Day One: Spotlight on Sotomayor
Able to leap tall life obstacles in a single bound!
It’s opening day of the Senate SCOTUS hearings on the Sonia Sotomayor nomination. We’ll get gavel-to-gavel coverage this morning on all major networks and CSPAN starting at 10am Eastern.
The good news: At least we’ll be spared Joe Biden’s bloviations.
That’s about the only positive thing I can say about a day that will be dripping in the politics of racial identity and judicial nomination-as-high-hurdles-contest rhetoric.
Wonder which Senator will be the first to bring up her “history-making” status as a Wise, History-Making Person Living With Diabetes?
Latinos are putting conservatives “on notice” and will watch Republicans “like hawks.” Estuardo V. Rodriguez, director of something called “Hispanics for a Fair Judiciary,” told ABC News: “We accept tough questions. But what we are going to object to are questions that misrepresent the judge or that distort her record.” (The group includes the pro-racial/ethnic preference Hispanic National Bar Association, U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, and the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund.)
Translation: Be quiet about Ricci, the Puerto Rican Legal Defense Fund, and the Wise Latina Woman remarks — or else!
I’m reminded of a good column a few months ago by Rachel Campos-Duffy, who happens to be a wise conservative Latina woman:
For conservative minorities, especially conservative minority women, Sonia Sotomayor’s nomination and the warnings from the left not to “bully” her are a reminder of the double standard with which we live out our social and political lives. The recognition that there are two separate rulebooks for minorities: one for liberals and one for conservatives. In the liberal rulebook, whites must be sensitive and considerate of a minority’s life story and the unique obstacles he or she faced and/or overcame. In the conservative rulebook, well, there really is no rulebook because there are no rules. It’s always open season on conservative minorities.
Speaking of open season, it’s open season on Frank Ricci — the lead plaintiff in the Connecticut firefighters’ discrimination case:
On Friday, citing in an e-mail “Frank Ricci’s troubled and litigious work history,” the liberal advocacy group People for the American Way drew reporters’ attention to Ricci’s past. Other advocates for Sotomayor have discreetly urged journalists to pursue similar story lines.
Specifically, the advocates have zeroed in on an earlier 1995 lawsuit Ricci filed claiming the city of New Haven discriminated against him because he’s dyslexic. The advocates cite other Hartford Courant stories from the same era recounting how Ricci was fired by a fire department in Middletown, Conn., allegedly, Ricci said at the time, because of safety concerns he raised.
The Middletown-area fire department was subsequently fined for safety violations, but the Connecticut Department of Labor dismissed Ricci’s retaliation complaint.
No People for the American Way officials could be reached Friday to speak on the record about the press campaign.
“To go after so sympathetic a plaintiff as Frank Ricci . . . is a new low in the politics of personal destruction,” said Roger Pilon, the director of the libertarian Cato Institute’s Center for Constitutional Studies. “If they were smart, they’d keep a low profile.”
I called attention to the left-wing smear merchants’ campaign in early May against Sen. Jeff Sessions. This is more of the same. Paul Mirengoff at Power Line rightly blasts those targeting Ricci:
Ricci has leveled no personal attack on Sotomayor, and surely will not do so in his testimony. All he did was file a lawsuit that eventually found its way into a courtroom where she happened to be sitting. To be sure, this ended up exposing Sotomayor as too intellectually dishonest to write a real opinion and too ideologically committed to reverse discrimination to reach a decision that a single Supreme Court Justice could agree with. But that’s not Ricci’s fault. I’m certain that when he filed his suit, he hoped that all judges who heard his case would get it right, or at least treat it seriously.
But what of Ricci’s “troubled” history of litigating employment claims. It consists of a suit claiming disability discrimination when one fire department decided not to hire him (Ricci is dyslexic); an administrative complaint claiming that his discharge by that same fire department was in retaliation for accusing the department of safety violations; and the reverse discrimination suit against the New Haven fire department that Sotomayor mishandled.
Isn’t it odd that an outfit calling itself People for the American Way would this history “troubling”? One might have thought that such an organization would applaud challenges to disability discrimination, race discrimination, retaliaton, and safety violations.
Nope. Like I said when Sotomayor’s nomination was greeted with MSM sob-story slobbering, not all “compelling stories” about overcoming “incredible odds” are equal.
