Video: Obama Discusses Sotomayor on NBC Nightly News

Left-wing blogs are absolutely loving this. Daily Kos posted a video of both GW Bush and John McCain praising the National Council of La Raza tonight.

MandyManners Fri, May 29, 2009 6:52:08pm

re: #1 JacksonTn

Can we just get a transcript? … he makes my head explode …

Or captions so that I can hit MUTE?

Bobblehead Fri, May 29, 2009 6:52:14pm

I didn’t think anyone’s voice could grate on me as much as Bill Clinton’s. I was wrong.

LSD Fri, May 29, 2009 6:52:14pm

Uhhhhhh, yeah.

jcm Fri, May 29, 2009 6:52:23pm

It’s not racial, she has empathy for those from poor and minority backgrounds.

Remember only powerful can be racists.

tradewind Fri, May 29, 2009 6:53:14pm

I thought Brian Williams was a (closet) conservative…….?

irongrampa Fri, May 29, 2009 6:53:17pm

re: #8 jcm

Or Republicans.

MandyManners Fri, May 29, 2009 6:53:30pm

re: #8 jcm

It’s not racial, she has empathy for those from poor and minority backgrounds.

Remember only powerful white people can be racists.

Jim in Virginia Fri, May 29, 2009 6:53:45pm

re: #8 jcm

Remember only powerful can be racists.

Like Jeremiah Wright?

tradewind Fri, May 29, 2009 6:54:21pm

re: #6 Bobblehead

I’m starting to miss Bubba’s drawl compared to this shiite.

JacksonTn Fri, May 29, 2009 6:54:23pm

re: #12 Jim in Virginia

Like Jeremiah Wright?

jinv … Racist!

/you must be an insensitive white guy …

Jim in Virginia Fri, May 29, 2009 6:54:27pm

re: #9 tradewind

I thought Brian Williams was a (closet) conservative…….?

Any evidence for that? I’ve never gotten that impression.

Ledger1 Fri, May 29, 2009 6:54:33pm

If Obama is defending racial remarks that is a sign of an immature person.

A transcript would be good. As a general rule I don’t watch any TV. I rarely watch MSM clips on the net.

I find Obama to be unpleasant looking and hard on the eyes. That is why a transcript would be good.

Mostly sane, most of the time. Fri, May 29, 2009 6:54:47pm

While I am still waiting for Sotomayor to be asked real, substantive questions by our congress (and I may remain waiting), I am not comfortable with the whole empathy thing.

She’s not supposed to feel anyone’s pain. She’s supposed to understand and correctly interpret the law. If the law isn’t right or just, then the legislators need to fix it.

Jim in Virginia Fri, May 29, 2009 6:54:50pm

re: #14 JacksonTn

jinv … Racist!

/you must be an insensitive white guy …

///Raises hand

IslandLibertarian Fri, May 29, 2009 6:55:03pm

……..”nonsense being spewed out”……….
Lump it all together and denounce it………clever……….

Shug Fri, May 29, 2009 6:55:41pm

Obama sat in her courtroom for 20 years and never heard anything offensive

J.D. Fri, May 29, 2009 6:56:09pm

A President with “knowledge of how the world works” would have been really nice.

Sharmuta Fri, May 29, 2009 6:56:28pm

What I’m finding sad is the vehemence with which these poorly chosen words are coming back to haunt Sotomayor, but similar instances from the right, and all sorts of excuses are made.

coquimbojoe Fri, May 29, 2009 6:56:37pm

re: #4 Charles

Left-wing blogs are absolutely loving this. Daily Kos posted a video of both GW Bush and John McCain praising the National Council of La Raza tonight.

Great point. Politicians have been running scared of them for a long while.

tradewind Fri, May 29, 2009 6:56:44pm

re: #12 Jim in Virginia

He was a racist, and he always had a mighty fine whine…..

Youtube Video

Charles Johnson Fri, May 29, 2009 6:56:47pm

It’s incredibly easy to find GOP politicians who work with or belong to the National Council of La Raza.

Obama is showing once again what a shrewd politician he is. He’s walking back the “wise Latina” comment, knowing that it’s a tiny concession. Meanwhile the GOP base has moved on, raving about the La Raza membership. And that’s going to backfire, big time.

IslandLibertarian Fri, May 29, 2009 6:57:34pm

So there’s no “under the bus” for the empathetic female Latino.

/Rev. Wright must be pissed.

coquimbojoe Fri, May 29, 2009 6:57:35pm

re: #22 Sharmuta

What I’m finding sad is the vehemence with which these poorly chosen words are coming back to haunt Sotomayor, but similar instances from the right, and all sorts of excuses are made.

No excuses should be made for anyone spouting that bilge.

[deleted] Fri, May 29, 2009 6:58:02pm

Bobblehead Fri, May 29, 2009 6:58:32pm

re: #17 EmmmieG

While I am still waiting for Sotomayor to be asked real, substantive questions by our congress (and I may remain waiting), I am not comfortable with the whole empathy thing.

She’s not supposed to feel anyone’s pain. She’s supposed to understand and correctly interpret the law. If the law isn’t right or just, then the legislators need to fix it.

Umm..I guess you missed the memo. New age justices are not supposed to interpret the law they are supposed to feel it. It’s all about feeeeelings.
/

Sharmuta Fri, May 29, 2009 6:58:40pm

What about when Bush 1 called one of his grandchildren a “little brown” one? Should we call him a racist for that?

Taqyia2Me Fri, May 29, 2009 6:58:40pm

The fact remains her rulings have been overturned on cases heard by SCOTUS.
Good, smart, conservative Republican senators should be using their allotted time in questioning to re-hash, in detail, why they don’t like the way the hearings for: Roberts, Alito, Thomas and Bork went. Point out EXACTLY how shitty they were treated (and Miguel Estrada and others too) and how they are above that.
Then vote against her.

Charles Johnson Fri, May 29, 2009 6:58:44pm

re: #27 coquimbojoe

No excuses should be made for anyone spouting that bilge.

It’s not going to work. Give it up. This is going to end up hurting the GOP enormously.

