Yesterday, on Hardball with Chris Matthews, Matthews breathlessly reported on a "disgusting" and "racist" document that was being circulated by Democrats:

Matthews: "In Other Words, They Nail Him On Not Putting Some Italian Mobsters In Jail From The [Lucchese] Family. Why Would They Bring Up This Ethnically Charged Issue As The First Item They Raise Against Judge Alito?" (MSNBC's "MSNBC Live," 10/31/05)

Matthews: "This Is Either A Very Bad Coincidence Or Very Bad Politics. Either Way Its Gonna Hurt Them. This Document: Not Abortion Rights, Not Civil Rights But That He Failed To Nail Some Mobsters In 1988. This Is The Top Of Their List Of What They've Got Against This Guy. Amazingly Bad Politics." (MSNBC's "MSNBC Live," 10/31/05)  (RNC link)

Maybe Tweety was blinded by the "glittering nobility" of Bush, but the document itself does no such racial baiting.  The right-wing has its talking point down: paint the Democrats as anti-Italian.  No surprise there, is there? If it has been a women, we would be wife-beaters. If it was a Hispanic, we would be anti-hispanic.  What the Democrats need to do is emulate Fitzgerald on this:  "that talking point won't fly.'

And here's is why the "so, Alito let off some mobsters 20 years ago" talking point sinks like a ton of lead.  

The reason why the case was first on that document is because, contrary to Matthews assertion, the fact that the criminals walked free here is a very big deal.

ALITO REPEATEDLY SCREWED UP ONE OF THE BIGGEST MOB CASE IN HISTORY

The case was United States v. Accetturo.  And, to be blunt, Alito let it slip away:

Bush has wasted little time in selecting another nominee for Sandra Day O'Connor's seat on the Supreme Court (it's almost as if he has done this before).  This one is the fight we have been waiting for since 2000 when Bush promised to appoint another historical revisionist (aka strict constructionist) to the Court.

This time the papers already have their research done and many Senators already have an idea of what to think, the wingnuts are cheering and we have started urging our Senators to fight.

The real questions are 10? 41? 50? and 50?  Are there 10 Senators on committee who might turn him down?  Do we have 41 votes to maintain a filibuster?  Do they have 50 Senators to implement the Nuclear Option (+Cheney)?  And after that do they have the votes to pass Alito in an "upperdown" vote.