Alito would tilt the SCOTUS to the Right, Rightfully

Some perspective is in order on the nomination of Samuel Alito to the US Supreme Court.

From 1994 to 2005, the nine justices comprised of three conservatives, two moderates, and four leftists.  Seven were appointed by Republican Presidents, and two were appointed by a Democrat, Bill Clinton.  Both of those two, Breyer and Ginsberg, are leftists.

So seven Republican Presidents appointed three conservatives, two moderates, and two leftists, while a Democrat reliably appointed two leftists, not even any moderates.

Which party appears to place more importance on ideology on a nominee, rather than sheer judicial qualifications?

Now that Alito, a conservative, is replacing Sandra Day O'Conner, a moderate, the balance of the Supreme Court is like this : four conservatives, one moderate, four leftists. 

This is hardly an overwhelming bias to the Right.  It is merely a removal of the tilt to the Left that has existed for so many years.  Given that conservatives outnumber liberals in the United States population, this is still not a reflection of the general population. 

Prediction : The American public will continue to demand a rightward shift in the Supreme Court, expecting one of the four leftist Justices to be replaced with a conservative, when the time arises.  The actions of Congress will reflect this, no matter how much pressure far-left groups exert. 

Update : Dick Morris on Why the Left can't sink Alito.

Comments

[Adam]

continue to demand? I've yet to see the actual citizens of the U.S. play much of a role in "demanding" any ideology for the court.

Plus, there are far more moderates than conservatives OR liberals in the U.S.

[Kartik]

Adam,

What you say is partly true, but it depends on what a 'moderate' is.

How possible is it that moderates are more offended by the far left than the far right?

Or that Alito might be considered a moderate by more people than those who consider him an extremist?

Replacing a liberal with a moderate is still a rightward shift..

[ATS]

The only reason the Democrats and liberals fight so savagely against level-headed, originalist judges such as Justice Sam Alito is that they despise and fear the American voter.

Without leftist judges to whom the liberals can shop their lawsuits, the liberal agenda of abortion-on-demand, gay marriage, socialized medicine, centralized education, giving full rights to foreign terrorists, etc. would never have a chance in the democratically elected branches of government. Not having a left-leaning SCOTUS would force the liberals to actually develop coherent arguments and try to petition and convince their fellow citizen of the 'validity' of their beliefs. Coherent and rational arguments are simply impossible in the defence of killing nascent human life, redefining marriage, universally lowering health care and educational standards (which is all that centraliztion has ever done for health care and education), and appointing American lawyers to defend the evil bin Ladens of the world. Yet, those are precisely what the Left and the Democrats stand for.

As long as Democrats and liberals continue to push their unpopular, backward, misanthropic, and anti-religious agenda, they will remain the party that keeps losing elections and the party that disgraces itself by attacking and obstructing highly qualified, non-activist judges who respect the Constitution as the framers intended it.

[Sublingual]

Demographic surveys continue to show, year after year, that a majority of Americans (not merely a plurality) support liberal objectives such as justice, fairness to minorities, and generosity to those in need. It is fallacious to state that the US comprises a majority holding conservative views.

[GK]

It's a shame that this hidden majority of liberals never vote then, eh?

Bush got more votes than Kerry in 2004, period.

Plus, the Senate and House both have Republican majorities. It is hard to say Dumbocrats have majorities..

Plus, the Right is the one that is fair to minorities and supports Justice. It is the left that wants minorities to remain poor, and criminals (like Tookie) to go unpunished.

[ATS]

Conservatives enjoy listening to liberals lie to themselves that gay marriage, abortion-on-demand, big failed social programs, and defending terrorists are as "mainstream" as apple pie. The Democrats wouldn't know 'mainstream' if it hit them in the side.

Last year the Republicans raised about $101 million and the Dems only $50 million. Currently, the Dems have only $5.5 million in the bank, which is one sixth (1/6) of what the Republican party now has. If liberalism is so overwhelmingly popular in America, then why this pathetic fundraising performance when compared to the conservatives? Why doesn't the liberal agenda win national elections?

[Jason]

The court is moving to the Right, which makes sense, as the entire country has moved to the Right: toward a much more conservative, authoritarian type of gov't (unitary executive, anyone?). This is a natural backlash against the (American) liberalism of the postwar period, culminating in the early seventies with (surprise) Nixon. I am not a conservative, but accept the inevitability of this. Eventually, in another 20-30 years, the court will swing back.

