Sotomayor Confirmation Hearings: Opening Statement

Politics • Views: 2,891

If you think Sonia Sotomayor is a judicial activist and radical leftist, you’re not going to find evidence for it in her opening statement: Sotomayor hearings: The judge’s own opening statement.

In the past month, many Senators have asked me about my judicial philosophy.  It is simple: fidelity to the law.  The task of a judge is not to make the law – it is to apply the law.  And it is clear, I believe, that my record in two courts reflects my rigorous commitment to interpreting the Constitution according to its terms; interpreting statutes according to their terms and Congress’s intent; and hewing faithfully to precedents established by the Supreme Court and my Circuit Court.  In each case I have heard, I have applied the law to the facts at hand.

The process of judging is enhanced when the arguments and concerns of the parties to the litigation are understood and acknowledged.  That is why I generally structure my opinions by setting out what the law requires and then by explaining why a contrary position, sympathetic or not, is accepted or rejected.   That is how I seek to strengthen both the rule of law and faith in the impartiality of our justice system.  My personal and professional experiences help me listen and understand, with the law always commanding the result in every case.

Since President Obama announced my nomination in May, I have received letters from people all over this country. Many tell a unique story of hope in spite of struggles. Each letter has deeply touched me.  Each reflects a belief in the dream that led my parents to come to New York all those years ago.  It is our Constitution that makes that Dream possible, and I now seek the honor of upholding the Constitution as a Justice on the Supreme Court.

Jump to bottom

422 comments
1 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 12:45:47pm
2 Mithrax  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 12:46:43pm

re: #1 buzzsawmonkey

It's not as though she was going to walk into the Senate, leap up on the table, hike her skirts and shout "Whoopee!" and kick over the water pitcher.

She wasn't?

Awww man.

3 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 12:47:19pm

re: #1 buzzsawmonkey

I was just going to say something precisely like that... except not as funny and with different words.

4 Charles Johnson  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 12:48:05pm

I was impressed with her opening remarks. There, I said it.

re: #1 buzzsawmonkey

It's not as though she was going to walk into the Senate, leap up on the table, hike her skirts and shout "Whoopee!" and kick over the water pitcher.

Especially not with a broken ankle.

5 Kragar  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 12:48:10pm

And something different was expected? I think a serious look at her track record and statements made off the cuff mean more than a statement which had months in the making designed specifically to deflect criticism does.

6 Russkilitlover  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 12:48:14pm

re: #1 buzzsawmonkey

It's not as though she was going to walk into the Senate, leap up on the table, hike her skirts and shout "Whoopee!" and kick over the water pitcher.

Had she done that, she would have had my support!

7 harrylook  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 12:48:34pm

So, she didn't repeat her racist remark in front of Congress as the whole country watched. Well, knock me over with a feather.

8 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 12:48:56pm

re: #1 buzzsawmonkey

I was gonna say...

"She's gonna walk in and say, "Wassup effers!? You think that Obama is a lib...whoo hoo, wait til you get a load of me!"

Or...

"Walk in with gang tats on her face doing the MS13 hand sign."

9 pingjockey  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 12:49:13pm

re: #1 buzzsawmonkey

Heh. Would've given Leaky Leahy a coronary!

10 Russkilitlover  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 12:49:35pm

Opening statements? Bunch of hot air.

Historical rulings? Much more to the point.

11 zombie  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 12:50:05pm
If you think Sonia Sotomayor is a judicial activist and radical leftist, you’re not going to find evidence for it in her opening statement

Of course we won't find it in her opening statement -- we'll find it in her voting record and past speeches.

Kind of goes without saying that she'll tone down the rhetoric for these hearings.

12 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 12:50:36pm
13 Charles Johnson  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 12:50:50pm

Let's see how she answers her questions. But if you read the section I quoted above -- well, that's exactly what I want to hear a Supreme Court nominee say.

14 Mad Al-Jaffee  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 12:51:22pm

re: #6 Russkilitlover

Had she done that, she would have had my support!

Is she got Scarlett Johansen or Christina Ricci to do that for her, she would have my support.

15 Kragar  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 12:51:38pm

re: #8 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

I was gonna say...

"She's gonna walk in and say, "Wassup effers!? You think that Obama is a lib...whoo hoo, wait til you get a load of me!"

Or...

"Walk in with gang tats on her face doing the MS13 hand sign."

I was hoping for something like from Scarface in the movie Half Baked.

Looking at each member of the commitee in turn and saying, "Fuck you, fuck you, you're cool, fuck you"

16 IslandLibertarian  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 12:51:59pm

If you think Sonia Sotomayor is a judicial activist and radical leftist, you’re not going to find evidence for it in her opening statement

Well, I hardly expected her to say something like "Ola white-gringo-oppressors.
Viva La Raza!"

/politics = polite war

17 Kragar  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 12:52:42pm

re: #13 Charles

Let's see how she answers her questions. But if you read the section I quoted above -- well, that's exactly what I want to hear a Supreme Court nominee say.

I'm sure the speech writers and staffers who wrote it are glad to hear that.

18 Russkilitlover  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 12:52:43pm

Oh, the wisdom of this Latina!

///

19 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 12:53:02pm
20 zombie  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 12:53:18pm

re: #13 Charles

Let's see how she answers her questions. But if you read the section I quoted above -- well, that's exactly what I want to hear a Supreme Court nominee say.

I should hope so! I think Clarence Thomas and Roberts both also gave very level-headed statements at their hearings. That didn't stop the Dems from attacking them.

Then role of the nominee at these hearing is to portray oneself as mainstream.

21 Adrenalyn  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 12:53:21pm

I like her use of the word "intent"
reminds me of Al Gore's people trying to glean "intent" from hanging chads and butterfly ballots

22 Russkilitlover  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 12:53:51pm
My personal and professional experiences help me listen and understand, with the law always commanding the result in every case.

*cough* Bullshit! *cough*

23 Dianna  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 12:54:11pm

re: #4 Charles

Has there been any update on how she's doing with that? Type 1 diabetics sometimes have a very bad time with healing of the extremities.

24 Gus  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 12:55:02pm

Sotomayor:

Since President Obama announced my nomination in May, I have received letters from people all over this country. Many tell a unique story of hope in spite of struggles. Each letter has deeply touched me. Each reflects a belief in the dream that led my parents to come to New York all those years ago. It is our Constitution that makes that Dream possible, and I now seek the honor of upholding the Constitution as a Justice on the Supreme Court.

If the Dream she is referring to is immigrating to the USA, the Constitution does not mention immigration. It only delegates power to congress to control naturalization.

Unless I'm mistaken.

25 Kragar  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 12:55:30pm

Trust Franken to come across as a suck up.

Franken told Sotomayor that she was "the most experienced Supreme Court nominee in 100 years." He said her story is inspirational and one in which "all Americans should take great pride in."

26 pingjockey  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 12:55:45pm

This guy on FNC, I really don't like...Chuckie Schumer. Could thump him soundly with a clue bat.

27 harrylook  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 12:55:45pm

I would vote against this racist because of her "lack of empathy" for those New Haven firefighters who got shafted.

28 Adrenalyn  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 12:55:53pm

I also like where she referred to letting personal experiences guide her.

So far, if I am a lefty, I like what I hear.

29 SanFranciscoZionist  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 12:56:29pm

re: #24 Gus 802

Sotomayor:


If the Dream she is referring to is immigrating to the USA, the Constitution does not mention immigration. It only delegates power to congress to control naturalization.

Unless I'm mistaken.

The Constitution does not delineate the Dream, but the Dream is dependent on the Constitution.

30 Ben Hur  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 12:56:34pm

I never realized that people from Puerto Rico were the huddled masses.

Could be because I've been going there for 20+ years, and live in New York.

31 badger1970  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 12:57:01pm

re: #17 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Amen.

She was given a four touchdown lead going into the forth quarter, all she's going to do is off tackle left, off tackle right. After confirmation, I predict strong side left sweeps.

32 Gus  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 12:57:52pm

re: #29 SanFranciscoZionist

The Constitution does not delineate the Dream, but the Dream is dependent on the Constitution.

Yes.

33 Adrenalyn  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 12:58:27pm

as the third leg of the trifecta
she is going to lean on precendents
"set by my circuit court"

so what she ruled on before, even if overturned
is still right, in her mind

wow...

34 sngnsgt  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 12:58:41pm

re: #1 buzzsawmonkey

Hillary's going to do it for her once Sonias' confirmed!

35 Honorary Yooper  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 12:58:45pm

re: #15 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

I was hoping for something like from Scarface in the movie Half Baked.

Looking at each member of the commitee in turn and saying, "Fuck you, fuck you, you're cool, fuck you"

Heh. Someone should do that to the Senate just once to see their reactions. It would be priceless.

36 badger1970  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:00:03pm

re: #30 Ben Hur

Why am I picturing "West Side Story?"

37 LGoPs  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:00:19pm

I heard a comment on the radio this morning about how this was a historic moment with the nomination of a Hispanic to the Court. I seem to recall President Bush nominating at least one, Estrada I beleive the name was, that the fucking democrats wouldn't even give a hearing to. I remember him languishing for over a year and I believe he finally removed himself from consideration.
Remember that when the Democrats achieve history.
Bastards.

38 persian shoe  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:00:31pm

The fact that she is a type 1 diabetic for over fifty years does not bode well. She has luckily survived beyond her actuarially predicted life span. This unfortunate medical condition should automatically disqualify her for a lifetime position that carries so much influence.

39 Adrenalyn  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:00:41pm

re: #15 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

I was hoping for something like from Scarface in the movie Half Baked.

Looking at each member of the commitee in turn and saying, "Fuck you, fuck you, you're cool, fuck you"

like Bob Duval did to his boss at the end of the movie " Falling Down

"fuck you very much, Lieutenant"

40 Kragar  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:00:45pm

re: #35 Honorary Yooper

Heh. Someone should do that to the Senate just once to see their reactions. It would be priceless.

And for those who don't know the scene, NSFW

41 Ben Hur  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:01:38pm

re: #36 badger1970

Why am I picturing "West Side Story?"


I know, but I tend to think of bigger boats when I hear the immigrant saga narrative.

42 varmint  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:02:01pm

i see no evidence in her opening statement that she has a pulse.

cut and paste banalities.

43 Mad Al-Jaffee  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:02:05pm

re: #36 badger1970

Why am I picturing "West Side Story?"

West Side Story always reminds me of one of my favorite Norm MacDonald SNL sketches:

[Link: snltranscripts.jt.org...]

44 horse  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:02:15pm

President Obama said a lot of what people wanted to hear last fall, but it is not what he is actually doing today. One could almost feel as if he was misleading us last fall based on what he has actually done. Is she doing the same? Don't know, time will tell.

I will say, without a doubt Judge Sotomayor has worked very hard at her profession; there is no disrespecting someone dedicated to their life's passion. However, I do not agree with the content of her work, and therefore do not trust she will change in her future judgments. But none of this matters because there is nothing that will stop her from being approved.

45 SixDegrees  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:02:31pm

re: #27 harrylook

I would vote against this racist because of her "lack of empathy" for those New Haven firefighters who got shafted.

So you would prefer a Supreme Court justice who makes new law from the bench rather than upholding existing law?

46 Adrenalyn  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:02:44pm

I have a question for her

how come I have to pass a background check and a safety test (with fees) to use my constitutional right to bear arms

but not to use "free speech" as the media does ?

or to vote ?

47 Mostly sane, most of the time.  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:02:54pm

Great. Now Sotomayor is rolling around in a diamond car with platinum wheels, which Obama, the king of Sweden, has given her.

If you find this confusing, see my number 193 on the Somali thread and my number 26 on the lizard thread. (I just spent ten minutes trying to figure out how to link inside GLF, and I'm giving up.)

If you still find it confusing, bone up on your jazz.

48 harrylook  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:02:54pm

re: #38 persian shoe

The fact that she is a type 1 diabetic for over fifty years does not bode well. She has luckily survived beyond her actuarially predicted life span. This unfortunate medical condition should automatically disqualify her for a lifetime position that carries so much influence.

Sorry I had to down-ding you for that. She a lousy judge with bigoted tendencies. She's obviously a beneficiary of AA. Those are reasons enough to vote against her. We don't know anything about her health at this point. Having diabetes, in and of itself, tells us nothing...

49 calcajun  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:02:56pm

re: #1 buzzsawmonkey

It's not as though she was going to walk into the Senate, leap up on the table, hike her skirts and shout "Whoopee!" and kick over the water pitcher.

But it sure would have been a helleva hearing! You know, she does have that Latina "Ethel Merman" thing going for her. I bet she could belt out "There's No Business Like Show Business".

50 Kragar  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:02:59pm

re: #41 Ben Hur

I know, but I tend to think of bigger boats when I hear the immigrant saga narrative.

I think of a land of the ice and snow, from the midnight sun where the hot springs blow

51 LGoPs  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:03:31pm

re: #44 horse

President Obama said a lot of what people wanted to hear last fall, but it is not what he is actually doing today. One could almost feel as if he was misleading us last fall based on what he has actually done. Is she doing the same? Don't know, time will tell.

I will say, without a doubt Judge Sotomayor has worked very hard at her profession; there is no disrespecting someone dedicated to their life's passion. However, I do not agree with the content of her work, and therefore do not trust she will change in her future judgments. But none of this matters because there is nothing that will stop her from being approved.

Ditto. Words are only words.

52 calcajun  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:03:39pm

re: #41 Ben Hur

I think of "Godfather, part II" with young Vito and his trek to America.

53 Charles Johnson  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:03:45pm

Fact is, it could have been much worse. There are real dyed-in-the-wool judicial activists who could have been picked. If the GOP squanders its political capital by attacking someone who is essentially a moderate -- and going by her own statements, a pretty strict Constitutionalist -- then when the Obama administration nominates a Ninth Circuit moonbat next time out, the GOP will have no credibility left.

54 Gus  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:03:47pm

re: #37 LGoPs

I heard a comment on the radio this morning about how this was a historic moment with the nomination of a Hispanic to the Court. I seem to recall President Bush nominating at least one, Estrada I beleive the name was, that the fucking democrats wouldn't even give a hearing to. I remember him languishing for over a year and I believe he finally removed himself from consideration.
Remember that when the Democrats achieve history.
Bastards.

Hispanic? But I thought she was an American. Being sarcastic of course. Makes me wonder though. She's being called a Hispanic yet we know that she if of Puerto Rican heritage.

