***scroll for hearing updates***

Robert Bluey at Human Events Online has the results of yesterday’s AlitoBlog poll: Which Democratic senator was the biggest windbag at the Judiciary Committee’s round of opening statements about Judge Samuel Alito?

With 500 votes cast, Kennedy received 69.6% of the vote — far outpacing his nearest rival, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D.-N.Y.), who finished with 18%. Sen. Joe Biden (D.-Del.), a likely presidential candidate in 2008, had 6.4% to finish third…

It ain’t over yet…

***

Ankle Biting Pundits perform a Senatorial Bloviation Statistical Analysis of the percentage of words spoken by each Senator compared with the number of words spoken by the nominee. Here are the Dem stats, Senators’ percentage first, followed by Alito’s percentage (w/ actual numbers of words used by the individual Senator and Judge Alito during the Q & A in parentheses):

“Rosary Joe” Biden 78-22% (DE) (3,673 - 1,013) (a 1,879 word, and 13 minute opening “question”)

Chuck Schumer (NY) 75-25% (3,555-1,165)

Ted Kennedy (MA) 69-31% (3,439-1,539)

Pat Leahy (VT) 60-40% (2,714-1,874)

Russ Feingold (WI) 56-44% (2,976-2,364)

Diane Feinstein (CA) 42-58% (1,912-2,593)

Herb Kohl (WI) 37-63% (1,835-3,094)

***

Speaking of Sen. Biden, whose noxious sermonizing yesterday about discrimination almost literally made me gag, check out Radioblogger and Hugh Hewitt for some of Sen. Sanctimony’s own brand of intolerance at Princeton circa 2004. Carol Platt Liebau asks Biden: “Would this be considered one of the “sophisticated” forms of discrimination you were decrying this morning?”

Speaking of Sen. Schumer, The Political Teen’s Ian Schwartz, one of the bloggers covering the Alito hearings on the scene, shares his impression from the hearing room: “Sen. Schumer is more of a schmuck in person than on camera.” Ed Morrissey notes more schmuckiness here.

And Justin at RightSideRedux has an audio/video compare-and-contrast between Ted Kennedy and Imam Khamenei.

***
Lunchtime update: Imam Kennedy is grilling Alito over his reading material, for God’s sake, and calling for a subpoena of the records of the Concerned Alumni of Princteon.

I’m with Ed Morrissey:

I have to add something about Kennedy’s pulling out sentences from magazines and newspapers and demanding to know if Alito had ever read them. Isn’t this the same kind of treatment that Democrats complain that the PATRIOT Act would do to Americans — hold them responsible for their reading material? None of this has anything to do with Alito’s record as a judge, but because he mentioned the Prospect and National Review as magazines he may have read, now he’s being held responsible for every word they have ever published. I read the New York Times, and I hardly agree with anything they write.

Now Kennedy wants to subpoena the records of CAP — and Specter is getting irate about the attitude of the Senator. Someone needs to explain to Kennedy that subpoenaing the records of a long-defunct group because one disagrees with its political views sets up a very bad precedent. Shall we have subpoenaed all the records of the ACLU during the Ginsburg confirmations?

Roger Clegg notes that some of the papers Teddy the Windbag wants to subpoena are available at the Library of Congress: ” Was Senator Kennedy demanding that the Senate Judiciary Committee subpoena records from the Library of CONGRESS? If so, doesn’t that amount to sending a subpoena to yourself?”

Lordy.

Daniel Glover at Beltway Blogroll offers a guide to Whack-A-Pol.

comments (0)   trackbacks (21)