Shug Fri, May 29, 2009 6:58:53pm

re: #22 Sharmuta

What I’m finding sad is the vehemence with which these poorly chosen words are coming back to haunt Sotomayor, but similar instances from the right, and all sorts of excuses are made.

politics is full of double standards and hypocrisy.

Which is why I am glad so many people here are intelectually honest and consistent . It’s easy to condemn bad behavior ” on the other side” when you condemned it when it was done by ” our side”

Too bad McCain and W praised La Raza.
Foolish pandering I suppose, but still a bad idea

JacksonTn Fri, May 29, 2009 6:58:57pm

re: #25 Charles

It’s incredibly easy to find GOP politicians who work with or belong to the National Council of La Raza.

Obama is showing once again what a shrewd politician he is. He’s walking back the “wise Latina” comment, knowing that it’s a tiny concession. Meanwhile the GOP base has moved on, raving about the La Raza membership. And that’s going to backfire, big time.

Charles … right but if she truly wants to get it behind her maybe she should tell everyone what La Raza is … get it out in the open … if she feels it is truly not a racist organization then she needs to address it … she will be seated no doubt but still I believe there are some questions that need answering …

HelloDare Fri, May 29, 2009 6:59:00pm

Obama: “I’m sure she would have restated it.”

Let’s see. She made a prepared speech. A year later, it was published. The only reason she would restate it now is being it’s causing her problems. She obviously believes in what she said.

Sharmuta Fri, May 29, 2009 6:59:23pm

re: #27 coquimbojoe

No excuses should be made for anyone spouting that bilge.

OK. George HW Bush is a racist then.

Bloodnok Fri, May 29, 2009 6:59:24pm

Democrats: “Hey Republican Party. Don’t touch this plate, it’s very hot.”

Republican Party: “Ouch”

Nevergiveup Fri, May 29, 2009 6:59:26pm

re: #30 Sharmuta

What about when Bush 1 called one of his grandchildren a “little brown” one? Should we call him a racist for that?

Well all the Bush’s have a limited vocabulary?

tradewind Fri, May 29, 2009 7:00:19pm

re: #15 Jim in Virginia
Here’s a major lefty site that thinks he is….
[Link: mediamatters.org…]
and there’s more evidence if you google it. I always got the feeling he was appalled at some of his fellow anchorpeople but way too polite to show it.

Shug Fri, May 29, 2009 7:00:40pm

I’m hoping she was at Strom Thurmond’s 100th birthday party and toasted to his long political career…………

winnd54 Fri, May 29, 2009 7:00:47pm

What if an older white candidate for the supreme court had said “I think my experience as an older white male would make me a better judge than a Latina women.” I don’t think anyone would have a problem with that.

DEZes Fri, May 29, 2009 7:00:53pm

Every time a politician is asked a simple question, they dance around it like its the plague. and end up never answering.

Occasional Reader Fri, May 29, 2009 7:01:12pm

This clip, once again, sounds like one of those Obama statements that’s very smooth-sounding, until you actually think about what he’s saying… for about 20 seconds. And then it sort of comes apart. She, as a Latina woman, will have an understanding of a farmer in Iowa… but, um, we’re not talking identity politics here!… okey doke.

Mostly sane, most of the time. Fri, May 29, 2009 7:01:15pm

I wish I could believe that our conservative congresspersons were smart enough to have hired some legal experts to pore over her work and her written opinions to come up with some good, tough, fair questions to ask her. She’s up to the job or she isn’t. Let’s find out.

Not feeling the confidence.

Shiplord Kirel Fri, May 29, 2009 7:01:26pm

Once again, we see the MSM portray the radio clown Rush Limbaugh as the defacto leader of the Republican Party, and essentially get away with it. This may be good for Limbaugh’s ratings but it will ultimately do the GOP no good at all.

Lefty media personalities, in contrast, are very good at deflecting any attempt to associate their often crazed views with the Democrats, even though media culture values are demonstrably more influential among Democrats than among Republicans.

Nevergiveup Fri, May 29, 2009 7:02:25pm

SINGAPORE — U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates warned North Korea on Saturday that the United States would respond quickly if moves by the communist government threaten America or its Asian allies.

[Link: www.foxnews.com…]

So like building a nuclear arsenal isn’t threatening? Ya could have fooled me?

albusteve Fri, May 29, 2009 7:02:51pm

re: #36 Sharmuta

OK. George HW Bush is a racist then.

of course, everyone is racist…it’s the new incrimination…check your six

slotgun Fri, May 29, 2009 7:02:53pm

The rule of right is simple: Any time you hear a construct that contrasts one racial/gender/age/regligious/political/whathaveyou aspect against another, flip the elements around in a sentence. If neither is offensive, it’s unlikely either point truly is. If only one construct is offensive, you’ve got a problem with your critical thinking skills. She let the curtain down a bit with that comment, and we got to see what she REALLY thinks, not what she says within the confines of a mainstream-media-protected interview. Same with her “policy” reference, which she acknowledged as soon as she said it that she hoped it wasn’t being taped. These people are what they are: the new racists.

Sharmuta Fri, May 29, 2009 7:03:14pm

re: #44 EmmmieG

I wish I could believe that our conservative congresspersons were smart enough to have hired some legal experts to pore over her work and her written opinions to come up with some good, tough, fair questions to ask her. She’s up to the job or she isn’t. Let’s find out.

Not feeling the confidence.

I haven’t seen anything in her decisions I’ve read that suggests she’s a racist.

seagreenroom Fri, May 29, 2009 7:03:17pm

LOL what a joke. Our president is out there trying to spin his racist court pick as some well-meaning, but badly-spoken and misunderstood jurist.

I highly resent him and his lack of respect for the intelligence of The American people.

Charles Johnson Fri, May 29, 2009 7:03:33pm

re: #37 Bloodnok

Democrats: “Hey Republican Party. Don’t touch this plate, it’s very hot.”

Republican Party: “Ouch”

Yep. We’re in Three Stooges territory.

researchok Fri, May 29, 2009 7:03:42pm

Sotomayor will be confirmed easily, in the same way Roberts was confirmed. There will be some bitching, but that’s all for show, just like the Roberts hearings

She may have her political ideological leaning, but she’s proved to be a good judge. Ideological preferences aside, she’s a good jurist.

