See what others have said

Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.

Trackbacks

1. Does he represent us, or just himself? « The New York Groove
2. What would you ask La Raza Sotomayor? | Fire Andrea Mitchell!
3. It Just Keeps Coming; More on Sotomayor, and it isn’t good « Northern Thoughts And Reflections
4. Warning Signs about Sonia Sotomayor, from Andrew Breitbart « Frugal Café Blog Zone
5. Obama’s Secret Weapon against Gun Ownership; Sotomayor enters the arena « VotingFemale Speaks!
6. Supreme Court Overturns Sotomayor Judgment — Where’s a Wise Latina Woman on the Court When You Need One? « Quick Daily Hits — Politics and Such
7. Friday’s Funnies: Sonia Sotomayor’s Supreme Court Judge Nomination Political Cartoons « Frugal Café Blog Zone
8. ~ Franken, Less Funny Than Ever: Uses Lame Schtick to Question Sotomayor — God Help The USA « Quick Daily Hits — Politics and Such

Trackback URL

Comments

1. #715880
   On June 9th, 2009 at 9:50 am, Tazed and Confused said:

   It seems that her opposition to the death penalty is related more to the color of one’s skin that to the “sanctity of life”.

   …and don’t forget BHO’s nominees are a reflection of HIS ideology.

2. #715883
   On June 9th, 2009 at 9:57 am, cpodug said:

   So many questions, so little time! *sigh*

3. #715884
   On June 9th, 2009 at 9:57 am, desertdweller said:

   Law Enforcement isn’t necessarily aligned with the prison system. They’re separate groups.

   This is just Biden On Parade, which is even more ludicrous than Sonia Sotomayor.

4. #715886
   On June 9th, 2009 at 10:02 am, MrOlympia said:

   She is SO WISE maybe this wise Latina woman should be dispatched to talk with Lil Kimmy.

   The “smart power” this President and his homies display is going to end the world as we know it. When Obi Won got elected it moved Armageddon up @ warp speed.

5. #715887
   On June 9th, 2009 at 10:02 am, BadIdeaGuy said:

   David Brooks= useful idiot.

6. #715889
   On June 9th, 2009 at 10:04 am, Ragspierre said:

   Here are a few I’d like her to answer, besides the obvious:

   1. Do you believe the TARP fund spending is beyond review by the courts?

   2. Does your reading of the Constitution support the death penalty?

   3. According to your understanding of bankruptcy law, were the actions by the administration respecting GM and Chrysler in line with precedent?

7. #715890
   On June 9th, 2009 at 10:05 am, Paul Revere said:

   Are you concerned that this wise latina woman tripped in a pair of heels designed by an evil White man?

8. #715891
   On June 9th, 2009 at 10:11 am, Craig said:

   Questions for Sonia Sotomayor

   Are you concerned that she will be correcting Joe Biden’s grammar and style of elocution when they speak together at a public function?

   Are you concerned that she will sue the city of New York over her recent accident at La Guardia?

   Are you concerned that her personal story “Dreams of My Mother” will be published by Simon and Schuster and may well outsell Dreams of My Father?

9. #715892
   On June 9th, 2009 at 10:12 am, Craig said:

   Correction: Dreams From My Father.

10. #715897
    On June 9th, 2009 at 10:19 am, Dexter Alarius said:

    With what organ do you sense emanations of penumbra from the Constitution?

    Wouldn’t you agree that a wise Latina woman, with the richness of her experience, and a white male, when interpreting the Law and the Constitution would more often than not come to the SAME conclusion?

    If your house were on fire, would you be happy knowing the Fire Chief in charge of putting it out were promoted to his/her position because of a racial quota?

11. #715900
    On June 9th, 2009 at 10:21 am, letget said:

    What is your view on the 2nd amendment and does citiziens have a right to arms under the constitution? What is your view on the 10th amendment on states rights not given to the federal govenment?
    L

12. #715902
    On June 9th, 2009 at 10:22 am, BadIdeaGuy said:

    Question for VP Biden: do you miss being able to ask stupid, self-aggrandizing non-question lecture questions at the hearings?

13. #715904
    On June 9th, 2009 at 10:27 am, lgm said:

    To balance this strictly partisan post, note:

    Her reversal rate was not high, and better than Alito.

    Decisions in hard cases always leave people on both sides.

    Her decisions on race are not radical.

    She’s had conservative judges on her side.