***
The witness list via the Senate Judiciary Committee:
American Bar Association Witnesses
Kim Askew, Chair of Standing Committee
Mary Boies, Primary Reviewer
Majority Witnesses
Michael Bloomberg, Mayor, City of New York
Chuck Canterbury, National President, Fraternal Order of Police
David Cone, former Major League Baseball pitcher
JoAnne A. Epps, Dean, Temple University Beasley School of Law, on behalf of the National Association of Women Lawyers
Louis Freeh, former Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation
Michael J. Garcia, former U.S. Attorney, Southern District of New York
Wade Henderson, President and CEO of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights
Patricia Hynes, President, New York City Bar Association
Dustin McDaniel, Attorney General, State of Arkansas
Robert Morgenthau, District Attorney, New York County, New York
Ramona Romero, National President, Hispanic National Bar Association
Congressman Jose E. Serrano, New York 16th District
Theodore M. Shaw, Professor, Columbia Law School
Kate Stith, Lafayette S. Foster Professor of Law, Yale Law School
Congresswoman Nydia Velázquez, Chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus.
Minority Witnesses
Linda Chavez, President, Center for Equal Opportunity
Sandy Froman, Esq., Former President, National Rifle Association of America
Dr. Stephen Halbrook, Attorney
Tim Jeffries, Founder, P7 Enterprises
Peter Kirsanow, Commissioner, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights
David Kopel, Esq., Independence Institute
John McGinnis, Professor, Northwestern University School of Law
Neomi Rao, Professor, George Mason University School of Law
Frank Ricci, Director of Fire Services, ConnectiCOSH (Connecticut Council on Occupational Safety and Health)
David Rivkin, Esq., Partner, Baker Hostetler
Nick Rosenkranz, Professor, Georgetown University School of Law
Ilya Somin, Professor, George Mason University School of Law
Lieutenant Ben Vargas, New Haven Fire Department
Dr. Charmaine Yoest, Americans United for Life
***
Early-morning Sotomayor news round-up…
*WSJ: GOP Looks for at Least 20 ‘No’ Votes .
Opponents of Judge Sonia Sotomayor’s nomination to the Supreme Court suggested they would consider it a victory if more than half of the Senate’s 40 Republicans voted against her in this week’s confirmation hearing, as the GOP grapples with how aggressively to challenge the nominee.
Many Republicans said they viewed 23 “no” votes as a benchmark, because that would be one more than Chief Justice John Roberts received in 2005 and would reflect a significant protest vote.
Others said that if the Senate GOP were to split roughly in half, that would signal support to conservatives who oppose Judge Sotomayor without angering Hispanic voters with a wholesale dismissal of her nomination.
*Gun-rights activists unite against Sotomayor.
*WJLA: Pro-life Activists Protest Sotomayor Confirmation.
***
Liveblogging summary here.
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
- Monday Morning Reading
- News You Won’t See In The Liberal Media Monday, July 13, 2009 — ExposeTheMedia.com
- Democrat Group Launches Smear Campaign Against Firefighter in Sotomayor Case « American Elephants
- Firefighter Frank Ricci about to be picked, targeted, frozen, personalized and polarized « Teh Resistance Blog
- Sotomayor » Current News Trends
- The Dems Game Plan: Distraction, Distraction, Distraction « Gunservatively!
- The Barton Bulletin » Supreme Court No Place For Activist Judge
- Sotomayor | Michelle Malkin » Day One: Spotlight on Sotomayor
- The Sonia Sotomayor confirmation hearings « Sister Toldjah
- Democrat Attack Dogs Waiting to Leap on Frank Ricci: SCOTUS Hearings for Sonia Sotomayor Begin Today « Frugal Café Blog Zone
- The Sotomayor & Franken Party « Blog Entry « Dr. Melissa Clouthier
- Right Wing News
- Sonia Sotomayor Beyond Thuderdome « Around The Sphere
- Sotomayor Hearings Begin This Morning | Right Soup
- Obama nominates Dr. Regina Benjamin as the U.S Surgeon-General… — P.U.M.A
- American People Trust Republicans More than Democrats on Eight of 10 Key Issues! Obama’s ratings falling Fast! « Goodtimepolitics
- Welcome to Wise Latina Sotomayor confirmation week | Fire Andrea Mitchell!