Nevergiveup Fri, May 29, 2009 7:04:28pm

White House: Sotomayor Says She Chose Words Poorly in 2001 Remarks

Youtube Video

So why didn’t she turn to dust?

scion9 Fri, May 29, 2009 7:05:44pm

re: #49 Sharmuta

I haven’t seen anything in her decisions I’ve read that suggests she’s a racist.

What does ‘racist’ mean?

Mostly sane, most of the time. Fri, May 29, 2009 7:07:42pm

re: #49 Sharmuta

I haven’t seen anything in her decisions I’ve read that suggests she’s a racist.

While that question is important, I almost feel like it’s a distraction. Democrats always win the racism game. I want to know whether she has the mental firepower and legal understanding that would merit a seat on the highest court in the land.

Randall Gross Fri, May 29, 2009 7:08:13pm

Obama knows the exact buttons to push on the right to elicit the response he wants. He plays our pop pundits like pianos.

It’s not fair, it’s not right - but when the whole discussion turns into a debate on race the Republicans are always going to lose. Those who leapt for the planted bait are idiots.

Should we bring the comment up? Sure. Should we dwell on it ? nope. Trying to paint her as a racist is the FAIL.

Bobblehead Fri, May 29, 2009 7:08:27pm

re: #37 Bloodnok

Democrats: “Hey Republican Party. Don’t touch this plate, it’s very hot.”

Republican Party: “Ouch”

You are right on target.
The Republicans have bigger fish to fry. Job 1 is getting their act together. Wishful thinking, I know.

Nevergiveup Fri, May 29, 2009 7:08:35pm

re: #55 EmmmieG

While that question is important, I almost feel like it’s a distraction. Democrats always win the racism game. I want to know whether she has the mental firepower and legal understanding that would merit a seat on the highest court in the land.

But But But she has empathy?

tradewind Fri, May 29, 2009 7:08:39pm

re: #38 Nevergiveup

Jeb Bush , like him or hate him, is a very acccomplished speaker…. and the ’ little brown one’ George P, is his son with his Mexican born wife…he’s
the next big Bush pol, supposedly. He’s really good looking and very bright, women love him…. kind of a conservative BHO. Haven’t heard much from him lately, though.

Gus Fri, May 29, 2009 7:08:41pm

re: #4 Charles

Left-wing blogs are absolutely loving this. Daily Kos posted a video of both GW Bush and John McCain praising the National Council of La Raza tonight.

Just finished watching it. In light of the information reveled regarding Marcus Epstein, executive director of Tom Tancredo’s inaptly named group “Team America” Tom Tancredo’s should be considered persona non grata by the GOP.

Mostly sane, most of the time. Fri, May 29, 2009 7:09:27pm

re: #58 Nevergiveup

But But But she has empathy?

So does my four year-old. He’ll kiss your owies and bring you a cookie. He can’t read yet, though…

captdiggs Fri, May 29, 2009 7:09:35pm

Did anyone really expect that Obama would be nominating anything but left leaning activist judges who will tinker with the Constitution?

tradewind Fri, May 29, 2009 7:09:59pm

re: #43 Occasional Reader

Yeah, and as usual, BHO didn’t even answer the question but sidestepped it and gave the answer he wanted the audience to have.
I just wish there had been a reporter with the cajones to say ’ When did she tell you that, Mr President?’…..

Sharmuta Fri, May 29, 2009 7:10:08pm

Presidential Nephew George P Bush has also spoken to La Raza

[Link: nclr.org…]

brookly red Fri, May 29, 2009 7:10:31pm

Well since race/racist/racisism is the flavor of the day, wtf just happened regarding the Black Panthers at the poll in Philly?

[Link: www.washingtontimes.com…]

Occasional Reader Fri, May 29, 2009 7:10:40pm

re: #57 Bobblehead

You are right on target.
The Republicans have bigger fish to fry. Job 1 is getting their act together. Wishful thinking, I know.

By that logic, Republicans should not criticize anything the Obama Administration (or the Congressional Dems) do, until they “get their act together”.

Sorry, I don’t buy that.

Bloodnok Fri, May 29, 2009 7:10:50pm

re: #58 Nevergiveup

But But But she has empathy?

“Empathy”. That’s another carefully chosen string on the violin they are using to play the right.

Sharmuta Fri, May 29, 2009 7:11:03pm

re: #55 EmmmieG

While that question is important, I almost feel like it’s a distraction. Democrats always win the racism game. I want to know whether she has the mental firepower and legal understanding that would merit a seat on the highest court in the land.

Why would we want to look into that when we can try to make political hay instead?

Nevergiveup Fri, May 29, 2009 7:11:05pm

re: #62 captdiggs

Did anyone really expect that Obama would be nominating anything but left leaning activist judges who will tinker with the Constitution?

I dont

J.D. Fri, May 29, 2009 7:11:19pm

Uighurs: Sometimes, the Obama Friday Night Bad News Dump Is Bad for the Left [Andy McCarthy]

The Obama Justice Department told the Supreme Court this evening that the Uighurs have no right to be released into the United States.
The Uighurs, Chinese Muslim detainees held at Guantanamo Bay, received terrorist training at al Qaeda affiliated camps (from an organization formally designated as a foreign terrorist organization under U.S. law) and were captured after the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan. They are the Left’s combatant cause célèbre. …

…Watch tomorrow as our usual conservative commentator suspects insist that we must give President Obama great credit for doing the right thing for national security — and conveniently ignore that the President tends to do the right thing only after knuckle-dragging right-wingers push back against his (and his Justice Department’s) reliable inclination to do the wrong thing.

MandyManners Fri, May 29, 2009 7:11:32pm

Is there any difference between speaking to an organization and belonging to it?

Colin Nelson Fri, May 29, 2009 7:11:43pm

Amazing - though I could only get through it once, seems to me the Obamatron essentially agrees with the racist comment/written text from his nominee.

Hold it - why should I be amazed?

After all, for President Narcissist it’s all about me all the time and thus, of course her “experience” (nudge, nudge wink wink) understandably will trump the Law - or any old white man or old white woman.

Blind justice indeed.

And this guy taught Constitutional law?

Nevergiveup Fri, May 29, 2009 7:11:50pm

re: #65 brookly red

Well since race/racist/racisism is the flavor of the day, wtf just happened regarding the Black Panthers at the poll in Philly?