14. #715905
    On June 9th, 2009 at 10:27 am, letget said:

    #11 s/b citizens.
    L

15. #715908
    On June 9th, 2009 at 10:30 am, spaceycakes said:

    Q: “Is that chain platinum, or is it just sterling?”

16. #715907
    On June 9th, 2009 at 10:30 am, tre said:

    My questions for her:

    Why should you, a wise latina with a 60% appeal reversal rate, be a Supreme Court Justice over a wise caucasian with a appeal reversal rate that’s much less than 60%?

    What’s your rational for saying that policy is made in the court of appeals?

17. #715909
    On June 9th, 2009 at 10:30 am, zyzzyg said:

    Those are fair questions, and should be asked of Judge Sotomayor during her confirmation hearings. Though I fear that we will get far more speach making from the Senators than we will get answers from Judge Sotomayor.

    The Senators who believe Judge Sotomayor is a poor choice for the Supreme Court should keep their questions under fifty words [Note: the questions above are good and average less than fifty words.] Then sit back and listen. Give her enough rope and see what happens.

    Please, Senators, no ’speachifying’ and ask many many short, and to the point, questions.

18. #715910
    On June 9th, 2009 at 10:31 am, RobM1981 said:

    I have a few:

    Do you believe that your specific DNA sequencing, making you a Latina Female, in any way makes your ankle fracture superior to a Yugoslav Male’s ankle fracture?

    If you were an Iranian Male postal worker, would your ankle have been stronger than the ankle you currently have? In other words, would you have suffered the fracture at all if you were Iranian, Male, and regularly worked on your feet?

    If you were Norwegian-American, Female,and a member of the US Olympic Soccer Team do you believe that your ankle fracture would in some way have less importance vis’a'vis the rich tapestry of wisdom that your life has generated by being a Latina Female attorney?

    Who do you secretly hold more in contempt: Successful German-American Men, or Successful Franco-American Women?

    How do you feel about Canadians? In your opinion are they primarily to be viewed as white, or as Canadians? Or do you hyphenate, such as “Aboriginal Canadian,” or “Quebecois Anglo-Canadian,” or “African American Canadian,” etc.?

    Please let us know. It’s getting hard to keep track of just what groups are superior to the other, which groups would be superior if they weren’t “disadvantaged” by the other groups, etc.

    Your Pal,
    RobM1981, CWM
    (Contemptible White Male)

19. #715911
    On June 9th, 2009 at 10:34 am, Dexter Alarius said:

    Are you concerned that she has been WRONG in more than 60% of her decisions?

20. #715914
    On June 9th, 2009 at 10:43 am, Truesoldier said:

    On June 9th, 2009 at 9:57 am, desertdweller said:
    Law Enforcement isn’t necessarily aligned with the prison system. They’re separate groups.

    Not to mention which “law enforcement” groups are they talking about? We saw the same tactiv used in the last election in WA state (for Governor). The incumbent claimed that she was backed by law enforcement. What it really turned out was she was backed by the beuracratic police unions and the challenger was backed by pretty much every police officer guilds which is a huge difference.

    I dont know about anyone else, but I would rather be backed by the police officer guilds (which are made up by the officers themselves) than the police unions which are made up of the typical union leeches.

21. #715916
    On June 9th, 2009 at 10:45 am, Dexter Alarius said:

    Are you expecting ‘better’ decisions from the Supreme Court since a wise Latina woman will be replacing a white male?

    Can you point to some opinions of Justice Souter’s that would have been better decided by Judge Sotomayor?

22. #715923
    On June 9th, 2009 at 10:52 am, spaceycakes said:

    LOL RobM1981

23. #715939
    On June 9th, 2009 at 11:04 am, rocketman said:

    ***
    I know a C**P SANDWICH when I see one. If this were any conservative non-minority group SCOTUS candidate the Left Wing Media (not MSM) would be going nuts 24/7.
    ***
    There isn’t enough LWM whitewash or enough Messiah “snow job” statements to make the Sonia Sotomayor nomintion look impartial.
    ***
    Get ready to have this “sandwich” crammed down our throats–again!
    ***
    John Bibb
    ***

24. #715958
    On June 9th, 2009 at 11:20 am, fighterDC said:

    RobM #17, could not have said it better myself! Hilarious.

