Betsy's Page blogged
Diane Feinstein really needs to review her history. This is what she said about why Alito's nomination differed from Breyer and Ginsburg. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., said things are different from when the Senate considered Breyer and Ginsburg, who were confirmed 87-9 and 96-3 respectively. "There was not the polarization within America that is there today, and not the defined move to take this court in a singular direction," she said.Gimme a break! As if Clinton wasn't trying to move the court in "a singular direction." Of course he was, but Feinstein just liked that direction so she didn't mind.
A Democrat does not notice something that supports the direction she thinks it should go, or news reports that support that direction, because they think they are always right. But they get very upset when things go in a Conservative direction, or when news reports give the Conservative side.And tell me that America wasn't polarized during the Clinton presidency. Does she have a total blank about the those years? And is her argument that, if the country is polarized politicially, the president can't nominate someone of his or her own ideology? Would she make those same arguments if Hillary were president? She better watch out. It's quite possible that a Democrat could be elected president and face a Senate that still has a majority of Republicans. Does she expect the GOP to suddenly become saints and roll over for the Democrats after their display on the Alito nomination?
There is not a snowball's chance in hell of that. Even if the Rebublicans lose their majority position, they have now learned how the Democrats want to play, and the Dems are going to be very upset when they see what they did, done to them.More disappointing things have happened with the GOP, but she shouldn't count on it. If the Democrats were smart, they'd acknowledge that Alito's confirmation is inevitable and have fifteen to twenty Democrats vote for him, just so they can have that talking point if a Democrat wins in 2008. But casting strict party-line votes (with a handfull of exceptions) will create a precedent that could very well come back to bite them.
Not could, but WILL