- La Raza and Sotomayor – Don’t Let The Senate Sell You Out | The Substratum
- News and Views 07-13-2009 : FreedoMedium
- blogwhoring 7-13-09 - rightofcourse.com
- Nightly Ramble:The “Just Passin’ Thru” Edition | BitsBlog
- Nightly Ramble:The “Just Passin’ Thru” Edition | BitsBlog
- Warning Signs about Sonia Sotomayor, from Andrew Breitbart « Frugal Café Blog Zone
- Rush Limbaugh: Shhh! Don’t Tell Robert Gibbs We’re Talking About Sotomayor « Frugal Café Blog Zone
- Congress Authorized CIA to Develop Secret Al Qaeda Plan « Goodtimepolitics
- Barely A Blog » Update II: Sonia A-Shout-Out-To-My-Mom Mayor
- The Racist Test for Judge Sonya Sotomayor and President Obama–Racism Unmasked!–Videos « Pronk Palisades
- Sonia Sotomayor’s SCOTUS Hearing, Day 2: Judicial Activism, Ricci v DeStefano, & “Wise Latina” Remarks « Frugal Café Blog Zone
- Franken & Sotomayor Share ‘Perry Mason’ Memories… Franken Loves the Sound of His Own Voice « Frugal Café Blog Zone
- As Expected: Senate Panel Endorses SCOTUS Nominee Sonia Sotomayor in 13-6 Vote « Frugal Café Blog Zone
- Sotomayor, the “Wise Latina,” Confirmed by Senate for SCOTUS, 68-31 « Frugal Café Blog Zone
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: Sonia Sotomayor
JustOneMinute
» The Prescient Joe Biden
AmSpecBlog
» A Good Time Not to be a DemocratRiehl World View
» More Climate Change Fraud: Et Tu New Zealand?Ed Driscoll
» Charges Filed In Kenneth Gladney CaseThe Other McCain
» Alan Colmes, having fun at #1Riehl World View
» Bet: Ratings Fail - Oprah/Obama Christmas SpecialMudville Gazette
» The five-year plan
G’ Morning Michelle. I guess I am not the only one that woke up early and could not get back to sleep! Or have you been up all night?
Let’s hope we see some backbone from our leaders today and that they ask questions that will expose Sotomayor for what she is – a bigot with an agenda.
Don’t watch too much of that, Michelle; not without plenty of Pepto-Bismol. You may need it.
I sure wish they would treat her the way Democrats have treated Republican nominees. BORK her!! However I know that is not going to happen.
She is not a healthy Latina woman as she has had diabetes, a horrible disease, for like 46 years. She won’t serve for a long time, if approved.
Great primer, Michelle. I think today’s proceedings will be more like a Three Ring Circus. Pray for our country.
Why even bother. She’s in, no matter what happens.
According to US Census and other projections, the Hispanic population will triple in the next thirty years. Even if we limit immigration (highly unlikely), Hispanics’ population share will still increase because they have a much higher birth rates than the overall population. The dominance of White people who made 85% of the population in 1960, will be whittled away, falling steadily to less than 50% in 2042. In the opposite trajectory, Hispanic, Black and Asian people will increase in proportion to become majority by 2040. The ethnic and racial profile of this country is also quickly changing because of higher rate of inter-marriages. More and more Americans are getting married to foreigners or someone outside their race/faith. One of my best friends, got married last year to a man from Pakistan and he just got his US immigration visa. The shift in majority status will have profound implications, it’ll prompt a sea-change in the country’s understanding of its politics and culture. It’s already reshaping the electoral landscape. Expect more Hispanics getting more prominent jobs (both governmental and also in private sector). Nothing will stop this trend and the election of President Barack H. Obama and the upcoming nomination of Justice Sonia Sotomayor are part of this trend. In the near future (whether you like it or not) Spanish will overtake English in the US as the most frequently spoken language (that’s what statistics say). I just came back from a short trip to Miami and in S. Florida, there are far more Spanish speakers than English speakers.
Um, I’m a recently diagnosed diabetic. I CAN HAS SUPREME COURT JOB?
Wouldn’t you love to see Frank Ricci ask Sotomayor, “Would do you believe I am not entitled to Justice?”
