Yeah, really. Scalito is getting to the point where he can't ever lie convincingly anymore. He lied to the senate when he was confirmed as a federal judge about the Vanguard issues, and now he's trying to get everyone to believe his words of 20 years ago were all to suck up for a promotion. Like he's trying to get now ... so, was he lying then, or is he lying now?
Supreme Court nominee Samuel A. Alito Jr. yesterday tried to tamp down criticisms of several past statements -- including his assertion that the Constitution does not protect the right to abortion -- by saying they were personal views or an advocate's work and not necessarily indications of how he might rule if confirmed, according to a key senator who quizzed him for more than an hour.
Alito's effort to distance himself from the recently disclosed 1985 documents came as liberal groups said the writings show him to be much more conservative than the newly confirmed chief justice, John G. Roberts Jr. Alito's explanation was meant to lessen the documents' impact, but it may expose him to accusations of insincerity or irresolution, advocates said.
Insincerity? Yeah, like rabbit dies and you're only a little bit pregnant. So, Sammy, when did you stop beating your wife? hmmmm...?
Oh, but now we have features of coming attractions...
Several conservative groups, meanwhile, plan a major push beginning Monday to portray Alito's opponents as anti-God. Talking points for the effort, which will involve ads and grass-roots organizations, were laid out in a strategy memo by Grassfire.org, which opposes abortion and same-sex marriage. Alito's opponents are united by "an agenda to purge any and all references to religion from our public life," the memo says.
The coalition, which includes the Judicial Confirmation Network, plans to send 2.3 million e-mails on the subject and hopes to "flood Senate offices with letters, faxes and phone calls." It will be joined in the effort by Fidelis, a Roman Catholic organization that describes itself as "pro-life, pro-family and pro-religious liberty."
Ah, the American Taliban goes to Washington. All we need to see is the Concerned Women for America show up at the Senate in Burquas, and we'll be on the Theocratic Tracks ... come to think of it, seeing them in Burquas...is that really such a bad thing?
posted by Jo Fish on 12.02.05 at 10:38 PM
Comments:
"Several conservative groups, meanwhile, plan a major push beginning Monday to portray Alito's opponents as anti-God. Talking points for the effort, which will involve ads and grass-roots organizations, were laid out in a strategy memo by Grassfire.org, which opposes abortion and same-sex marriage. Alito's opponents are united by "an agenda to purge any and all references to religion from our public life," the memo says."
Uh, as opposed to an effort to cram their religion down my throat? Seems to me that our country has gone way overboard to ensure that religion comes under NO real challenges. We must be 'religously correct' in this country. It is viewed as impolite to ask tough questions, hence we have a country that is pretty gullible to any idea that seems to make sense to the individual. Of course, you should have the right to believe whatever you want. HOWEVER, those beliefs aren't worth much if they can't pass a bullshit detector!!! By the way, at least don't try to cover as broad a swath as possible by saying 'God,' be specific (and honest) of exactly what you mean by God. Which god, whose god, how many gods? HOW DO YOU KNOW YOU HAVE THE RIGHT GOD? What's your certain evidence for the certainity of you're beliefs? How sceptical have you been? Is it a virtue to accept you're beliefs on faith alone? And why is that a virtue? And when it comes to Alito, there should be strong opposition to him IF he intends to subvert the First Admendment by advancing his religous beliefs at the expense of mine!!!