Imagine now if there was someone of German heritage, would they consider her European and call her as such. Of course the intent behind the use of the word Hispanic is that it carries political and emotional weight.

55 Adrenalyn  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:05:02pm

re: #53 Charles

Fact is, it could have been much worse. There are real dyed-in-the-wool judicial activists who could have been picked. If the GOP squanders its political capital by attacking someone who is essentially a moderate -- and going by her own statements, a pretty strict Constitutionalist -- then when the Obama administration nominates a Ninth Circuit moonbat next time out, the GOP will have no credibility left.

yes, that worked well when the republicans handed Ginsberg to Clinton on a silver platter

56 Ben Hur  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:05:13pm

re: #53 Charles

Fact is, it could have been much worse. There are real dyed-in-the-wool judicial activists who could have been picked.

And none of them would have exposed or admitted to the level of their activism during their confirmation hearings.

57 Fenway_Nation  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:05:21pm

I hope her 'progressive' cheerleaders on the left and MSM will go all-out after Frank Ricci, the lead plantiff in Ricci vs DeStefano like they contemplated next week. I'm sure that going after firefighters who've worked hard and invested considerable time and personal expense into passing an exam for promotion will play well with the rest of America.

It'll be a win-win; 0bama gets his appointee and the GOP will have some large caliber HEAT and Sabot ammunition for the 2010 election.

58 Tikk  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:05:23pm

Well she should know better than all of us, fore she is a minority and therefore more competent to hold the post; because she is a minority.

QED

59 Charpete67  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:05:29pm

re: #54 Gus 802

has a Lithuanian ever been nominated?...

60 Mad Al-Jaffee  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:05:47pm

re: #47 EmmmieG

I wonder if she's kicking the gong around. We know that 0 used to back in the day.

61 anotherindyfilmguy  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:06:01pm

Just wondering if she'll have prepared answers to read from for the questions she's been prepped for and if she'll need to go back to her notes or not for them...

62 Kragar  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:06:03pm

re: #53 Charles

Fact is, it could have been much worse. There are real dyed-in-the-wool judicial activists who could have been picked. If the GOP squanders its political capital by attacking someone who is essentially a moderate -- and going by her own statements, a pretty strict Constitutionalist -- then when the Obama administration nominates a Ninth Circuit moonbat next time out, the GOP will have no credibility left.

Just because I agree with the fact that this is a skirmish that would best be served by letting it go by doesn't mean I have to like it

63 persian shoe  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:06:19pm

re: #48 harrylook


My point was she is 4F to start with. Damaged goods. Look for somebody else.

64 Mad Al-Jaffee  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:06:41pm

re: #50 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

I think of a land of the ice and snow, from the midnight sun where the hot springs blow

Please don't Plant any Zeppelin songs in my head.

65 Kragar  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:06:59pm

re: #61 anotherindyfilmguy

Just wondering if she'll have prepared answers to read from for the questions she's been prepped for and if she'll need to go back to her notes or not for them...

Al Franken has queue cards he'll hold for her.

66 calcajun  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:07:08pm

re: #53 Charles

But then, what is the counter for when (not "if" as I am an optimist) the next GOP POTUS offers up another Roberts or Alito and the left becomes predictably unhinged?

67 Gus  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:07:12pm

re: #59 Charpete67

has a Lithuanian ever been nominated?...

Probably not.

68 Ben Hur  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:07:17pm

re: #54 Gus 802

Hispanic? But I thought she was an American. Being sarcastic of course. Makes me wonder though. She's being called a Hispanic yet we know that she if of Puerto Rican heritage.

Imagine now if there was someone of German heritage, would they consider her European and call her as such. Of course the intent behind the use of the word Hispanic is that it carries political and emotional weight.

Remember, she's a different kind of Hispanic than Alberto Gonzales.

He is what they call "a republican Hispanic."

Totally different species.

69 harrylook  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:07:23pm

re: #45 SixDegrees

So you would prefer a Supreme Court justice who makes new law from the bench rather than upholding existing law?

1. I am mocking Zero, the President, who voted against a current Supreme Court justice - not because he wasn't qualified (Hussein said he was qualified) - but because the nominee didn't have "sufficient empathy."

2. Sotomayor did not follow existing law when she ruled as she did. And her ruling did not contain much explanation, in any case. I am sure New Haven's lawyers advised them it would be better to be sued by whites and a couple hispanics than by blacks. That must be how Sotomayor reads the precedent. Not me.

70 anotherindyfilmguy  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:07:35pm

On the other hand if all the Republicans on just the committee refuse to vote for her doesn't her nomination go pffft? Pesky rules and stuff?

71 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:07:37pm

People who think she is ultra left should also remember that the president who appointed her to federal court in the first place was Bush senior.

72 Kragar  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:07:40pm

re: #64 Mad Al-Jaffee

Please don't Plant any Zeppelin songs in my head.

Dont mind me. I tend to ramble on.

73 Charpete67  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:07:59pm

re: #67 Gus 802

Probably not.

damn...we need to rise up...I feel left out of the American dream...

74 Charles Johnson  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:08:00pm

re: #50 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

I think of a land of the ice and snow, from the midnight sun where the hot springs blow

75 calcajun  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:08:02pm

re: #60 Mad Al-Jaffee

I wonder if she's kicking the gong around. We know that 0 used to back in the day.

I don't think she can handle the diamond car with a pull at the wheel.

76 MandyManners  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:08:04pm
77 NelsFree  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:08:08pm

re: #37 LGoPs

I heard a comment on the radio this morning about how this was a historic moment with the nomination of a Hispanic to the Court. I seem to recall President Bush nominating at least one, Estrada I beleive the name was, that the fucking democrats wouldn't even give a hearing to. I remember him languishing for over a year and I believe he finally removed himself from consideration.
Remember that when the Democrats achieve history.
Bastards.

Sen. Hatch brought that up in his opening remarks. Well put!

78 redc1c4  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:08:10pm

re: #4 Charles

I was impressed with her opening remarks. There, I said it.
.

she's a lawyer: of course she has access to high grade BS.

it's still just BS though...

79 anotherindyfilmguy  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:08:11pm

re: #65 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Al Franken has queue cards he'll hold for her.

Now that would be funny to watch...

80 Gus  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:08:34pm

re: #68 Ben Hur

Remember, she's a different kind of Hispanic than Alberto Gonzales.

He is what they call "a republican Hispanic."

Totally different species.

Yeah, a whole different genre of reactions as well. In a dramatic sense since they tend to accentuate the drama.

81 LGoPs  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:08:43pm

re: #58 Tikk

Well she should know better than all of us, fore she is a minority and therefore more competent to hold the post; because she is a minority.
QED

But who will understand and stand for the rights of the transgendered, hermaphroditic, Papuan headhunter community. I weep for their lack of representation.
/

82 zombie  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:08:46pm

re: #13 Charles

that's exactly what I want to hear a Supreme Court nominee say.

Sotomayor says:

Each reflects a belief in the dream that led my parents to come to New York all those years ago.

To be perfectly frank, that's NOT what I want to hear a Supreme Court nominee to say. Once again, even right in her opening statement, she drags her ethnicity and family history into it -- as if being the child of immigrants is some big special badge of honor she wants to show off.

Look lady, I don't care what your ethnicity is, or where your parents came from, and neither of those details should play any role in whether or not you are qualified! Stop focusing on your goddamn family history! I'm tired of it.

Once again, do the ol' "What would it sound like with the ethnicities reversed" test to see:

(White male judge being nominated): "Each reflects a belief in the dream that led my parents to come over on the Mayflower and found this country."

He'd be dragged over the coals!

83 reine.de.tout  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:08:56pm

re: #53 Charles

Fact is, it could have been much worse. There are real dyed-in-the-wool judicial activists who could have been picked. If the GOP squanders its political capital by attacking someone who is essentially a moderate -- and going by her own statements, a pretty strict Constitutionalist -- then when the Obama administration nominates a Ninth Circuit moonbat next time out, the GOP will have no credibility left.

I agree (regardless of how wonderful or not her words are in her opening statement).

It was a given Obama was not going to nominate a conservative. Of the nominations he could have made, this one on occasion shows some centrist tendencies and is not the worst possible; the GOP needs to pick its battles carefully.

84 Adrenalyn  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:09:04pm

re: #66 calcajun

But then, what is the counter for when (not "if" as I am an optimist) the next GOP POTUS offers up another Roberts or Alito and the left becomes predictably unhinged?

do a "Ginsburg" and refuse to answer questions

85 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:09:11pm
86 Charles Johnson  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:09:17pm

re: #68 Ben Hur

Remember, she's a different kind of Hispanic than Alberto Gonzales.

He is what they call "a republican Hispanic."

Totally different species.

And Alberto Gonzales is also a member of the National Council of La Raza, by the way.

87 calcajun  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:09:19pm

re: #64 Mad Al-Jaffee

Please don't Plant any Zeppelin songs in my head.

But it was offered in the spirit of Bon Hommie. //

88 Mostly sane, most of the time.  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:09:46pm

re: #50 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

I think of a land of the ice and snow, from the midnight sun where the hot springs blow

My husband is 1/4 Icelandic (genetically--temperamentally he's about 3/4 Icelandic). Do we have an Icelandic seat on the Supreme Court? If not, why not? It would be really interesting. All decisions would have to be written out as a saga. Weapons would be allowed, but only swords, pikes, and clubs.

89 Mad Al-Jaffee  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:09:46pm

re: #72 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Dont mind me. I tend to ramble on.

I don't have a whole lotta love for these puns.

90 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:10:04pm
91 Bloodnok  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:10:07pm

re: #83 reine.de.tout

I agree (regardless of how wonderful or not her words are in her opening statement).

It was a given Obama was not going to nominate a conservative. Of the nominations he could have made, this one on occasion shows some centrist tendencies and is not the worst possible; the GOP needs to pick its battles carefully.

Hear, hear.

92 calcajun  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:10:16pm

re: #85 buzzsawmonkey

Sorry--too vague and esoteric.//

93 anotherindyfilmguy  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:10:16pm

re: #82 zombie

I think those dead guys would do a much better job of running things... but then again if the dead were in office who would vote democrat?

94 Adrenalyn  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:10:56pm

re: #71 LudwigVanQuixote

People who think she is ultra left should also remember that the president who appointed her to federal court in the first place was Bush senior.

yes, excellent point
and he also nominated who to SCOTUS
Breyer fella ?
Souter too perhaps ?

why ?

because the fucking dem's would have shot down anyone else
and he basically said, aw fuck it

an early example of a Bush's lack of desire to fight the left

at least they fought terrorists OUTSIDE the country

95 Gus  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:11:16pm

re: #85 buzzsawmonkey

To the tune of "There's No Business Like Show Business":

No hay sabiduria como Latina sabiduria
Como sabidurias conozco
Todos sus aspectos son atractivos
Todos que la ley se permite...

That's great! Now, can you do that in a bee costume?

/

96 Kragar  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:11:37pm

re: #89 Mad Al-Jaffee

I don't have a whole lotta love for these puns.

If you dont like them, you can always just take your self to Kashmir

97 debutaunt  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:11:43pm

re: #93 anotherindyfilmguy

I think those dead guys would do a much better job of running things... but then again if the dead were in office who would vote democrat?

Did you mean who would vote Republican?

98 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:11:57pm

re: #68 Ben Hur

Remember, she's a different kind of Hispanic than Alberto Gonzales.

He is what they call "a republican Hispanic."

Totally different species.

She's also different in that she actually respects the law - rather than constantly trying to find loopholes for the president to expand his power against the Constitution. That could be an issue too.

Any American who fears that Obama might become a tyrant, by taking their rights away as part of a leftist agenda, but is ok with every mail and communication of every American being monitored by the government without a warrant is simply not thinking consistently.

99 Ben Hur  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:11:58pm

re: #76 MandyManners

100 anotherindyfilmguy  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:12:14pm

re: #86 Charles

And Alberto Gonzalez is also a member of the National Council of La Raza, by the way.

However since it was such a huge dogpile on him that never really surfaced as an issue. So much vitriol dropped on him they never got to anything resembling a substantive reason for him to not be nominated...

101 calcajun  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:12:15pm

re: #96 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

If you dont like them, you can always just take your self to Kashmir

Or kick 'em down the stairway.

102 Mad Al-Jaffee  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:12:32pm

re: #96 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

If you dont like them, you can always just take your self to Kashmir

Maybe when the levee breaks*

*one of many blues songs Zep stole

103 Kragar  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:13:21pm

re: #101 calcajun

Or kick 'em down the stairway.

I think anyone who got kicked that hard would be pretty dazed and confused

104 avanti  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:13:48pm

re: #48 harrylook

Sorry I had to down-ding you for that. She a lousy judge with bigoted tendencies. She's obviously a beneficiary of AA. Those are reasons enough to vote against her. We don't know anything about her health at this point. Having diabetes, in and of itself, tells us nothing...

I have to ask why anyone that was successful beneficiary of affirmative action would be disqualified ? Yes, she got a kick start, but excelled once she had the opportunity. She could be the poster gal for AA, that may not have had the opportunity otherwise.
It's also help she got many years ago when AA may well have been more valid then it is today. I agree with the POTUS that any AA today, might better be directed at a candidates disadvantaged background rather then race. i.e., Obama children don't need AA, but a white from from a impoverished background might.

105 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:14:19pm
106 blangwort  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:14:22pm

re: #13 Charles

Let's see how she answers her questions. But if you read the section I quoted above -- well, that's exactly what I want to hear a Supreme Court nominee say.

...and they all know this. The question is who is going to pander to those of us who want to hear this, and who is really pushing an agenda and is willing to say anything for the nomination?

107 MandyManners  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:14:33pm

re: #76 MandyManners

Some links to ponder.

[Link: littlegreenfootballs.com...]

[Link: littlegreenfootballs.com...]

[Link: littlegreenfootballs.com...]

[Link: www.washingtontimes.com...]

The third one is about her thoughts on the Second Amendment. I hope she's changed her mind since she wrote her thesis.

108 FigJam  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:14:33pm

I would hope that with the richness of my experience as a white male, I would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a woman, or a Hispanic, or an African-American, or a Native American who hasn't lived that life.

109 eschew_obfuscation  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:14:43pm

From the original post:
"The task of a judge is not to make the law – it is to apply the law"

"The court of appeals is where policy is made"
Sonia Sotomayor

Which is it Sonia?