As far as Republicans go, it is quite natural for them to out-fundraise the Democrats (or any other political party). The Republicans operate a "pay-for-play" system of access, and quite openly (K street project). They are also much more efficient in punishing, both politically and financially, groups that act against the party leadership, or try and work around their system. This is classic "machine" politics, and will work *brilliantly* until gross corruption derails the "machine". It is not easy to get a "machine" working, and I admire the Republicans for their discipline. Personally, I think they have at least another 10-15 years of steam left.

[Jason]

GK and ATS: The Democrats have been on a slow slide since Nixon split the South, so I can't understand the vitriol you hold for them. It's like kicking a guy that has been hit by a car. Sure, they had a gasp with Clinton, but that was the exception, *not* the rule. In an increasingly unstable world, the Right will assume more and more power and control.

[ATS]

Jason,

It seems that you too are living in a mythology of your own making, "machine politics" and all. The majority of the Republicans' fundraising comes from large numbers of small, individual donations, i.e., contributions from average citizens who agree with the Republicans' ideas.

Also, the reason the Democrats lost the South is only that they scorn the South and American values so much. Clinton permanantly lost the South for the Dems when in '92 he demogogued the public regarding "assault weapons" and vigorously promoted abortion and gays in the military. Normal family people simply don't get as hysterical about these causes as liberals need them to.

Regarding SCOTUS, the difference between conservative judges and liberal ones is that the latter sees themselves as activists out to alter the meaning of the Constitution, whereas conservative judicial philosophy is to defer to the elected branches of government when there is no clear direction in the Constitution. This philosophy is in line with democracy and is a more popular and appealing alternative to the Left's judicial activism, and now Republicans are promoting this view more effectively. To say that conservative judges will 'swing the court to the right' is inaccurate. What a conservative court will do is undo the activism of the Left as in Roe v. Wade and leave such issues to the elected branches of government where they belong.

[Brian]

The hilarity of seeing a blog titled "The Fututists" by a conservative is more than I can take. The owner of this blog should open a dictonary someday and look up the meaning of the words 'conservative' and 'liberal'. If you look up the definitions of these words you will see that liberals focus on the future and conservatives focus on the past.

[Tester]

Brian,

I disagree. Left-wing hatemongers hide behind the dictionary definition of the world 'liberal' by exhibiting behavior that is exactly the opposite of liberal. They are very illiberal.

The left is much more racist, regressive, and uneducated than the right, in America today. This is demonstrated by how badly the leftist losers are getting their clock cleaned on all fronts, from elections to judges.

The Right is the optimistic, forward-thinking faction. The left is the pessimistic group of loserish girlie-men.

[Brian]

Tester,

The Right is the optimistic, forward-thinking faction. The left is the pessimistic group of loserish girlie-men.

If your so optimistic then why do you feel the need to name call the left "loserish girlie-men".

[pat]

The real truth is that the so-called "conservatives" conserve nothing and destroy everything that is valuable in this nation.

And they do it by actively conspiring to bribe and threaten the "representatives" of the citizens of the United States. They do this through their thugs-in-Congress- Delay, Blunt, Sensenbrenner who allow no one to truly read and debate the actual laws that they will pass through their kangaroo court currently called Congress. Why? Because they can.

Part of the reason they can is that they have a rubber-stamp majority that endorses whatever latest back-stabbing plan idiot Georgie-boy has brought up to destroy jobs, healthcare, education, clean air, clean water, safety, security, and constitutional protections in this country.

The other reason they can is that the so-labeled "liberal media" is owned by crony corporations that keep the American people blind-folded and gagged while they are being raped by Georgie-boy and his band of thugs-in-Congress.

If you don't believe it, then why don't you allow real investigations to take place? The proof is in the pudding. Georgie-boy and thugs-in-tow Rove, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, Delay, Blunt, Boehner (boner), Sensenbrenner, Abramoff, torture-boy Gonzales, Chertoff, Wolfowitz, Bolton, ... ALL evade prosecution -not by courageously and righteously facing a true unbiased investigation but by using their rubber-stamp majority to evade justice.

If you have nothing to hide, why do you hide?

You are the real girlie-men, hiding behind your thugs-in-Congress.

[Liberal Smasher]

pat,

You call the normal, common-sense people girlie-men? Seems to me your side was the one that wanted gay marriage, you disease-laden faggot.

No wonder you faggots lost the 2004 election in such a devastating manner, giving the common-sense heterosexuals control of the Presidency, House, Senate, and Governorships.

[noah]

Sublingual: By implication you accuse conservatives of not desiring the things you list. I am a conservative and I desire all the things you list, as do the conservatives I know. How we get there is where the disagreement arises.

Have a good day!