Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

In Alito, G.O.P. Reaps Harvest Planted in '82
New York Times ^ | January 30, 2006 | DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK

Posted on 01/30/2006 1:30:00 AM PST by RWR8189

Last February, as rumors swirled about the failing health of Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, a team of conservative grass-roots organizers, public relations specialists and legal strategists met to prepare a battle plan to ensure any vacancies were filled by like-minded jurists.

The team recruited conservative lawyers to study the records of 18 potential nominees — including Judges John G. Roberts Jr. and Samuel A. Alito Jr. — and trained more than three dozen lawyers across the country to respond to news reports on the president's eventual pick.

"We boxed them in," one lawyer present during the strategy meetings said with pride in an interview over the weekend. This lawyer and others present who described the meeting were granted anonymity because the meetings were confidential and because the team had told its allies not to exult publicly until the confirmation vote was cast.

Now, on the eve of what is expected to be the Senate confirmation of Judge Alito to the Supreme Court, coming four months after Chief Justice Roberts was installed, those planners stand on the brink of a watershed for the conservative movement.

In 1982, the year after Mr. Alito first joined the Reagan administration, that movement was little more than the handful of legal scholars who gathered at Yale for the first meeting of the Federalist Society, a newly formed conservative legal group.

Judge Alito's ascent to join Chief Justice Roberts on the court "would have been beyond our best expectations," said Spencer Abraham, one of the society's founders, a former secretary of energy under President Bush and now the chairman of the Committee for Justice, one of many conservative organizations set up to support judicial nominees.

(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 109th; 1982; alito; alitovote; brokebackreporters; bush43; federalist; federalistsociety; judgealito; justiceroberts; reagan; reaganlegacy; reaganrevolution; roberts; samalito; samuelalito; scotus; supremecourt

1 posted on 01/30/2006 1:30:04 AM PST by RWR8189
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: RWR8189
a team of conservative grass-roots organizers, public relations specialists and legal strategists met to prepare a battle plan to ensure any vacancies were filled by like-minded jurists.

I saw the source for the headline and thought "Ahh, another Vast Rrightwing Conspiracy" story.

Only took till the first paragraph to confirm that suspicion.

2 posted on 01/30/2006 1:34:13 AM PST by Darkwolf377 (http://www.welovetheiraqiinformationminister.com/#quotes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RWR8189

MSM moonbats on parade...with typical anonymous sourcing for their delusions.


3 posted on 01/30/2006 1:40:09 AM PST by peyton randolph (As long is it does me no harm, I don't care if one worships Elmer Fudd.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Darkwolf377

A win is a win.


4 posted on 01/30/2006 1:47:53 AM PST by Past Your Eyes (Criticize me if you will, but just don't circumsize me any more. -Kinky Friedman)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Darkwolf377

A group of winners, not whiners.


5 posted on 01/30/2006 1:48:58 AM PST by billhilly (The Democrat symbol is no longer the donkey, it's a strait Jacket.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Past Your Eyes; billhilly

I should have explained I was illustrating the DUmmies who think every issue is going to lead to Bush's destruction. My fault, sorry.


6 posted on 01/30/2006 1:53:30 AM PST by Darkwolf377 (http://www.welovetheiraqiinformationminister.com/#quotes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: RWR8189

So let me understand this, a group of thinkers, get together to hammer out a vision of what America should be. They then act on that vision and produce the desired results. The only weapons they used was their God given intellect and their persuasion.

Yeah, that's radical....


7 posted on 01/30/2006 1:57:19 AM PST by RadioCirca1970
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RWR8189

Those leftist suckers. They get blindsided by decades old vast right wing conspiracies every time! Shows that they just don't know how to plan ahead./s


8 posted on 01/30/2006 1:59:50 AM PST by Nathan Zachary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Darkwolf377

Nothing to be sorry for. Let them bark at the moon all they want. ";^)


9 posted on 01/30/2006 2:03:57 AM PST by Past Your Eyes (Criticize me if you will, but just don't circumsize me any more. -Kinky Friedman)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: RadioCirca1970

Yes. Kind of sounds like what the Founders did about 230 years ago.

