Scary Pudding

I've been listening to as much of the confirmation hearings as I can stand. It's a challenge. Most of the Senators can't get to the bloody point and it seems like time that could have been spent getting to the heart of Alito's views has gone to some sort of weird self-aggrandizement, with the Senators going on at length, presumably to demonstrate that they know enough about law to be asking questions of the nominee. Or maybe they just like being on camera.

There haven't been a ton of fireworks during the hearings (Spector had a little smack-down for Kennedy yesterday but that was, again, the Senators). Alito is a pretty cool cucumber. He's got all the personality and pizazz of a guy who calculates actuarial tables. He doesn't really joke. He sounds competent. He doesn't say things that make you go, "Wow, what a legal mind" (like Roberts did) but unlike Harriet Meirs, he at least knows and understands the law. It goes without saying that a conservative President is going to appoint a conservative nominee, so on the face of it, as conservatives go, he doesn't seem so bad. Right?

Wrong. I have a really oogey feeling about this guy. His very blandness is the root of it. Sam Alito is like a big, yummy bowl of vanilla pudding. Except that the pudding is full of raisins. There's more to this guy than meets the eye but since the Senators are wasting all their time blustering, all they're doing is skimming the surface. Find the raisins!

Adding to the overall creepy feeling about Alito is that he is clearly a guy who will say anything to be accepted. This is sad but when it comes to a life-time appointment it's also a little scary. He has gone on and on in praise of Justice O'Connor, who he would replace. But it is clear from his record that he won't be an O'Connor kind of justice. Further, there have been any number of questions about his position on abortion, affirmative action and presidential powers with their basis in some statement or ruling he made previously. The statement gives a clearly stated view of the issue at hand. And every single time a Senator says, "So is that in fact what you believe/meant?" the answer from Smoothy McSmootherson is some variation on "That was then, this is now".

First of all, I would much rather have some guy sit there and say, "Hell, yes, if Roe is challenged I'll do my level best to bring it down". Of course, then he'd be Robert Bork and even the Republicans would have to vote against him. But I have no respect for someone who lacks conviction or worse, someone who very much has convictions but hides them under the radar so that they don't interfere with his ambitions. Which is what Alito is doing. He's as much as said so. On a number of ocassions he has "explained" a position as being something he wrote on an application to get a job. In other words, he will say and do whatever in order to get what he wants. And what he wants now is a gig for life. I fear this is not a good thing for the rest of us.

In his favor, however, I will say this: Dude, who really remembers what they did in college? I totally believe that he proudly belonged to some right-wing, keep-out-all-the-women-&-coloreds organization while at Princeton but doesn't remember a lick about it now. I'm assuming a beer bong was involved.

I impressed a librarian yesterday because I could pronounce "stare decisis" and knew what it meant.