Senatorial Schizophrenia and Alito     1/26/2006
By Jan LaRue, Chief Counsel

Left breaks with reality and majority of Americans.

A shrink on a morning news show today said the majority of people are wrong about schizophrenia. They think it means having multiple personalities. Not so. It means “a break with reality.” As in “hearing voices,” “hallucinating” and “denying reality” for example.

Let’s go with that. Abortion, Alito, Americans and Senatorial Schizophrenia. Let’s use a liberal version of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual to define reality as to whether Judge Samuel Alito should be confirmed by the Senate:

The Washington Post editorial, January 14, 2006:

A Supreme Court nomination isn’t a forum to refight a presidential election. The president’s choice is due deference — the same deference that Democratic senators would expect a Republican Senate to accord the well-qualified nominee of a Democratic president. And Judge Alito is superbly qualified. His record on the bench is that of a thoughtful conservative, not a raging ideologue. He pays careful attention to the record and doesn't reach for the political outcomes he desires. His colleagues of all stripes speak highly of him. His integrity, notwithstanding efforts to smear him, remains unimpeached. … No president should be denied the prerogative of putting a person as qualified as Judge Alito on the Supreme Court.

Where are Americans on Alito and Abortion? Polling results, conducted January 10-12, 2006, and released by the Susan B. Anthony List, indicate that if Alito is pro-life, that should not disqualify him:

Seventy percent of women and 71 percent of men said Judge Alito should NOT be disqualified from serving on the U.S. Supreme Court if he is pro-life on abortion.

Sixty-six percent of women and 70 percent of men said a well-qualified nominee should NOT be disqualified from serving on the U.S. Supreme Court if he or she is pro-life on abortion.

And what about among pro-choicers? Of those sampled in the poll, 28 percent identified themselves as pro-life and 34 percent identified themselves as pro-choice. Among those that were pro-choice, 56 percent said Alito’s position on abortion should not disqualify him from serving on the U.S. Supreme Court.

Wait a minute. Maybe schizophrenia does include multiple personality disorder:

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-California):

“If one is pro-choice in this day and age, in this structure, one can’t vote for Judge Alito. It is simply that simple.” Orange County Register, The Nation Blog, January 24, 2006

“In my view he is clearly qualified. … This is a man I might disagree with but that doesn’t mean he shouldn’t be on the Court.” Face the Nation, January 16, 2006

This is probably what the shrink meant by hallucinating:

Sen. Chuck (Why is it, Judge Alito, you can see written words but can’t see the unwritten ones? I can see them) Schumer (D-New York):

“He [Alito] still believes that the Constitution does not protect a right to an abortion, but does not want to tell the American people because he knows how unpopular that view is.” Sen. Chuck Schumer: Associated Press (AP), January 24, 2006

This must be the “denying reality” symptom:

Sen. Herb Kohl (D-Wisconsin) said Alito has refused to call Roe v. Wade “settled law.” AP, January 24, 2006

A reality check on Judge Alito and abortion:

“But the judge also refused to affirm that Roe v. Wade was ‘settled law,’ or that it was what Democrats called ‘super-precedent’ or ‘super-duper-precedent. That reminds me of the size of laundry detergent in the supermarket,’ Mr. Alito said. He emphasized that the job of a Supreme Court justice is ‘to interpret the Constitution,’ saying that ‘the principles don’t change,’ and that a judge should not ‘add to, subtract from, or distort the Constitution.’” “Roe v. Wade: Grilled Alito,” World magazine, January 21, 2006

I think Judge Alito may have been thinking of the hallucinating branch of the judiciary that has broken with reality and hears voices in its left ear.

Hopefully, the senatorial schizoids will voluntarily and quickly end their “talkathon,” before we have to dispatch a band of shrinks with some meds and straitjackets. A little pat on the head, “Everything’s gonna be okay. All you have to say is yea or nay and we can let you out of the padded room.”

Printer Friendly Version

Recent Articles

Life and Death of the 'Empathy Standard'

The Death of the Living Constitution

Graham's Sellout on Sotomayor

Sotomayor and the Law through the Eyes of a First-Year Law Student

Day IV: The Real Life Consequences of a Radical Judicial Philosophy

Lies, Leahy, and the Wise Latina

Day III: Sotomayor More Confident About Rights Read into the Constitution than those Explicitly Laid Out within its Text

Senator Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) Way Off the Mark

Day 2: Facts Are Stubborn Things

Sotomayor Stands Alone