Sotomayor will be a disaster for ordinary white males. It is impossible now to get fair treatment with the victim entitlement mentality that has been nurtured by the Democrat party. What do these racial auditors think when they look at the professional basketball and football leagues? Plainly, there are real differences between groups. The great discoveries in Math and Science have been made almost entirely by white males. If we accept the tenets of Sotomayor, we must live a lie. But, we have been doing that for 40 years.
What does that have to do with anything? She is still unqualified for SOTUS (but would make a fine latino defense lawyer with the ACLU).
My concern is that too many Senators will love the sound of their own voices and not ask enough questions of Judge Stomayor, and/or allow her time to answer them.
LOL! We “accept tough questions”, BUT YOU BETTER NOT ASK ANY if you know what’s good for ya!
edelwuss = racist
Typical liberal, can only think in terms of racial groups.
Sotomayor is a judicial train-wreck. She, too, is an avowed racist (like her Presidential sponsor), and an avowed sexist. She detests the Constitution. She is a lock-step collectivist.
THE ONE chose just who he wants on the Court. The Senate will, most likely, give him what he wanted. Again.
What, you live in a cave somewhere? There are sections of major cities throughout the country (I happen to live in LA) where you cannot read a street sign unless you happen to speak spanish, chinese, vietnamese, persian…etc. Get with the program. Its already here. Geez.
Its not about her “ethnicity” its about the politicizing of her rulings. She is not fit for SCOTUS because she has an obvious agenda and would not show objectivity in applying the law to a given case.
that and a few chill pills!! Let’s all hope that both sides are open and honest and question this candidate on her past decisions as a judge…Her personal story shouldn’t be the focus…her record is…her 60% overturn rate is horrible and would get her fired in most jobs…unfortunately there are 12 dimocraps and only 8 repubs
Nothing helpful.
For her sake, and for our country’s, we should hope that your friend married the exception, rather than the rule, from Pakistan. Speaking strictly in probabilities – and, let’s face it, stereotypes exist for a reason – let’s see how that situation has worked for your likely foolish friend in the next 5-10 years.
I’m waiting for the movie….
Westminster Dog Show vs. the Kentucky Derby.
This Dog and Pony Show is sure to disappoint.
As usual, the trolls see only race where substance is the issue.
HAHAHAHAHAH!!!! That’s funny — open and honest.
Someone will have to watch the farce called “hearings” for me – I don’t have the stomach for this anymore.
Why all the jumping all over edelweiss for the comment above? I saw nothing wrong with it. It looked like pretty much common sense as far as demographics are concerned.
The racist tag is flung around today WAY TOO EASILY. Mostly to try and silence someone you don’t agree with rather than argue the facts. And I know you guys are VERY capable of excellent arguments.
edelweiss, I am not sure what your point is. As far as I know the Constitution does not demand nor contemplate a static population mix. It does, however, contemplate a separation of powers between the Judicial and other branches of the government. Sotomayor is a bigot with an agenda and she will, if given the chance, legislate her agenda from the bench. I see that as not only wrong but very very dangerous. Do you think legislating from the bench is good?
BTW, I meet your profile of the emerging American demographic. I speak two languages, am in a “mixed” marriage and respect other cultures. That does not change my respect for the Constitution and separation of powers.
23 “no” votes signals a protest??? You think tea party people are going to be happy with a protest vote if Sotomayor is confirmed??? Not one average American can tell you how many votes Roberts received for or against. All they know (if they even do) is the outcome: Roberts on the bench. This is another reason why people should stop supporting Republicans: they are only interested in the political tug-of-war with the Dems. Start supporting and voting libertarian.
For the record, I do not care if a person is white, black, red, pink, blue, orange, magenta, worships the planet Jupiter, or whatever. What I care about is whether they believe in freedom, liberty, personal responsibility, and the U.S. Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. If they do, they are fine with me.
I would gladly trade any of our home-grown collectivists for an “American born in the wrong country” regardless of where that is.
Yep, my experience, too. I wish poor edelwuss’s buddy well, but the odds are long. I know some fine folks from that part of the world, but very few successful marriages between Westerner and Pakistani.
Others (me included) did. That’s why.
FACT: 60% overturn rate.
FACT: The Constitution does not provide for a SOTUS judge to be racially sensitive, but to apply the law without bias.
FACT: She gets poor peer reviews.
