‘A fight worth having’

PRESIDENT BUSH on Monday gave editorial boards something they haven’t had much experience writing about recently -- an experienced Supreme Court nominee who actually has a paper trail showing a clear ideological tilt.

The Wall Street Journal today says it likes nominee Samuel A. Alito Jr.’s conservative record. And, as its editorial page did with John G. Roberts Jr., it determines before any Senate hearing that he “deserves to be confirmed easily and soon.” The Journal warns liberal interest groups gearing up to oppose Alito’s confirmation that “this is a fight worth having.”

The New York Times, meanwhile, says about as much as an editorial can say without explicitly coming out against Alito’s nomination. Rather, his conservative judicial record gives the Times reason to “pay attention.” The nomination, the Times notes, says the most about President Bush -- he’s callously unwilling to fix his style of governing and is, instead, bowing to his base despite the “almost endless setbacks and embarrassments the White House has suffered over the last year.”

Elsewhere, both USA Today and the Christian Science Monitor look ahead to Senate hearings, agreeing that Alito is in for a sticky confirmation battle. USA Today’s editorial encourages senators to avoid wasting time with verbose speeches -- as they did in Roberts’ hearings -- and ask questions instead.

The Monitor has similar advice for senators, predicting Alito will probably face questions that “will be ideological” and focus “less on his legal philosophy.” The Monitor would prefer that senators probe Alito’s “legal approach” rather than his ideological positions.