To the US Senate: Alito is Wrong for US

It's taken awhile for me to come to this personal conclusion. I can't even link to all of the sites and media outlets which I've studied because A) there are so man and B) much has come from radio listening to the confirmation hearings on my local NPR station.

Another of those email lists I'm on includes the lovely virtue of providing it's subscribers with a form to send letters to our Congressfolk. Their website is plain and relevant to the topic on which they've sent a link. Their form provides a wonderful space for inclusion of my opinion on the issue at hand.

So I utilized it as follows.

I have joined with my fellow americans and given Judge Sam Alito both the benefit of the doubt, and a fair ear and mind over the course of these Senate confirmation hearings. What has become quite clear from his stories and disposition is that he intrinsically supports the Executive Branch of government over the other two.

His record shows that he does so both fairly AND in a biased manner. By consistently putting the burden of Legal Clarity on the legislature, he follows the Constitutional admonition that the making (drafting) of Laws belong to the people's duly elected representatives. He is completely right in suggesting the onus for clarity falls upon the body delineating and refining such laws.

Mr Alito fails in the objectivity of his opinions when such Laws are in confrontation with the desires the Executive branch. He is irrationally consistent in support the Exe over the Leg and, as he pointed out repeatedly, this body of opinion has evolved in synchronicity with his more than two decades of Advocacy for the supremacy of the Executive branch.

His assertions that all of his decisions, and most of his advisories on behalf of past Administrations, reveal a character of Top Down decision making which is contraindicated by the US Constitution. Each of his opinions can indeed be found supported by some portion of the USConst but, as a whole, they show an interpretation of that august document which belies the arguments of the framers' themselves when Jefferson and Hamilton first clarified the importance of 3 Distinct yet Interdependant institutions needed to assure both Checks and Balances each of and for the others.

I've withheld a strong opinion until only this week passed, because Judge Alito has shown himself an intelligent and thoughtful human who's integrity is as solid as his supporters have promoted. He has simply shown too much disrespect for the rights of individuals when those rights are abutted by those already in the seat of power.

That stance - or ideological perspective - is perhaps the one true prerequisite for the Fascism and State Control which Conservatives, Liberals and Libertarians of all degrees can NOT tolerate in a Free and Democratic Republic.

Our President MUST pick again. Please do your best to strengthen this democracy of individuals (both human and corporate!) without tilting the balance towards or away from any one of the 3 branches our American government. Deny this man his desire to cement the Executive as the ONE final arbiter of our nation's direction into the future of our species.

Sincerely

Michael Bains
Cleveland, OH 44118
sillyhumans.blogspot.com

The site does clarify what their Litmus Test for a Supreme Court nominee is.

Alito is on the record stating that he believes in a dictatorial model of the president and that a woman's private decisions are up for grabs. He lied about his position on the former and categorically refused to repudiate the later. Robert Bork himself stated the other day he believes conclusively that Alito still holds that view. THAT is the evidence to filibuster Alito, not what he might have evaded saying at his hearing.

This is our litmus test. If our senators will not protect us from this constitutional outrage, we call for each and every one to be defeated in their next election. We call for candidates to arise in their own primaries if necessary to punish them for their cowardice and their complicity. If putting their own job on the line is not a circumstance "extraordinary" enough for them we don't know what is.

(their emphasis)

As usual from such organizations (even the li'l ones!) they lean a little too emotionally into their stand. Still, I find that, in this instance especially, I am decidely leaning with them.