110 Kragar  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:14:57pm

re: #102 Mad Al-Jaffee

Maybe when the levee breaks*

*one of many blues songs Zep stole

Anyone still around when the levee breaks would have to be a fool in the rain.

111 SixDegrees  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:15:08pm

re: #44 horse

President Obama said a lot of what people wanted to hear last fall, but it is not what he is actually doing today. One could almost feel as if he was misleading us last fall based on what he has actually done. Is she doing the same? Don't know, time will tell.

I will say, without a doubt Judge Sotomayor has worked very hard at her profession; there is no disrespecting someone dedicated to their life's passion. However, I do not agree with the content of her work, and therefore do not trust she will change in her future judgments. But none of this matters because there is nothing that will stop her from being approved.

Quite right. People can piss and moan all they want about ideology - real or imagined - all they want, but that doesn't make any difference to confirmation. Sotomayor is more than sufficiently qualified for the job as far as I can tell. And that's what we've been demanding of the Senate for years not - that nominees be judged strictly on their qualifications, not on their beliefs.

If there's anything in her record that suggests judicial incompetence, or an inability to conduct the court's business, then we really ought to hear about that and the committee really ought to look into it thoroughly. But apparently, there's nothing of the kind; if there were, it would have been splashed all over the headlines weeks ago, Sotomayor would have been tossed under the bus along with all of 0's other liabilities, and another nominee would have already been put forward.

I much rather see Conservatives conserving their limited political ammunition for matters that are actually important, like defeating cap & trade along with nationalized health care. Instead, they seem to be stuck on ephemera and stupid lately.

112 calcajun  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:15:16pm

re: #105 buzzsawmonkey

I think she might deliver "Anything You Can Do" with a little more passion./

113 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:15:23pm
114 LGoPs  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:15:54pm

re: #100 anotherindyfilmguy

However since it was such a huge dogpile on him that never really surfaced as an issue. So much vitriol dropped on him they never got to anything resembling a substantive reason for him to not be nominated...

Yeah. I wonder why the Democrats never seem compelled to hold their fire in order to maintain their fucking credibility...

115 Adrenalyn  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:15:58pm

re: #110 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Anyone still around when the levee breaks would have to be a fool in the rain.

but the fool on the hill sees the world spinning 'round

116 Ben Hur  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:16:09pm

re: #86 Charles

And Alberto Gonzales is also a member of the National Council of La Raza, by the way.


Is he really?

That sucks.

But you get my point.

117 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:17:32pm

re: #48 harrylook

Sorry I had to down-ding you for that. She a lousy judge with bigoted tendencies. She's obviously a beneficiary of AA. Those are reasons enough to vote against her. We don't know anything about her health at this point. Having diabetes, in and of itself, tells us nothing...

She is obviously a beneficiary of AA?

SHE WAS YALE LAW REVIEW AFTER PRINCETON!

Anyone who looks at a minority member who made something of themselves, and automatically assumes that they are some charity case from AA is a racist.

Ohhh you can go on all over the place about how you aren't a racist, You can on on how "some of your best friends are..." but the second tht you start making such a horrible assumption, you are clearly prejudging her based on her race. That would be the very definition of racism.

118 debutaunt  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:17:43pm

re: #104 avanti

I have to ask why anyone that was successful beneficiary of affirmative action would be disqualified ? Yes, she got a kick start, but excelled once she had the opportunity. She could be the poster gal for AA, that may not have had the opportunity otherwise.
It's also help she got many years ago when AA may well have been more valid then it is today. I agree with the POTUS that any AA today, might better be directed at a candidates disadvantaged background rather then race. i.e., Obama children don't need AA, but a white from from a impoverished background might.

Should we ever revert back to merit in your world?

119 Killgore Trout  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:17:54pm

re: #74 Charles


Awesome!

120 Kragar  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:18:01pm

re: #115 Adrenalyn

but the fool on the hill sees the world spinning 'round

But what is there to see if you're over the hills and far away?

121 LGoPs  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:18:23pm

re: #105 buzzsawmonkey

It's a rough rendering of "There's No Business Like Show Business" as:

There's no wisdom like Latina wisdom
Like no wisdom I know
Everything about it is appealing
Everything that the law will allow...

Everything is just about damn feelings
If you don't like it we'll just hit you with the big Kapow!

122 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:18:36pm
123 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:18:39pm
124 Mad Al-Jaffee  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:18:40pm

Important question - has she said anything about Michael Jackson yet?

125 Dianna  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:18:46pm

re: #88 EmmmieG

My husband is 1/4 Icelandic (genetically--temperamentally he's about 3/4 Icelandic). Do we have an Icelandic seat on the Supreme Court? If not, why not? It would be really interesting. All decisions would have to be written out as a saga. Weapons would be allowed, but only swords, pikes, and clubs.

And everybody gets a time-out while they straighten out their swords!

126 Kragar  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:19:05pm

re: #124 Mad Al-Jaffee

Important question - has she said anything about Michael Jackson yet?

i keel you

127 pingjockey  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:19:44pm

re: #74 Charles
Mwahahaha! That is great!

128 zombie  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:20:13pm

re: #53 Charles

Fact is, it could have been much worse. There are real dyed-in-the-wool judicial activists who could have been picked. If the GOP squanders its political capital by attacking someone who is essentially a moderate -- and going by her own statements, a pretty strict Constitutionalist -- then when the Obama administration nominates a Ninth Circuit moonbat next time out, the GOP will have no credibility left.

I agree there's no point in fighting against her confirmation, since it's a done deal, but that doesn't mean we have to be happy about it.

Most of the conservative "litmus test" issues are pretty unimportant to me personally: if Obama has nominated a pro-choice activist, or a pro-gun-control judge, or whatever, I wouldn't particularly be incensed. But the issue of revenge-racism (euphemistically called "Affirmative Action") is something I do find particularly offensive, and Obama just happened to choose the one judge who is most identified with racial bias in her rulings and philosophy. For me, that is the exact sour note that pushes my buttons and gets my goat. (Worst mixed metaphor of the day.)

As for the Dems being nice in 12 years the next time a Republican president nominates a conservative, based on everyone's sense of fair play and long memories about how decently Sotomayor was treated -- fugeddaboutit. It's partisan war up there. The Repubs already have no credibility left, in the Dems eyes.

129 pingjockey  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:20:33pm

re: #120 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)
Golum and the evil one?

130 LGoPs  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:21:14pm

re: #111 SixDegrees

Quite right. People can piss and moan all they want about ideology - real or imagined - all they want, but that doesn't make any difference to confirmation. Sotomayor is more than sufficiently qualified for the job as far as I can tell. And that's what we've been demanding of the Senate for years not - that nominees be judged strictly on their qualifications, not on their beliefs.

If there's anything in her record that suggests judicial incompetence, or an inability to conduct the court's business, then we really ought to hear about that and the committee really ought to look into it thoroughly. But apparently, there's nothing of the kind; if there were, it would have been splashed all over the headlines weeks ago, Sotomayor would have been tossed under the bus along with all of 0's other liabilities, and another nominee would have already been put forward.

I much rather see Conservatives conserving their limited political ammunition for matters that are actually important, like defeating cap & trade along with nationalized health care. Instead, they seem to be stuck on ephemera and stupid lately.

I agree with you 100%. And I would add that a President is entitled by virtue of winning to get the benefit of the doubt on his appointments.
What I can't abide is that that courtesy and standard of advise and consent is not extended to Republican presidents.
And the injustice of that makes me fume.

131 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:21:27pm
132 Kragar  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:21:40pm

re: #129 pingjockey

Golum and the evil one?

Would that be a south bound Sauron?

133 Mostly sane, most of the time.  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:22:09pm

re: #131 Iron Fist

I have a Vikaing pattern spear, will that be OK? If we wanted to add an eastern flavor, I have an impressive daisho. That would be more multicultural :-)

Spears will do. Are you volunteering for the Icelandic seat on the SCOTUS?

134 Adrenalyn  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:22:54pm

re: #120 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

But what is there to see if you're over the hills and far away?

I don't see anything
but I hear the ocean's roar

135 Mad Al-Jaffee  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:22:58pm

re: #133 EmmmieG

Spears will do.

Britney?

136 pingjockey  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:22:59pm

re: #132 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

I have no clue!

137 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:23:18pm
138 calcajun  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:23:34pm

re: #133 EmmmieG

Are you volunteering for the Icelandic seat on the SCOTUS?

Anyone who does would be Bjorked.

139 Mostly sane, most of the time.  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:23:36pm

re: #135 Mad Al-Jaffee

Britney?


I really should down ding you for that, but I will show mercy.

140 SixDegrees  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:24:02pm

re: #38 persian shoe

The fact that she is a type 1 diabetic for over fifty years does not bode well. She has luckily survived beyond her actuarially predicted life span. This unfortunate medical condition should automatically disqualify her for a lifetime position that carries so much influence.

What a remarkably ignorant thing to say. Type I diabetic here, years beyond the "actuarial" onset of secondary symptoms I'm "supposed" to be suffering from while displaying precisely none of them despite close to 30 years on the needle. Please go educate yourself; diabetes can now be extremely well controlled, and if it is the patient's lifespan, overall health outlook and and susceptibility to secondary medical issues is no different from that of the general population's.

Not to mention that you have given absolutely no rational reason why a shortened life expectancy - even if it existed - would disqualify her from holding this position.

Also, as someone who is obviously grasping at straws to concoct any excuse to derail Sotomayor's appointment, if you really believe the nonsense you're peddling you would be better served adopting a Machiavellian attitude and promoting it, instead, given that she wouldn't be on the bench as long as someone without diabetes.

141 Mad Al-Jaffee  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:24:18pm

re: #139 EmmmieG

I really should down ding you for that, but I will show mercy.

Oops, I did it again.

142 Adrenalyn  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:24:22pm

re: #128 zombie

I agree there's no point in fighting against her confirmation, since it's a done deal, but that doesn't mean we have to be happy about it.

Most of the conservative "litmus test" issues are pretty unimportant to me personally: if Obama has nominated a pro-choice activist, or a pro-gun-control judge, or whatever, I wouldn't particularly be incensed. But the issue of revenge-racism (euphemistically called "Affirmative Action") is something I do find particularly offensive, and Obama just happened to choose the one judge who is most identified with racial bias in her rulings and philosophy. For me, that is the exact sour note that pushes my buttons and gets my goat. (Worst mixed metaphor of the day.)

As for the Dems being nice in 12 years the next time a Republican president nominates a conservative, based on everyone's sense of fair play and long memories about how decently Sotomayor was treated -- fugeddaboutit. It's partisan war up there. The Repubs already have no credibility left, in the Dems eyes.

I think the dem's think the repubs have no BACKBONE either

143 Russkilitlover  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:24:28pm

re: #104 avanti

Financial assistance and admittance based on race/ethnicity/gender are two completely different things.

144 Dianna  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:25:21pm

re: #120 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

But what is there to see if you're over the hills and far away?

I like that thought!

Over the Hills and Far Away

145 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:25:28pm
146 MrSilverDragon  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:25:46pm

re: #1 buzzsawmonkey

It's not as though she was going to walk into the Senate, leap up on the table, hike her skirts and shout "Whoopee!" and kick over the water pitcher.

Hrmm... I'd probably be more inclined to watch if that's what would happen.

/strange fellow, that's me.

147 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:26:17pm
148 SixDegrees  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:26:53pm

re: #53 Charles

Fact is, it could have been much worse. There are real dyed-in-the-wool judicial activists who could have been picked. If the GOP squanders its political capital by attacking someone who is essentially a moderate -- and going by her own statements, a pretty strict Constitutionalist -- then when the Obama administration nominates a Ninth Circuit moonbat next time out, the GOP will have no credibility left.

Yes, yes, a thousand times - yes.

149 Sparkizzy  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:27:01pm

re: #147 Iron Fist

How much? Native Americans fascinate me to be honest.

150 sngnsgt  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:28:28pm

OT

Kim Jong-il is ill: Kim Jong-il 'has pancreatic cancer'

North Korea's "dear leader", Kim Jong-il, has life-threatening cancer, South Korean media claimed today, prompting fears for the country's long-term stability.

www.guardian.uk

151 bill in tx  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:28:39pm

To paraphrase Jeanine Garafolo, Sotomayor is a racist, "straight-up" but in that certain way that leftist elitists find so quaint.

She represents trading one reflexively liberal vote for another, and by many accounts is an intellectual lightweight, so isn’t likely to sway other opinions in any meaningful way. Keep in mind that 60% of her opinions have been overturned by the Supreme Court. Surely that must raise an eyebrow amongst the other Judges of the High Court.

So even though she is, by her own admission, an affirmative action baby (admits that she did not have the grades to make it into Yale, if it weren’t for the color of her skin) and offends me personally, I’d basically say no substantive change in the makeup of the Supremes.

152 Ben Hur  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:29:39pm

re: #98 LudwigVanQuixote

She's also different in that she actually respects the law - rather than constantly trying to find loopholes for the president to expand his power against the Constitution. That could be an issue too.

Any American who fears that Obama might become a tyrant, by taking their rights away as part of a leftist agenda, but is ok with every mail and communication of every American being monitored by the government without a warrant is simply not thinking consistently.

I don't agree with that first part.

153 avanti  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:30:03pm

re: #143 Russkilitlover

Financial assistance and admittance based on race/ethnicity/gender are two completely different things.

To be honest, I don't know what benefit the nominee got from AA, just that if she did, it worked out brilliantly.

154 Paul  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:30:09pm

I've never seen a candidate for federal office who didn't place himself/herself square in the middle of "mainstream America". Why would we expect a wise Latina to say otherwise? Opening statements are worthless.

155 Kenneth  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:30:52pm

Six Reasons Insurgencies Lose:
A Contrarian View

The American conventional wisdom is of the all-powerful, all-knowing, invincible insurgent. Insurgencies always win; it is pointless to resist them. The archetype is the black pajama-clad Vietcong guerrilla triumphing over supposed American imperialism in Vietnam. The truth, in the case of Vietnam, as with insurgencies in general, is much different.
Insurgencies generally lose, not win. The Dupuy Institute, using a database for an ongoing research project that includes 63 post-World War II insurgencies, found that the insurgents only win 41% of the time.

Interesting read.

156 eschew_obfuscation  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:31:08pm

re: #151 bill in tx

To paraphrase Jeanine Garafolo, Sotomayor is a racist, "straight-up" but in that certain way that leftist elitists find so quaint.

