IT’S AN ALITO-NOMINATION POLL over at Hugh Hewitt’s.

IN THE MAIL: My law school classmate Gene Sperling’s new book, The Pro-Growth Progressive : An Economic Strategy for Shared Prosperity. This looks quite interesting, and seems in some ways to resonate with things I’m saying in my forthcoming book. I’ll be writing more about it after I’ve had a chance to read the whole thing. Just the notion that “pro-growth” and “progressive” should go together, of course, will seem radical in some quarters.

PORKBUSTERS UPDATE: PorkBusters has entered Version 2.0. N.Z. Bear explains Senator Coburn’s new bill to cut spending, and what’s going on. (More on that bill here).

N.Z. Bear has also set up a new interactive PorkBusters tracking page that records support from Senators, bloggers, and the like in graphic form. Weigh in!

And here’s a snazzy new PorkBusters graphic, by Karl Egenberger. Feel free to use it. Note that the pig is starting to look worried. . . .

MORE ON OIL SANDS: “The Julian Simon effect is already occurring.”

STUART BUCK POSTS on the origins of “Scalito.”

THIS WEEK’S Carnival of the Capitalists is up!

ABORTION AND SPOUSAL NOTIFICATION: As several people point out, that’s going to be an issue with regard to Alito. I’m not sure what I think about this issue, but looking at the Pennsylvania statute I notice a lot of exceptions, one of which is this: “Her spouse is not the father of the child.”

I’m not sure about Pennsylvania, but in many states her spouse — even if he’s not the father of the child — would still be on the hook for child support. Likewise, if he didn’t want children, but she disagreed, lied to him about birth control, and got pregnant. And he certainly couldn’t force her to have an abortion if she did so, even if his desire not to have children was powerful, and explicitly expressed at the outset. (The usual response — “he made his choice when he had sex without a condom” — never comes up in discussions of women and abortion.)

So where’s the husband’s procreational autonomy? Did he give it up by getting married? And, if he did, is it unthinkable that when they get married women might give some of their autonomy up, too?

The problem here is that you can say “my body, my choice” — but when you say, “my body, my choice but our responsibility,” well, it loses some of its punch.

Somewhat related earlier post, here.

YOU DON’T TUG ON SUPERMAN’S CAPE: Brian Maloney reports that some people, afraid of Michelle Malkin’s new book, are launching preemptive attacks. This strikes me as unwise . . . .

UPDATE: Amazon-review flamewar underway!

MAUREEN DOWD MAY NEED A DATE, but Meryl Yourish needs a job. If you can’t help out one, see if you can help the other!

SO MUCH FOR MY KOZINSKI BOOMLET: Reports are that Bush will nominate Judge Samuel Alito of the Third Circuit.

Orin Kerr: “I’m very pleased.”

Ann Althouse: “I welcome hearing something more substantial about the man than that people call him ‘Scalito’ to signify his similarity to Scalia and because his last name is similar enough to Scalia that people just can’t hear ‘Alito’ without wanting to say ‘Scalito.'”

Kathryn Jean Lopez: “I just got the White House talking points on Alito. Nowhere in them does it say that he is one of the best male lawyers in New Jersey.”

UPDATE: Law Dork notes that Bush is stressing the credentials, this time.

Meanwhile, Patterico says that Alito’s Casey dissent will be the main issue. More on that here, from Shannen Coffin.