Goatees as in Evil Spock? Or as in Bork's facial hair?

Because that wasn't really a goatee. I don't actually think English has a word for what was occurring on that man's face.

I am so friggin' ready to, in the words of Private Vasquez, "ROCK 'N' ROLL!!!" with the Alito nomination. Him and Roberts are pretty much unbeatable as far as SCOTUS nominees are concerned. Sure, it took Bush being whapped on the nose like a naughty dog for him to finally get it right, but he sure did get it right.

My entire law school class is, in the words of a hapless Democrat during the 2004 campaign (Ace would know - you should to), SO PUMPED about this nominee.

This one's going to be an easy fight. Too bad Bush didn't want a close one for Jones.

Btw, the Sully watch isn't loading, which is messing up this blog's pages.

Oh, I don't think he's all that! I bet he's never given Georgie a back rub. Hmph.

We’ve got the nominee we want. We’re equipped for the fight. Let’s do this thing.

Love that.

Am I the only one who gets Maureen Down confused with Helen Thomas? Maybe that confusion is why she's so lonely.

It is a great piece and very favorable to the judge, but I was struck by one offhand detail. Why would the Times refer to a family with two parents and two kids as "small," unless they meant it was "small for Italian-American Catholics?" (Second page, fourth paragraph: "The small family was close...") Maybe I'm too sensitive, but that smells like a swipe to me.

The correct term for Bork's facial hair was "gopher butt."

I give certain factions about 10..., 9 seconds before they start complaining that Bush dissed women by nominating Alito, a man (!), after that nice lady withdrew her name.

"Am I the only one who gets Maureen Down confused with Helen Thomas?"

Maureen's the one who's always saying really stupid things.

If he is a god fearing flag waving constittution beleiving conservative he will be opposed by the liberals especialy by the politicians like AL GORE and TED KENNEDY and HILLARY CLINTON

I wonder what Dean is thinking after reading the article. Did anyone see his interview at the hands of Wolff Blitzer last night? He said, and I paraphrase. Meirs was defeated because she's a woman and was not someone who the conservatives could accept and now we have Alito who is anti abortion and a man. Is Dean off his medication? How will he handle that 'nice' Judge Alito?

Uhm, excitable B Back Andy, I believe Perky Katie Couric said something shitty about the fact that Alito has no vagina yesterday morning...

So it didn't even take ten minutes.

yer gonna eat lightning, and yer gonna crap thunder!

But then you read the editorial on him - the Times expresses its dismay that Bush would dare nominate such a man.

Crap! I'm looking for that quote from Katie (I think it was Katie, I heard it replayed n the radio yesterday).

Something to the effect of 'Welp, I guess there's no rule the replacement has to be a woman...'

"Am I the only one who gets Maureen Down confused with Helen Thomas?"

Maureen's the one who's always saying really stupid things.

As much as I want a fight, the Dems are rolling over on this one.

We can take it as a truism that the Left is comprised of cowards. And in this case, they know they cannot win. They are going to put up a facade of an opposition, like Roberts, and vote the guy in.

We can't back down, of course. As the Conservative Tees girl's shirt says, you can't argue with the idea of Peace through Superior Firepower.

But apart from the Q'os Q'idz going bananas (again), and a few foil hat-wearers spewing bile about Alito approving of "strip searching 10 year old girls," there will be no substantial Senate-level opposition on this one.

Schumer wouldn't use words like "sad" if they were. He can be sad. The rest will vote him in. There will be fewer yes votes than with Roberts, by a handful, but it will still be 65-70 for, at the end of the day.

They know that if they fight Alito (and lose), the whole underpinnings of the Left's worldview will be exposed for the fraud that it is. They will, in the process, lose much more than one SCOTUS seat. Having a huge fight with us and losing would discredit all of the gains the Left has made through the Court for the last 75 years.

They may be cowards, but they're not that stupid. Not the ones who are pulling the strings, anyway.

I hope you're right, Phinn, because I don't have the stomach for several weeks of lying Dem politicians, abetted by their lunchmates in the press, blathering on about the return to the Dark Ages and the end of freedom that Alito will supposedly ring in and threatening filibuster and crying (again, aided by their lunchmates in the press) about the affront to the Constitution the nuclear option supposedly represents.

Andy's Fozzy Bear,
Sorry you don't have the stomach for it, but that's what I call entertainment.
Remember the Roberts hearings? How stupid and venal our elected officials appeared?
You can't beat it. You just can't.

They know that if they fight Alito (and lose), the whole underpinnings of the Left's worldview will be exposed for the fraud that it is.