She represents trading one reflexively liberal vote for another, and by many accounts is an intellectual lightweight, so isn’t likely to sway other opinions in any meaningful way. Keep in mind that 60% of her opinions have been overturned by the Supreme Court. Surely that must raise an eyebrow amongst the other Judges of the High Court.

So even though she is, by her own admission, an affirmative action baby (admits that she did not have the grades to make it into Yale, if it weren’t for the color of her skin) and offends me personally, I’d basically say no substantive change in the makeup of the Supremes.

I believe that's 7 out of 10 of her cases that have been appealed to the SCOTUS rather than 60% of all her cases... just to be clear. ;-)

157 Hooray for Captain Spaulding  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:31:11pm

re: #4 Charles

I was impressed with her opening remarks. There, I said it.
.

You're obviously easily impressed.
She's a small woman with a big chip on her shoulder.
She is antithesis of what I would want a latino SCOTUS judge to be: one who judges through the prism of judicial experience, not personal prejudice.

158 MrSilverDragon  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:31:38pm

re: #150 sngnsgt

OT

Kim Jong-il is ill: Kim Jong-il 'has pancreatic cancer'

North Korea's "dear leader", Kim Jong-il, has life-threatening cancer, South Korean media claimed today, prompting fears for the country's long-term stability.

www.guardian.uk

Well then, a dictator with an expiration date, that's not dangerous...

(not enough / for that)

159 LGoPs  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:31:42pm

re: #145 Iron Fist

The thing you have to understand is that the Democrats are not going to reciprocate. If, say, Obama loses his second term, but the Senate remains Democrat, there will be war over any judge appointment he/she makes. Look at how the Democrats did Bush.

I'm not sure what we gain by being "fair" to them while they piss inour face at every oppertunity they get. Personally, I'd have the Republicans filibuster her because she's a Democrat, but we can't pull even that off. We're fucked, and we might as well admit it. There's just absolutely nothing we can do at this stage.

Which is why I said it makes me fume. Actually fume is a very polite word for what it really makes me feel.

160 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:32:03pm
161 3 wood  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:32:57pm

OT:

The market was up over 2% today in anticipation of improved profit numbers from the banks. The VIX (measure of risk in the market, the lower the better) dropped to 26.31, lowest it's been in a long long time.

162 jcm  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:32:57pm

re: #150 sngnsgt

OT

Kim Jong-il is ill: Kim Jong-il 'has pancreatic cancer'

North Korea's "dear leader", Kim Jong-il, has life-threatening cancer, South Korean media claimed today, prompting fears for the country's long-term stability.

www.guardian.uk

Some of the buzz is that Lil' Kim's recent bellicosity is related to consolation of power so his son can step up to the top spot.

163 Kosh's Shadow  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:34:16pm

OT, but where does a Jew-hating KKK member hide? In Israel.
He'll be heading back to the US soon; one of the 100 most wanted is caught.

164 pingjockey  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:34:30pm

re: #162 jcm
Wonder if the military will go along? I would think the military holds the upper hand, not the secret police/palace guard.

165 zombie  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:34:58pm

re: #160 Iron Fist

There is a lot on that side of my family that we just don't talk about. I don't even know why. Nobody says nothing.

Perhaps, like me, your family heritage consists of runaways, gambling men, prostitutes, abandoned babies, rape victims, gigolos and infidelity.

166 MrSilverDragon  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:34:59pm

re: #162 jcm

Some of the buzz is that Lil' Kim's recent bellicosity is related to consolation of power so his son can step up to the top spot.

Considering they're writing songs about him to boost him up, yeah, I think we know where things are going. Funny, that happened with our current president, too... oh, the parallels.

167 SixDegrees  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:35:05pm

re: #83 reine.de.tout

I agree (regardless of how wonderful or not her words are in her opening statement).

It was a given Obama was not going to nominate a conservative. Of the nominations he could have made, this one on occasion shows some centrist tendencies and is not the worst possible; the GOP needs to pick its battles carefully.

Also agree with this post. Sotomayor, at worst, is a waste of energy. She's been a moderate on the bench, and - like all appointees - there's absolutely no telling how she'll perform on the Supreme Court. She's qualified - that's sufficient, and it's what Conservatives have demanded be the sole factor in judging appointees for the last many years.

Meanwhile, Congress is debating two bills that will have profound effects on the nation's economic well being - Cap & Trade and nationalized health care. The first is in serious trouble in the Senate - with a concerted bipartisan effort, it could be mauled there so badly that it wouldn't survive to return to the House for modification, and die a quiet, well deserved death. Health care is a much harder battle, but rumblings over it's enormous, unsupportable costs are beginning to be heard. Instead of wasting precious time trying to spin each and every tiny action the Administration takes - from how Michelle parted her hair to what the Obama children are wearing today - into some nefarious Satanic action undertaken by the Prince of Darkness, how about getting our job done and fighting to ensure that at least those Conservative principles we have a small measure of control over get their full measure of support?

168 Bill in TX  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:35:37pm

re: #156 eschew_obfuscation

So it's even worse that I had previously read. Thanks for the correction.

b.

169 Sparkizzy  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:35:42pm

re: #160 Iron Fist

Wow, but that makes sense given the limited info I've read about modern Native Americans.

170 Nevergiveup  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:35:48pm

re: #163 Kosh's Shadow

OT, but where does a Jew-hating KKK member hide? In Israel.
He'll be heading back to the US soon; one of the 100 most wanted is caught.

Makes sense to me. I wonder if he likes falafel?

171 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:36:06pm

And another note about qualifications, Republicans and Democrats...

At least Obama didn't actually think that his completely unknown and un qualified personal attorney was a good pick.

Even the rest of the GOP wouldn't fight for that one when they had both houses.

As to the all of you who say that Sotomeyer is some sort of AA charity case, I say again, you are doing nothing more than being a racist yourself.

She is easily, on paper, in terms of legal scholarship, one of the best appointees in a very long time.

As has been pointed out, she is a moderate. It should be noted that she started her career as a prosecutor. She was excellent at it. That means she put criminals away. That also means that in terms of real life issues, she has real life experience.

As to her pointing out her notions of the American dream and her immigrant heritage, there is nothing wrong with that. My great grandfather came through Ellis Island. So did Irish, Italians, Poles and everyone else under the sun. And you know what, things sucked back in Russia, when my Great grandfather came here. Things sucked back in lots of other places too. Yet here, we prospered and we love this nation for giving us the chance.

Further if a white male who was descended of people who dated back to the Revolution talked about his family heritage or American dreams, he would not be raked over the coals. He would say something like:

When my ancestor fought at Cowpens, he was fighting for a great cause and dream of America... I share that dream...

Only someone who truly hated America could possibly say anything bad about that.

She is an Hispanic Female. It honestly seems to me that the only people who are truly caught up about it are rightwingers who are much too dangerously close to racism themselves.

172 avanti  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:36:11pm

re: #161 3 wood

OT:

The market was up over 2% today in anticipation of improved profit numbers from the banks. The VIX (measure of risk in the market, the lower the better) dropped to 26.31, lowest it's been in a long long time.

Thanks for posting that, I was starting to believe we might have a major correction after the recent gains. My broker is telling me to hang in there, just doing some bottom feeding on select stocks.

173 Mostly sane, most of the time.  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:36:30pm

re: #165 zombie

Perhaps, like me, your family heritage consists of runaways, gambling men, prostitutes, abandoned babies, rape victims, gigolos and infidelity.

Wow. I felt bad about a couple of drinkin', travelin' men. (Although one of them did leave the funds for my great-grandmother, his daughter, to go to business school, making her the first educated person, not just woman, in my family line.

174 Ben Hur  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:36:40pm

Senior Ku Klux Klan member arrested in Tel Aviv apartment

A special Interior Ministry unit has arrested senior Ku Klux Klan member Micky Louis Mayon in a south Tel Aviv apartment, it was announced on Monday night.

Mayon is wanted by Interpol and the US government, for many federal crimes including membership of the racist group, violence against Jews and setting fire to federal police cars.

The 33-year-old is a US citizen who is amongst America's '100 Most Wanted' criminals.

The arrest operation, carried out Sunday by the 'Oz' unit, which was recently put together to deal with illegal immigration, was apparently planned after Interpol received intelligence that Mayon was holed up in an apartment in Tel Aviv's Florentine neighborhood.

According to the intelligence relayed, he arrived in Israel in 2008, and had been moving from place to place and changing identities so as not to be apprehended.

The US advised that law enforcement representatives be sent to Israel to arrest Mayon, and take him back to America to stand trial.

Threadalicious?

175 Nevergiveup  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:36:42pm

re: #165 zombie

Perhaps, like me, your family heritage consists of runaways, gambling men, prostitutes, abandoned babies, rape victims, gigolos and infidelity.

My family heritage is worse. Mostly moonbat liberals?

176 LGoPs  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:36:46pm

re: #165 zombie

Perhaps, like me, your family heritage consists of runaways, gambling men, prostitutes, abandoned babies, rape victims, gigolos and infidelity.

As checkered as that past is at least you don't seem to have to deal with the shame and humiliation of having a journalist in your lineage...
/

177 Hooray for Captain Spaulding  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:36:50pm

re: #137 taxfreekiller

Those who come seeking justice MUST come with clean hands.

Membership in La Raza is not a hand cleaner.

Exactly.
She is not "a moderate", and the fact that others would have been even less palatable does not make this racist a GOOD choice.

She is a RACIST. Get over the "moderate" bullcrap.

178 3 wood  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:37:17pm

OT:

This just in, Tony Romo has dumped Jessica Simpson.

Said he needs to focus on his career, which I assume is throwing interceptions in big games.

179 voirdire  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:37:31pm

The real problem is having anyone in a position to pick politically liberal and judicially activist SCOTUS Justices.

180 eon  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:38:01pm

My principle objection to Judge Sotomayor is her decision in the Maloney vs. New York case, in which she argued (in a case involving the legality or otherwise of possessing a set of nunchaku- basically an agricultural winnowing flail- in NYC), that the Second Amendment really only applied to the Federal government, and thus state and local governments were free to place whatever restrictions on the ownership of "arms", fire- or otherwise, they wished.

I am less concerned by the effect of this opinion viz. the 2nd Amendment than its effect viz. the 14th, specifically the clause in Section 1 saying;

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty or property, without due process of law, nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

If I am "reading" her opinion correctly (and I am trained in Constitutional law), she is saying that the "several States" are only bound by the restrictions of the Constitution and/or Bill of Rights when it suits them. If they prefer to treat their citizens in a way inconsistent with, among other things, the restrictions the Constitution places upon the Federal government, they are free to do so.

I personally can think of a few decisions that this opinion, if it were to be affirmed by the Supreme Court, would cause to be overturned or at least very likely be subject to reconsideration, likely due to cases filed by states;

Brown vs. Board of Education of Topeka

Miranda vs. Arizona

Escobedo vs. Illinois

Mapp vs. Ohio

And probably a few others, going back to the Dred Scott decision. Yes, I know that decision affirmed the legality of slavery; and the arguments used to make it closely resembled hers in the Maloney case.

(You notice, I haven't mentioned Heller vs. District of Columbia, but it falls in the same category.)

If Judge Sotomayor believes that State or local compliance with the Constitution is "voluntary, "optional", or "only if it's convenient", then she has essentially taken "states' rights" to the reductio ad absurdum level. As she seems to be largely a "liberal", I wonder if she would have ruled the same way if it was a local anti-abortion ordinance being challenged in front of her bench (in effect, challenging Roe vs. Wade).

My estimate is her ruling in such a case would be different, in fact probably the exact opposite. Which, with this decision under her belt, would make nonsense of the principle of "equal protection under the law".

If she honestly believes that her opinion in this case constitutes a reasonable and/or "originalist" reading of the Constitution, not only do I question her qualifications to sit on the highest court in the land, I am forced to question her competence to hold the post she has now.

/That's about all I have to say on the subject.

cheers

eon

181 Vicious Babushka  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:38:06pm

re: #174 Ben Hur

Senior Ku Klux Klan member arrested in Tel Aviv apartment

Threadalicious?

What.The.Fuck?

182 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:38:10pm

And to those two brave souls Mad Al and Raven, who downdinged my 117. PLease do speak up for yourself. How is assuming that she must be a beneficiary of AA charity - and therefore not really qualified not racist?

Seriously, speak up. Make your case.

183 Nevergiveup  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:38:34pm

re: #178 3 wood

OT:

This just in, Tony Romo has dumped Jessica Simpson.

Said he needs to focus on his career, which I assume is throwing interceptions in big games.

I thought it was because she blew-up like a blimp?

184 Ben Hur  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:38:36pm
185 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:39:05pm
186 Nevergiveup  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:39:43pm

re: #181 Alouette

What.The.Fuck?

If you think about it, it's brilliant. I mean would you expect an anti-Semite to hide in Tel Aviv?

187 Ben Hur  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:39:53pm

re: #181 Alouette

What.The.Fuck?


It's genius.

I actually think that there are Nazi war criminals that live in Israel as Jews.

Perfect cover.

188 jcm  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:40:24pm

re: #164 pingjockey

Wonder if the military will go along? I would think the military holds the upper hand, not the secret police/palace guard.

That's part of the problem with the Norks. We really don't have a good handle on the players, allegiances, and internal politics of them. For that we need humint and that's something that hard to come by with the Norks. It so hard to get people in to recruit and gather intel.

I would not be surprised to see low grade civil war between factions vying for the upper hand on Lil' Kim's demise.

189 Nevergiveup  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:40:34pm

re: #184 Ben Hur

Hamas: Israel distributes libido-increasing gum in Gaza

Rehashing an old one.

Were can i buy some?

190 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:40:44pm

re: #179 voirdire

The real problem is having anyone in a position to pick politically liberal and judicially activist SCOTUS Justices.

Then lucky for you that she isn't. Of course, picking judicial activist right wing judges is ok?

191 zombie  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:40:51pm

re: #178 3 wood

This just in, Tony Romo has dumped Jessica Simpson.

That explains that big jolt I felt a while ago -- I thought it was a small earthquake. Instead, it was just Jessica's rear end landing.

192 Ben Hur  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:41:14pm

re: #178 3 wood

OT:

This just in, Tony Romo has dumped Jessica Simpson.

Said he needs to focus on his career, which I assume is throwing interceptions in big games.

Damnit.

She'll start up again with the calls, emails, text messages.

That chick will NOT leave me alone!

193 voirdire  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:41:30pm

re: #190 LudwigVanQuixote

Then lucky for you that she isn't. Of course, picking judicial activist right wing judges is ok?