25. #715962
    On June 9th, 2009 at 11:20 am, Jet Jaguar said:

    On June 9th, 2009 at 10:31 am, RobM1981 said:

    I have a few:

    Thanks, Rob, for my first laugh of the day!

26. #715967
    On June 9th, 2009 at 11:22 am, Savage24 said:

    I believe those crutchs are sympathy sticks. She doesn’t need the help. The weak kneed Senate will not block her nomination. In the real world, belonging to La Rasa would have been enough to sink her.

27. #716007
    On June 9th, 2009 at 11:50 am, jsmiddleton4 said:

    “Her decisions are not radical”

    PERFECT illustration as to why she should not be on the Supreme Court. Define “radical” and define the process by which we determine “radical” from “not radical”.

    Any part of the answers to either of those questions come for the law? Or do the answers for both of those questions come from our culture, our society?

    Wait for it….wait…..

    CULTURE and SOCIETY!

    But Sotomayor is NOT a judicial activist? The law is first and foremost?

    Even lgm has established the truth of the matter that she should not be a Supreme Court justice and why. Thanks for helping out lg….

28. #716019
    On June 9th, 2009 at 12:00 pm, TXGator said:

    Sra. Sotomayor, what are your tie-breakers when minorities are the plaintiff and defendant?
    Maybe:
    1st-Lowest household income as a child
    2nd-Least amount of hugs received
    3rd-Number of white people who looked at them strangely
    4th-Number of times they didn’t get what they wanted on the first try
    5th-Degree of nervousness around white people who you just know hate you?

29. #716022
    On June 9th, 2009 at 12:10 pm, DBNinKY said:

    According to Brooks, Sotomayor had bad luck in being born in 1954, because that meant that she went to college and law school in the 1970’s…

    So if we believe Mr. Brooks, we are to attribute her liberal opinions as the result of a 1970’s environmental mindset and just accept that once on the Court, she’ll be a restraint-minded, even tempered jurist who never strays from stare decisis in her decisions?

    Yeah, right!

    David Brooks column proves he either has no allegiance to the ideal of judicial restraint (which shows he’s no conservative) or that he lacks any concept of the Court’s ability to negatively impact that ideal should it tilt even further Left, which is what will happen if a far-left Sotomayor replaces a less-left Souter.

    And LGM, please, since when may Esquire, Law.com, etc be considered objective sources by any stretch of the imagination?

30. #716027
    On June 9th, 2009 at 12:17 pm, Living in the PSRK said:

    Ehhh, she is old enough to have osteoperosis and broken ankles hurt really, really bad. BTDT. Sucks. AND it is her RIGHT ankle. Maybe it was GOD trying to slow her down and give her a special message?

    Otherwise, heck no, I don’t want her on SCOTUS. Just “bench” her on the sidelines, darn it! She’ll do plenty o’damage just keeping her activist bootah in NY.

31. #716083
    On June 9th, 2009 at 1:25 pm, Ragspierre said:

    Here’s another one;

    Please explain your apparent hostility to FOIA requests by jounalists, given your record.

    http://hotair.com/archives/2009/06/09/sotomayor-and-freedom-of-information-act-the-odd-couple/

32. #716146
    On June 9th, 2009 at 2:12 pm, Member-VRWC said:

    According to Brooks, Sotomayor had bad luck in being born in 1954, because that meant that she went to college and law school in the 1970’s…

    I had the bad luck to be born in 1947, so even though that meant I attended college and grad school in the 60’s and 70’s when socialism on the college scene was gaining full acceptance, I had the good luck to be born with a brain, which allowed me to reject that BS and become convinced at an early age that NYT columnists are uniformly unwise.

33. #716272
    On June 9th, 2009 at 3:33 pm, MacEamonn said:

    Wendy Long of the Judicial Confirmation Network has more questions for the White House:

    * Are you concerned that would have granted the claims of convicted felons in prison that their right to vote had been violated on account of their race or color, just because they couldn’t vote since they were in prison? (Hayden v. Pataki case)

    * Are you concerned that The Supreme Court reversed Judge Sotomayor’s decision creating a federal claim so that prisoners can sue private prison contractors for alleged violations of their constitutional rights? (Malesko Bivens case)

    * Are you concerned that she would have hampered law enforcement with her view that the state creates an “express racial classification” when the police look for a black male suspect when a 70 year-old woman who has been attacked describes her assailant as a young black male?

