Did I mention the Economist?

The Brainbox and the Blowhards.

..aka Alito and the Senators.

TED KENNEDY is deeply troubled by the ethics of the Supreme Court nominee. Between 2001 and 2006, Samuel Alito, who is currently an appeals court judge, accepted $7,684,423 in “donations” from special interests who perhaps wanted the law tweaked in their favour. That included $28,000 from defence contractors, $42,200 from drug firms and a whopping $745,373 from lawyers and law firms.

No, wait. Those are Senator Kennedy's conflicts of interest.

...

So one would expect senators to ask him tough questions. Instead, most chose to make speeches. On the second day of hearings, ten out of the first 12 senators spoke for longer than the nominee.

Patrick Leahy of Vermont waxed thespian on the subject of strip-searching young girls, a practice of which he said Mr Alito was too tolerant. In one burst, he rolled the words “strip-search” around his mouth four times and “ten-year-old girl” five times.

...

Even a cursory look at his record shows that the sound-bite charges against Judge Alito—that he doesn't think machineguns should be regulated, that he never sides with blacks alleging discrimination—are simply untrue. His record on the bench is one of cautious rulings and scrupulous deference to precedent.

...

There is little evidence voters buy the idea that Mr Alito is an extremist. And on the basis of the hearings so far they are right.

...but don't listen to what Senate Democrats will say on Jannuary 20. They'll claim that they can't vote for such an "extreme judge." What they really mean is that the interests that fund their campaigns don't want them to.