Judge Alito Accused of Allegiance to "Radical Right"--Sounds Good To Me

In a post entitled, "Whose 'American Way?'," Powerline's Paul Miringoff comments today on what must be one of the best "oops" comments ever uttered by People for the American Way. I can't figure out what to excerpt so here is the whole thing:

Here's the tail end of a story in today's Washington Times about Judge Alito's 1985 statement of philosophy:

Judge Alito went on to say that "racial and ethnic quotas should not be allowed" and that he strongly favors "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."

[Ralph] Neas [president of People for the American Way] said this proves the nominee's "fervent allegiance to virtually every pet cause of the radical right" and "underscores our concern that he would vote to turn back the clock on decades of judicial precedent protecting privacy, equal opportunity, religious freedom, and so much more."

So let's see -- according to Neas, the "pet causes" of the "radical right" are race-free, merit-based selection decisions; limited government; federalism; free enterprise; the supremacy of the elected branches of government; strong defense and law enforcement; and protection of traditional values.

As an opponent of the right, Neas' pet causes appear to be race-based preferences, unlimited government, unfree enterprise, the supremacy of unelective branches of government, less than strong defense and law enforcement, and indifference (if not hostility) towards traditional values.

Which set of people is "for the American way?"