The interrogation portion of the Alito hearings treated America to a dismal spectacle of a group of liberal senators attempting to demonize an accomplished jurist and a decent man. Replete with ominous insinuations, the stratagem predictably featured dark hints of closeted bigotry and racism. Closeted is the key word here since nothing in Alito's extensive writings or personal life has indicated that this actually may be the case.

Apart from being a disgust—provoking sight, the hearings had a tremendous educational value presenting a textbook illustration of the liberal modus operandi. By being their target and suffering through his ordeal with patience and dignity, Judge Alito has done an invaluable service for his country.

Thanks to him more Americans now know what liberals are really like and how they treat those with whom disagree.

The reason why liberals dislike Judge Alito is very simple: He is a committed conservative. In their minds, Alito's long paper trail and numerous utterances should have provided the Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee — and the leftwing interest groups who pull their strings — with plentiful ammunition to blow him out of the interrogation chamber. Here at last they had in their clutches a red—blooded conservative — a pure specimen of that evil species — pinned down, alone and exposed to their penetrating gaze and examination.

What an opportunity for Democrat senators to sink their liberal fangs into bare conservative flesh!

And what did they do? Instead of taking Alito to task on the basis of his ideology, they sought to demonize him as a person, an effort with only a slim chance of success, since — as anybody could see — Samuel Alito is a nice man.

But why would the Democrats behave in this seemingly irrational way? Why would they pass up on this golden opportunity to nail and convict a proven conservative, extreme as he must be, on national television?

For a clue we need to go no further than Alito's job application from 1985. It reads in part:

I believe very strongly in limited in limited government, federalism, free enterprise, the supremacy of the elected branches of government, the need for a strong defense and effective law enforcement, and the legitimacy of a government role in protecting traditional values... I disagree strenuously with the usurpation by the judiciary of decision—making authority that should be exercised by the branches of government responsible to the electorate.

This is as straightforward a summary of American conservatism as we can get. This is also happens to be what a majority of Americans believe. To put it differently, the good judge is well within the American mainstream.

To have attacked Alito on ideological substance would have alienated the Democrats even further from the centrist electorate and expose them for the extremists that they really are. Thus their stratagem of personal destruction was not some tactical blunder but a bare necessity, as it was their only option.

This is, in fact, what liberals do all the time. They never engage their conservative opponents on substance. They cannot afford to do so. How does one argue against limited government, lower taxes, free enterprise, strong defense, effective law enforcement, tough sentencing for crimes, smaller regulatory burden and traditional values? These imperatives embody many of the principles that informed the founding of this country, and to this day most Americans identify with them. To attack this world—view would be a political suicide. Democrats' only hope is to demonize and destroy its messengers.

What makes the Democrats' quandary even bleaker is that they stand for precisely the opposite. How in this world are they to convince the American people that a bigger government, higher taxes, weak military, partial—birth abortion, shackled law enforcement, leniency for criminals and more regulation are good things?

These are the core beliefs of the Democratic Party which they — for the obvious reasons of self—preservation — try to disown especially come election time. But it is easy to see through the ruse when we remind ourselves of the trusted old saying: 'Watch what they do, not what they say.'

When was the last time you came across a Democrat who was sincere about shrinking government, cutting taxes, strengthening national defense, instilling traditional values or expanding free enterprise? Such Democrats are few and far between.

Dire indeed is the Democrats' predicament. They can't engage their opponents on substance, while at the same time they must try to hide what they themselves believe. Caught between a rock and a hard place, demonization and deceit are their only options.

These, however, make for a flimsy foundation on which to build a party, a majority,  and a future. This conclusion holds true especially in this era of the new media when lies tend to get exposed rather quickly, as Dan Rather and a few others have painfully learned. Nevertheless, the Democrats have nothing else to go on — hence the pathetic spectacle of the Alito hearings. In the course of their attempt to monsterize a first—rate judge and a good human being, Biden, Kennedy and Co. came off as lying and slandering desperadoes that they are.

This, sad to say, is the Democratic Party of today.

Vasko Kohlmayer defected from Communist Czechoslovakia at the age of 19. He lives in London and works in the publishing industry. He can be contacted at vasko_kohlmayer@msn.com.