[lbo-talk] Alito & disability

John Lacny jlacny at earthlink.net
Sat Jan 14 18:25:06 PST 2006


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



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list