We've learned the Washington Post tomorrow will endorse Samuel Alito's confirmation to the Supreme Court.
When the liberal Washington Post editorial page calls for Alito's confirmation, it goes to show the extremity of Senate Democrats who want to delay the confirmation vote in an effort to look for more dirt - which they won't find - about Alito's past. It also illustrates just how well Alito did this week to get such an endorsement.
Here's an excerpt:
"The Senate's decision concerning the confirmation of Samuel A. Alito Jr. is harder than the case last year of now-Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. Judge Alito's record raises concerns across a range of areas. His replacement of Justice Sandra Day O'Connor could alter - for the worse, from our point of view - the Supreme Court's delicate balance in important areas of constitutional law. He would not have been our pick for the high court. Yet Judge Alito should be confirmed, both because of his positive qualities as an appellate judge and because of the dangerous precedent his rejection would set."