[Link: www.washingtontimes.com…]

their man won?

Shug Fri, May 29, 2009 7:12:03pm

Double standards bug me.

Things that were said about Clarence Thomas and Janice Rogers Brown and Alberto Gonzalez were FAR FAR worse than anything being said by republican leaders ( not far right whack jobs ) about Sotomayor.

Far worse.

from what I see, most of the criticism of her is about comments she’s made and in her opinions.
I believe she is one of the most overturned Judges in the appeals court.

but she’s probably better than Souter

Sosigado Fri, May 29, 2009 7:12:08pm

re: #52 researchok

She may have her political ideological leaning, but she’s proved to be a good judge. Ideological preferences aside, she’s a good jurist.

And upon what evidence do you base that assertion?

Mostly sane, most of the time. Fri, May 29, 2009 7:12:22pm

re: #71 MandyManners

Is there any difference between speaking to an organization and belonging to it?

Wel…Obama just spoke to a Catholic University…

Shug Fri, May 29, 2009 7:12:40pm

re: #71 MandyManners

Is there any difference between speaking to an organization and belonging to it?

Ask Robert Spencer

Occasional Reader Fri, May 29, 2009 7:12:50pm

re: #63 tradewind

Yeah, and as usual, BHO didn’t even answer the question .

To be fair, he DID “answer” the question… which was a softball question that contained the answer. (Listen to the clip again.)

quickjustice Fri, May 29, 2009 7:12:58pm

re: #25 Charles

I agree that the “Latina female good, white male bad” remark can be explained away with a simple “she misspoke”, or even “it was a poor choice of words”. It’s curious that Obama is deigning to speak for her while denying that he’s spoken to her. Typical “I want it both ways” from Obama.

I also agree that the La Raza issue is a loser, because prominent Republicans have given cover to the organization, and it’s different from its radical “reconquista” counterpart.

I’ll repeat my comment from an earlier thread about how Republicans should manage the Sotomayor nomination:

If I were a sitting GOP U.S. Senator, I think I’d explore the subject of identity politics with Judge Sonia Sotomayor at her confirmation hearing. That’s the festering sore on the body of the Democratic Party, and one that has dragged it down into the sewer. Sotomayor’s buy-in to identity politics should be explored fully to educate the public.

Identity politics, the centerpiece of the Democratic Party, is inherently divisive. That’s because the concept, together with “white privilege” was developed by the radical communists in the Weather Underground precisely to divide the country by race, gender, sexual orientation, etc.

[Link: en.wikipedia.org…]

“The Weathermen were outspoken advocates of the critical concepts that later came to be known as “white privilege” and identity politics. As the unrest in poor black neighborhoods intensified in the early 1970s, Bernardine Dohrn said, “White youth must choose sides now. They must either fight on the side of the oppressed, or be on the side of the oppressor.””

The American people deserve to understand how a radical, communist ideology (identity politics) came to be mainstreamed in American political discourse to the point that a nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court, Sonia Sotomayor, openly espouses it.

As for GOP National Chairman Michael Steele’s enthusiasm for this nomination, Steele wasn’t hired to be a cheerleader for the other side. His strategy of praising Sotomayor seems breathless and half-baked. In short, he doesn’t know what to do. Sotomayor will be confirmed. Even acting in unison, the GOP doesn’t have the votes to stop her. The question for the GOP is how to turn this “shoo-in” into an opportunity for them, a “teaching moment”.

I think it must be a judo strategy. Sidestep the “American Dream, Horatio Alger” aspect of the story, i.e., “I was born a poor black child” (with apologies to Steve Martin), and focus on the new obstacles that reverse racism and identity politics present to the American Dream. Acknowledge her rags to riches story as vintage American, but explore how identity politics destroys that dream. Sotomayor is a walking contradiction in terms, an American success story we should celebrate, harboring the seeds of the destruction of that same success for others with her identity politics, which we should condemn.

Bobblehead Fri, May 29, 2009 7:13:03pm

re: #62 captdiggs

Did anyone really expect that Obama would be nominating anything but left leaning activist judges who will tinker with the Constitution?

Elections have consequences. Like it or not this is what a majority of the electorate wanted or thought they wanted.

OldLineTexan Fri, May 29, 2009 7:13:09pm

re: #4 Charles

Left-wing blogs are absolutely loving this. Daily Kos posted a video of both GW Bush and John McCain praising the National Council of La Raza tonight.

But Boooosh is evil, so whatever he does is wrong.

Right, DKOS?

/It’s a hell of a catch, that Catch-22

tradewind Fri, May 29, 2009 7:13:22pm

re: #26 IslandLibertarian

It’s early yet.

brookly red Fri, May 29, 2009 7:13:28pm

re: #73 Nevergiveup

their man won?

I am curious about the timing.

J.D. Fri, May 29, 2009 7:14:03pm

re: #71 MandyManners

Is there any difference between speaking to an organization and belonging to it?

Yes.

HelloDare Fri, May 29, 2009 7:14:46pm

re: #71 MandyManners

Is there any difference between speaking to an organization and belonging to it?

Yes. Bill Clinton spoke to the Girl Scouts but they wouldn’t let him be a (pardon the expression) member there.

OldLineTexan Fri, May 29, 2009 7:15:18pm

re: #85 HelloDare

Yes. Bill Clinton spoke to the Girl Scouts but they wouldn’t let him be a (pardon the expression) member there.

He was kicked out for eating brownies.

J.D. Fri, May 29, 2009 7:15:21pm

re: #85 HelloDare

Yes. Bill Clinton spoke to the Girl Scouts but they wouldn’t let him be a (pardon the expression) member there.

Upding.

Sosigado Fri, May 29, 2009 7:15:28pm

re: #57 Bobblehead

You are right on target.
The Republicans have bigger fish to fry. Job 1 is getting their act together. Wishful thinking, I know.

You don’t think a counter-Constitutionalist majority on the Supreme Court is a “big fish”? I sure as hell do.

iceweasel Fri, May 29, 2009 7:15:31pm

re: #37 Bloodnok

Democrats: “Hey Republican Party. Don’t touch this plate, it’s very hot.”

