SUPPORT OUR TROOPS!
Topic: Iraq
If you're a self-confessed liberal you've heard it all before. You've been called every meaningless name in the book; "traitor," "Commie," "Unpatriotic," "Un-American," and even "bleeding-heart liberal" (like it's a bad thing).

I wish that just once I could get an honest answer from a conservative. I'd like to ask them if they ever get tired of cutting down so-called "liberal" arguments by attacking the person and not the proposition. Just once would I like an honest answer to the question of whether or not they see the blatant stupidity in using personal attacks against arguments that they do not agree with because there are going to be times when doing so may be downright dangerous to their well-being. I would love to know if they can think of a time when these personal attacks just won't work because the person they'd be attacking just may be one of them. I mean guys like Pat Buchanan and Paul Craig Roberts don't agree with the majority of conservatives on the war in Iraq and they're not traitors, are they?

What about the men and women serving in our armed services? If an overwhelming number of our troops didn't support the mission would they be considered Un-American? I'm curious, would they be called pinko-commies? If 25% of them thought that we should leave Iraq right away would they be called terrorist appeasers? How about if more than half thought that we should either leave immediately or in 6 months, would conservatives attempt to shame them by trying to label them as Unpatriotic? What if almost 3 quarters of our troops believed that we should pull out of Iraq within the year? What would they call them then? Would they hang on old standbys like "traitor, commie, or an Unpatriotic bleeding heart dove" or would they get more creative and call them fools who want to make sweet homosexual love to Bin Laden while a picture of Hillary hangs on the pinko colored cave wall overlooking it all?!?

According to the results of a Le Moyne College/Zogby Poll released today, that's exactly what our troops serving in various branches of the armed forces are thinking. I'd like to see these conservative chickenhawks personally attack the soldiers of the 82nd Airborne Division.

I have just one last question for all the personally condemning conservatives out in la-la land,

"How can you support our troops
when THEY don't support the mission?"

---

For more information see,
U.S. Troops in Iraq: 72% Say End War in 2006

Our Troops Should Leave Iraq Yesterday!
Topic: Iraq
The problem that many don't seem to understand is that not only did we directly cause the chaos in Iraq by failing to fully understand that war means killing innocent people who's families and friends aren't too thrilled about the idea and are presently violently seeking retribution and justice but what most fail to understand is that our presence in Iraq IS THE PROBLEM! It is clear that we owe the Iraqi people a huge economic and moral debt but we do not need to repay them by fostering the chaos and the forces of violence and extremism. We're the "petri" in the dish on which the disease is growing. Pulling our troops out of Iraq doesn't mean that we abandon what now has become our responsibility.

Leaving Iraq means that we have to use all of the peaceful resources at our disposable to right our wrong. We could utilize the energies of our greatest minds and biggest hearts to formulate a holistic novel solution for fixing many of the problems that exist there, such as paying for the reconstruction of Iraq by empowering the Iraqi's to do it themselves and bringing in experts from countries that had nothing to do with its present destruction and chaos. That would be a good first step and just 1 small piece of the puzzle. The U.S. could strengthen the UN as an institution so that it could provide non-profit humanitarian relief to the country. We could work to fight the corruption, greed and power lust that is not only responsible for the problems in our own country but also the reasons for the continuation of Iraqi sectarian violence. We could work through groups that already exist around the world whose goal would be not to further their own self-interest but to help the Iraqis to have a little dignity and self-determination. We could step aside and logistically and financially support the operations of a massive worldwide humanitarian mission to Iraq.

This is what I mean when I say our troops should leave Iraq yesterday.

We could help the Iraqi's in the U.S. by actively helping them claim their need for justice against the political masters that brought this scourge upon them. We could castrate those forces in our country that believe violence is always the simple answer by educating our population to understand that more patient alternatives exist to solve world problems that while not as glamorous as the "Mother Of All Bombs" is sustainable and uniquely human. In the same vain we could work towards castrating the forces of the "big-dick" military-industrial boys who's only success at solving world problems has been to fuck-up things around the globe. Or we could just stick with what we know and send troops and drop bombs on innocents everywhere in the world where we see a problem and hope and pray for a different outcome. But that I believe is the definition of insanity.