Did I say that?

194 SixDegrees  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:41:57pm

re: #156 eschew_obfuscation

I believe that's 7 out of 10 of her cases that have been appealed to the SCOTUS rather than 60% of all her cases... just to be clear. ;-)

She sat on the appeals court. By the very nature of the cases she was considering, further appeal is much more likely than it would be at a lower court level. And the fact that the Supremes choose to hear a case means, again by definition, that it has aspects that suggest it might be a candidate for reversal. In other words, the nature of her caseload imposes a high reversal rate and a high appeals rate, both.

If this were significant, it would only be so if her rates of reversal, appeal, or any other metric differed significantly from those of her peers. I have no idea if this is the case, but I would bet serious money that it isn't, or people griping about reversal rates would, instead, be griping about rates relative to other judges, a metric that might actually be meaningful.

What is the average reversal rate for Federal Appeals Court judges? What is the average rate of reversal for cases accepted by the Supreme Court from the Federal Appeals Court? Anybody know?

195 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:42:14pm
196 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:42:20pm

re: #150 sngnsgt

I wish for him a swift and painless death.

Is that wrong?

197 Kragar  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:42:26pm

re: #184 Ben Hur

Hamas: Israel distributes libido-increasing gum in Gaza

Rehashing an old one.

Can I get some for the wife?

198 JohnAdams  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:42:32pm

I just tuned in and I am jaw-dragging-on-the-ground horrified that Al-fucking-Franken is on the Judiciary committee! Holy shite! Couldn't they put him on the Bake Sale Committee or something?

199 3 wood  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:42:47pm

re: #172 avanti

Thanks for posting that, I was starting to believe we might have a major correction after the recent gains. My broker is telling me to hang in there, just doing some bottom feeding on select stocks.


If we get Cap and Trade and nationalized health care look for another dump out of the market.

200 J.S.  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:42:49pm

re: #140 SixDegrees

Speaking of "expected shortened life expectancies..." there's an incident re-told in the text, "The Drunkard's Walk" (by a stats person)...In France, there's a 90 year old woman -- Jeanne Calment -- she signs an agreement with a lawyer -- the agreement? Well, he'll pay her a modest stipend each month, until she dies, then (after her death) he'll get the apartment...Sounds like a fabulous deal, doesn't it? Well, the joke was on the lawyer. She lived to the age of 122, and the lawyer died...he also ended up paying twice what the apartment was actually worth...

201 pingjockey  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:42:52pm

re: #188 jcm
We can root for both sides to lose!

202 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:43:11pm
203 quiet man  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:43:13pm

re: #190 LudwigVanQuixote

What makes you think she isn't a radical. Of course her well rehersed statements will show her as the perfect choice...we are sepaking if liberals and the way they do things.

And if there are any judicial activist right wing judges to be icked, we will let Sarah Palin pick them, if that is what she wants to do as President.

204 jvic  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:43:36pm

re: #117 LudwigVanQuixote

Anyone who looks at a minority member who made something of themselves, and automatically assumes that they are some charity case from AA is a racist.

"Anyone who ___ is a racist!" The whimpering you hear is from those in the white liberal set who have curled into a ball at the sound of the r-word.

I look at Asian-Americans who have made something of themselves and hope they don't flip us the bird and go somewhere where they're properly appreciated.

205 calcajun  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:44:29pm

re: #201 pingjockey

We can root for both sides to lose!

That would be the political version of assisted suicide--and we're the ones being euthanized.

206 JohnAdams  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:44:41pm

re: #196 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

Yes. Let me fix that.

I wish for him a swift and painless horrible death at the hands of millions he has enslaved for decades.

Is that wrong?

207 Nevergiveup  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:44:57pm

re: #197 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Can I get some for the wife?

For the wife? yeah sure that's the ticket.

208 calcajun  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:45:27pm

re: #198 JohnAdams

I just tuned in and I am jaw-dragging-on-the-ground horrified that Al-fucking-Franken is on the Judiciary committee! Holy shite! Couldn't they put him on the Bake Sale Committee or something?

What alternate universe did I wake up in today?

209 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:45:32pm

re: #178 3 wood

Cowboys fan, and ding.

210 quiet man  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:45:38pm

According to the left, AA is still required racism as they are unable to make something of themselves through ability.

It is the left who think Affirmative action is still needed.

211 sngnsgt  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:45:58pm

re: #196 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

I wish for him a swift and painless death.

Is that wrong?

Not at all.

212 LGoPs  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:46:04pm

re: #208 calcajun

What alternate universe did I wake up in today?

The Obamaverse...

213 avanti  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:46:11pm

re: #189 Nevergiveup

Were can i buy some?

I was listening to Hannity on XM on the way home and he mentioned a claimed engineered corn that had a birth control hormone component, but did not pursue the implications and just left that to the audience.

214 pingjockey  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:46:26pm

re: #205 calcajun
Huh? We're talking about the Norks having a civil war between the military and the secret police/palace guard. Why would we be eunthanized?

215 quiet man  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:46:43pm

re: #208 calcajun
Get used to it..Franken is the liberals white knight..

well, not for those kids in that charity in New York, but the rest of them love the guy.

216 3 wood  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:46:55pm

re: #192 Ben Hur

Damnit.

She'll start up again with the calls, emails, text messages.

That chick will NOT leave me alone!

Try to bear up under the strain, mkay?

217 SixDegrees  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:46:57pm

re: #191 zombie

That explains that big jolt I felt a while ago -- I thought it was a small earthquake. Instead, it was just Jessica's rear end landing.

It's as though a million chlamydia bacteria cried out in terror, and then fell silent.

218 MandyManners  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:47:44pm

re: #180 eon

My principle objection to Judge Sotomayor is her decision in the Maloney vs. New York case, in which she argued (in a case involving the legality or otherwise of possessing a set of nunchaku- basically an agricultural winnowing flail- in NYC), that the Second Amendment really only applied to the Federal government, and thus state and local governments were free to place whatever restrictions on the ownership of "arms", fire- or otherwise, they wished.

I am less concerned by the effect of this opinion viz. the 2nd Amendment than its effect viz. the 14th, specifically the clause in Section 1 saying;

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty or property, without due process of law, nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

If I am "reading" her opinion correctly (and I am trained in Constitutional law), she is saying that the "several States" are only bound by the restrictions of the Constitution and/or Bill of Rights when it suits them. If they prefer to treat their citizens in a way inconsistent with, among other things, the restrictions the Constitution places upon the Federal government, they are free to do so.

I personally can think of a few decisions that this opinion, if it were to be affirmed by the Supreme Court, would cause to be overturned or at least very likely be subject to reconsideration, likely due to cases filed by states;

Brown vs. Board of Education of Topeka

Miranda vs. Arizona

Escobedo vs. Illinois

Mapp vs. Ohio

And probably a few others, going back to the Dred Scott decision. Yes, I know that decision affirmed the legality of slavery; and the arguments used to make it closely resembled hers in the Maloney case.

(You notice, I haven't mentioned Heller vs. District of Columbia, but it falls in the same category.)

If Judge Sotomayor believes that State or local compliance with the Constitution is "voluntary, "optional", or "only if it's convenient", then she has essentially taken "states' rights" to the reductio ad absurdum level. As she seems to be largely a "liberal", I wonder if she would have ruled the same way if it was a local anti-abortion ordinance being challenged in front of her bench (in effect, challenging Roe vs. Wade).

My estimate is her ruling in such a case would be different, in fact probably the exact opposite. Which, with this decision under her belt, would make nonsense of the principle of "equal protection under the law".

If she honestly believes that her opinion in this case constitutes a reasonable and/or "originalist" reading of the Constitution, not only do I question her qualifications to sit on the highest court in the land, I am forced to question her competence to hold the post she has now.

/That's about all I have to say on the subject.

cheers

eon

So she hasn't changed her opinion on the Second Amendment since she wrote her thesis in No. 107.

219 sngnsgt  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:47:51pm

re: #212 LGoPs

The Obamaverse...

I'd prefer an Obama re-verse.

220 avanti  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:47:57pm

re: #199 3 wood

If we get Cap and Trade and nationalized health care look for another dump out of the market.

Cap and trade will go on the back burner in favor of the health care bill IMHO.

221 Ben Hur  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:48:01pm

re: #216 3 wood

Try to bear up under the strain, mkay?

Was that a "Jessica is fat" joke?!?

222 3 wood  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:48:45pm

re: #191 zombie

That explains that big jolt I felt a while ago -- I thought it was a small earthquake. Instead, it was just Jessica's rear end landing.

Given that certain female relatives of mine lurk sometimes at LGF to see what the old man is up to, let me say that I definitely I did NOT chuckle at that one.

223 Charles Johnson  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:48:59pm

re: #157 Hooray for Captain Spaulding

You're obviously easily impressed.

No, actually, I'm not.

224 pingjockey  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:49:04pm

re: #221 Ben Hur
Only if she was on top!

225 SixDegrees  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:49:10pm

re: #200 J.S.

Speaking of "expected shortened life expectancies..." there's an incident re-told in the text, "The Drunkard's Walk" (by a stats person)...In France, there's a 90 year old woman -- Jeanne Calment -- she signs an agreement with a lawyer -- the agreement? Well, he'll pay her a modest stipend each month, until she dies, then (after her death) he'll get the apartment...Sounds like a fabulous deal, doesn't it? Well, the joke was on the lawyer. She lived to the age of 122, and the lawyer died...he also ended up paying twice what the apartment was actually worth...

Statistics have a funny way of not being well behaved when applied to individuals. No one, it turns out, is average. And some distributions are highly skewed, making arrival in the extreme tails quite probable.

226 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:49:18pm
227 3 wood  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:49:26pm

re: #221 Ben Hur

Was that a "Jessica is fat" joke?!?

Me!?!

No, I would never ever do such a thing.

228 LGoPs  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:49:32pm

re: #220 avanti

Cap and trade will go on the back burner in favor of the health care bill IMHO.

I'd rather that Obamacare burn up on the pyre of Cap and Trade.
Time for scorched earth tactics.

229 Nevergiveup  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:49:41pm

re: #222 3 wood

Given that certain female relatives of mine lurk sometimes at LGF to see what the old man is up to, let me say that I definitely I did NOT chuckle at that one.

But I bet you smiled?

230 quiet man  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:49:56pm

re: #217 SixDegrees

Scratch long with mustard

231 pingjockey  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:50:15pm

re: #222 3 wood
That stinks. They know your nic? Damn.

232 Nevergiveup  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:51:03pm

I hate the All Star Break. No baseball.

233 LGoPs  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:51:36pm

re: #232 Nevergiveup

I hate the All Star Break. No baseball.

And that is a bad thing?

234 eschew_obfuscation  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:51:46pm

re: #194 SixDegrees

She sat on the appeals court. By the very nature of the cases she was considering, further appeal is much more likely than it would be at a lower court level. And the fact that the Supremes choose to hear a case means, again by definition, that it has aspects that suggest it might be a candidate for reversal. In other words, the nature of her caseload imposes a high reversal rate and a high appeals rate, both.

If this were significant, it would only be so if her rates of reversal, appeal, or any other metric differed significantly from those of her peers. I have no idea if this is the case, but I would bet serious money that it isn't, or people griping about reversal rates would, instead, be griping about rates relative to other judges, a metric that might actually be meaningful.

What is the average reversal rate for Federal Appeals Court judges? What is the average rate of reversal for cases accepted by the Supreme Court from the Federal Appeals Court? Anybody know?

This information is from Media Matters, so I'm a little suspicious of it, but here is what I found:

Circuit Cases Taken Cases reversed Reversal rate

1st 4 4 100%
2nd 2 2 100%
10th 3 3 100%
9th 19 16 84%
3d 4 3 75%
8th 4 3 75%
5th 7 5 71%
4th 3 2 67%
6th 11 7 64%
7th 2 1 50%
11th 10 5 50%

O.K...that's not spacing well...Here is the link, about half way down the page

235 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:51:53pm
236 Nevergiveup  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:51:56pm

re: #231 pingjockey

That stinks. They know your nic? Damn.

I fooled my relatives. I used nevergiveup instead of my other nickname SOB.

237 pingjockey  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:52:16pm

re: #232 Nevergiveup
I like the homerun derby though.

238 pre-Boomer Marine brat  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:52:39pm

re: #53 Charles

Fact is, it could have been much worse. There are real dyed-in-the-wool judicial activists who could have been picked. If the GOP squanders its political capital by attacking someone who is essentially a moderate -- and going by her own statements, a pretty strict Constitutionalist -- then when the Obama administration nominates a Ninth Circuit moonbat next time out, the GOP will have no credibility left.

Which might be just what Obama's hoping they'll do.

239 Nevergiveup  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:52:58pm

re: #237 pingjockey

I like the homerun derby though.

Well I'll watch but it's kinda hokey

240 pingjockey  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:53:21pm

re: #236 Nevergiveup
Mwahaha! If I ever have a sock it'll be grumpybear! That's what I've been called recently.

241 jcm  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:53:42pm

re: #201 pingjockey

We can root for both sides to lose!

LOL! Really...

As long as it doesn't spill out.

Norko eventually is going to do one of two things.
Explode, one hell of mess and lots of dead American soldiers, S. Koreans and even more N. Koreans.

Imploded, and leave a humanitarian crises of unprecedented dimensions.

I don't see any "rational" leadership coming to the front and saying, "we need help, and we're not gonna' play the bad boy anymore."

242 JohnAdams  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:53:48pm

Al has ruined many things for me...Frankenberry cereal, Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, Ball Park Franks, Frankfort, Germany, France (well...) all conjure up that dumb visage of his. Damn.

243 Kragar  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:53:53pm
244 3 wood  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:53:58pm

re: #232 Nevergiveup

I hate the All Star Break. No baseball.

You going to watch the home run contest?

Me neither.

245 MrSilverDragon  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:54:05pm

re: #240 pingjockey

Mwahaha! If I ever have a sock it'll be grumpybear! That's what I've been called recently.

You're lucky, for me it's mostly been "a$$hole".

246 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:54:06pm
247 eon  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:54:15pm

re: #218 MandyManners

So she hasn't changed her opinion on the Second Amendment since she wrote her thesis in No. 107.

Apparently not.

I might add that her decision in Maloney, if it had occured in 1959 instead of 2009, would have made the Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Act significantly more difficulty to enforce.