Republican Party: “Ouch”

So true. This is such a losing battle for the Republican party and they are damaging themselves terribly. The left loves this—comments like the one Liddy made about “what happens if she’s menstruating” are going to get endless play.

And all this for a pick which is, all things considered, the best possible pick conservatives could have hoped for, and one which doesn’t change the political balance of the court.

In addition to further alienating moderates and independents (not to mention women and the Latino community!) the REAL damage now is going to happen when the right tries to block or criticise the next Obama SCOTUS picks—the ones they should have held their fire for, the ones that will involve replacing conservative justices with liberals and tilt the court’s balance.

Mark my words: no matter how reasonable or justified the attacks the right mounts are then, people are going to remember the unreasonable, unjustified ones being made now, and they’ll immediately discredit what the GOP says or simply not listen. This is how a party becomes a permanent minority.

[deleted] Fri, May 29, 2009 7:15:38pm

DEZes Fri, May 29, 2009 7:15:51pm

re: #86 OldLineTexan

He was kicked out for eating brownies.

/

I knew that was coming. ;)

Gus Fri, May 29, 2009 7:15:55pm

re: #81 OldLineTexan

But Boooosh is evil, so whatever he does is wrong.

Right, DKOS?

/It’s a hell of a catch, that Catch-22

Yeah, it’s kind of ironic in that they are in way praising Bush and McCain.

The Shadow Do Fri, May 29, 2009 7:15:57pm

Linda Chavez was scorned for suggesting conservatives/GOP were heading down a long road to nowhere with all the vitriol surrounding immigration reform - a lot of noise that was on the edge of racism she inferred. And she was right.

Making a big stink over Sotamayer will simply cement this. Stupid, stupid throwback GOP.

researchok Fri, May 29, 2009 7:16:37pm

re: #75 Sosigado

And upon what evidence do you base that assertion?

The legal bloggers- Volokh, etc.

I’m not a lawyer or jusrust, so I look to people I respect that are better informed than I.

My having a definitive opinion on her legal capabilities would be like anti vaccination people opining on meds or biochemistry.

Nevergiveup Fri, May 29, 2009 7:17:31pm

re: #83 brookly red

I am curious about the timing.

curiosity killed that cat?

John Neverbend Fri, May 29, 2009 7:17:33pm

re: #54 scion9

What does ‘racist’ mean?

Indicating one’s own concession of defeat - see LGF dictionary.

Dr. Shalit Fri, May 29, 2009 7:18:23pm

re: #4 Charles

Left-wing blogs are absolutely loving this. Daily Kos posted a video of both GW Bush and John McCain praising the National Council of La Raza tonight.

Charles -

The National Council of “La Raza” - is still the council of “Iberian” America that refuses to recognize the 1840’s War - and its outcome.
Truth be known, I FAVOR a North American Union. Canada is “easy” - except for the “National Health” - the Two (2) Nations are in synch.
Mexico is another matter, BIG DIFFERENCE in per Capita Income. A difference of about 8 - 11 to 1 - same ratio as the money.
For what it is worth, if the “Statesmen” OF THE THREE (3) COULD AGREE - ALL ‘US’ALL would have an Invincible Nation - The Union of North America.

-S-

Racer X Fri, May 29, 2009 7:18:25pm

There will be no game 7.

The Black Mamba™ has awakened.

John Neverbend Fri, May 29, 2009 7:19:06pm

re: #94 researchok

My having a definitive opinion on her legal capabilities would be like anti vaccination people opining on meds or biochemistry.

Or the Discovery Institute opining on neo-Darwinism.

100

Mostly sane, most of the time. Fri, May 29, 2009 7:19:20pm

BB—I have reached the part of parenthood in which I get to chauffeur my daughter and her friends around on Friday nights.

101

astronmr20 Fri, May 29, 2009 7:19:26pm

re: #4 Charles

Left-wing blogs are absolutely loving this. Daily Kos posted a video of both GW Bush and John McCain praising the National Council of La Raza tonight.

…Which is exactly why the “big tent” is political suicide. And one of the many reasons McCain lost.

102

Occasional Reader Fri, May 29, 2009 7:19:32pm

Much as I loath Bill Maher, I will give him a small bit of credit for pointing out this bit of scthoopidity by NRO’s Mark Krikorian:

Assimilated Pronunciation [Mark Krikorian]
So, are we supposed to use the Spanish pronunciation, so-toe-my-OR, or the natural English pronunciation, SO-tuh-my-er, like Niedermeyer?

So… we’re supposed to criticize her for pronouncing her own last name correctly?!

103

Dr. Shalit Fri, May 29, 2009 7:19:32pm

re: #51 Charles

Charles -

MOE, LARRY or CURLY?

-S-

104

quickjustice Fri, May 29, 2009 7:19:47pm

re: #89 iceweasel

There’s no doubt that the GOP leadership is stupid, but that doesn’t mean that you’re correct. As I’ve said upthread, Sotomayor’s nomination is a cause for celebration of the success of her “American Dream” climb to the top, and for somber reflection on the divisive and destructive impact of identity politics on the Democratic Party and on the unity of our nation. It’s a teaching moment if any Republican can get his/her act together to teach.

105

Occasional Reader Fri, May 29, 2009 7:21:00pm

re: #97 Dr. Shalit

Ummm…. alllrighty, then.

106

Dr. Shalit Fri, May 29, 2009 7:21:13pm

re: #97 Dr. Shalit

Reply to Self -

“La Una!”

-S-

107

tradewind Fri, May 29, 2009 7:21:21pm

re: #80 Bobblehead
What I really don’t like is that the average Obama voter probably could not name even one justice currently sitting on SCOTUS.
And yeah, SCOTUS was one of the most important issues of the election for me and most of the people I know who opposed Teh One’s candidacy.

108

researchok Fri, May 29, 2009 7:21:23pm

re: #99 John Neverbend

Or the Discovery Institute opining on neo-Darwinism.

Exactly

109

Seagreenroom Fri, May 29, 2009 7:22:59pm

re: #80 Bobblehead

Elections have consequences. Like it or not this is what a majority of the electorate wanted or thought they wanted.

