Last week I wrote that in rushing in to oppose Judge Samuel Alito, the president’s nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court, national gay groups showed their left-wing stripes. I just learned that, for a change, Log Cabin is challenging that narrow ideological agenda. According to the Washington Blade, Log Cabin Executive Director Patrick Guerriero took issue with these groups for “seeking to impose an ideological ‘litmus test’ on Alito that they did not impose on the two Supreme Court justices nominated by President Clinton.” Kudos, Patrick.
Sounding like many Republicans and conservatives who have weighed in on the nomination, Patrick added:
Our angle on this is the rules applied for justices nominated by Republican presidents should not be any different than those nominated by Democratic presidents. . . . It’s unfair not to apply the Ginsburg-Breyer ground rules to Alito.
While I’m inclined to favor Alito’s confirmation given his judicial temperament, conservative principles and solid record — as well as a respect for the privacy interests of gay and lesbian citizens going back thirty years — I acknowledge that Log Cabin’s stance (waiting for the hearings before deciding on endorsement) makes sense at this point. I’m particularly heartened that Patrick Guerriero has publicly taken issue with the national gay groups whose agenda leans increasingly to the far left.
Good job, Patrick. You got this one right.
-Dan (AKA GayPatriotWest): GayPatriotWest@aol.com