Political Theater At Its Worst

While trying to move as little as possible as I recover from the marathon, I've been listening to almost non-stop radio coverage of the nomination of Samuel A. Alito to replace Sandra Day O'Connor on the Supreme Court. I don't know if I've ever heard such a farce. On the left pundits are saying “There's going to be a huge fight; he's a right wing wacko.” On the right, pundits are saying “I don't think there's going to be much opposition; once people get to know him they'll see he's a great guy and they will support him.” I don't believe either side is saying what they think is true. Instead, both sides are taking extreme positions in an effort to shape public opinion. I guess this is how politics works these days: You never hear real opinions and rarely hear many facts; instead, you hear spin. This isn't new; it's just rare that you see it so clearly.

That said, the spin is revealing in itself. The left is arguing from the facts of Alito's long record that he's an extreme Right nominee, while the Right is arguing from nothing more than “he's a really good guy” that he should be unobjectionable. If you had the choice, would you pick a judge based on a concrete record, or would you pick based on whether you thought he was a good guy?

Oh, the Right is also arguing that Alito is “just like Roberts” because Roberts supposedly set such a high standard and everyone loved him. Of course, Alito might turn out to be just like Roberts in terms of how the two would rule in any given case, but we can't know that because we still don't really know how Roberts is going to rule. Roberts turned out to be unobjectionable because he had such a thin record; that's not the case with Alito.

What is certain is that Alito will add nothing to the diversity of the court in terms of background, gender, race, ethnicity, philosophy, experience, etc.

Happy Halloween, everybody. Are you scared enough yet?

Posted October 31, 2005 04:08 PM | law general