Isn't that what people who love this country are supposed to do?


10 posted on 01/30/2006 2:14:13 AM PST by joyspring777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: RWR8189
>lawyer and others present who described the meeting were granted anonymity because the meetings were confidential and because the team had told its allies not to exult publicly until the confirmation vote was cast.

Back in the day, I would have said, "The New York Times: They have sufficient credibility for me to assume this is true."

Nowadays, I say, "The New York Times has been caught in so many outright fabrications that it is OBVIOUS they are simply making it up."

11 posted on 01/30/2006 2:19:46 AM PST by Lazamataz (I have a Chinese family renting an apartment from me. They are lo mein tenants.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: joyspring777

Yup, but the founders were eeeeeevil....just ask ward churchill.


12 posted on 01/30/2006 2:24:17 AM PST by RadioCirca1970
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: RadioCirca1970

I am from Colorado...so you are touching an incredible sore spot right now.

That was one thing our lame duck and turncoat Governor (Ref C) got right in opposing and speaking out about.


13 posted on 01/30/2006 2:35:30 AM PST by joyspring777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: joyspring777

I heard Churchill was going to endorse HAMAS in the election last week, but decided at the last minute not to; he thought they were too soft on Israel...


14 posted on 01/30/2006 2:39:10 AM PST by RadioCirca1970
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: RadioCirca1970

The guy gags everyone I have ever talked to about him.

What a wretched human being!

I won't even dignify him by calling him a man.

I came across a web site last week that exposed an author that now lives in extreme southern Florida that has been outed as truly pretending to be an American indian orphan.

Those same indian folks say they could spend their lives outing person after person who has done this.

I believe they should aim their research at Ward Churchill. Blow his lying and cheating carcass out of our University system...and make him have to "work" for a living...instead of lying and plagerizing on the public dole.


15 posted on 01/30/2006 2:45:12 AM PST by joyspring777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

Comment #16 Removed by Moderator

To: Darkwolf377
"Ah, another Vast Right Wing Conspiracy story."

Leahy was the dem who was known for his staunch opposition to Federalist Society members serving in the Judiciary. After Hillary's election, she became the most vocal and has publicly stated that the Federalist Society is the cornerstone of the VRWC conspiracy, that they are intending on "rolling back the New Deal".

Briefly, the dems base this conspiracy on those feddies working for Reagan influencing the Reagan Whitehouse when the investor protection languge that would become NAFTA Chap 11 was composed. After these investor protections have spread thru-out the western hemisphere via all the FTAs, there will exist duel set of conflicting regulatory laws. Once that happens, the dems say, a Supreme Ct dominated by the Federalist Society would find a case in which they would rule that 90% of the regulatory law that the dems created in the 20th century to be un-constitutional.

This is why the dems have been most opposed to Bush's nominees that were/are members of the federalist society or those that the dems perceive to be stealth feddies such as John Roberts, Janice Brown, and also AG Alberto Gonzales.

The problem for the dems is that if they try to use the this conspiracy in opposition to Alito or any other feddie, they look like kooks.

17 posted on 01/30/2006 5:57:51 AM PST by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: RWR8189

These sources should not be talking now. It will be the source of conspiracy stories in the future. It looks like Alito is in, although we won't be sure until the votes are counted tomorrow. But now that rumors are flying that Stevens may retire this summer, and knowing Ginsburg is not in good health, our president may well have a shot at a third nomination, possibly even a fourth. The way those dems went after Alito insisting to know who he talked to after he was nominated and what they said to him is unsettling. These lawyers need to keep their mouths shut. Let's just see the results of their exceptional work and let their role come out as future histories are written.


18 posted on 01/30/2006 6:00:41 AM PST by twigs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wtp7
Alito's nomination is a highlight of Bush's presidency.

