[lbo-talk] Alito & disability

[John Lacny]

I have a hard time getting worked up about nomination fights like this, 
because Bush is going to eventually get a nominee, and whoever it is is 
going to be bad. It would be different if the Democrats had a majority in 
the Senate; then, they could at least block the worst ones and insist on 
some kind of "compromise" nominee, another David Souter or something. As it 
stands now, Bush will eventually get someone; the Democrats could 
filibuster, of course, but then the Republicans could just get rid of the 
filibuster and steamroll the nomination through anyway. You can argue that 
the Democrats should do that anyway for the symbolic effect, but it would be 
just that: symbolic. Of course they should at least all vote against him 
just as they should vote against all Bush nominees, but what practical 
effect does that have?

Justin argues that Kennedy may be the "swing" vote on the court now, but all 
that means is that the entire pendulum has been moved to the right. I'm with 
Doug and with Nathan Newman, who has repeatedly argued here that reliance on 
the courts and on legalistic strategies of making change is a big mistake. 
By no means am I suggesting that having better or worse judges makes no 
difference; but I am saying that we are in a bad position even to influence 
who ends up on the bench.

- - - - - - - - - -
John Lacny
http://www.johnlacny.com

Tell no lies, claim no easy victories