The Loaded Gun...
Topic: Hopefully Humorous

As my father would say,
"That's not nice...
it's true but it's not nice."

(Thanks Brian, I always knew you had latent Republican leanings.
Ewwwwww!
That's just so unnatural!)

How You Spell Victory...
Topic: State Of The Union
The Indy Voice has linked to articles by the conservative Paul Craig Roberts in the past but this one is really eye opening, Nuking the Economy.

It is time for liberals to grab the mantle of immigration policy reform. Liberals need to communicate to people that the policies of the Bush administration effectively reward the greed of the governments of other nations who starve their people to the point that the backbone of their societies must escape to manual labor jobs in the U.S. to the detriment of the U.S. worker, the economy and cause harm to the ability of our government to provide the resources and services that Americans have come to take for granted.

Liberals have to ask themselves, what is the true value of the rule of law when illegal immigration is met with a yawn? We DO NOT have to go to the extreme of building a wall across the borders of the southern U.S., which would be cost prohibitive, isolationist, incite more racism, ensure indefinite future conflict and would basically be a complete logistical failure but our government needs to apply REAL (financial, political, etc.) pressure on the governments of other countries who, for too long, have gotten away with using our country as a relief valve so that their people don't reach the tipping point of revolution.

This country is facing a major problem which is easily observable by anyone with a 5th grade economics lesson on the effects of supply and demand. A major thrust of the problem comes from the illegal supply of labor to employers in this country who have effectively outsourced (or in this case, "insourced") labor to foreign countries by employing the illegal emigrants of those countries here. Employers have been able to hire on a seemingly unending supply of not only extremely cheap labor but a labor force that is completely politically and economically detached from issues like workers rights, the right to organize and worker's safety and doesn't have to pay into systems that depend on collective efficiencies like Worker's Compensation, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, the country's infrastructure and generally speaking, most taxes. Almost any employer that can get away with hiring this type of laborer will and will do so in place of the American worker who won't, shouldn't and can't financially and physically afford to.

Consider just some of the values that liberals hold dear, like worker and human rights and how advocating a policy which contradicts the Bush administration's would allow them to be upheld. Advocating illegal immigration reform would be tantamount to a Scrabble triple word score for Victory - with the victors being our way of life, our values and forcing the governments of other countries to work on behalf of their people instead of forcing them to escape to the U.S. To continue the present policy of indifference would be to forget the human, civil and workers rights reasons why people are leaving their native countries to work here and it would continue to ignore the tangible political and economic implications that it has on the people that already live and work here.

Globalization, unregulated free markets and the resulting outsourcing of labor to foreign markets combined with the "insourcing" of labor to illegal immigrants are a recipe for disaster and are the causes of the problems that Mr. Roberts describes. These problems are not going to go away anytime soon and they'll never go away if future administrations continue to follow the same failed policies.

In difference, Hope
Topic: State Of The Union
In this political atmosphere I have adopted a new outlook and policy of working on those things that I can influence.

I will no longer speak of the damages that are being wrought on this country at the hands of the Republicans and fail to mention those who let it happen. I will no longer speak of the President's latest ideological nomination to the Supreme Court without highlighting how many of those that should are not working on stopping it. From now on I am on a mission to expose the accomplices and capitulators that are in positions to stop these things from happening but sit idly by and do nothing. I long for the day when the truly strong and courageous people of substance and energy can rise to the top and begin to take action.

I realize that most of the time my comments will most likely never extend further than this blog, after all it is an election year and we do have to restore these ball-less wonders to office, but I will not be deterred. The status quo isn't working and I am liberal enough to admit it, announce the problem so that others may know, analyze it and start working on a solution to fix it.