Yep, for all its faults, no conservative can complain about Bush's court nominees. With Alito, Roberts, Thomas, and Scalia, conservatives have a 15 year age advantage over the four liberal justices.

19 posted on 01/30/2006 6:03:40 AM PST by Always Right
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: RWR8189

I see the New York Times four editorials against Alito did not do any good, now it is time to start making up news stories about him.


20 posted on 01/30/2006 6:05:22 AM PST by Always Right
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Always Right
And a good chance for at least one and maybe two more Bush appointees.!!!!!!
21 posted on 01/30/2006 6:08:10 AM PST by Coldwater Creek ("Over there, over there, We won't be back 'til it's over Over there.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: mariabush
And a good chance for at least one and maybe two more Bush appointees.!!!!!!

I wouldn't hold my breath. The liberals on the court would have to be taken off life support before they would let Bush appoint their successor.

22 posted on 01/30/2006 6:15:54 AM PST by Always Right
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin

"Briefly, the dems base this conspiracy on those feddies working for Reagan influencing the Reagan Whitehouse when the investor protection languge that would become NAFTA Chap 11 was composed. After these investor protections have spread thru-out the western hemisphere via all the FTAs, there will exist duel set of conflicting regulatory laws. Once that happens, the dems say, a Supreme Ct dominated by the Federalist Society would find a case in which they would rule that 90% of the regulatory law that the dems created in the 20th century to be un-constitutional."

An interesting conspiracy. However, this isn't what their activists use as rhetoric. They seem very concerned about "globalisation" and corporatism. Why wouldn't they rather be frank and express their fears that the New Deal era regulations would be ruled unconstitutional, and ride with that?


23 posted on 01/30/2006 6:43:51 AM PST by Frank T
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Frank T
As I said, the dems have a difficult time using this conspiracy because it sounds so kookey. Its much easier to find something else to oppose the nominee that will register with public opinion.

As for their "concern with 'globiliation' and corporatism", you need to understand that the dems and their activists/constituents are not neccessarily opposed globalization and world trade, they just want it done in such a way that it protects the worker(AFL-CIO), the environment(Earth Justice), and social justice(Public Citizen). As written, the investor protections in NAFTA Chap 11 and other FTAs benefit the investor/businessmsn/transnational at the expense of the labor, environment, and social welfare. The dems have tried to prevent this from expanding. This can be seen in the actions that the dems took before Bush was granted. fast-track authority and the Public Citizen lawsuit against Bush on transparency. They are toothless to prevent it.

The dems knew something was going on as far back as the 80s, but they didn't know what it was. When the NAFTA arbitration panel made its first few decisions, the dems knew then that Chapter 11 was being used as a sword against US and Canadian regulatory law. And when SCOTUS ruled in Bush vs Gore, the dems knew the full implications.

In 2001, Grieder wrote the article that describes, in great detail, this situation. It was piblished in The Nation and entitled: The Right and US Trade Law: Invalidating the 20th Century.

It is a long article that includes all that I have written here in much further detail. I could give you a link to the article, but, for a good reason, I won't. If you would do an exact phrase advanced google search on the article title, you will find links to the article published at many, many democratic-liberal-leftest-marxist websites. Being published and so many websites demonstrates that the left puts great credibility in this VRWC/Federalist conspiracy.

The dems last best chance to stop this is to stop FTAA, and to that end, Hugo Chavez' attempts to stop FTAA is the dems last best chance to stop the conspiracy. That is why Cindy Sheehan went to Venzuela.

24 posted on 01/30/2006 8:26:42 AM PST by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Darkwolf377

To the NYT, the Constitutional Convention in 1784 was a vast Right Wing Conspiracy.


25 posted on 01/30/2006 8:34:15 AM PST by Sam Cree (absolute reality) - ("Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one." Albert Einstein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin

Once that happens, the dems say, a Supreme Ct dominated by the Federalist Society would find a case in which they would rule that 90% of the regulatory law that the dems created in the 20th century to be un-constitutional.


