Thursday, January 12, 2006

Sam Alito

I had a chance yesterday afternoon to listen to the Alito hearings on NPR. Now I have to say up front I didn't care a whit about Roberts and after listening to the Robert's hearings, I cared even less. I put him in the old tradition of just blindly confirming the president's choice, which I generally support (with the exception of Bork).

Ailto said some things that really bothered me and, this was a surprise. I expected not to care, especially after a long soliloquy by Sen. Graham about what a decent guy he is. I even cringed a little at Shumer's no-nonsense cross-exam.

OTOH, he's clearly lying about the CAP thing. He might not want to admit it, but he purposely put that on a job application knowing the political sympathies of his bosses and is now pretending not to remember anything about it. It's clearly a lie. I compare this to Ginsburg who, while a flawed candidate in a hostile Senate, stepped up and owned her words.

I'm not saying that Alito is a bigot, or misogynist or anything, I don't really know and am willing to take the word of the many people who wrote in on his behalf that he is not.

That's not the point.

The point is either, he's lying and I don't like government officials to start their careers with a lie, or he's a fool. And I don't think he's a fool.

Also, he is painting a picture of himself as someone who is a "pleaser", i.e. who will tailor his opinions (like CAP) to get a job. The only conclusion I can reach from the man's own defense is that he'll gladly say things he doesn't believe in to get a job.

While this is common, I expect a higher standard of ethics from a SCJ. I find I have gone from not caring to, very concerned.



(non-sequetor: I've composed a song about Sam sung to the tune of Mona Lisa. I will not list it here, but every time I hear his name I start to sing the damn thing)

1 comment:

Brian Dunbar said...

Durned if you do, durned if you don't?

If he does come clean and tell them exactly where he stands and so on ... would he still get the job? Yes, the Republicans have a majority vote but could enough pressure be put on the middle-of-the-road guys to make a diff?

I dunno - politics is fun to watch but I'm no pundit.

Also - it's the job of a judge to interpret the law and not to interject his own opinion into the process, no? To the extent this is possible (and an intelligent guy should be able to do this) then his opinions on this or that are irrelevent.