Not a good resume for anyone applying for any job.
Rags –
You usually have much better arguments. Calling someone a racist should be followed by your reasoning. I have no idea if edelweiss is a racist or not. I saw a post about demographics. Big whoop.
Jangar – Read my post. I was talking about edelweiss’ post, not Sotomayor AT ALL. I think Sotomayor is a disaster and not qualified for the SCOTUS.
I did. # 21 saw cool, but #19 left me hanging.
saw= was…sorry.Out here in Arizona, they do not consider her a REAL hispanic as, apparently Mexico is the ONLY country with hispanic heritage.
Thank you.
I also make statements, not requiring argument for support.
SWEET. Affirmative action jobs for whites!!!
Yep. It’s a 20th Century joke term. Are Brazilians, for instance, “Hispanic”? Cubans? Why not, then, Jamaicans? I could go on, but have work to do.
At least ONE LATINO will be watching Republicans “Like a Hawk” and demand they call this Wise Latina Women on her racist, Leftist views. Yes edelweiss this hispanic population is increasing…but Constitutional Law must still be defended and this Leftist Loon makes no real pretense of doing so. Miguel Estrada was “hispanic” to enlighten our trolls.
So edelweiss you are telling us the highly Balkanized Miami is the future? That is a future well worth fighting. Do they still have the Billboard “Welcome to Miami-Capitol of Latin America”? You might try East LA for a Latino Experience-I won’t as I would be spotted at a Norte Americano Marron and not treated well.
Identity Politics and race baiting are indeed the tools of the fools of the Left-Sarajevo in every City edelweiss? Tell us Sophisticated and Enlightened edelweiss what are YOU doing for the old line Mexican Americans and blacks being chased out of East LA by these Hispanic Gangs? It is also happening in parts of Phoenix–so what are YOU going to do about it edelweiss?
—
The death of one is a tragedy–the death of millions is a statistic so keep your powder dry.
Edelweiss: Following is demograhic profile of Potomac, Maryland your hometown:
As of the census[5] of 2000, there were 44,822 people, 15,655 households, and 13,024 families residing in the CDP. The population density was 1,780.2/sq mi (687.3/km²). There were 15,960 housing units at an average density of 633.9/sq mi (244.7/km²). The racial makeup of the CDP was 79.46% White, 3.93% African America, 0.11% Native American, 13.37% Asian, 0.01% Pacific Islander, 0.90% from other races, and 2.22% from two or more races. Hispanic 5.38% of the population.
Looks to me like you really don’t like being around all those brown skinned people that you eagerly anticipate being a majority. Better hang on to that Swiss passport because by 2042 you won’t be able to avoid them, even in your gated communities.
what’s distressing is her willingness to continue to espouse and rule in the same way which has gotten her slapped down and overruled in the past. when every one keeps telling you 1 plus 1 does not equal 11, why do you keep insisting it does. mental defect?
But wait I thought Obama was going to move us past all this racial sepratism (/sarc).
As for the attacks on Ricci, it reminds me of the way the media, and certain government officials, went after a certain plumber furing the election.
Let’s see if the press will be complicite in this smear job as well. If they are it will be just one more nail in their coffin by the voters who are fed up with biased news.
Tempest in a teapot regarding edelweiss.
Back to the reason for the post. Sotomayor will not be asked questions that should be asked about her beliefs on whether the Constitution is a living document, whether it is a limit on the federal government or what she thinks about various amendments, such as the 2nd amendment. Democrats won’t dare ask her these questions, and the Republicans will be afraid to.
So, you are saying the only way Hispanics can get more jobs is by having more numbers so that it is statisticaly possible not because they are better qualified? And liberals call us Conservatives bigots….
Just one more I told you so about Obambi’s being moderate. There is nothing moderate about him and his appointments. This is a judicial disaster waiting to happen. And, just as the economy is beginning to be hung around Obambi’s neck so should this attempt to high jack the Constitution. This should be made more about Obambi than Sotomayor and the types of judges he will appoint in the future. This is a chance for Republicans to stand up for what the rule of law means. I am not hopeful based on what the Republicans have said so far. We’ll see.
All who question her have an obligation to measure the content of her character without regard to the color of her skin or her gender.
It is too bad we do not have a Senator Joe Friday; “Just the facts maam.”