Pleasing no one, except perhaps George Wallace and Bull Connor.

cheers

eon

248 calcajun  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:54:32pm

re: #214 pingjockey

Because at some point someone will get the button and one of those erector-set nukes will fly somewhere to either Seoul or Japan and there will be the risk of escalation. It's not inconceivable that the Chinese and the US could get into a brief but very bloody shooting war. I hope the old fart dies in his sleep and there's a smooth transition/coup. The last thing we need is for someone over there to get jumpy with their atomic weapons.

249 pingjockey  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:54:32pm

re: #239 Nevergiveup
Have you ever seen the old B & W homerun derby? The had Willie Mays, Hank Aaron, etc...Big money, like 50 bucks a homerun!

250 badger1970  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:54:40pm

re: #232 Nevergiveup

At least it gives me a small respite to stop cursing at the Brewers. MLB is just a way to kill time until football (NASCAR still sucks).

251 eschew_obfuscation  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:54:45pm

re: #235 taxfreekiller

sell any thing T. Boone Pickens says is good
cause T. Boone Pickens has slipped a cog or two

his latest e-mail from his "Pickens Plan" deal
brags about support from Harry Reid, and
has a letter on it from Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

T. Boone is out the the loon bin, picking lint...

IMO

More like attempting to pick our pockets to line his...

252 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:54:55pm
253 calcajun  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:55:01pm

re: #232 Nevergiveup

At least the Padres won't be losing.

254 J.S.  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:55:18pm

re: #225 SixDegrees

Yes. The point was that individual lives are (always will be) unpredictable...it's only when large numbers are amassed that you can derive some sort of pattern (but, again, there will be individual oddities)...

255 calcajun  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:55:46pm

re: #249 pingjockey

Have you ever seen the old B & W homerun derby? The had Willie Mays, Hank Aaron, etc...Big money, like 50 bucks a homerun!

And a gift certificate to the men's department at Sears.

256 pingjockey  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:55:47pm

re: #241 jcm
There's the rub, a bloodbath internally or a bloodbath that spills onto the rest of the peninsula.

257 SanFranciscoZionist  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:56:21pm

re: #46 Adrenalyn

I have a question for her

how come I have to pass a background check and a safety test (with fees) to use my constitutional right to bear arms

but not to use "free speech" as the media does ?

or to vote ?

Because people very rarely blow their own heads off while poking holes in a ballot.

258 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:56:23pm

re: #195 Iron Fist

That might get by, but if someone were decended from someone who fought on the wrong side during the Civil War, there would be hell to pay if they mentioned their heritage. If they were decended from someone famous from the War, even if they were quite about it it would be an issue. You can bet money on that.

Possibly, it would depend on what they said.

I'll say something rather directly, and I don't mind if it bugs people.

Someone who said that their ancestor fought the Union because their ancestor truly believed that they were defending hearth and home from aggression is one thing. There were plenty of non-plantation owning Southerners who felt that way.

Someone who fought to keep the plantation running is another matter entirely. There were also plenty of Southerners like that too. I am sorry, there is no moral justification for fighting to keep other human beings enslaved. To be proud of that in any way is against everything this nation stands for. What do notions of justice for all, all men being created equal or even an American notion of fair play mean in a slave state?

So point blank, if someone thinks it was really cool that their ancestor owned people, then to hell with them. Cry me a river and call the waahhhmbulance when they whine.

259 pingjockey  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:56:45pm

re: #255 calcajun
How things have changed. A lot of MLB/NFL guys had real jobs in the off season.

260 LGoPs  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:56:53pm

re: #256 pingjockey

There's the rub, a bloodbath internally or a bloodbath that spills onto the rest of the peninsula.

Aaah. The happy legacy of Stalinism...
/

261 3 wood  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:57:22pm

Got to run, playing a volunteer music gig for a bunch of old dears at a nearby retirement home (nobody visits them much) tonight and have to get ready.

Later.

262 pre-Boomer Marine brat  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:57:29pm

re: #256 pingjockey

How did the tests come out?

263 badger1970  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:57:29pm

re: #249 pingjockey

ESPN classics. I remember Aaron v. Mantle. It wasn't so much the HRs but the host interviewing who wasn't at bat that made it entertaining. How many ways can you say, "Wow, that was a good HR!"

264 Nevergiveup  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:57:39pm

re: #249 pingjockey

Have you ever seen the old B & W homerun derby? The had Willie Mays, Hank Aaron, etc...Big money, like 50 bucks a homerun!

Yeah it was a tv show. I have seen some.

265 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:57:44pm
266 SixDegrees  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:57:46pm

re: #234 eschew_obfuscation

This information is from Media Matters, so I'm a little suspicious of it, but here is what I found:

Circuit Cases Taken Cases reversed Reversal rate

1st 4 4 100%
2nd 2 2 100%
10th 3 3 100%
9th 19 16 84%
3d 4 3 75%
8th 4 3 75%
5th 7 5 71%
4th 3 2 67%
6th 11 7 64%
7th 2 1 50%
11th 10 5 50%

O.K...that's not spacing well...Here is the link, about half way down the page

Thanks. Pretty much like I thought - the reversal rate for these cases taken by the Supremes is crazy high - as you would expect, given that the Court decided to hear them in the first place, and didn't simply send them back to stand.

As the article points out, the fairly wide variance is due to the small number of cases involved. But this makes it clear that the rate being claimed for Sotomayor is comfortably within the ballpark and not an outlier.

267 quiet man  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:58:20pm

re: #265 taxfreekiller

If so, goodbye California...wait..that might not be so terrible

268 pingjockey  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:59:03pm

re: #262 pre-Boomer Marine brat
Will know tomorrow. Going for a consult with one doc I hope I don't have to use. The guy that puts the feeding tube in! I really, really don't want a tube into my stomach!

269 A Kiwi Infidel  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:59:22pm

Joe Satriani is hotter than Sonya Sotomayor, smokin hot!

Howy'all doin lizards?

270 Ben Hur  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:59:25pm
271 Nevergiveup  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:59:28pm

re: #263 badger1970

ESPN classics. I remember Aaron v. Mantle. It wasn't so much the HRs but the host interviewing who wasn't at bat that made it entertaining. How many ways can you say, "Wow, that was a good HR!"

An A-bomb by A-rod? I liked the good old days better.

272 pingjockey  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:59:50pm

Later folks BBIAW.

273 horse  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 1:59:52pm

re: #50 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

I think of a land of the ice and snow, from the midnight sun where the hot springs blow

Thank you for that witty reply, it made my afternoon. :) Of course it will now be playing in my head for at least a few hours, and perhaps every time I now look at Judge Sotomayor. "aha ah ahhh, aha ah ahhh..."

274 calcajun  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:00:02pm

re: #242 JohnAdams

Al has ruined many things for me...Frankenberry cereal, Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, Ball Park Franks, Frankfort, Germany, France (well...) all conjure up that dumb visage of his. Damn.

Beans and Franks? Lil' Smokies (they're about the same size as ...oh well) Abbott and Costello meet Frankenstein? Young Frankenstein (that's Fronk -uhn-steen)?

275 SanFranciscoZionist  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:00:07pm

re: #82 zombie

(White male judge being nominated): "Each reflects a belief in the dream that led my parents to come over on the Mayflower and found this country."

He'd be dragged over the coals!

Doubt it. He might mute it a little, lest he be seen as bragging, but "my family's history of service goes back to the Mayflower" actually is not a disadvantage in the real world.

276 opnion  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:00:35pm

This has I am sure been already mentioned, but Obama as a Senator was not very open minded about Bush's nominees. He even threatened a fillibuster.
Sotomayar shouild not pay for that, but BHO should not have been such a jerk at the time.

277 pre-Boomer Marine brat  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:00:47pm

re: #268 pingjockey

Will know tomorrow. Going for a consult with one doc I hope I don't have to use. The guy that puts the feeding tube in! I really, really don't want a tube into my stomach!

I wouldn't either (to put it most mildly).
I shalt enquire again, later.
*prayers & best wishes*

278 LGoPs  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:01:06pm

re: #242 JohnAdams

Al has ruined many things for me...Frankenberry cereal, Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, Ball Park Franks, Frankfort, Germany, France (well...) all conjure up that dumb visage of his. Damn.

He ruined Minnesota for me.

279 SixDegrees  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:01:18pm

re: #254 J.S.

Yes. The point was that individual lives are (always will be) unpredictable...it's only when large numbers are amassed that you can derive some sort of pattern (but, again, there will be individual oddities)...

True, that. And in the case of diabetes, relying on historical mortality rates is even more suspect, as care has improved phenomenally in recent years, allowing control of blood sugar within a very narrow range. It hasn't been long enough for this tremendous improvement in care to percolate through actuarial statistics.

280 SanFranciscoZionist  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:01:20pm

re: #88 EmmmieG

My husband is 1/4 Icelandic (genetically--temperamentally he's about 3/4 Icelandic). Do we have an Icelandic seat on the Supreme Court? If not, why not? It would be really interesting. All decisions would have to be written out as a saga. Weapons would be allowed, but only swords, pikes, and clubs.

Well, that would get my husband interested in politics, but other than that, how is it analogous?

281 calcajun  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:01:27pm

re: #259 pingjockey

How things have changed. A lot of MLB/NFL guys had real jobs in the off season.

They still do. Only instead of selling cars, they own the dealerships.

282 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:01:39pm
283 pre-Boomer Marine brat  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:01:49pm

re: #277 pre-Boomer Marine brat

I wouldn't either (to put it most mildly).
I shalt enquire again, later.
*prayers & best wishes*

"I shalt enquire again, later." --- SHEESH, I must need coffee!

284 quiet man  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:01:57pm

re: #276 opnion
Yes, he was a poor judge of things..still is if you ask me.
I doubt that if she is kicked away because of his own lousy votes he still would learn anything.

285 LGoPs  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:02:11pm

re: #276 opnion

This has I am sure been already mentioned, but Obama as a Senator was not very open minded about Bush's nominees. He even threatened a fillibuster.
Sotomayar shouild not pay for that, but BHO should not have been such a jerk at the time.

He's a Democrat. It's what they do.
Bastards.
*Spit*

286 vxbush  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:02:59pm

re: #277 pre-Boomer Marine brat

I wouldn't either (to put it most mildly).
I shalt enquire again, later.
*prayers & best wishes*

My son had a feeding tube for a while. In his case, it wasn't that bad, but I definitely wouldn't want to wish it on anyone who wasn't prepared.

{ping}

287 pre-Boomer Marine brat  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:03:01pm

bbl

288 SanFranciscoZionist  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:03:14pm

re: #109 eschew_obfuscation

From the original post:
"The task of a judge is not to make the law – it is to apply the law"

"The court of appeals is where policy is made"
Sonia Sotomayor

Which is it Sonia?

It is sort of both, though, isn't it? A weird dance of precedent and no precedent that gradually builds new law.

289 Mostly sane, most of the time.  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:03:45pm

re: #280 SanFranciscoZionist

Well, that would get my husband interested in politics, but other than that, how is it analogous?

Somebody drug up the Immigrant song. Listen closely: it's about Iceland (Hot springs, etc.)

290 opnion  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:04:28pm

re: #282 taxfreekiller

BHO should not continue to be such a jerk "all" the time

He has made it an art form

291 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:04:55pm

re: #265 taxfreekiller

What of it?

292 Kosh's Shadow  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:05:11pm

re: #257 SanFranciscoZionist

Because people very rarely blow their own heads off while poking holes in a ballot.

No, but they end up blowing a big hole in the economy.
See the 2008 Presidential election.

293 Ben Hur  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:05:14pm

C'mon.

There are no Icelanders.

It was all made up to trick the Vikings.

294 eschew_obfuscation  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:05:21pm

re: #288 SanFranciscoZionist

It is sort of both, though, isn't it? A weird dance of precedent and no precedent that gradually builds new law.

Yes...case law, but that's clearly niot what she was referring to as she was embarassed to have said it in front of a camera... see the video.

295 SanFranciscoZionist  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:05:23pm

re: #117 LudwigVanQuixote

She is obviously a beneficiary of AA?

SHE WAS YALE LAW REVIEW AFTER PRINCETON!

Anyone who looks at a minority member who made something of themselves, and automatically assumes that they are some charity case from AA is a racist.

Ohhh you can go on all over the place about how you aren't a racist, You can on on how "some of your best friends are..." but the second tht you start making such a horrible assumption, you are clearly prejudging her based on her race. That would be the very definition of racism.

She herself has said she made it to college as an affirmative action student. Following that, obviously, she showed her extreme competence. They don't do AA with Yale Law Review. That's the whole POINT of affirmative action--not that the incompetant are promoted, but that the competant get enough of a boost to get started.

296 quiet man  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:05:35pm

re: #285 LGoPs
yeah buddy!

It is who they are...

No surge, no judge, no private motorcars
taking every single luxury
Like Robinson Crusoe, we're all fucked you and me

297 Nevergiveup  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:05:51pm

re: #281 calcajun

They still do. Only instead of selling cars, they own the dealerships.

There is a former NY Giant here in NJ who owns one and advertises all the time on Radio that he and his wife will refrain from sex unless he sells a certain number of cars? Yeah, like after being married all these years that fazes me.

298 LGoPs  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:06:41pm

I accept that Sotomayer is going to get seated. There is nothing the Republicans can do.
But it does stick in my craw that the Democrats have demostrated repeatedly that there are no rules when it comes to the nomination process.
And at the same time the Republicans are held scrupulously to the rules.
That is bullshit.

299 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:06:56pm
300 Ben Hur  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:07:04pm

re: #297 Nevergiveup

There is a former NY Giant here in NJ who owns one and advertises all the time on Radio that he and his wife will refrain from sex unless he sells a certain number of cars? Yeah, like after being married all these years that fazes me.

Brad Benson.

301 tedzilla99  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:07:28pm

"If you think Sonia Sotomayor is a judicial activist and radical leftist, you’re not going to find evidence for it in her opening statement:"

Um wow really? I guess that's why they might be looking at her record? And her public statements? Ya think?

302 quiet man  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:07:38pm

re: #298 LGoPs

The left cant stick to rules because they have few if any morals..time and again this is proven

303 Nevergiveup  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:07:46pm

re: #298 LGoPs

I accept that Sotomayer is going to get seated. There is nothing the Republicans can do.
But it does stick in my craw that the Democrats have demostrated repeatedly that there are no rules when it comes to the nomination process.
And at the same time the Republicans are held scrupulously to the rules.
That is bullshit.

So what's new?