    * Are you concerned that she signed a memo saying there is not a single rationale that would support capital punishment, and only evidence against it?

    * Are you concerned that she does a disservice to public servants in the ranks of the fire and police departments when she engages in activism, both on and off the bench, to press for racial preferences and quotas to deny jobs and promotions to qualified white police officers and fire fighters?

    I can’t imagine any reason why the White House would have any concern with these positions since they share them. The people who need to answer these questions are the American people, and they need to let 100 members of the Senate what those opinions are before it’s to late!

34. #716493
    On June 9th, 2009 at 7:21 pm, ScottyDog said:

    In my service to the United States Senate I cannot remember the last time I mentioned my race giving floor speeches.

    Will you be citing your Latina heritage in your decisions on the court?

    Is Latina a race widely recognized by demographers?

    Why do you think it is necessary to mention your culture when giving speeches to college students and in some cases citing your “Race” as Latina 41 times in a 10-15 minute speech?

35. #716515
    On June 9th, 2009 at 8:15 pm, Papa Louie said:

    The 1981 memo that Sotomayor signed said this about the death penalty:

    “It is counter-productive; we inflict death on the offender to manifest our opposition to his inflicting death on another.”

    This is the type of argument that drives me crazy. Taken to its extreme, it would prevent us from punishing criminals at all. For example, suppose some lowlife kidnaps a kid and holds him for ransom. Then, after the ransom is paid, he kills the kid anyway. Now let’s say that the perp is eventually caught, tried, and found guilty. What punishment would Judge Sotomayor find acceptable to impose on this murdering scum?

    We already know that the death penalty is off the table because it would be “counter-productive” to kill a killer to show that killing is wrong. But, by the same logic, you can’t put him in prison because that would be holding him against his will. In other words, you’d be kidnapping a kidnapper to show that kidnapping is wrong. And you couldn’t fine him, either, because that would be taking money from a thief to show that stealing is wrong.

    I guess the only punishment left would be to have him beaten. But that would be considered torture. Besides, if he beat the kid before he murdered him, that punishment would be out, too, because we have all learned from the progressives who run our schools that it’s counter-productive to hit someone to show that hitting is wrong.

    The only thing left that is not “cruel or unusual” is to turn him loose and hope he’s learned his lesson. That would only be cruel to his next victim. Obama wants judges who have empathy for criminals. But to protect society because you have empathy for future victims is counter-productive.

    It’s time to grow up and find judges who know the difference between “crime” and “punishment”. The difference is “due process”. A fine is not stealing, confinement in prison is not kidnapping, and capital punishment is not the same as murder if due process is followed by the court. It concerns me that a long-time judge like Sonia Sotomayor doesn’t seem to understand that.

36. #716563
    On June 9th, 2009 at 10:46 pm, rightwingrocker said:

    No racism here … Keep moving …

    Nothing to see here … Keep moving …

    Yeah, ok.

    Whatever.

    RWR
    http://www.rightwingrocker.com

37. #716567
    On June 9th, 2009 at 10:49 pm, rightwingrocker said:

    2. Does your reading of the Constitution support the death penalty?

    She wouldn’t know. I doubt she places any value on the Constitution, assuming she’s even read it.

    RWR
    http://www.rightwingrocker.com

38. #716571
    On June 9th, 2009 at 10:54 pm, rightwingrocker said:

    What’s your (rationale) for saying that policy is made in the court of appeals?

    Anyone who says something like that is supremely unqualified to sit on the bench of any court in the United States.

    RWR
    ww.rightwingrocker.com

39. #716612
    On June 10th, 2009 at 1:12 am, SpeakEasy said:

    Judge Sotomayor,

    Do you consider blacks to be racially inferior therefor requiring a judge to step in to ensure their advancement since they are unable to compete on a level playing field?

    It would never get an answer but I think the implication might stick.

    And for the trolls, I personally DO NOT believe blacks to be racially inferior- I have worked FOR many talented black men and women in the military who got to their rank based on personal acheivement, not quotas.

40. #732399
    On June 29th, 2009 at 11:05 am, tiredofit08 said:

    I have only one question…Do you think with a record of about 60% of your decisions being overturned that you are a good decision maker? Libtard answer?

    Why of course, I had empathy for those cases…the law just gets in the way of my feelings….

41. #732520
    On June 29th, 2009 at 12:15 pm, Chief RZ said:

    Liberals do not know how to answer questions truthfully.