Alito: Death Of The Constitution

The New York Times editorial today gets real about the dangers Bush poses to the USA. It says "you cannot deal in good faith with a White House that does not act in good faith", and Bush "seems to see no limit to his imperial presidency". It calls Bush's lawyers "morally challenged". Then it focuses on the Alito nomination as an example of Bush's dangerously expanding powers:

Both of the offensive theories at work here - that a president's intent in signing a bill trumps the intent of Congress in writing it, and that a president can claim power without restriction or supervision by the courts or Congress - are pet theories of Judge Samuel Alito, the man Mr. Bush chose to tilt the Supreme Court to the right.

The administration's behavior shows how high and immediate the stakes are in the Alito nomination, and how urgent it is for Congress to curtail Mr. Bush's expansion of power. Nothing in the national consensus to combat terrorism after 9/11 envisioned the unilateral rewriting of more than 200 years of tradition and law by one president embarked on an ideological crusade.

Despite this, the general (MSM?) media and many top Democrats are already conceding that the Alito nomination will almost certainly go ahead, simply because the Democrats were unable to score a political king hit during questioning last week.

But that's not a logic which Georgia10 at Kos is happy to follow:

Don't tell me a filibuster isn't warranted when 56% of this nation says Alito SHOULD be blocked if he'll overturn Roe. Don't tell me a filibuster isn't warranted when Alito implied Bush could invade Iran without the consent of Congress. And don't tell me a filibuster isn't warranted when it's my rights, my body, my way of life on the line.

I keep hearing the Dems needs to "grow a spine." That we need "angry" Dems, we need Dems with courage. We need Dems with courage. Well guess what-- we HAVE angry Dems, we HAVE courageous Dems. Look in the damn mirror, people. WE are the party. WE are the Democrats. We're angry, we spit fire, and our time has come.

Obviously, Georgia10 is pretty worked up on this issue. The full post is worth reading:

I remember sitting in front of the TV as the 2004 election results came in, and as the dark reality of what had occurred surrounded me, I suddenly felt tears streaming down my cheeks. And I distinctly remember thinking to myself, "what the fuck, you're crying about politics"? But I wasn't tearing up because of politics. I was tearing up because I am an American. I love my country, and I could foresee the wounds this President would inflict on our nation...

When I have children, I'm going to look them in their eyes and tell them that yes, your mother was there. When the rest of the nation was blissfully unaware of the fate that had befallen us, me and a few million of my anonymous friends stepped up to the plate and saved this nation from the brink of fascism. I'll them I was there when Congress rallied up and shook off the yoke of its President King. That I was there when the clock was running out and America's back was up against the wall--and I helped her fight back. Never will I utter any phrase with more pride than "I was there."

Many in the anti-Bush world, particularly registered Democrats, have seen the Alito nomination as a "line-in-the-sand" issue. From a Constitutional point of view, it most certainly is. But until and unless more people in Bush's USA get as seriously engaged as Georgia10, Bush & Co will simply carry on regardless...

More via HuffPo:

Jonathan Alter at Newsweek asks "What if we faced a constitutional crisis and hardly anyone noticed?"

Al Gore to lead the charge?