Alito nomination is huge defeat for Democrats...

[kentuck]

It's too bad that we cannot read history until it has happened. But, we are making progress if we consider that when Clarence Thomas was nominated, we had 11 Democrats that voted for him. Eleven Democrats voted for Clarence Thomas. He won 52-48.

And now, we are Chapter 2 of the same story. This time it is Sam Alito. No less "conservative" or radical than Clarence Thomas, we have more Democrats lining up to support this "decent and honest" man who shammed his way thru the hearings.

We have no choice but to pick ourselves up, dust ourselves off, and continue the fight. Yes, we can fight it to the end but the end does not look good. When 8 Democrats say they will not vote to filibuster, the battle is lost, because Republicans never betray their Party in such numbers. Never.

[H2O Man]

1. Alito

is worse than Thomas. He is worse than Bork.

[cali]

8. No he's not.

Look, I don't want Alito on the court, but it's absurd to claim he's worse than bork and thomas. Bork was/is nuts and had no judicial temperment. He's more extreme than Alito. Thomas was/is, quite simply, unqualified to sit on the SC. Alito may turn out to be a nightmare, and he may be better than we expect. I don't have high hopes, but I have read quite a few of his opinions/dissents. Are we turning him into more of a bogeyman than he really is? I hope so.

[kentuck]

11. But is it just about Alito ?

Or is it about an opposition Party that refused to stand up to the usurpers and fascists, when they had the opportunity. It's not just about Alito, in my opinion. There is much more at stake. We blew it!

[H2O Man]

18. I respectfully disagree.

While you are certainly entitled to your opinion, I think that it is easy to make the case that Alito is worse than Thomas or Bork. I do not make statements like that for fun, and am not unprepared to back them up.

Thomas is a conservative, but not more conservative than Alito. It would be accurate to say that they are at about the same place on the liberal-conservative scale. Most of their views are fairly similar. The only significant difference between them is that Thomas is, intellectually speaking, a bump on a log. He is without question the least capable of the justices intellectually. He is Scalia's side-kick, nothing more. Alito is a very intelligent person, who is very capable of advocating his agenda. Thus, I think an intelligent conservative, who is able to make legal arguments that could sway centrist votes, is more dangerous than Thomas.

Bork was certainly right-wing, and an extremist. By no coincidence, he "was/is" Alito's hero and role model. A significant difference between the two has to do with their respective opinion on the concept of the separation of powers, and the idea of an imperial presidency. Bork's role in the case of the Nixon presidency was used against him, because he stayed on after others had left, and participated in the "defense" of the wounded president. Yet Bork had communicated his concerns about an out-of-control president to several others, including a couple who resigned. To be fair, it should be noted that Bork's actions were largely due to his concerns about damage being done to the presidency as an institution, rather than Nixon as an individual. Alito believes in a presidency that is not held in check by the Constitution's balance of powers. Thus, while their social and cultural beliefs are about equally "extreme" right-wing, Alito's beliefs on the power of the presidency make him, in my opinion, worse.

Now, if you could be so kind as to back up your calling me "absurd" for holding the opinion I do, I will listen with an open mind. I hope that you can do better than "and he may be better than we expect," which is mere speculation, and hardly qualifies as worthy of discussion.

[rodeodance]

2. it ain't gonna be pretty come Monday.

[acmejack]

3. When these people come up for reelection and ask for our support

we must consider their tired old canard; "Elections have consequences!" I for one, am prepared to ensure my funds go to candidates committed to fighting the good fight, standing up for the little guy, more Bernie Sanders types. No more business as usual in my politics, I have been betrayed for the last time, no more sellouts, I demand accountability.

[no_hypocrisy]

9. Assuming there will be viable alternative dems running in the

primary who can overcome the incumbency and who will potentially be more democratic . . .

[cali]

10. Sure, let's replace

Ben Nelson with a Bernie type. Not likely. There are no more than 2 or three states where a bernie style pol could be elected. I consider myself lucky to live in one of them.

[acmejack]

13. OK, I'll just give up then.

[MoonRiver]

16. I'm with you jack.

I will probably still drag my arse to the polls and vote Dem, but my money won't be in the DNC coffer anymore. There are a lot of liberal causes needing my money, and that are frankly doing much more good than our so called Democratic leadership.

on edit: My post is assuming that Dems don't filibuster Alito. The ones that try (if any try, and by that I mean standing up on the Senate floor and calling for a filibuster, not just spinning that they will), whether they succeed or not, will have my respect. But if they all just roll over, I won't get over it. Not again.