304 Ben Hur  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:07:50pm

re: #297 Nevergiveup

There is a former NY Giant here in NJ who owns one and advertises all the time on Radio that he and his wife will refrain from sex unless he sells a certain number of cars? Yeah, like after being married all these years that fazes me.


And it must have been his wife's idea.

305 Nevergiveup  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:08:11pm

re: #300 Ben Hur

Brad Benson.

That's the guy.

306 quiet man  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:08:58pm

re: #301 tedzilla99
Yes, but they need to fool the credulous with such talk..that and speeding her past so no one can look too closely at what matters.

307 Vicious Babushka  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:09:36pm

re: #297 Nevergiveup

There is a former NY Giant here in NJ who owns one and advertises all the time on Radio that he and his wife will refrain from sex unless he sells a certain number of cars? Yeah, like after being married all these years that fazes me.

Why are married guys fatter than single guys?

A single guy looks at what's in the fridge and goes to bed.
A married guy looks at what's in the bed and goes to the fridge.

308 tedzilla99  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:09:55pm

re: #295 SanFranciscoZionist

She herself has said she made it to college as an affirmative action student. Following that, obviously, she showed her extreme competence. They don't do AA with Yale Law Review. That's the whole POINT of affirmative action--not that the incompetant are promoted, but that the competant get enough of a boost to get started.

No the POINT of affirmative action is to level the playing field down to have the appearance of "fairness" while guaranteeing that unqualified applicants will get in and subsequently fail, thereby perpetuating the need for the program, which will then level it down again.

309 opnion  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:10:27pm

re: #284 quiet man

re: #285 LGoPs

I am sure that Sotomayar will be treated better than Bush nominees.
Her opening statement does not persuade me that she is not a judicial activist, when past decisions & speeches suggest otherwise.
I would not expect her to say something like,"Good Morning, ya got me.
I don't give a hoot in hell about any Constitution or laws that you pass.
I am a wise Latina damn it, & I'll make law from the bench."

310 eon  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:11:00pm

re: #260 LGoPs

Aaah. The happy legacy of Stalinism...
/

Yes. One of the almost inevitable side effects of a one-party state being ruled by a strong man with a "cult of personality" he has carefully constructed around himself is that when he dies, unless his heirs crack down hard instantly, the result is usually a bloodbath, not just from people jockeying for position in the new pecking order but also because of some seizing the opportunity to settle old scores. Think Stalin's death in 1953, and Beriya's shortly thereafter, apparently as the climax of a "palace spat" within the Kremlin with the KGB on his side and GRU on the Politburo's (Geh Eh Ru won), or Mao's death in 1979 followed almost immediately by the trial and execution of his widow, Qiang Qing, and the rest of the "Gang of Four".

Lil' Kim has apparently been unable to make up his mind which of his sons he wants to be his heir, apparently due to his suspicion that both are in fact idiots. (Saddam had the same problem with Uday and Qusay, which persisted until the Third Herd solved it for him with a couple of TOW IIs bunged into the house they were holed up in.) If the matter is still unresolved when The Dear Leader goes wherever it is good, psychotic Trotskyites go when they kick off (I'm not a theologian), look for something very like the Gene Wilder/Donald Sutherland movie Start The Revolution Without Me- minus the laughs.

cheers

eon

311 1SG(ret)  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:11:08pm

re: #299 taxfreekiller

But... La Raza has moderated their language so they are OK now!

//

312 SanFranciscoZionist  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:11:24pm

re: #265 taxfreekiller

and what of membership in La Raza now, and the say last 20 years?

TFK, what do you say about Alberto Gonzales' membership in said organization?

313 LGoPs  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:12:08pm

re: #301 tedzilla99

"If you think Sonia Sotomayor is a judicial activist and radical leftist, you’re not going to find evidence for it in her opening statement:"
Um wow really? I guess that's why they might be looking at her record? And her public statements? Ya think?

In much the same way that since Obama doesn't wear an 'I heart Lenin" button he can't be a socialist or a communist.

314 Russkilitlover  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:12:12pm

re: #295 SanFranciscoZionist

She herself has said she made it to college as an affirmative action student. Following that, obviously, she showed her extreme competence. They don't do AA with Yale Law Review. That's the whole POINT of affirmative action--not that the incompetant are promoted, but that the competant get enough of a boost to get started.

For me, it all goes back to who do you want opening up your chest in the operating room - a surgeon who excelled his/her way into the med school through brilliant performance, or one who was admitted to med school under less stringent criteria?

I have always been amazed that the stigma of AA didn't bother more minorities. It's terribly insulting.

315 Emmett Flatus  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:12:50pm

Was the TelePrompTer script correct?

316 quiet man  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:12:56pm

re: #313 LGoPs

A high fly ball smacked to center field..yeeesss It's outta here..Homerun!!

317 SanFranciscoZionist  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:13:17pm

re: #289 EmmmieG

Somebody drug up the Immigrant song. Listen closely: it's about Iceland (Hot springs, etc.)

My husband loves Viking stuff. And the Viking Kitty video for the Immigrant Song.

318 Ben Hur  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:13:23pm

I'd like to see a link, ONE LINK, that shows that she's an alcholic.

319 Nevergiveup  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:13:43pm

Another reason to hate the All Star Game:

Obama to join Fox broadcast booth for All-Star Game

[Link: sportsillustrated.cnn.com...]

320 A Kiwi Infidel  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:13:54pm

re: #297 Nevergiveup

There is a former NY Giant here in NJ who owns one and advertises all the time on Radio that he and his wife will refrain from sex unless he sells a certain number of cars? Yeah, like after being married all these years that fazes me.


"Buy the car, please, just buy the car! G-d dammit, buy the car, cant you see I'm climbing the wall, here? BUY THE CAR!!"

321 quiet man  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:14:08pm

re: #317 SanFranciscoZionist
Is rthere a Viking Hello Kitty??

'cause my wife likes them

322 Nevergiveup  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:14:58pm

re: #318 Ben Hur

I'd like to see a link, ONE LINK, that shows that she's an alcholic.

Like ya think she really broke that ankle in a Airport Terminal?

323 Ben Hur  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:15:20pm

re: #318 Ben Hur

I'd like to see a link, ONE LINK, that shows that she's an alcholic.

That was an AA joke.

Get it?

No?

Ok.

BBL

324 SanFranciscoZionist  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:15:26pm

re: #314 Russkilitlover

For me, it all goes back to who do you want opening up your chest in the operating room - a surgeon who excelled his/her way into the med school through brilliant performance, or one who was admitted to med school under less stringent criteria?

I have always been amazed that the stigma of AA didn't bother more minorities. It's terribly insulting.


You know, as long as the surgeon did WELL in med school, I honestly don't care that much about how they got in.

Now, if they got through the certification process under less stringent criteria, I would be nervous.

325 eschew_obfuscation  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:16:45pm
326 quiet man  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:16:50pm

re: #323 Ben Hur
Not all minorities in airports are anonymous, but they often drink like they are.

327 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:17:09pm
328 John Neverbend  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:17:10pm

re: #174 Ben Hur

Senior Ku Klux Klan member arrested in Tel Aviv apartment

How on earth did he get through airport security to be living there in the first place? Don't tell me he dressed up as Nachman Grobstein, a Brooklyn yeshiva bocher.

329 SanFranciscoZionist  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:17:23pm

re: #321 quiet man

Is rthere a Viking Hello Kitty??

'cause my wife likes them

I don't know. There should be, shouldn't there?

330 reloadingisnotahobby  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:17:35pm

re: #318 Ben Hur

Now that's just Wrong!!
How can you possibly judge a person by the standard "If they drink"??
Now ! Judging a person by "WHAT they drink"...is a different issue altogether!!

331 Kragar  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:17:42pm

re: #321 quiet man

Is rthere a Viking Hello Kitty??

'cause my wife likes them

Not that I know of, but they do have a Warhammer Hello Kitty army

332 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:17:49pm
333 Dianna  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:18:16pm

re: #326 quiet man

I'd stop. Really. Even in context, it's not very funny.

334 SanFranciscoZionist  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:18:41pm

re: #332 taxfreekiller

Alberto G. should have never been Atty. Gen. due to his membership in La Raza, he proved up his crap by putting the Border Patrol guys in for such long terms just for catching a f'n drug mule with a load of drugs.

like that

Thank you. That's clear.

335 jjag  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:18:57pm

She is clearly an "activist" as enunciated often in her previous writings.

She epitomizes "radical leftist" thought. Some people "deserve" more consideration than others...because of race, relative wealth, etc.

This is the exact opposite of fair judicial temperament.

She will be an "activist" because, as her clearly racial statement implied, something's are more important than mere "justice"...SOCIAL justice for example.

That's your classic liberal judicial activist in a nut shell. She'll find "penumbras and emanations" all over the place as often as it suites her fancy. Obama didn't nominate her to be passive. He went for the entire enchalada on this one as he (boldly) knew he could easily get away with the worst possible nominnee with a Democratic majority, a flaccid Republican opposition and the media behind him 100%.

She'll be a joke. Worse than any other justice. The only good thing that will come of this is she'll make a fool of herself so often her opinions will stand as symbols of magnificent stupidity born of abject dedication to liberal willfulness.

336 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:19:03pm
337 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:19:51pm

re: #242 JohnAdams

Al has ruined many things for me...Frankenberry cereal, Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, Ball Park Franks, Frankfort, Germany, France (well...) all conjure up that dumb visage of his. Damn.

Don't forget Weird Al Yankovic, Al Bundy, El Al, Al Capone, Al Pacino, Already Gone (Eagles song...)

338 LGoPs  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:19:58pm

I keep hearing about Kim's hairs. What do Kim's sons have to do with his hair?
///

339 SixDegrees  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:20:00pm

re: #314 Russkilitlover

For me, it all goes back to who do you want opening up your chest in the operating room - a surgeon who excelled his/her way into the med school through brilliant performance, or one who was admitted to med school under less stringent criteria?

I have always been amazed that the stigma of AA didn't bother more minorities. It's terribly insulting.

I want the one who graduated with honors. I don't really care how they got admitted, or what they did prior to that.

But I agree that AA is demeaning, and actively detrimental to the very people it claims to be trying hardest to serve. Those who bust their asses to excel, who pull that 4.0+ GPA in order to succeed, wind up getting dissed by AA because so many people automatically discount their achievements as artificial. The assumption that those high achievers got their positions because of AA punishes the best and the brightest.

In Sotomayor's case, I'm not seeing the issue. She may have gotten a leg up starting her legal career through AA, but her subsequent career can stand on it's own merits, without any fudging over set-asides or preferential treatment.

340 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:20:13pm
341 LGoPs  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:21:25pm

re: #330 reloadingisnotahobby

Now that's just Wrong!!
How can you possibly judge a person by the standard "If they drink"??
Now ! Judging a person by "WHAT they drink"...is a different issue altogether!!

If all a man, or woman, drinks is kool aid, I hold them in very low esteem...
/

342 quiet man  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:21:58pm

re: #333 Dianna
Can't win them all. Sometimes you get the bear, sometimes it gets you.

343 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:22:00pm
344 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:22:28pm

re: #295 SanFranciscoZionist

She herself has said she made it to college as an affirmative action student. Following that, obviously, she showed her extreme competence. They don't do AA with Yale Law Review. That's the whole POINT of affirmative action--not that the incompetant are promoted, but that the competant get enough of a boost to get started.

You are making a great point, and I think we are on the same side here. The contention of the pot that I was so offended by was that after she got a boost from AA to get into Princeton - that great institution that almost didn't take Feynman because he was Jewish - she proved herself to be brilliant. Being editor of the Yale Law Review does not go to trivial people.

I am not upset that AA forced certain institutions to give talented people a chance.

My other point is that of course the poster who said this about her initial boost would love to have you think that of course she can't possibly be qualified. She must have been an unqualified charity case her whole life.
That is simply racist.

345 Kosh's Shadow  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:22:39pm

re: #341 LGoPs

If all a man, or woman, drinks is kool aid, I hold them in very low esteem...
/

Kook-aid pollutes your precious bodily fluids.
Drink nothing but rainwater and grain alcohol.

346 reloadingisnotahobby  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:22:46pm

re: #324 SanFranciscoZionist

I went to the University of Utah Sports Center so I would have
the BEST Orth... replacing my knee!
After all, they SAW your Fu""ng knee apart and glue in Titanium shit!!
Well the Surgeon I consulted with and assumed would be cutting on me wasn't even in the BUILDING when they did the procedure!
Some "youngster" with senior surgeon looking over his shoulder!
Pffft!

347 tedzilla99  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:22:51pm

re: #321 quiet man

Is rthere a Viking Hello Kitty??

'cause my wife likes them

here are some Viking kittens

348 quiet man  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:23:10pm

re: #343 taxfreekiller
That is probably why Obama chose her..it's why he chose all those tax cheats

349 eon  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:23:16pm

re: #327 buzzsawmonkey

Does that mean that we have to keep the Democrats in power forever to avoid a bloodbath after the strongman with the cult of personality is no longer head of state?

They'd like you to think so...

///??

The real conflict would be when The One got tired of being Supreme Leader Of The Universe, and Plugs Biden would have to try to outwit San Fran Nan and Botox Barb for the big chair. (I expect Hairbrained Harry to be in SuperMax by then, on grounds of general stupidity.)

And the winner is... Michelle, aka "Mingette the Merciless".

Have a great evening, Lizards.

cheers

eon

350 John Neverbend  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:23:54pm

re: #337 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

Don't forget Weird Al Yankovic, Al Bundy, El Al, Al Capone, Al Pacino, Already Gone (Eagles song...)

There was an "uncle Al" character on Rowan and Martin's Laugh-In. He was a permanently drunk children's host. "Uncle Al had a lot of medicine last night," was his constant refrain.

351 Kosh's Shadow  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:23:59pm

re: #346 reloadingisnotahobby

I went to the University of Utah Sports Center so I would have
the BEST Orth... replacing my knee!
After all, they SAW your Fu""ng knee apart and glue in Titanium shit!!
Well the Surgeon I consulted with and assumed would be cutting on me wasn't even in the BUILDING when they did the procedure!
Some "youngster" with senior surgeon looking over his shoulder!
Pffft!

But he still sent you a bill, I'm sure.

352 opnion  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:24:02pm

re: #319 Nevergiveup

Another reason to hate the All Star Game:

Obama to join Fox broadcast booth for All-Star Game

[Link: sportsillustrated.cnn.com...]