In this instance I already have and this is my conclusion,

I call upon my liberal brethren; those people who value and are willing to fight for human rights, workers rights and civil rights, those who's political philosophy's draw them to the conclusion that those who would seek to uphold the traditions of the present framework are fools for expecting a different result from the same tired actions, people who follow the path of non-violence and diplomacy at all costs, appreciate and use our right to free speech, free press and religion, those who believe that human beings are not a unit of measurement to be analyzed in some cruel economic system, those who believe in the rule of law, that human beings can transcend dogma through rational God giving thought and especially those who welcome and embrace the greatness of the human race in all its different colors, sizes, religions and cultures and who recognize that just merely tolerating one another often is not enough to keep tensions from spilling over into violence, that empathy, respect and compassion should be the ultimate goal of every rational human being for the benefit of each other, all other living beings and the planet.

Those of you with this type of courage and spirit
know who you are and I respectfully
ask that you focus your attentions
where you can make the most difference.

OUST THE CAPITULATORS!!!
Mood:  don't ask
Topic: Retort
Below is a response to Sen. John Kerry latest e-mail message (below):

Senator Kerry,

Cut the horse shit! What you did was too little, too late and frankly me and I suspect millions of people like me have had enough. I hereby pledge to NEVER AGAIN support any Democrat who doesn't represent my values, which include having the gonads to stick up for what you believe. So you can tell your capitulating buddies that since I have absolutely no influence with any Republican, I'm going to be knocking down the doors of the Democrats and with some help we’re gonna be booting the chaff from the Democratic party, which while it is extremely weak, won't even do those things that they can to show the rest of the country that the have the courage of their convictions!

Don't you guys get it? The reason you are where you are, is DIRECTLY due to the fact that when pressured you grab onto “moderation,” every single time. There is grey in the world but you guys never seem to see the black and white. Alito was a clear example of black and white and yet again Democrats clung to “moderation” and this country received something it never asked for and the Dems, your fellow Senators, hustled it along! You just handed what should have been a clear liberal victory to the conservatives and to them it's freaking Christmas and the “thank you” cards for the gift wrapping are being written out to the offices of Senators like Landrieu and Lieberman!

I'm sorry Mr. Kerry but I will not rejoice in yet another MAJOR LOSS by the Democrats! I will not attempt to find the positive again in a loss for the country. I will not rationalize cowardice. I will no longer accept politics as usual and I certainly will not accept some capitulating Senator trying to tell me that they either had to vote against what was right to save their own ass or that there is some light in this utterly disturbing ass-trouncing by the conservatives who, by the way, are rapidly expediting the deterioration of the American way of life. There is no reason for celebration because there is something profoundly wrong with this party Sir.

I hope that you convey my sentiments to those cowardly members of your party so that they know exactly what to expect when the liberal and courageous half of the Democratic party has enough and starts booting out the moderate, cowardly, do nothings. You can’t expect to gain more political power to set this country on a good course by sitting back and waiting for the Republicans to self-destruct when their fates and ours are intertwined.

Honestly, I'd rather have a Republican in office who I know is going to fuck up this country, than a Democrat who talks like they represent my values and ideals and only acts when it comes to saving their own ass!

Mr. Kerry, I ask you, what is the fate of a party who has neither the integrity nor the moral courage to do the right thing? I don’t know the answer but we’ll see where the Republican Party winds up. I just hope that in the Democrats quest for political power they don’t continue to follow the same example.

Spread the word.

Thanks,

The Indy Voice
One pissed-off Liberal

On 1/31/06, John Kerry wrote:

Dear The Indy Voice,

Yesterday, 25 Democratic Senators joined our effort to filibuster the Alito nomination -- that's more votes to filibuster the Alito nomination than there were votes against Justice Roberts' nomination itself just a few months ago.
This morning, 42 Senators voted against Alito's nomination. That's the highest number of votes against any Supreme Court nominee since Clarence Thomas in 1991.

It's hard to lose -- but it's important to fight for what we believe in. I want to thank the hundreds of thousands of you who signed our petitions, called your senators, wrote letters to the editor and, most important, refused to stand silent while President Bush worked to pack the highest court in the land with far right ideologues. We fought a fight that needed fighting.
We made sure the nation knew the truth about the Alito nomination. We made sure America heard how a right wing ideological coup sandbagged Harriet Miers' nomination and replaced her with Judge Alito. No one will be able to say, in five to ten years, that he or she is surprised by the decisions Judge Alito makes from the bench. People who believe in privacy rights, who fight for the rights of the most disadvantaged, who believe in balancing the power between the President and Congress had to take a stand.