If Sotomayer were conservative, she would have already withdrawn her nomination. There is no commitment to America’s values anymore by any elected vermin, demoncrat, or rino.
maldef supporting sotomayor should be more of a reason to dig even deeper. with the groups already making threats, is another indication the foul smell of racism is very much in play. my response to republicans would be to ask real questions and expect real answers, if these so called hispanic groups can’t handle the truth, the hell with them. giving in to these jerks will only enpower them and their demands will become even more idiotic and neverending. step on them like the cockroaches they are, they weren’t going to vote republican anyway.
Great op-ed by Barnett in the WSJ this a.m. “The Seinfeld Hearings”
The questions will likely focus on precedent and Soto’s spast rulings, and will thus be a show about nothing, and with an absolutely predictable ending.
The questions should be focussed instead on Sotomayor’s views on specific constitutional passages, which would actually reveal her philosophy of legislating from the bench.
Don’t hold your breath.
It’s an outlier, not a trend; the result of a severe economic down-turn (which, despite the Dems’ and Obama’s promises, isn’t getting any better) and a populace scared witless into voting for the wrong party by the pro Dem/Obama media that hyped it.
Perhaps you need to go back to stats class for refresher, if you’re still planning on that “med degree.”
I tried to watch the C-Span stream, but Leahy’s bloviating and distorions were too much to take.
Sen Sessions said it best when he stated that empathy cannot be shown for one party without exacting discrimination against the other (paraphrased).
Much speechmaking but only one important question – and I doubt it’ll be asked.
What is the role of the constitution?
(Questions such as Does it supersede “feelings”? or Is it superior to all other “legal” documents? or Does the constitution adhere to it’s original meaning or is it subject to change? – are all subsets of the original)
Sotomayer has already answered these questions by her past rulings and her answers should give every sentator pause.
Does it not occur to the senators on both sides that if “feelings” rule – then what if someday the “feeling” is against them and their position and the “remedy” is beheading?
And exactly what did ANY of that have to do with whether Sotomayer is qualified for the Supreme Court?
I can’t find a single qualification in any of that other than race.
Just a question elelweiss – why are you bothering to go to school?
Senator Sessions made us proud this morning.
Yeah, and you know you dont have to watch the socialist democrats who are already in your back pocket and on your payroll.
Unfortunately, this nomination process is a farce. The “wise Latina woman” will be confirmed and the Republicans wont do anything about it. They’ve already surrendered.
Absolutely not! It is not infrequent that intensity of debate about a particular subject is directly proportional to it’s importance.
Trying to shape or skew the debate before it has begun, is, for lack of a better word, undemocratic.
And, now she’ll get the opportunity to explain to her potential future colleagues why she did the ‘wrong thing’ on the Ricci case…. awkward, very awkward. That isn’t a job interview where you fall on the banana peel as it evolves, it is one where you’re already down on the ground and have to pick yourself up in full view of the panel.
Diversity is a non-starter. Diversity should not be a consideration for any court in the land. The law is the law, which is to be applied equally across the board.
Those who want diversity want it because they already know that their nominee is perverted in that way and will bring that perversion to the court. They are deliberately and willfully subverting the courts.
Dont forget the liberal racist Ruth Bader Ginsberg.
Would that I could…
Again, typical of the strain….
well so far this has pretty much gone party lines…kudos for Sen. Sessions for taking the high road and calling her out on her empathy and lack of judicial qualifications. Who the heck was that heckler?? Couldn’t hear what he said but good timing while feinsh*t was speaking though….lol
So during this Confermation Hearing, how many times will La Raza come into the conversation?
I am wagering NONE!!!
Even tho it is a vital part of this womans past. People do not have a clue what it stands for, what its purpose is, and what its Final goal is.
We might as well put Vincente Fox on the Bench!
Botom line CREDENTIALS don’t make the judge!
This is the only thing the libs have to go on.
ANY JUDGE THAT HAS BEEN OVERTURNED 60% OF HER DECISIONS BY SC DOES NOT BELONG ON THE COURT THAT DECIDES ON CONSTITUTION!
SHE OBVIOUSLY DOESN’T KNOW OR UNDERSTAND BASIC CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPALS OR INTERPRETATIONS!
That is the issue not credentials or race!
