The New York Times Joins the Wacko Left

The New York Times is losing it. Today they published this editorial begging the Democrates to block Sam Alitos appointment to the Supreme Court by using a filibuster. On what grounds do they claim this is needed? Look at this inflammatory, ridiculous and unsubstantiated claim in their first paragraph.

"Judge Samuel Alito Jr., whose entire history suggests that he holds extreme views about the expansive powers of the presidency and the limited role of Congress, will almost certainly be a Supreme Court justice soon. His elevation will come courtesy of a president whose grandiose vision of his own powers threatens to undermine the nation's basic philosophy of government — and a Senate that seems eager to cooperate by rolling over and playing dead."

Get that! Not just specific decisions, but a hysterical generalization of a good judge's record.

And let's take a look at this gem from the crack editorial staff at the Times

"There was nothing that Judge Alito said in his hearings that gave any comfort to those of us who wonder whether the new Roberts court will follow precedent and continue to affirm, for instance, that a man the president labels an "unlawful enemy combatant" has the basic right to challenge the government's ability to hold him in detention forever without explanation. His much-quoted statement that the president is not above the law is meaningless unless he also believes that the law requires the chief executive to defer to Congress and the courts. "

What precedent are they talking about. The SCOTUS has not ruled on this matter and what law requires the President to defer to the
Congress and Courts. Are they seriously suggestion that the Executive Branch give up it's constitutional powers? What drivel!
Oh and then they complain;

"Judge Alito's refusal to even pretend to sound like a moderate was telling because it would have cost him so little. Chief Justice John Roberts Jr., who was far more skillful at appearing mainstream at the hearings, has already given indications that whatever he said about the limits of executive power when he was questioned by the Senate has little practical impact on how he will rule now that he has a lifetime appointment"

Why should Alito have to "pretend" to be a moderate? To please the Times editorial staff. Liberals are crazy. They lost an election. The President gets to pick who he wants on the court. The Senate is conservative, the President is conservative and the SCOTUS is soon going to be conservative. I'd suggest if the liberal weenies at the Times have an issue with that they should go out and win some elections and stop whining.