We also made it clear to the Bush administration that no matter what they throw at us in 2006 -- whether it's extreme nominees, special interest giveaways, shortsighted policy or Swift Boat-style attacks against Democratic candidates -- we will never surrender. We will always fight back.

Now, we must be clear about something else. Winning the 2006 congressional elections is the only way to change the dangerous path George W. Bush has put us on. We need to defeat those Republicans who have overlooked this administration's incompetence, turned a blind eye to its failures, and lent a helping hand to its dangerous ideology.

Together, we have to act to make sure 2006 is the year Americans, led by Democrats, stand up to incompetence, cronyism and corruption, take back Congress, and get our nation moving in the right direction again.

I look forward to fighting alongside you.

Sincerely,
John Kerry

Message to Dems: GROW A SPINE!
Mood:  irritated
Topic: State Of The Union
Below you will find a petition on John Kerry's website. Please fill it out and submit it.

Tell the Democrats that we the people have had enough of their complacency in the face of criminal, unconstitutional, unAmerican and inhuman behavior. Tell them that we've had enough of the ideologues who stand to drive this great country back into the barbarism of the middle ages. Tell the Democrats that you DO NOT believe that the President should have the powers of a King.

Tell the Democrats that unless they do your bidding and stop trying to cover their own ass you are NOT going to contribute 1 dime to their party, nor are you going to vote for another Democrat until they stand up and fight the corporate/fundamentalist/militaristic/individualistic/short-sighted/manipulating and exploiting Republicans who have for the past 40 years been ruining the middle class, driving people further into despair and poverty through their myopic policies, creating a system of black and white and more and more punishment even as the world plainly sees that their way DOESN'T work.

Tell them that you are not going to sit idly by and watch as these wealthy, white, angry, men, destroy the country that you love and corrupt and make ugly the ideals of and everything that this country attempts to stand for.

TELL THE DEMOCRATS TO GROW A SPINE!

OFFICIAL ANNOUNCEMENT
Topic: Hopefully Humorous
The government announced today that it is changing its national symbol from an Eagle to a CONDOM because it more accurately reflects the government's political stance. A condom allows for inflation, halts production, destroys the next generation, protects a bunch of pricks, gives you a superiority complex and gives you a sense of security while you're actually being screwed.

[Hats Off To A Damn Brit!]

---

RANT!

Just when I had given up all hope that no one else on this planet gets it, John Kerry has suddenly grown a little backbone and has vowed to filibuster Scalito. If this is anything more than just hot air he's going to catch a lot of flack from the dinkleberries on the right (and you know what they're going to say i.e. "every nomination deserves an up and down vote," "this is unprecedented" "blah, blah, blah") but The Indy Voice foresees Kerry getting even more viciously attacked by members of his own party.

Here's my political analysis of this entire situation. Forgetting that filibustering Scalito on ideological issues for preservation of the union is certainly the right thing to do, Kerry's move is politically savvy because it shows the American voter that there is an alternative to the corporate party of the U.S. and that maybe, just maybe, the Democrats do in fact have some balls. Barring the growing of big hairy ones by the remaining set of knuckle headed Democrats their party is going to crash and burn and I for one don't mind getting the fire going! Until Democrats stand up and fight for democracy here at home and for what is rationale, just and fair, the Republicans, who are, need I remind you, a bunch of selfishly myopic, corporate-owned and operated lackeys will continue to increase their monopoly on the federal and state governments which will only further push this country into all-out fascism.

The Republicans like to blame Democrats for everything from the bubonic plaque to athletes foot but those who know better realize that while Republicans only have themselves to blame for the last 35 years of miserable failures they do have a point in that Democrats are to blame because for the most part they have sat around and watched it happen. And the irony is that while some political consultants believe that to act to the contrary would appear to be "radical" and voters don't want that, it would seem to be a major logical oversight when these same Democratic politicians and their political consultant masters miss that Republicans have been promoting their radical corporate/militaristic/individualistic/globalization agendas even as they continue to win election after election.

