Here’s the problem with knee-jerk reactions: They’re typically made
by people acting like jerks.
Case(s) in point:
Last Monday, Senator Schumer took to the airwaves to denounce
President Bush’s Miers The Redux–Appeals Court Judge Samuel Alito—as
being "likely to divide America." Of course, it’s hard to know how
Schumer could have confidently rendered such a verdict 45 minutes
before even Bush made his public announcement. Senate Majority Leader
Harry Reid instantly labeled Alito "too radical." The jerking knees,
it seemed, were everywhere.
But this is a lose-lose for Democrats. It is neither worth the
expended political capital nor one that is likely to result in a
Democratic victory.
With the powerful Gang of 14 crumbling apart, Democrats will be
unable to stop the Alito nomination without the filibuster. And the
filibuster—or any serious political confrontation—would be a
disastrous move.
First, the news headlines would turn from territory favorable to
Democrats—Iraq, Plamegate, etc.—to the politically neutral (and even
potentially damaging—and definitely boring) subject of a judicial
showdown. Following Harry Reid’s Rule 21 move, the dominant spin for
that news cycle would concern Democratic obstructionism to the
democratic process. True or not, it will work, dominate and stick.
But let’s go ahead and say that the Dems, having already failed to
convince the Gang of 14 of Alito’s supposed radicalism, lose the
filibuster fight. Now, they’ve not only seriously altered the news
cycle, they’ve also altered the political climate by giving Bush a
victory (does anyone remember Republican victories? Seems like ages…)
and are left with serious egg on their face. They will then have also
permanently damaged their cause by making it abundantly clear that
Bush can jam through any nominee of his choosing—however conservative—
during his remaining years, should another opening surface (not a
remote possibility either…Justice Stevens is 85). It’ll be open
season for true radicals, then…
The case against Alito—contrary to initial news reporters—is hardly a
strong one. While he’s certainly conservative, he’s hardly radical.
While Democrats may disagree with his conclusions, his journey to
those conclusions are not only respectful of precedent but are
remarkably restrained. The cases cited by Alito’s opponents to paint
him as a radical (especially Planned Parenthood v. Casey) aren’t
nearly as cut-and-dry as they claim, And Dems will be hard pressed to
find any colleagues of Alito—past or present and on both sides of the
aisle—who think of him as some sort of tub-thumbing partisan out to
turn the world upside down with the flick of his gavel.
Sure, sure: Dems should ruffle their feathers, asks pointed questions
and do their best to make Alito sweat over issues that, well, he
deserves to be grilled on.
But that’s it. Democrats have much going for them as a party right
now. Even the Democrats convinced that Alito will ruin the Court
(relax, he won’t) shouldn’t let him kill two birds with one stone and
ruin their party in the process.