I think a lot of moderates, who should have known better, would be happy to take their votes back right about now. I don’t think most people realized what they were voting for. It seemed obvious to me, hey I’m just smarter than most.

110

FrogMarch Fri, May 29, 2009 7:23:26pm

re: #89 iceweasel

The left loves this—comments like the one Liddy made about “what happens if she’s menstruating” are going to get endless play.

Someone said that? OK - that is the dumbest thing to say, ever.
(G Gordon Liddy?)

111

Bobblehead Fri, May 29, 2009 7:23:30pm

re: #66 Occasional Reader

By that logic, Republicans should not criticize anything the Obama Administration (or the Congressional Dems) do, until they “get their act together”.

Sorry, I don’t buy that.

That’s quite a jump in logic you made.

112

Nevergiveup Fri, May 29, 2009 7:23:33pm

re: #100 EmmmieG

BB—I have reached the part of parenthood in which I get to chauffeur my daughter and her friends around on Friday nights.

My kids both drive and are out with their friends tonight. So I get to stay up and worry. Be glad your driving.

113

J.D. Fri, May 29, 2009 7:24:09pm

EDITORIAL: The franchise for felons
Sotomayor would let prisoners vote

Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor wants to give jailbirds the right to vote. It’s her opinion that the federal Voting Rights Act can be used to force states to allow voting by currently imprisoned felons. Ms. Sotomayor’s dissenting opinion in a 2006 felon-voting case should make senators extremely wary of confirming her for the high court.
In Hayden v. Pataki, a number of inmates in New York state filed suit claiming that because blacks and Latinos make up a disproportionate share of the prison population, the state’s refusal to allow them ballot access amounts to an unlawful, race-based denial of their right to vote. Eight of 13 judges on the liberal-leaning Second Circuit dismissed their arguments, and the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled likewise in a similar case.

Yet, operating on a dubious and extremely broad reading of the Voting Rights Act, Ms. Sotomayor dissented from the decision. In a remarkably dismissive, four-paragraph opinion, she alleged that the “plain terms” of the Voting Rights Act would allow such race-based claims to go forward.

Judge Jose Cabranes, who like Ms. Sotomayor was appointed by President Bill Clinton, didn’t find the matter to be so clear. His majority decision against the criminal felons, in favor of the state, comprised 36 tightly reasoned pages. Particularly compelling is the fact that the Voting Rights Act was passed to help further the aims of the Constitution’s 14th and 15th Amendments. The 14th Amendment specifically allows states to deny the vote to those convicted of crimes.

Ms. Sotomayor is thus in the position of asserting that Congress can prohibit New York from doing something the Constitution itself specifically endorses. It’s as if she thinks black and Hispanic felons are convicted in order to deny them the vote, rather than that they are denied the vote as a result of being duly convicted. Her position ignores the fact that it is the convicts’ own actions, their crimes - not any state-based racial discrimination - that make those felons ineligible to vote. …

114

tradewind Fri, May 29, 2009 7:24:55pm

re: #100 EmmmieG

Embrace and enjoy it, because you have awaiting you the point of parenthood where you won’t have that comfortable control. I know it was endless and boring and inconvenient at times, but I would trade back….

115

Bobblehead Fri, May 29, 2009 7:26:09pm

re: #88 Sosigado

You don’t think a counter-Constitutionalist majority on the Supreme Court is a “big fish”? I sure as hell do.

How, pray tell, are you going to stop it? Right now I see no united front on the Republican side.

116

Altermite Fri, May 29, 2009 7:26:48pm

[Link: news.yahoo.com…]

Al-Queda terrorist forced to talk. Instead of waterboarding, interrogators use sugar-free cookies. Apparently it worked.

117

tradewind Fri, May 29, 2009 7:26:52pm

re: #113 J.D.

I hate to burst the bubble, but almost any democrat would let felons vote. They could not resist the bump.

118

iceweasel Fri, May 29, 2009 7:26:54pm

re: #104 quickjustice

There’s no doubt that the GOP leadership is stupid, but that doesn’t mean that you’re correct. As I’ve said upthread, Sotomayor’s nomination is a cause for celebration of the success of her “American Dream” climb to the top, and for somber reflection on the divisive and destructive impact of identity politics on the Democratic Party and on the unity of our nation. It’s a teaching moment if any Republican can get his/her act together to teach.

I may be wrong about the fallout in re: future attacks on Obama choices for SCOTUS, but I certainly agree with you that this could have been—and should have been—a teaching moment. I think Noonan is dead on about that in the WSJ OpEd Charles just posted.
Unfortunately that opportunity has so far been squandered. Maybe they’ll get it together for the confirmation hearing; I hope so.

Right now though it’s a circus and the left is loving it and benefiting from it. I think it’s hurting the GOP enormously.

119

Bobblehead Fri, May 29, 2009 7:28:27pm

re: #109 Seagreenroom

I think a lot of moderates, who should have known better, would be happy to take their votes back right about now. I don’t think most people realized what they were voting for. It seemed obvious to me, hey I’m just smarter than most.

And then we have the angry ones who decided to sit on their a@#es just to show the party what they thought of McCain. I hope everybody is happy now.

120

researchok Fri, May 29, 2009 7:30:23pm

re: #113 J.D.

Now that’s worth exploring- her undersatnding and interpretation of state’s rights

121

iceweasel Fri, May 29, 2009 7:30:38pm

re: #110 FrogMarch

Someone said that? OK - that is the dumbest thing to say, ever.
(G Gordon Liddy?)

Yes. I hope Charles starts a thread about this.

LIDDY: Let’s hope that the key conferences aren’t when she’s menstruating or something, or just before she’s going to menstruate. That would really be bad. Lord knows what we would get then.

link here, with the audio:
[Link: thinkprogress.org…]

This is going to get endless play by the left, and you have to admit it’s a horrible, degrading, and sexist thing to say.

122

tradewind Fri, May 29, 2009 7:31:34pm

re: #121 iceweasel

What it was was plain stupid. She’s fifty-eight…….

123

OldLineTexan Fri, May 29, 2009 7:32:56pm

re: #121 iceweasel

Yes, Liddy is the absolute leader of the Republican Party with a following that dwarfs Luap Nor’s.

