According to the Washington Post, in his application to work with Ed Meese in the Reagan Administration, Alito wrote "It has been an honor and source of personal satisfaction for me to serve in the office of the Solicitor General during President Reagan's administration and to help to advance legal positions in which I personally believe very strongly."

He continued: "I am particularly proud of my contributions in recent cases in which the government has argued in the Supreme Court that racial and ethnic quotas should not be allowed and that the Constitution does not protect a right to an abortion."

No amount of wishy-washy non-answers in his confirmation hearings can change what he has said. So was he lying to get a job or did he really believe that? If he really believed that, hasn't he already expressed a bias that should disqualify him from hearing an abortion case? (using his theory that he can't now discuss his opinions for fear of prejudging a case)

In that same document, Alito wrote...
"In college, I developed a deep interest in constitutional law, motivated in large part by disagreement with Warren Court decisions, particularly in the areas of criminal procedure, the Establishment Clause, and reapportionment."

The Warren Court's decisions, with which he seems to disagree include: Miranda warnings agaisnt self-incrimination, the Exclusionary Rule barring admissibility of illegally seized evidence, outlawing school-led prayers in the public schools, outlawing mandatory Bible reading in school, and requiring all state legislatures to be apportioned on the basis of population.

So let's see...he's cool with police misconduct, he supports elitist election law, is for more religion in public schools....

Does this guy strike anybody else as the anti-Earl Warren?

So...why aren't their marches? Why isn't their a swell of outrage over this nomination? Why does noone seem to care very much?