Wake up folks! Democrats have such a hard time pushing their agenda because 1- they're not financially and ideologically backed by a huge conglomerate of multinational conglomerates 2- this country has never attempted nor does it know anything about "liberal" policies and 3- Democrats today are by and large completely spineless and continually fail to understand that as long as they attempt to maintain their power by maintaining the status quo they are going to lose it and lose it faster than they have been with expedited expedience over the past 25 years.

The Republicans make stands all the time to push their radical conservatism in the interests of big business as they continue to push this country towards the edge of the great abyss, why don't you take a lesson out of their play book and push back with even greater fervor in the interests of the people? Hey, at the very least there's more of us little people than there are of them.

Response to Feinstein: WAKE UP!
Topic: By Paul Loeb
The Indy Voice is reposting this article (below) by Paul Loeb as a response to the majority segment of ball-less Democrats who don't seem to get that ideology is the specific reason why Alito (and those like him) should be opposed using every possible political tool available.

It is my wish that the American people would elect representatives that nominate judges who don't believe that the President should have unlimited power and have respect for human, worker and civil rights. Barring 61 million people suddenly waking up to reality, those of us who get it should use every ethical means to oppose Bush and this dominant conservative and harsh ideology which over the past 25 years is leading our country down the road of impending disaster. The moral, spiritual and financial standings of the United States in the world continue to erode and untold numbers of the meek and powerless suffer even as more and more people slip into powerlessness as a direct consequence of this cold, unfair, irrational and extreme ideology.

IT MUST BE STOPPED AND SOMEONE NEEDS TO MAKE A STAND!!!

FILIBUSTER EVASION

In the wake of the Alito hearings, mainline pundits are calling his nomination a done deal. Alito didn’t spew obscenities or green bile. He didn’t admit that he’d reverse Roe v. Wade or vow to proclaim George Bush Lord Emperor. Rehearsed and coached by committee member Lindsay Graham (and by some of the same lawyers who justified Bush’s NSA wiretaps), he instead spoke deferentially and humbly about respecting legal precedent and separation of powers, while Republican committee members made him out to be a mix of Solomon and Mother Teresa. Much like Clarence Thomas during his hearings, Alito dodged the tough questions with evasions and platitudes, suffered convenient memory lapses on areas he couldn’t dodge, and justified controversial past stands by saying he was just trying to be a team player. We know little more about him than before--except about his capacity to dissemble.

Meanwhile, in a galaxy far away, former Congresswoman Liz Holtzman, who sat on Nixon’s impeachment committee, just wrote that Bush’s defiance of the law through illegal wiretapping, lying about the reasons for going to war, and condoning of violation of US law about detainee abuse constitute grounds for impeachment. Holtzman said impeachment should never be undertaken lightly. She found “voting for [Nixon’s] impeachment to be one of the most sobering and unpleasant tasks I ever had to undertake.” But she said it was necessary in Nixon’s case, and merited in Bush’s as well. A Zogby poll taken last November, just before the wiretap scandal broke, found that 53 percent of those questioned favored impeachment of President Bush if he lied about the war in Iraq.

If there’s a chance to stop Alito, much less reclaim our democracy, we need to bring these realities together. The filibuster just might be the vehicle to do that, as Senators could spell out the links between link runaway executive power and a nominee who has consistently ruled and spoken in favor of the unaccountable expansion of that power. Suppose the Democratic Senators actually used a filibuster to talk about the Alito nomination in its broadest context. They wouldn’t read the phone book. They wouldn’t get lost in an endless maze of legal rhetoric about stare decisis. They could talk about how they’d have readily accepted a more moderate nominee, much as Clinton nominated Steven Breyer and Ruth Ginzberg in part because Orrin Hatch said he’d accept them as preferable to other proposed justices. They’d use the filibuster to educate as well as impede.