[abluelady]

17. I Agree.

Right now I'm in the process of thinking about my giving budget. It sure as hell won't be going to the DNC or the Democratic party in my state. I have pretty much decided it is all going to causes, soup kitchens, planned parenthood, food banks, etc. At least they stay with their program.

[MoonRiver]

19. After selection 2000 my husband and I gave all our earmarked donation $s

to the DNC and Democrats. We neglected causes we hold very dear, such as the Humane Society and Amnesty International. I actually feel guilty about that. Last year we gave proportionally more to everything not political. It felt really good to know our money might actually be doing some good.

[kentuck]

20. Cut off their money...

and they will find their voices.

[AbbyR]

24. When this is all over...

I'm making a list of every senator and how they voted both on the nomination and on the filibuster. If they did not both vote against the man and to support the filibuster, they get nothing from me. If they DID stand up for me in this fight, I will make at least a small contribution to their reelection campaign, no matter where they are located. I think we all need to let them know, when this is over, that we were watching and will back up our beliefs.

I will see Pryor's father next month, and will question him about his son's actions.

[izzie]

4. Who else would a Right wing GOP President put in?

We all know he is looking at Party and not our country. We saw that when he took office.

[NJCher]

5. sorry, I don 't mean to spam your thread but

I got this in my email box this a.m. and regardless of what is said, I'm going to call call call this weekend and Monday.

Hi Friends,
BECAUSE OF YOUR PHONE CALLS, EMAILS and FAXES (and nothing else) we went from Zero to 12 Supporters in 24 hours, including Dianne Feinstein , who insisted she wouldn't support a filibuster just yesterday!!
Momentum is picking up; don't stop just because of the weekend, we don't have time. Here's what we can do:

Keep calling the Senators who are undecided or opposed to a filibuster. You can call their DC office all weekend and leave polite but firm voicemails urging the Senators to support Kerry's filibuster. When offices open on Monday 9 a.m. ET, make another round of calls. (not sure about toll-free switchboard on weekends; use cell phones for free direct calls.

Call the DNC (202-863-8000) and the DSCC (202-224-2447) and tell

them your 2006 contributions will depend on the success of the Alito filibuster.


DO NOT LISTEN to the media, and this includes, unfortunately, NPR and even Progressive Radio (the hosts, not the callers; apparently the callers are talking up filibuster and the hosts are laughing at them...). The Media has an agenda and no clue about the real story and YOUR agenda.

DON'T do the math! Just make the effort. Remember, we have succeeded in re-framing the Cloture vote on Monday. We have forced Senators to take a position, and some are taking the challenge to challenge the others. Hey, it's way more than we had yesterday...

Thank you!
Love,
Erica

CALL THESE PEOPLE FIRST:

SENATORS WHO PROBABLY OPPOSE FILIBUSTER (but likely against Alito) (Remember, Feinstein was in this group earlier!!)

Mark Pryor (D- AR), 202-224-2353
Ken Salazar (D- CO) , 202-224-5852
Joseph R. Biden, Jr. (D- DE) , 202-224-5042
Bill Nelson (D- FL), 202-224-5274
Daniel K. Akaka (D- HI) (1,), 202-224-6361
Mary Landrieu (D- LA) (1,), 202-224-5824
Byron L. Dorgan (D- ND) (1,), 202-224-2551
Kent Conrad (D- ND) (1,), 202-224-2043
Olympia Snowe (R- ME) (1,), 202-224-5344

CALL SECOND:
SENATORS WHO HAVE NOT DECLARED FILIBUSTER POSITION (will probably vote no on Alito):

Blanche Lambert Lincoln (D- AR), 202-224-4843
Joseph I. Lieberman (D- CT), 202-224-4041
Thomas R. Carper (D- DE), 202-224-2441
Daniel K. Inouye (D- HI), 202-224-3934
Tom Harkin (D- IA), 202-224-3254
Barack Obama (D- IL), 202-224-2854
Evan Bayh (D- IN), 202-224-5623
Barbara A. Mikulski (D- MD), 202-224-4654
Paul S. Sarbanes (D- MD), 202-224-4524
Carl Levin (D- MI), 202-224-6221
Mark Dayton (D- MN), 202-224-3244
Max Baucus (D- MT), 202-224-2651
Frank Lautenberg (D- NJ), 202-224-3224
Robert Menendez (D- NJ), 202-224-4744
Jeff Bingaman (D- NM), 202-224-5521
Jack Reed (D- RI), 202-224-4642
Lincoln D. Chafee (R- RI), 202-224-2921
Patrick J. Leahy (D- VT), 202-224-4242
Maria Cantwell (D- WA), 202-224-3441
Patty Murray (D- WA), 202-224-2621
Herb Kohl (D- WI), 202-224-5653
John D. Rockefeller, IV (D- WV), 202-224-6472
James M. Jeffords (I- VT), 202-224-5141

