Drudge Report - the Coming Assault on Samuel Alito

Update 1/7/05 - 10:20pm - see Jeremy Pierce's post for some excellent comments (much better than mine) on this matter. 

According to Drudge, the democrats are war-gaming for Samuel Alito's confirmation hearings and they think they have a silver bullet that will derail him.  Here is an excerpt from Drudge:

Senate Democrats have put into place a plan that includes one last push to take down the nomination of Judge Samuel A. Alito as he heads into his confirmation hearing next week, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned.

Senate Democrats intend to zero in on Alito’s alleged enthusiastic membership to an organization, they will charge, that was sexist and racist!

Democrats hope to tie Alito to Concerned Alumni of Princeton (CAP).

Alito will testify that he joined CAP as a protest over Princeton policy that would not allow the ROTC on campus.

THE DRUDGE REPORT has obtained a Summer 1982 article from CAP’s PROSPECT magazine titled “Smearing The Class Of 1957” that key Senate Democrats believe could thwart his nomination!

In the article written by then PROSPECT editor Frederick Foote, Foote writes: “The facts show that, for whatever reasons, whites today are more intelligent than blacks.”

Senate Democrats expect excerpts like this written by other Princeton graduates will be enough to torpedo the Alito nomination.

One Democrat Hill staffer involved in their strategy declared, “Put a fork in Scalito. It doesn’t matter that Alito didn’t write it, it doesn’t matter that Alito wasn’t that active in the group, Foote wrote it in CAP’s magazine and we are going to make Alito own it.”

However, a Republican insider contacted about the situation said, “It’s the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard. The reason CAP was formed was to protest against people like Drujack who think killing chickens is similar to what happened at Auschwitz. I don’t understand how what a guy named Foote wrote in some magazine has anything to do with Alito.”

Hilzoy at Obsidian Wings offers his own history of CAP which is neatly summarized in the statement:

CAP was not about opposing affirmative action. It supported quotas that favored white men. CAP was about opposing the presence of women and minorities at Princeton. Period. Moreover, its tactics were despicable. In retrospect, it was one of the first instances of what has now become a familiar pattern: an extremely well-funded organization dedicated to spreading lies about some opponent in an effort to force that opponent to change course through the sheer volume of vitriol and harassment that a lot of money can buy. Samuel Alito pointed with pride to his membership in CAP in 1985. What relevance this should have now is open to debate; I just wanted to clarify what exactly it was that he was proud to be a part of.

Marty Lederman finds it odd that Alito would trumpet his CAP membership in a 1985 job application and yet not be able to recall his participation in the group in a questionairre submitted to the Senate Judiciary Committee this week.  Yet, commenters Thomas and David Nieporent offer some background that makes this oddness sound a little less odd.  Nieporent says:

As a post-CAP era Princetonian who has spoken with older alums on the subject, I think the answer is simple: he doesn't remember going to meetings because that wasn't the sort of "organization" it was. You put your name down, gave them some money, got their newsletter. There were a few cranks who wrote letters to the PAW (Alumni magazine), but that's about it. Being a member was more like signing a petition than joining an organization.

My interest in this has more to do with the statment of the "Democratic Hill Staffer" than anything else.  When Hilzoy wonders what relevance this should have now it seems that for some this will have singular and/or primary relevance. 

And, I think it would be fair to ask Mr. Alito questions about his involvement in this group.

Yet, it appears that charges have already been proferred against Mr. Alito on the basis of his association with this group which may or may not have any validity.  And, if the words of the aforementioned "Democratic Hill Staffer" are any indication, the charges have not only been made but the trial has been conducted and the verdict has been handed down.

And I bring this up to say that this is one more example of the sorry state of public and political discourse today.  Proverbs 18:17 warns us about making judgments before hearing all sides of an issue:

The first to present his case seems right, till another comes forward and questions him.  The Holy Bible  : New International Version. 1996, c1984 . Zondervan: Grand Rapids

I don't deny Alito's opponents the right to have and express their concerns, and to ask whatever questions they feel are necessary to address these concerns.  But in this case it seems that for some the case is already closed, before it has been opened.

Technorati Tags: Alito, Samuel Alito, Supreme Court, Supreme Court Justice, Supreme Court Confirmation Hearings, CAP, Concerned Alumni of Princeton, Princeton, Democrat, Democrats, Senate Democrats

Comments

[pgepps]

I think the key accuser in this matter has been withdrawn; it will be an embarrassment for Democrats if they make much of this.

Alito will be confirmed, and the Dems will make noises but keep it moving along, lest they look even more foolish than they already do.

Cheers,
PGE