Using Alito to Deflect Attention from Abramoff

by Jonathan Singer, Sun Jan 08, 2006 at 10:33:13 AM EST

It looks like the White House is up to its old tricks again these days. Just as the screws are beginning to turn against the Republican Party for its legal woes and ethical lapses, President Bush has signalled that he will try to turn the nation's attention towards the battle over a judicial nomination, as Mike Allen and Matthew Cooper note towards the end of their article on Bush's relationship with Tom DeLay in this week's issue of Time magazine.

Republican officials say they are so worried about the Abramoff problem that they are now inclined to stoke a fight with Democrats over the confirmation of Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court in an effort to turn the page from the lobbying investigation. Outside groups plan to spend heavily, and the White House will engage in some tit for tat with Democrats as the hearings heat up. This tactic is nothing new for the Bush White House. In July 2005, just as the media began to place increased focus on the investigation into the Valerie Plame leak (it emerged that Karl Rove had spoken with Matt Cooper about Plame, Judith Miller went to jail, and, Bush shifted his position on firing those implicated), Bush announced the nomination of John Roberts to the Supreme Court. Just over two months later, during the same week in which House Majority Leader Tom DeLay was indicted for conspiracy and money laundering and the Security and Exchange Commission commenced a probe into potential insider trading by Senate Majority Leader, President Bush hastily announced that he had nominated Harriet Miers to serve on the Supreme Court.

While it certainly would be unwise to lay down on Samuel Alito without a fight at this moment -- it is essential that Democrats and progressives ensure that a rabid conservative is not allowed to dictate his views from the Supreme Court -- just the same, it would be a strategic mistake to allow President Bush to distract Americans from serious Republican problems. Undoubtedly, a balance can be found between the two to ensure that a sufficient fight is put up against Alito while at the same time the public is educated about the degree to which Washington has become compromised under Republican control.

Tags: Judges (all tags)

  • 10 Comments
  • 0 recs
  • Share
  • Permalink

Comments

10 Comments

Shadow_head_small
tie it together
Isn't a solution to tie the two problems together? As in, why does Bush nominate a man so far to the right of the nation? Oh, right, follow the money.
by sdedeo 2006-01-08 11:02AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Let the courts deal with Abranoff, don't let Alito
have the court.

Moveon.org gathered 300,000 signatures in their Anti-Alito petition -- in a day!

They're shooting for 500,000, please sign if you haven't already:

Move On.org's stop Alito petition

People for the American Way have sent over 60,000 letters to the Senate:

Save the Court Petition

American Rights at Work also
Oppose Alito Petition

Defending the Constitution's Stop Alito Petition

http://ga3.org/...

Democratic anti-Alito petition:

Democratic Party's Reject Alito Petition

Stop the NRA is also getting in on the party:

Stop the NRA's Oppose Alito Petiton

And while you're at it: sign Planned Parenthood's anti-Alito petition, too:

Planned Parenthood Petition

NARAL is shooting for 500,000 signatures, please add yours:

Naral Anti-Alito Petition

And don't forget: urge Congress to support Plan B:

Plan B Petition



by judybrowni 2006-01-08 08:46PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Alito is part of the problem

The GOP is the party of dishonesty and corruption.  Alito told the Senate during his first confirmation hearings that he would recuse himself from matters involving Vanguard Financial, because he had a financial interest in it.  When the time came, however, he did not recuse himself; instead, he ruled in favor of Vanguard at a time that he himself had almost a half million dollars invested in Vanguard funds.

He lied.  He used his public office for personal gain.  He is the perfect embodiment of the Republican scandals.

by Califlander 2006-01-08 11:46AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
strength vs. weakness
The difference between this attempt and other times that the WH has created controversy to change the subject is the undeniably weak position from which they are acting.

Keep in mind they don't want to debate Alito's merits; they want to make the issue whether there should be a debate -- they want to be able to say that any opposition is inappropriate because like him or not, Alito is a respected judge. By getting drawn into a debate over how conservative he is, they weaken their own position further by ceding the high ground.

Moreover, it raises the risks for them higher; if we can stop Alito, then the burgeoning corruption scandals make it impossible for them to go back to the well. They will have to more or less lie down and let someone else (Frist? Reid? a new WH CoS?) pick a nominee (and for that matter decide on any legislative agenda they are going to propose).

In other words, we absolutely can and should engage the WH "tit for tat" on Alito's merits -- why does he think the President should have unlimited power to tap our phones and why does the President want a nominee who would give him that power?

No one is going to forget the corruption, but its going to be all that more important if Bush is finished off this month by stopping Alito.

by desmoulins 2006-01-08 12:15PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
How conservative
You're right, this is exactly what the debate should be about, and honestly, I think it is unavoidable for the WH as long as liberals don't just sit there and allow the WH to define the debate. He's got the paper trail, so unlike with Roberts, it won't take much to make his conservative extremism the issue.

The second, longer-term benefit of this, is that it brings conservativism itself into question. Note how conservatives are trying to push the "Alito is moderate" meme. There seems to be some swing away from the Right in the country. We need seize the opportunity and turn "conservative" into the dirty word "liberal" has become.

by LiberalFromPA 2006-01-08 04:21PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
The old greek saying..
 Every virtue is a median between two extremes.
by turnerbroadcasting 2006-01-08 12:18PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
ABRAMOFF WILL UNFOLD SLOWLY ANYWAY
#1 is partly correct
stress his lying, ignore the how dare you chorus
that will tie in later, indeed artfully refer to Abramoff in every other sentence of judiciary questioning

but, #4 is close to the mark
torpedoe this guy and the GOP is near dead in the water till the mid terms
there will be plenty of time before the whole abramoff saga unfolds anyway; best to fight the good fight and have the scandal waiting on the wings to explode back onto the stage
while defeating strip search sammy is #1
we must set the stage for blocking anymore tax cuts, patriot act and domestic spying outrages,  and other repuke nonsense

by macedc 2006-01-08 12:51PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
distraction?
Nothing like pulling that old distraction of naming Supreme Court nominees to fill vacancies.
Boy that sure will fool everybody.
by champiod 2006-01-08 03:28PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
distraction
maybe the republican members of Congress can introduce some new legislation, that will really throw a smoke screen over everything until november
by champiod 2006-01-08 03:30PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Gosh,
who would've thought Supreme Court nominations would take the place of Terra Alerts as the distractor of choice?
by Johnny Gentle Famous Crooner 2006-01-08 05:19PM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads


----------- myDD - skin -----------