CALL THIRD:
SENATORS WHO OPPOSE FILIBUSTER AND "YES" FOR ALITO (HOWEVER, apparently Nelson's office was taking a "tally" of for/against Alito; call in and weigh in)

Ben Nelson (D-NE) 202-224-6551
Tim Johnson (D- SD) , 202-224-5842
Robert C. Byrd (D- WV) , 202-224-3954
Ted Stevens (R- AK) , 202-224-3004

SENATORS WHO WILL SUPPORT FILIBUSTER: (remember to thank them when you can)

Barbara Boxer (D- CA) , 202-224-3553
Dianne Feinstein (D- CA) , 202-224-3841 (1,)
Christopher J. Dodd (D- CT), 202-224-2823 (1,)
Richard J. Durbin (D- IL) , 202-224-2152
John F. Kerry (D- MA) , 202-224-2742
Edward M. Kennedy (D- MA) , 202-224-4543
Debbie A. Stabenow (D- MI) , 202-224-4822
Harry Reid (D- NV) , 202-224-3542
Hillary Rodham Clinton (D- NY) , 202-224-4451
Charles Schumer (D- NY) , 202-224-6542
Ron Wyden (D- OR) , 202-224-5244
Russell D. Feingold (D- WI) , 202-224-5323




Cher

[rodeodance]

22. glad to see Russ Feingold on list that supports filly

SENATORS WHO WILL SUPPORT FILIBUSTER: (remember to thank them when you can)

Barbara Boxer (D- CA) , 202-224-3553
Dianne Feinstein (D- CA) , 202-224-3841 (1,)
Christopher J. Dodd (D- CT), 202-224-2823 (1,)
Richard J. Durbin (D- IL) , 202-224-2152
John F. Kerry (D- MA) , 202-224-2742
Edward M. Kennedy (D- MA) , 202-224-4543
Debbie A. Stabenow (D- MI) , 202-224-4822
Harry Reid (D- NV) , 202-224-3542
Hillary Rodham Clinton (D- NY) , 202-224-4451
Charles Schumer (D- NY) , 202-224-6542
Ron Wyden (D- OR) , 202-224-5244
Russell D. Feingold (D- WI) , 202-224-5323

[HereSince1628]

6. It's Saturday morning, there is still time to work it.

Sure it's uphill, but we can run until the race is over.

[kentuck]

7. That is true but don't climb too high in the tree...

the fall can be very painful.

[BlueIris]

12. Don't try so hard, don't nurture any hope, any reserve of energy that

it might work in some positive way. Jesus. And people say I'm too negative.

Respectfully, why did you even post this? I hope it wasn't in order to undercut the effort of people here or do things that might derail their resolve. If you don't believe anyone should get her hopes up--don't believe that. Maybe you should keep your defeatest attitudes over in GD: Everything else, one of the other candidates forums or...your own head? If you don't want to do this because you don't think the effort is worthwhile or appropriate, fine. Don't get involved. It's that simple.

Posters here are clearly much more capable of preparing for loss while hoping for gain; they're stronger than you've given them credit for. You would have seen that if you'd read the majority of the posts here or given them the consideration they deserve.

I love Ignore.

[kentuck]

15. Good for you.

And once you are disappointed, you will probably be the first in line with your threats of dropping out of the Party. Ignore? Yes, ignore reality. Sometimes opposing ideas nurture that which we wish for and also, those we most fear. Being close doesn't count in a bear fight. Sorry.

[H2O Man]

21. The only "loss"

comes from not doing our best. We are only responsible for our own actions. If we do our best, then we can take satisfaction in that, no matter what the outcome.

[Cocoa]

14. Alito filibuster is already a huge defeat for Greens

where's Ralph?

[applegrove]

23. The defeat was in Nov 2006. Why we need to get out the vote - no matter

what machine is there. We need to work it in every way. So there is no chance the the 49 GOP electoral tricks will take the vote.

[sirjohn]

25. Sorry to agree with you but the hearings this

time were a rehash of Anita Hill and the Repubs were ready for it. Our blowhard windbags blew it. Stupid of them not to learn a lesson. We need more effective leadership in our Party.