However they label their actions, suppose the Democrats started debating the nomination, and didn’t stop, in the process addressing the real roots of why Alito would be so destructive. They could read from articles and books about this administration’s abuse of presidential power. They could talk about whether we really want government officials to be able to strip us of our rights at will, listen in on our phone and email conversations without a court order, and infiltrate the citizen groups through which we gather peacefully to express our beliefs. They could talk about the choices women were forced to make when abortion was illegal, what it’s like to be discriminated against, then told you don’t meet an impossible burden of proof, and whether police should be able to shoot unarmed 15-year-olds who flee after stealing $10. They could talk about the Sago mine disaster, and the fruits of a politics where unions are busted and regulations gutted at every turn. They could tell the stories that bring seemingly abstract issues of jurisdiction and constitutional interpretation to life, and make clear their real-world consequences.

In the process they could remind America that this president, with this track record of lies, deceptions, and favors for the most destructive private interests, deserves no presumption of deference. And that when he nominates someone, like Alito, who will only further his abuses of power, Senators have a moral responsibility to oppose him however they can. The wink-and-nod games of the hearings were designed to obscure Alito’s record and frame him as genial and reasonable. If the Democrats accept this, or even quietly vote against him without further protest, they further the lie that this is an ordinary nomination in an ordinary time. If they filibuster and stand firm, there’s a chance that just enough of the now politically weakened Republicans will back down and not risk putting themselves on the line to destroy nearly 200 years of Senate tradition for the naked goal of increasing their power. But Democrats have to take the risk of standing strong, and we as ordinary citizens have to do all we can to convince them to do so.


Paul Rogat Loeb is the author of The Impossible Will Take a Little While: A Citizen's Guide to Hope in a Time of Fear, named the #3 political book of 2004 by the History Channel and the American Book Association, and winner of the Nautilus Award for best social change book of the year. His previous books include Soul of a Citizen: Living With Conviction in a Cynical Time. For more information see www.PaulLoeb.org

ALITO'S EXTRAORDINARY CIRCUMSTANCES
Topic: By Paul Loeb
Remember the "nuclear option" compromise? When the group of 14 Senators reached their agreement last May, they said they'd support a filibuster only under "extraordinary circumstances," presumably if Bush nominated Attila the Hun. I'd suggest these circumstances apply not only to Samuel Alito's track record but also to his nomination's entire political context.

In threatening to end the Senate's ability to filibuster judges, Republican leaders talk much about high principle, the right of Presidents to have their nominees accepted or rejected without parliamentary obstructions. But the sole principle behind this proposed change is that of the power grab. The Republicans control the White House and Senate. They're attempting to consolidate control in every way they can, including trying to obliterate 200 years of Senate tradition on the filibuster. This threat isn't a moral stand: Republicans have filibustered nominees themselves. It's just one more in series of attacks on individuals and institutions that they've viewed as political obstacles, like Tom DeLay's mid-census gerrymandering, the leaking of Valerie Plame's identity, the jamming of Democratic phone banks, and the branding of political opponents as unpatriotic. Honorable conservatives used to warn against the raw power of the state. But the love of power has now become the political right's prime gospel, making the slightest notion of checks or balances heretical treason. Republican leaders work to end the filibuster not because they believe it violates some deep constitutional mandate, but because they believe they can get away with it.

But maybe they can't anymore. When Republicans first floated the "nuclear option" threat in early 2005, Bush's polling numbers were as high as 57 percent. His support has dropped steadily since, in the wake of the Katrina disaster, the legal problems of DeLay, Bill Frist, Karl Rove, Scooter Libby, and Duke Cunningham, and an Iraqi quagmire that's inspired powerful challenges by Cindy Sheehan and Congressman John Murtha. Republicans have lost key electoral battles in Virginia, New Jersey and California. Bush's polls have dropped as low as 37 percent. With once-solid Republican Senate and House seats now seemingly vulnerable, those who vote to eliminate the filibuster and confirm Alito will be taking far more of a political risk than they would have just a year ago.