The interesting thing is edelweiss not acknowledging or even realizing the inherant racism in his/her post.
Exactly, and she claims to be studying as a physician!
Can someone please explain to me why David Cone is on the witness list?
Of course she does “NOT” belong on the Supreme Court !
BUT… In the Last 30+ years, when did The Constitution Matter ?
This administration has thrown OUR most Prescious Document under the rug. Obama has CZARS for Gods sake, in America! And thats just the tip of the Iceberg as to how they have urinated on OUR Constitution!
I believe her losing ratios is closer to 86%, 6 out 7 reversals.
you mean like this….
http://www.mikechurch.com/zenshop/images/Obama_peeing_lg.jpg
She was a primary on the baseball strike! They credit her with the outcome.
I have to ask myself why is it a problem for Republicans to vote against this nomination, since she is by her own words a racist, sexist, a woman that has and will make judgments based on her life experiences(a minority) rather than opinions based on law. The Ricci case a prime example. No wonder I now consider myself an independent conservative.
Senator Coburn is reaming her a new one, I love it.
I haven’t had a chance to read the comments yet, and someone has probably already said this, but I have to comment…Do you think that if a famous black entertainer died this a.m., they would pre-empt the hearings for 24×7 on the black entertainer?? I wonder what the choice would be? Well, thank goodness Michael Jackson didn’t die this week. What would they do?
Two weeks in a row of wall-to-wall crap. I can’t bring myself to watch the liberals double standard bloviating when I remember so well how they treated Alito and Roberts in their hearings. Rude, disrespectful, nasty, sneering, and rambling on and on about their own liberal agenda, not giving the candidates much time to speak. It was unbelievable. And now, I assume they are fawning all over Sotomayor. This is all so tawdry and sickening, I can’t turn it on. I will be watching Little House on the Prairie marathon today, until Glenn Beck at 4:00.
I was surprised to read that Mexico supreme court is comprised of Hispanic’s, just like Sotomayor. I was even more surprised to read that the Mexican Supreme Court is royally f’d up.
Impossible, I say. Haven’t they read about the amazing powers of jurisprudence attributed to Sotomayor, just because she’s Hispanic?
I’ve heard that just being in the same room as her can cure cancer, but that’s not confirmed…
edelweiss, as is Judge Sotomayor, is a Politically Correct Racist and they do not think that counts The “wise Latina woman” me arse.
So far I am pleased with the hearings–all the issues are being argued–well by Arizona Senator Jon Kyl, lies by Leahy and Shumer and thus answering the bigger question: No, I am sorry, we can not all get along nor should we try.
I do imagine the Racebaiter in Charge -Eric Holder- is making a list, checking it twice. Await the knock on the door.
Exactly why should this be of any concern to Republicans? The Latinos keep voting against us anyway! McCamnesty kissed up to The Race and see where it got him?
anyone catch the commodian…talks about himself, talks about the absence of Kennedy, etc…geeze…what a kiss up….
A short quote, if I may:
We are about to see the enshrining of a 19th-century peasant philosophy of jurisprudence on the Supreme Court of the United States of America. I cannot understand how going backward can be considered “progressive.”
How is attacking someone’s disability supposed to help their cause?
So edelweiss, is that how we have a black man (I say that very loosely) as POTUS now, because the population demographic demands it? That is how an inexperienced, freshmen senator, community organizer gets the top gubment job? So you did not vote for him because you thought he was the best for the job….racist. At least you are somewhat slick enough to recognize lackluster when you see it, and politically correct enough to choose lackluster when it makes you feel good, thanks for admitting it.
From the AP
gag! “…the most experienced SC nominee in 100 years.”
A comedian just can’t quit being funny, you know!
Has a coked up Al Franken tackled any GOP solons from behind yet?
Any Senator that says they will vote to put this racist bigot on the Court should be asked if they would vote to put David Duke on the court as well.
Although I wish they would ask if she would support the Constitution as it is written rather than the living breathing Constitution, it is just too much to expect when Senators for the last 60 years basically ignore the Constitution.
How do you explain that there are only 27 Amendments to our Constitution when there should be hundreds just based on the agencies or modifications to power added to the federal Government like the Department of Energy ect?
This woman has no business being a judge let alone being a Supreme Court Justice.She should have been impeached after she said she makes better rulings than a white man.