------------------------------

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. . . .

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.

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 Times is right about one thing, though: If there is to be a really
futile and stupid gesture, Senate Democrats are just the guys to do it. Here
are some of the highlights of the Democrats' floor speeches in opposition to
Alito's nomination:

Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York: "Judge Alito also holds a harshly limited
view of what the government can or should do to help ordinary Americans.
Judge Alito said it all in 1986, when he was a young lawyer in the Reagan
administration. He wrote that in his estimation, it is not the role of the
federal government to protect the health, safety and welfare of the American
people. Well, I guess that explains the inept, slow and dangerous response
to Hurricane Katrina."

Does Mrs. Clinton really think Alito's memo had any influence on
disaster-response policy 19 years later? Nah, this is base-baiting, like her
Martin Luther King Day remarks. Anticipating a presidential run in 2008, she
is desperately trying to ensure that black Americans remain on the
Democratic plantation.

Sen. John Kerry* of Massachusetts complained that Alito was nominated
because "the president was under fire from his conservative base for
nominating Harriet Miers, a woman whose judicial philosophy they mercifully
attacked."

The Democrats' adopting Miers as a liberal martyr -- and the false claim
that conservative opponents of her nomination objected to her on grounds of
"judicial philosophy" rather than qualifications -- was a frequent theme.
But we cite the Kerry quote for another reason: Is there any doubt that if
President Bush said "mercifully" when he meant "mercilessly," the media
would mercilessly make fun of him for his inability to speak?

Hilarious!  Yep,  Double Standard. -- DSH

The most appalling quote, though, came from Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont,
ranking Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, opening this morning's session:
"This is a time of unprecedented governmental intrusion into the lives of
ordinary Americans.  The president has attempted to justify secret,
warrantless wiretapping of Americans, and the evasion of legal bans against
torture, and the detention of American citizens without due process of law."

Leahy apparently regards Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and Jose Padilla as
"ordinary Americans." The rest of us are lucky he has only one vote.

Indeed. -- DSH

Two Democrats -- Tim Johnson of South Dakota and Robert Byrd of West
Virginia -- joined Nebraska's Ben Nelson today in announcing that they'll
back Alito. (We've been regularly updating our tally here.) At this writing
four Republicans -- Ted Stevens of Alaska, Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe
of Maine, and Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island -- are officially unannounced,
though Stevens has no history of voting against Republican judicial nominees
and thus is a probable "yes."

It would be amusing if Alito were approved 59-41, with the 41st "no"
vote -- enough to make the Angry Left livid, by creating the illusion that a
filibuster was possible -- coming from Chafee or one of the other liberal
Republicans."

"* Are we crazy, or does that name sound vaguely familiar?"

James Taranto
The WSJ
---------------------------------

DSH