/not

Liddy wanted free advertisement, and you are helping provide it

124

Curt Fri, May 29, 2009 7:33:23pm

re: #22 Sharmuta

What I’m finding sad is the vehemence with which these poorly chosen words are coming back to haunt Sotomayor, but similar instances from the right, and all sorts of excuses are made.

Today, they are “poorly chosen.”

Then, she was a person of importance. Her voice carried weight. If someone in such a position, particularly those charged with being thoughtful and as unbiased as possible, for it matters to the people standing before them, then they aren’t material for the profession of judging.

I also am more swayed to think those words, which she spoke without hesitation, then laughed about it, tells me it is her true belief. The laugh was a way to say…hey, I was just joking! Does that make it less offensive? Not at all, in fact, it’s basically cowardly to drop out a statement, then put the “qualifier” of “i was joking all along” behind it. It’s as if she planned to hear those words again, and she could dismiss them as humor and nothing serious.

OTOH, if Jay Leno said them, and joked, I’d take it as a joke. He’s not a judge. She was.

I learned this lesson when I sat in a position of authority, and to a much smaller “audience.” I learned it was far more correct to keep my humorous remarks to myself, for they may well be taken out of context. I consciously kept my sarcastic remarks to myself, even if they seemed like they might get a good chuckle at the time.

We need a mature, mentally disciplined person sitting on SCOTUS as Souter’s replacement.

125

scion9 Fri, May 29, 2009 7:34:15pm

re: #96 John Neverbend

Indicating one’s own concession of defeat - see LGF dictionary.

Heh. Forgot about that.

What I was trying to get at, is there isn’t really any point in labeling someone a ‘racist’ without first defining your terms. It is a very nebulous concept, especially politically.

126

Randall Gross Fri, May 29, 2009 7:44:40pm

re: #97 Dr. Shalit

Even the nutball conspiracists have stopped with the NAU crap, and most of the sites have been pulled down out of embarrassment.

127

capitalist piglet Fri, May 29, 2009 7:49:39pm

re: #121 iceweasel

link here, with the audio:
[Link: thinkprogress.org…]

This is going to get endless play by the left, and you have to admit it’s a horrible, degrading, and sexist thing to say.

He is such a frigging jerk. I’m not surprised to read that.

128

gtrs Fri, May 29, 2009 7:50:48pm

there is not ANY current republican that can shine obama’s shoes when it comes to political skills; who do they have? DICK cheney?………./

129

iceweasel Fri, May 29, 2009 7:53:13pm

re: #123 OldLineTexan

Yes, Liddy is the absolute leader of the Republican Party with a following that dwarfs Luap Nor’s.

/not

Liddy wanted free advertisement, and you are helping provide it

I’m not suggesting that Liddy is the leader of the party or the face of the party or anything like that—I’m just pointing out that this was a terrible thing to say and it’s going to get endless play by the left, and that can’t possibly be a good thing for the GOP.

I don’t see how anyone could disagree about that.

130

gtrs Fri, May 29, 2009 7:54:07pm

re: #118 iceweasel
rahm could not have asked for a better “firestorm” to erupt than what is currently taking place

131

Seagreenroom Fri, May 29, 2009 7:55:07pm

re: #4 Charles

Left-wing blogs are absolutely loving this. Daily Kos posted a video of both GW Bush and John McCain praising the National Council of La Raza tonight.

This is why Bush and McCain drive true conservatives nuts.

They can’t be counted on to exercise any common sense.

132

ladycatnip Fri, May 29, 2009 7:55:46pm

#113 J.D.

Thanks for the link. I checked up and sure enough in Hayden v. Pataki she sided with the felons to give them the vote.

So, let’s move on from her comments from 2001 since that seems to cause all manner of consternation, and let’s focus on something she wrote in 2006 that would be unbelievably dangerous for our country - ballots for felons.

That bother anyone?

133

iceweasel Fri, May 29, 2009 7:55:55pm

re: #122 tradewind

What it was was plain stupid. She’s fifty-eight…….

Sure it’s stupid, but not because she may no longer menstruate. It’s stupid because it’s sexist and crazy.

But I agree with you that the fact of her age provides the icing on the stupid here. :)

134

iceweasel Fri, May 29, 2009 7:57:44pm

re: #130 gtrs

rahm could not have asked for a better “firestorm” to erupt than what is currently taking place

So true. This is like a gift from heaven.

Over on the lefty blogs people are talking about how much they enjoy watching the Republican party’s death throes.

135

OldLineTexan Fri, May 29, 2009 7:58:38pm

re: #129 iceweasel

I’m not suggesting that Liddy is the leader of the party or the face of the party or anything like that—I’m just pointing out that this was a terrible thing to say and it’s going to get endless play by the left, and that can’t possibly be a good thing for the GOP.

I don’t see how anyone could disagree about that.

Why does the GOP own Liddy?

Because the Left wishes it?

That’s MY point … I’m not agreeing with the nutcase, but there is that pesky First Amendment …

136

iceweasel Fri, May 29, 2009 8:35:35pm

re: #135 OldLineTexan

Consider this: all baseless and crazy attacks on Sotomoyer help to create an environment where real ones will inevitably be tarnished by association.

For an analogy with the other side, consider how genuine critics of the Iraq War were tarnished by association because of crazy critics. Substantive criticisms and questions were all too easy to dismiss because of the crazies.

AFAIK Liddy still self-identifies as a Republican, btw. But he’s such a nut that who knows?

137

ShanghaiEd Fri, May 29, 2009 8:57:56pm

re: #74 Shug

I believe she is one of the most overturned Judges in the appeals court.

I haven’t seen that anywhere. Do you have a reference?

138

Lynn B. Fri, May 29, 2009 8:58:42pm

No. See, it’s not the least bit important for a Supreme Court justice to understand how an Iowa farmer feels about how hard it is to farm or what a corporate CEO might be thinking. That may be important for a judge at the trial level, but it has absolutely nothing to do with the job of the SCOTUS.

And that fact that the POTUS thinks that is does … is truly frightening.

139

Flyers1974 Fri, May 29, 2009 9:20:34pm

re: #135 OldLineTexan

Why does the GOP own Liddy?

Because the Left wishes it?

