Character assassination & bullying of Judge Alito by Senate Democrats leaves Mrs. Alito in tears
What a day! And what a political hack hit job on federal Judge Samuel Alito by many Senate Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee in today's hearings, following their similar attack on Tuesday.
The attack was not just on Judge Alito. It was also on President Bush and the Constitution. More can be read on this topic and presidential powers---both enumerated powers and those left unenumerated, so as not to tie the President's hands in matters of state and war---in David Horowitz' frontpagemag article, Democrats vs. the Constitution, excerpted below:
"The Bush administration has cited a number of laws and legal precedents to support its
powers, as well as the actions of previous administrations from both parties. But President Bush has also cited inherent powers under the Constitution, so it is important to understand what the Founding Fathers were trying to do when they wrote it.
The principal failing of the Articles of Confederation was the lack of a strong central authority in defense and foreign policy. As Secretary for Foreign Affairs in 1786, future Federalist Papers author John Jay argued “to be respectable abroad, it is necessary to be so at home: and that will not be the case until our public faith requires more strength.” The creation of the presidency was the principle aim and achievement of the Constitution....
It is well known that the writings of John Locke had a strong influence on early American political thought. In his essay Of Civil Government, Locke argued, 'Where the legislative and executive powers are in distinct hands, as they are in all moderated monarchies and well-framed governments, there the good of society requires that several things should be left to the discretion of him that has the executive power.' This is similar to the royal prerogative, which Locke defines as the 'power to act according to discretion for the public good, without the prescription of the law and sometimes even against it.' The relative silence in the Constitution enumerating the specific powers of the presidency, as opposed to the more precise list of what the legislature is empowered to do, seems meant to give the president considerable latitude to manage affairs of state in the national interest....
As the world’s leading power, trying to defend its security and interests in a time of global turbulence, terrorist threats, and foreign wars, the United States cannot tolerate the kind of partisan politics that create “impotence, perplexity and disorder.” Whether motivated by a ideology of defeatism or mere self-interest, opponents of effective national leadership cannot be allowed to prevail by the American public. The Framers of the Constitution did not want their country to be weak, vulnerable, or a failed state...."
Likewise, the Framers of the Constitution would be horrified at even the prospect of what we have seen yesterday and today in the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee's advise and consent hearings on Judge Samuel Alito's nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court. I refer, specifically, to the character assassination of Sam Alito, who has an exemplary record of twenty-five years of public service, fifteen years of which have been in service on the federal court bench.
The Committee Democrats' primary goal, in the hearings and run-up to them, has been to assassinate the character and professional qualifications and reputation of Judge Alito, through distortions of his record, his association memberships and many of his judicial rulings. Even through attempts to tie his responses to questions about Judge Robert Bork and Judge Clarence Thomas, by association---simply because Alito identified or agreed with principles or beliefs that they professed to holding.
And, should Senate Democrats fail to "Bork" Judge Alito, they strive to at least give him a good bloodying-up and tar his reputation so that they can proceed in the future to ridicule him the way they have to this day ridiculed Bork and Thomas. It's the same tactic they have used against Pres. George W. Bush, Vice Pres. Cheney, Sec. of State Condaleeza Rice, Attorney Gen. John Ashcroft and other administration officials. They reduce all their perceived enemies to caricatures or straw men to be swatted down. And they don't care whom they harm collaterally.
It's stunning that we have political smackdown hardball and politics of personal destruction tactics by hard-left Democrats now substituted for the historical honor, decorum and dignity of the U.S. Senate.
Only the Republican Committee members conducted themselves in a manner worthy of the august upper body of the U.S. Congress, along with the exemplary behavior and responses of Judge Samuel Alito who always provided civility and exceptional self control as he gave consistently forthcoming responses throughout---even in the face of brutal verbal assaults that brought his wife to tears as she and other family members were exposed to her husband's being denigrated and falsely accused.... again and again.
Senator Lindsay Graham apologized on behalf of the Senate. That's good, but it is not enough.
Those attack-dog Democrat Senators---especially Kennedy, Durbin, Schumer, Feingold, and Feinstein---need to be disciplined for bad behavior, bringing dishonor to the Senate, abusing a presidential nominee to the Supreme Court, and abusing the Constitutionally mandated advise and consent process. And, they all owe a formal apology to Judge Alito and his family.