Liberals Losing Abortion Battle?

Liberal action groups are going to focus their ad campaign against the confirmation of Judge Samuel Alito on issues beyond abortion, based on recent polling which is driving the liberal alliance to focus on:

• Judge Alito's support as a lawyer in the Reagan administration for an employer's right to fire someone who had AIDS.
• A judicial opinion he wrote supporting a police strip-search of a suspected drug dealer's female companion and her 10-year-old daughter.
• Votes against employment discrimination suits and an opinion overturning part of the Family and Medical Leave Act. (source: NYT)
  

The Libs are finding that strident pro-abortion rhetoric turns off voters in the age of high-res ultrasounds and partial birth abortion. They're finding that fewer women of childbirthing age are pro-abortion activists.

So they've dug up cases where a strict constructionish judge affirmed the law -- not necessarily the wisdom of the action that brought the matter before the court. Their message: If you want a "feel good" judge, toss out the constitution, and Alito along with it.

And, oh by the way, can you imagine David Kirkpatrick of the Times, who authored the piece, calling up conservative groups involved in Supreme Court issues and asking them what their advertising strategies are to fight a Dem appointment?

The article fawns on the Left in typical NYT style. Take, for example this passage:

Even before seeing the commercials, Steve Schmidt, a spokesman for the White House, accused the groups of planning "millions of dollars worth of wildly inaccurate advertisements that border on character assassination."

"Even before seeing?" "Accused?" I don't think a Dem operative in a Kerry White House would have gotten the same treatment, do you?

h/t Memeorandum