Maybe so, but they are also captured by their moonbat fringe right now so they can't afford the perception that they aren't crazy too. Rolling over with off-year elections coming would make them nervous indeed.

I'd guess that we are going to see a whole lot of senatorial foot dragging while NARAL, PFAW and the usual Bork Squad see what kind of red meat they can dish out. A confrontation over the nuke option is likely both for the time it consumes and for the opportunity to paint the GOP, and by extension its nominee, as extremist.

Seems a little optimistic to think we are going to have a showdown where we brawl over the proper role of judges. The lefties are all about symbolism, myth making and misdirection - and they will be actively abetted by the MSM. These guys don't do arguments over ideas. Or ideas themselves, for that matter.

Sure hope our Dark Master Karl has his game face on.

Do you guys remember Clarence Thomas???? When the NARAL/NOW crowd smells pro-life in the air, they go tear your hair out insane. They found Anita Hill and convinced her for the good of REPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM, to tear into Thomas.

You watch. The witches are stirring their brew. It won't be long now.

"We’ve got the nominee we want. We’re equipped for the fight. Let’s do this thing."

I just love it when Ace goes all macho...ohhh yeah baby...;-)

I just love it when Ace goes all macho...ohhh yeah baby...;-)

I just wish we could get that Reo guy to talk tough! THAT would be something.

Michael,

Are you following me???..;-)

I guess I shoulda known it wasn't Ace.

Ace is more of the cute cuddly teddy bear type (the one that looks at porn though)

;-)

Did wonders for my career, tell ya that.

Did wonders for my career, tell ya that.

For me? No so much.

Clarence Thomas and Bork will never happen again. Never.

The internet is alive and well. The vast American public may not be reading them, but the chattering classes sure as hell are. They have staffers whose job it is to read them (including this one) and report back.

The blogs have already altered the course of media and thus politics. The Swift Boat Vets got a huge boost from the blogs. Dan Rather. Eason Jordan. The NY Times is in a free fall.

Joe Wilson is next.

They simply cannot do what they once did. That's why they had to roll over on Roberts, and why they will have to roll over on Alito.

Phinn,

From your mouth to God's ear.

But I don't think so. When NARAL howls the media will follow. Exactly what you said is the problem. The vast American public is not reading the blogs. They WILL be watching the news.

Blogs may give you some leverage with information and information quickly that you didn't have before. OR even ideas how to fight the beast, but the media still rules.

And don't forget the dark side of the blogs. They will be howling as well.

Joe Wilson has been discredited? His BS abought refuting Iraq's uranium attempts in Niger has been excised from MSM reporting? The ridiculous meme that his wife was outed in retaliation is gone? I missed all that.

We're better than we were but a long way from anything like balance.

So far, the new media has worked better as a sword than a shield. That's going to be of limited value when every lefty special interest group from NARAL to NAACP to PONY is shotgunning new accusations weekly.

Taken together with their editorial against Alito's nomination, though, I think the NYT is just looking to make their position look more respectable through a cream-puff article like this. They're trying to make clear that they don't want to destroy the guy and they don't dislike him personally--but they don't want to see him on the Supreme Court. Hence the soft, saccharine, oh-so-reasonable article surrounds one memorable harder statement--Alito will definitely move the court to the right, and the question is whether or not you want to see that. The NYT is definitely trying to avoid being accused of Borking or the 'politics of personal destruction'--but I doubt that they or any other liberals intend to roll over on this nomination; I think they intend to fight. This article is just part of a calculated effort (on the part of the NYT at least, which seems of late to be unusually invested, for a liberal publication, in giving the appearance of impartiality) not to look either nasty or crazy while they do it.

"Alito will definitely move the court to the right, and the question is whether or not you want to see that."

Yeah, but this is true. So they're actually reporting it straight, for once. They're allowed to say "hey, we don't like this guy, because he's on the right" - just as - and the day will come whether 3 or 19 years from now, when some postmodern "critical legal studies" whacko is nominated by a Democratic President - the Wall Stree Journal will have kittens.

"Maureen's the one who's always saying really stupid things."

Gosh, I didn't realize she wrote virtually everything in the NYT!

I still think Phinn is close (65-70 for), but even if it is 51-50, the moonbats will have made fools of themselves (again) and shown the majority of the country that they don't care about qualifications, only about whether a nominee will legislate.

I would love to see Schumer/Reid/Kennedy/Boxer/ Pelosi be the only nays, but unfortunately they're not the only slimebuckets afraid to tell the public what they really want: totalitarian government.