Were Alito a reasonable Supreme Court choice, all this would be moot. But he isn't. He'll follow the script and evade specifics at his confirmation hearings, but he's still the candidate nominated to appease the political right because they deemed Harriet Miers insufficiently hard-line. Consistently opposing the federal government's right to address corporate abuses, Alito has argued for virtually unlimited executive power, including the government's right to intervene in the most intimate realms of personal life. He's endorsed the rights of police to shoot an unarmed 15-year-old who was fleeing after breaking into a house, defended the refusal of state employers to pay damages for violating the Family and Medical Leave Act, and said it created no undue burden if husbands could prevent their wives from getting abortions. Citizen groups, he's ruled, have no standing to sue convicted polluters under the Clean Water Act. The federal government, he's argued, has no right to pass national consumer protection legislation aimed at preventing odometer fraud or banning the sales of machine guns. Regarding the exclusion of blacks from juries in death penalty cases, he's called the statistical evidence as inconsequential as the disproportionate number of recent U.S. presidents who've been left-handed. In one case, Alito's Third Circuit colleagues said the federal law prohibiting employment discrimination "would be eviscerated if our analysis were to halt where [Judge Alito] suggests."

Alito now downplays his membership in a Princeton alumni group so hostile to the admission of women and minorities that even Senate Majority Leader Frist condemned it. He dismisses as mere job-seeking his declarations, while applying to the Reagan-era Justice Department, that the Constitution does not protect a woman's right to choose an abortion, and that he disagreed with the Warren Court rulings that desegregated schools and expanded voting rights. He's trying to dismiss he memo he wrote, after getting the job, embracing the "goals of bringing about the eventual overturning of Roe v. Wade." He also minimizes the breaking of his pledge to recuse himself from cases involving his sister's law firm.

It's precisely because Alito's presence on the Court is so potentially damaging that Democrats and moderate Republicans have a responsibility to challenge his nomination through every possible mechanism, including the filibuster. Republican leaders who try to eliminate it as a political option need to be branded, along with every Senator who supports them, as embodying a politics that believes in nothing except its own right to power. With Roberts, Senators could say they were replacing the equally conservative William Rehnquist. To support Alito, we need to make clear, is to alter the balance on the Court radically for the most dubious of political ends. It does no good to reserve the right to filibuster in theory. If our Senators aren't willing to risk using it in a situation this exceptional, it becomes practically meaningless.

Senators accept a president's court nominations for three reasons: They respect the perspectives of their nominees; they believe a president should have the right to choose whomever they please as America's legitimately elected leader; or they fear the president's political power. But this administration has no moral standing to which Senators should automatically defer. Bush gained the presidency through the extraordinary interventions of his brother Jeb and the existing Supreme Court. He was reelected based on lies about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, ties between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaida, John Kerry's war record, and the true costs of his tax cut and prescription drug plans. And through Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell's elimination of 300,000 overwhelmingly Democratic voters from the Ohio rolls and the withholding of voting machines from key Democratic precincts. My friend Egil Krogh, who worked in the Nixon administration, hired G. Gordon Liddy, and went to prison for Watergate, told the sentencing judge that he and his colleagues had "almost destroyed democracy." The Bush people, he said to me recently, "are even more ruthless."

Alito's nomination embodies that ruthlessness. If confirmed, his track record suggests he'd support the Republican consolidation of power at every opportunity. But maybe the capacity of that power to intimidate is finally beginning to wane. If the Senate can find the courage to block Alito's confirmation, they will draw a critical line on a choice whose effects could echo for the next forty years. They need to recognize the high stakes and extraordinary circumstances of our time.


Paul Rogat Loeb is the author of The Impossible Will Take a Little While: A Citizen's Guide to Hope in a Time of Fear, named the #3 political book of 2004 by the History Channel and the American Book Association, and winner of the Nautilus Award for best social change book of the year. His previous books include Soul of a Citizen: Living With Conviction in a Cynical Time. (See www.PaulLoeb.org) To receive his monthly articles email sympa@onenw.org with the subject line: subscribe paulloeb-articles