That’s MY point … I’m not agreeing with the nutcase, but there is that pesky First Amendment …

The Republicans own Liddy and Rush. The difference is, Liddy is nothing compared to Rush in terms of influence. Nobody will buy that Liddy is a leader of the Republicans, so anything he says will be forgotten in a few days. The GOP owns whoever perception says they own. Just as the Democrats own Barbara Streisand. I really wish that wasn’t true, sucks to be a Democrat in that case but unless someone pays me to be a Democratic operative, I won’t deny that.

140

iceweasel Fri, May 29, 2009 9:25:51pm

re: #139 Flyers1974

As predicted though, the Liddy story is already exploding all over the place—it’s at the top of Memeorandum:

[Link: www.memeorandum.com…]

Granted it will be forgotten in a few days, but probably only in favour of yelling about yet another idiotic attack on Sotomayor from another crazy.

The noise is drowning out legitimate questions about her and making the GOP look bad.

141

Arbalest Fri, May 29, 2009 10:43:02pm

A quick check of Wiki (yes, there are other sources, but this one will do) reveals that Sotomayor seems to have lived the American middle/upper-middle/… class dream: parochial school (starting in grammar school), then Princeton on a full scholarship, a JD from Yale … … and up and up.

But Wiki also mentions various other things:

“She [Sotomayor] became a moderate student activist and co-chair of the organization Acción Puertorriqueña, which looked for more opportunities for Puerto Rican students. The organization filed a formal letter of complaint with the Department of Health, Education and Welfare, saying the school discriminated in its hiring and admission practices, and she wrote opinion pieces for The Daily Princetonian with the same theme.”

This all sounds understandable, activism being rather stylish, but now 30 years later, Sotomayor’s “… wise Latina …” comment is rather troubling. Life in the Bronx is rough, but life in the Bronx is rough for everyone. Life outside the US is generally very much worse.

The Wiki article makes her look like any other ~~regular~~ extremely successful American, who likes the Yankees. Except this particular one is a member of La Raza, and seems to see no problem with it. But La Raza doesn’t like me, or much of America and American values. Then there are the various associates of La Raza … …

Has Sotomayor forgotten the support she received from Senators Moynihan, Leahy, Kennedy, Lott, Hatch, and others? Then there are the nominations from Bill Clinton and George H. Bush (?). It would be interesting to hear about the full scholarship to Princeton: where did the money come from? Come to think of it, who founded Princeton, or America, or the Constitution, or … … What deals were the various competitors offering?

Has Sotomayor ever repudiated her remark, prior to 01 May 2009? Alternatively, are more of these gems waiting to surface? What are her values? There are already 2 cases of hers that make her look bad.

The GOP may indeed be making a bad mistake in trying to block her from the SCOTUS, as the other 2 on Obama’s short list seem much worse. From a gaming perspective, there’s no sense in wasting political capital on this issue; political capital needs to be saved for the upcoming issues that endanger the economy, government, etc.

But one-paragraph findings, particularly ones that miss the gist of the case, just isn’t going to cut it coming from the SCOTUS. The values and goals of La Raza do not jibe with those of most of America.

The American public needs proper hearings and answers.

142

BartB Sat, May 30, 2009 1:22:28am

Ms. Sotomayor is a sacrificial goat. President Obama (IMO) does not really expect her to be approved.

Instead, she is supposed to gather all the lightning of the Right, be pilloried, and go down to failure. I don’t know if she was told this or not.

The reason is so that “He who comes After me”, who will be an even farther to the left person, will get through.
Such a person would never have made it if he/she had been the first, but after all the political capital the GOP will spend defeating Ms. Sotomayor,
they won’t be up to an even bigger, meaner fight.

If she accidentally gets through, than the second person will step up when Ms. Ginsburg retires. The same situation applies - I believe that
Ms. Ginsburg is hanging on only long enough for this drama to play out.

While Ms. Sotomayor doesn’t have the skills to sway other jurists, the new person will, and that’s why he/she will make such a difference.

We will be in a heap of trouble.

143

suntory_boss Sat, May 30, 2009 5:09:19am

If a white had made “poorly chosen” words would there be a campaign for us to forgive that person, or perhaps are we witnessing a double standard?

144

suntory_boss Sat, May 30, 2009 5:10:04am

PS: How do you make “poorly chosen words” in a prepared speech?

145

Joel Sat, May 30, 2009 5:10:29am

I cannot stand the sight of Obama any more.

146

gtrs Sat, May 30, 2009 6:59:53am

re: #142 BartB
are you kidding? she will be approved by a huge margin in the US senate

147

abolitionist Sat, May 30, 2009 8:19:44am

re: #65 brookly red

Well since race/racist/racisism is the flavor of the day, wtf just happened regarding the Black Panthers at the poll in Philly?

[Link: www.washingtontimes.com…]

I just learned that the pair at the polling site were not the only ones charged. The defendants included Malik Zulu Shabazz, the “Attorney at War” head of the New Black Panther Party, and the organization itself.
Charges Against ‘New Black Panthers’ Dropped by Obama Justice Dept.

Justice Department Files Suit Against New Black Panthers

THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff,
v.
NEW BLACK PANTHER PARTY FOR SELF-DEFENSE, an unincorporated
association, MALIK ZULU SHABAZZ,
MINISTER KING SAMIR SHABAZZ aka MAURICE HEATH, and
JERRY JACKSON, Defendants.

For reasons that I hope Charles can understand (and I’m not suggesting the source is trustworthy, so I’m on thin ice here), this renews my curiosity about the identity of a mystery man [no last name] mentioned in a publication controlled by Malik Zulu Shabazz — NBPP newspaper, v2n1, Apr/May 2004, p28.

“Brother Barry” used to drive for Dr. Muhammad in 1996. According to Muhammad, he proved himself over the years as just a man who wanted to be seen with anybody popular and was found around Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and anybody he could be with in the spotlight regardless of their political position.

Malik Zulu Shabazz came to lead NBPP & FOI after the former leader, Dr Khalid Abdul Muhammad, died in Feb 2001.

Spy Mode Auto

This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Video: Obama Discusses Sotomayor on NBC Nightly News

► LGF Headlines

► Top 10 Comments

► Bottom Comments

► Recent Comments

► Tools/Info

► Tag Cloud