...even some liberal lawyers and judges who know Alito are wholeheartedly supporting his nomination, calling him an impartial jurist. ... Former 3rd Circuit Court Judge Timothy Lewis, who had a liberal record on the court, says, "contrary to what the Republican right is saying about him being a 'home run' Alito does not have an agenda."
This Lewis guy seriously missed the point, in my opinion. Speaking for myself, as a member of the Republican right, we DON'T WANT a guy with an agenda. We were hoping for someone with a clear record of interpreting the constitution based on what it really means, and allowing lawmakers to be the ones to push agendas. We had nothing against Miers except that we could not be sure that she would keep her personal agendas to herself -- whatever they may be.
Not that agendas are bad -- there are good ones and bad ones, and some that are neither here nor there I suppose. However, the way this is supposed to work is that 'we the people' push our agendas through Congress, and they pass laws to reflect the agendas of the majority (numerically, not racially, speaking; e.g. the agendas with the most votes). The role of the Supreme Court (or part of their role) is to ensure that those laws are not contradictory to the Constitution, and if they are, the Court nixes them. If 'we the people' are not satisfied with the result, we can attempt to Amend the Constitution to clarify the matter. There are, oh, a few examples of these 'Amendments' already in place.
So I guess I'm saying that this Lewis guy is very confused. The Republican right is saying Alito is a 'home run' PRECISELY BECAUSE he has no agenda.
My 2 cents,
P.S. I love the way Scott Wilder put it the other day: Supreme Court Justices should not, must not represent the American people. They represent the Constitution. Period.