The above appears like wishful thinking, but an originalist court could progressively, and over time, accomplish the same.


26 posted on 01/30/2006 10:49:46 AM PST by joyspring777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Sam Cree

No doubt!


27 posted on 01/30/2006 11:06:19 AM PST by joyspring777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Always Right
Well. I believe in Divine Intervention.
28 posted on 01/30/2006 2:46:31 PM PST by Coldwater Creek ("Over there, over there, We won't be back 'til it's over Over there.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: mariabush; Ernest_at_the_Beach; Mo1; Grampa Dave; NormsRevenge; RWR8189

This is the article that torqued off Kennedy so much today!


29 posted on 01/30/2006 9:33:32 PM PST by Howlin (Why don't you just report the news, instead of what might be the news? - Donald Rumsfeld 1/25/2006)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
I recall hearing the same kind of conspiracy stories about how Jimmy Carter got picked for the Dems
30 posted on 01/30/2006 9:41:08 PM PST by Mo1 (Republicans protect Americans from Terrorists.. Democrats protect Terrorists from Americans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: RadioCirca1970

So let me understand this, a group of thinkers, get together to hammer out a vision of what America should be. They then act on that vision and produce the desired results. The only weapons they used was their God given intellect and their persuasion.

Yeah, that's radical....

-- sounds like our Founding Fathers. :)


31 posted on 01/30/2006 9:42:18 PM PST by NormsRevenge (Semper Fi ... Monthly Donor spoken Here. Go to ... https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin; Mo1

Very interesting.....Feinstein's question regarding the commerce clause makes a bit more sense now!!


32 posted on 01/30/2006 9:49:18 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach (History is soon Forgotten,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge; Howlin

I love it!


33 posted on 01/30/2006 9:54:18 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach (History is soon Forgotten,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

How'd ya like to be the next nominee? lolol

That should be even better, Kennedy may blow up .


34 posted on 01/30/2006 10:04:08 PM PST by NormsRevenge (Semper Fi ... Monthly Donor spoken Here. Go to ... https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge; Ernest_at_the_Beach; Howlin; Mo1

Norm this is a superb reply to the whiners of the NY Slimes:

"So let me understand this, a group of thinkers, get together to hammer out a vision of what America should be. They then act on that vision and produce the desired results. The only weapons they used was their God given intellect and their persuasion."

"Yeah, that's radical...."

"-- sounds like our Founding Fathers. :)"


35 posted on 01/30/2006 10:34:35 PM PST by Grampa Dave (The NY Slimes has been committing treason and sedition for decades.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
"makes a bit more sense now"

If you think about it, Bush's nomination of Harriet Myers also makes sense. If, as the dems maintain, a conspiracy exists, Myers is a better choice than Alito.

First, she is more pro-business/anti-regulation than Alito(tho he is no slouch on pro-business issues) and second, her history had nothing with which the dems could attack her.

In retrospect, as Alito appears to be confirmed, it is/was the best nomination. But at the time, there was a certain amount of risk in nominating Alito. That risk being the dems ability to find a social issue with which they could sway public opinion against Alito. With a negative opinion, the dems could have blocked him without appearing obstructionist.

36 posted on 01/31/2006 6:59:51 AM PST by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: joyspring777
It may be wishful thinking for pubs/conservatives but it is a real perceived threat for the dems. As to whether it will happen and whether it is gradual or abrupt, is subject to debate

Regardless of the implications in the courts, there is no dispute that US Regulatory law and US Trade law are on a significant collision course.

37 posted on 01/31/2006 7:25:44 AM PST by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: RWR8189
In Alito, G.O.P. Reaps Harvest Planted in '82 New York Times ^ | January 30, 2006 | DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK

"Brokeback Reporting!"

38 posted on 01/31/2006 7:45:55 AM PST by Itzlzha ("The avalanche has already started...it is too late for the pebbles to vote")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson