BCT Editorial – 11/3/05

This page was last updated on November 3, 2005.

Base move; Editorial; Beaver County Times; November 3, 2005.

Below is a detailed critique of the subject editorial.

“In nominating Judge Samuel A. Alito to replace Sandra Day O’Connor on the U.S. Supreme Court, President Bush has gotten what he wanted by pleasing the right and infuriating the left.”

[RWC] How quickly the editorial author forgets. Ms. Miers infuriated the left. Remember the allegations of cronyism? Of course, remembering that fact would undermine the editorial’s agenda.

“It’s almost as if he’s overreacting to the spurned nomination of White House counsel Harriet Miers and has gone out of his way to pick a fight. Quite clearly, the president is attempting to placate his base, divide the nation and divert attention from problem areas such as Iraq and Plamegate.

“But that’s what happens when governance takes a back seat to perpetual political campaigning.”

[RWC] Over time, President Bush made it clear the type of person he would nominate to the courts, including the Supreme Court. This was one of the reasons people voted for President Bush. The Times simply has a problem with President Bush following through on his campaign platforms. What is wrong with a politician doing what he said he would do when running for office? I wonder what the Times wrote when Bill Clinton nominated a former chief counsel (Ruth Ginsburg) for the ACLU? Though Republicans approved her nomination by 41-3 (93%), does anyone believe Republicans really liked her positions?

If the author had cared to check, he/she would have found a lot of liberals are complimenting Judge Alito. A common comment from liberals who worked with Judge Alito or tried cases in front of him is something like, “Though I disagree with his politics, he was always fair and thorough.” The only folks apoplectic about Judge Alito’s nomination appear to be the wackos and the politicians beholding to them.