That's just wrong, it just is. I don't remember another President with this kind of hubris, he is always in our face,

353 quiet man  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:24:08pm

re: #347 tedzilla99
I think they say Hello with weapons!

bad kitties for sure

354 Nevergiveup  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:25:00pm

re: #352 opnion

That's just wrong, it just is. I don't remember another President with this kind of hubris, he is always in our face,

Do what i do. Watch the History Channel more.

355 Charles Johnson  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:25:08pm

re: #301 tedzilla99

"If you think Sonia Sotomayor is a judicial activist and radical leftist, you’re not going to find evidence for it in her opening statement:"

Um wow really? I guess that's why they might be looking at her record? And her public statements? Ya think?

Wow! I never thought of that.

/dripping

356 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:25:24pm

re: #331 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Not that I know of, but they do have a Warhammer Hello Kitty army

Rock ON!

357 Kosh's Shadow  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:25:39pm

re: #350 John Neverbend

There was an "uncle Al" character on Rowan and Martin's Laugh-In. He was a permanently drunk children's host. "Uncle Al had a lot of medicine last night," was his constant refrain.

I wonder how many actual kid's show hosts had a bit so they could deal with the kids.

358 quiet man  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:26:47pm

Death by Hello Kitty storm troopers...

I just do not know how to integrate that bit of knowledge

359 Pianobuff  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:27:07pm

So it looks like Steve Rattner the Car Czar quit today. He wants to, ahem, spend more time with his family.

Hey, at least the guy taking his place is a former union negotiator.

360 Russkilitlover  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:27:15pm

re: #350 John Neverbend

There was an "uncle Al" character on Rowan and Martin's Laugh-In. He was a permanently drunk children's host. "Uncle Al had a lot of medicine last night," was his constant refrain.

Uncle Al, the kiddie's pal?

Wow. I remember that.

361 opnion  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:27:16pm

re: #354 Nevergiveup

Do what i do. Watch the History Channel more.

Guess that I will have to. I just hope that he has no White Sox hat on.

362 Lincolntf  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:28:20pm

Alberto Gonzalez was clearly an Affirmative Action pick (both Dems and Repubs are guilty of chasing "Firsts" in the name of "diversity").
So-So went from being a darling of the Leftist activists (there's a reason her name was the first one on the "short list") to being a moderate Jurist in the blink of an MSM eye.
Obama has appointed virulently partisan hacks to 90% of the positions available to him (not counting the extra-Constuitutional czardoms he created out of thin air), so why should she be any different?
She'll get confirmed without a serious vetting, just like Barry got elected without one.

363 Bob Dillon  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:28:23pm

Well, it is Fox but ...

[Link: foxforum.blogs.foxnews.com...]

YOU DECIDE: Is Judge Sotomayor out of step with mainstream America? Share your thoughts. First, vote in our poll, then click 0n “Leave a Comment” below.

Yes 89% (15830 votes)

No 10% (1722 votes)

I'm not sure 2% (331 votes)

TOTAL VOTES: 17883

This is not a scientific poll

364 reloadingisnotahobby  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:28:28pm

re: #351 Kosh's Shadow

Standard bill...including pharmacy meds...That I brought and took when required and 7 PT's I never recieved...Even dated AFTER my discharge was signed!
No kidding!I called my Insurance Company and they just paid!

365 redstateredneck  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:28:32pm

re: #357 Kosh's Shadow

I wonder how many actual kid's show hosts had a bit so they could deal with the kids.

I think Cactus Jim, our local guy, did. He came down from the station one day in the elevator wearing nothin' but his hat and his boots.
He went away for a while.

366 tedzilla99  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:28:45pm

re: #355 Charles

Wow! I never thought of that.

/dripping

Then I'm confused about your statement that I quoted, because it would be incredibly naive to think she would do anything other than play it safe right down the middle.

367 Desert Dog  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:29:03pm

Barring any "skeletal discoveries" from the proverbial closet, Ms. Sotomayor will be confirmed. It is the duty of the Senate to grill these nominees, no matter which party nominated them. I don't want her treated unfairly, but I do want someone to ask her tough questions. This is not for membership to the Mickey Mouse Fan Club, it's the SCOTUS. The Dem Senators will toss her softballs and the Republicans will have to ask the tougher questions (it's visa-versa when the Republicans nominate). She needs to be grilled and asked about her past decisions and her judicial philosophy. Then, they can vote to confirm or reject her nomination based on that. That is way it is supposed to be, at least.

Do the Dems have their shootin' hands on the race card, just waiting to whip it out? Oh yes, of course they do. The Republicans have to be careful here not to come across as meanies and "wise latina" haters. They can still open up her past and let everyone see what kind of judge she has been, for better or worse.

368 John Neverbend  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:29:07pm

re: #360 Russkilitlover

Uncle Al, the kiddie's pal?

Wow. I remember that.

Of course, I was just a nipper at the time. It was one of the many TV exports from the US to England. Eventually, you got Benny Hill in return.

369 Nevergiveup  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:29:41pm

re: #361 opnion

Guess that I will have to. I just hope that he has no White Sox hat on.

Probably not. isn't the game in St. louis?

370 quiet man  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:30:07pm

re: #360 Russkilitlover

I remeber Rowan and Martin making Isreali/palestinian jokes...the very same ones that we could make today

371 avanti  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:30:23pm

re: #314 Russkilitlover

For me, it all goes back to who do you want opening up your chest in the operating room - a surgeon who excelled his/her way into the med school through brilliant performance, or one who was admitted to med school under less stringent criteria?

I have always been amazed that the stigma of AA didn't bother more minorities. It's terribly insulting.

To me, it's not about how you got to the starting line, it's how you finished the race. I'd take the AA surgeon that did better in school over the one that finished lower without the leg up.

372 Charles Johnson  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:30:42pm

re: #366 tedzilla99

Then I'm confused about your statement that I quoted, because it would be incredibly naive to think she would do anything other than play it safe right down the middle.

You're reading something I didn't write, obviously.

373 quiet man  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:31:54pm

re: #366 tedzilla99
I think everyone expects her to lie thru her teeth..same as her supporters..and if you call her on it..well, they be coming fer ya

374 right_wing2  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:32:21pm

I'd bet it's a good thing she's not Pinoccio- her nose could easily be 30' long by now.

375 avanti  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:32:31pm

re: #352 opnion

That's just wrong, it just is. I don't remember another President with this kind of hubris, he is always in our face,

It's the first all star game where all the living Presidents will be in the booth. To not invite the sitting POTUS would have been strange.

376 opnion  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:34:13pm

re: #369 Nevergiveup

Probably not. isn't the game in St. louis?

Yeah, but BHO sells himslf as a big SOX fan & maybe he is.
I am a SOX fan & would rather see him support the Cubs or any other
team.

377 kansas  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:34:54pm

Since that day, White House officials have refused to comment further on Sotomayor's diabetes or make her doctor available for an interview. ...


Follows a pattern.

378 Nevergiveup  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:35:23pm

re: #376 opnion

Yeah, but BHO sells himslf as a big SOX fan & maybe he is.
I am a SOX fan & would rather see him support the Cubs or any other
team.

If he had any class he'd be a Cub's fan anyway

379 opnion  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:35:47pm

re: #375 avanti

It's the first all star game where all the living Presidents will be in the booth. To not invite the sitting POTUS would have been strange.

I didn't know that. You mean that Bush 1&2, Clinton & Carter will be in the booth?

380 Nevergiveup  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:36:24pm

re: #379 opnion

I didn't know that. You mean that Bush 1&2, Clinton & Carter will be in the booth?

Maybe carter will fall outa the booth? OOps did I say that? Must be the booze

381 Lincolntf  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:37:36pm

re: #379 opnion

I hadn't heard that either. Should be an interesting conversation (provided Avanti is telling the truth about it).

382 sngnsgt  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:38:01pm

re: #337 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

Don't forget Weird Al Yankovic, Al Bundy, El Al, Al Capone, Al Pacino, Already Gone (Eagles song...)

Don't forget Al Borland (grunt, grunt, grunt)

383 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:38:36pm

OK, so for her whole career, she's actually been pretty moderate.

Her opening remarks are very moderate.

People are assuming that she must, just must, be lying about being moderate. Jeesh.

Do you not get, that Bush appointed some seriously right wing people to the Court and that Obama could have appointed someone who was as far to the left as Roberts or Scalia is to the right - yet, we got a real actual moderate?

Jeesh.

One of the things that gives me some hope that Obama isn't quite as bad as I am afraid, and believe me, I really hate a lot of things he has done so far, but one of the things that gave me some hope is that he is actually choosing a moderate - based on her excellent credentials. I honestly think that as a former law professor, Obama appreciates just how good she is.

384 opnion  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:38:47pm

re: #378 Nevergiveup

If he had any class he'd be a Cub's fan anyway


Take him.

385 opnion  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:39:29pm

re: #381 Lincolntf

I hadn't heard that either. Should be an interesting conversation (provided Avanti is telling the truth about it).

It doesn't sound right but, maybe...

386 tedzilla99  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:40:24pm

re: #372 Charles

You're reading something I didn't write, obviously.

"If you think Sonia Sotomayor is a judicial activist and radical leftist, you’re not going to find evidence for it in her opening statement:"

Pretty sure that's what I read and then quoted - sounds like you're speaking to those who actually think she is a radical and an activist. And you have posted on other occasions that you believe she is moderate in her decisions, so obviously I am reading what you wrote.

387 eschew_obfuscation  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:43:04pm

re: #385 opnion

It doesn't sound right but, maybe...

It seems legit. I can't get to the MLB site because it's blocked at work, but here's part of the URL.

mlb.mlb.com/news/press_releases/press_release.jsp?ymd=2...

388 Lincolntf  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:44:37pm

re: #385 opnion

If it's true, I hope there's a recording device catching all their chit-chat. Not that I'd necessarily ever hear it, but the possibilities are endless in such a conversation. Should be preserved for posterity.

389 bbuddha  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:48:04pm

re: #377 kansas

Since that day, White House officials have refused to comment further on Sotomayor's diabetes or make her doctor available for an interview. ...

Follows a pattern.

I do NOT think she is qualified to be a supreme court justice but whether or not she is diabetic is completely irrelavent

390 avanti  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 2:49:00pm

re: #388 Lincolntf

If it's true, I hope there's a recording device catching all their chit-chat. Not that I'd necessarily ever hear it, but the possibilities are endless in such a conversation. Should be preserved for posterity.

I need to correct myself, they all will be in a opening video, but they may not be at the game.

"Obama is scheduled to throw out the first pitch Tuesday in St. Louis at Busch Stadium. He will be joined by former Presidents George W. Bush, Bill Clinton, George H.W. Bush and Jimmy Carter in a seven-minute video address to be aired during the pregame ceremony. The video will honor 30 Americans whom MLB and People magazine have recognized for service to their communities. "

391 Charles Johnson  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 3:01:14pm

I have not been convinced by any of the arguments that Sotomayor is a radical, a racist, or a judicial activist. I took a good look at her record, read the entire speech that was published in the New York Times (from which a single sentence was taken to smear her as a racist), and have looked into her online history pretty extensively, and I'm not seeing any of those things. I would say so if I did. I don't like activist judges either.

But in Sotomayor I see a person who leans left on some issues, right on others, and whose record contains nothing at all to suggest she tries to legislate from the bench.

That video where she says court decisions affect policy has also been ridiculously distorted; her point is a simple matter of reality -- decisions DO affect policy. She was not saying she thinks the decisions should BE the policy.

And I've found numerous statements from Sotomayor, on many occasions, in which she says exactly the same things about the Constitution that she says in the quote above. I don't see any reason to assume she's lying about those opinions.

392 bbuddha  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 3:02:44pm

gotta go, thunderstorm coming in

393 anotherindyfilmguy  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 3:09:33pm

re: #97 debutaunt

Did you mean who would vote Republican?

Nope.

394 jvic  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 3:12:23pm

1. Liberal pundit Joe Conason compares Sotomayor and Thomas as affirmative action picks, to Thomas's disadvantage.

2. According to Wikipedia, there are two routes to the Yale Law Journal. One is via competitive examinations. The other is via publishing in the Yale Law Journal. S published as did Alito but not Thomas; I don't know if S also took the exams.

Although the YLJ acceptance process is anonymous, a skeptic might ask whether the topics serve as dog whistles; Sotomayor wrote about Puerto Rican seabed rights.

3. I'm not thrilled about her, but I don't see a case that she's academically unqualified. I'm not thrilled about her, but I don't see anything serious enough to warrant rejecting the nomination.

4. My attitude is that government-enforced affirmative action does more overall harm than good; and that the longer it continues, the greater the imbalance is.

395 Ojoe  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 3:31:10pm

re: #394 jvic

In my view, Affirmative Action amounts to a de facto title of nobility, conferring as it does, unmerited advantages by accident of birth, with all the attendant corrosive effects on the body politic that a nobility produces: resentments, and rule by incompetents.

The founding fathers knew this, and that is why titles of nobility are prohibited by the US Constitution.

I really think Affirmative Action is unconstitutional on the face of it.

396 tradewind  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 3:32:37pm

Here's the thing: She's bo-ring. Can't write. Her opinions tend to be dense and impenetrable. It's gonna be a long lifetime term...
[Link: lawprofessors.typepad.com...]
Clarence Thomas may not talk a lot during oral arguments, but his opinions are elegantly written, as are Scalia's.

397 Ojoe  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 3:33:30pm

re: #394 jvic

I'm not thrilled about her, but I don't see anything serious enough to warrant rejecting the nomination.

She cannot be believed to be impartial after her "wise Latina" comment disparaging white men. Do I think I would get justice from her? I do not. She should not sit on the Supreme Court. She will be damaging to Latinos and whites alike.

398 debutaunt  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 3:33:58pm

re: #395 Ojoe

In my view, Affirmative Action amounts to a de facto title of nobility, conferring as it does, unmerited advantages by accident of birth, with all the attendant corrosive effects on the body politic that a nobility produces: resentments, and rule by incompetents.

The founding fathers knew this, and that is why titles of nobility are prohibited by the US Constitution.

I really think Affirmative Action is unconstitutional on the face of it.

Affirmative tainting.

399 jjag  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 3:38:48pm

#391 Charles,

There's a lot of evidence then that you've missed about her. She's repeated the racial "Latina" quote several times and in print. Its nonsense to think she doesn't have a major chip on her shoulder.

The proof is in her dismissal, without hearing, of the Ricco case. She got ripped a new one, rightfully, by KENNEDY of all people. The issue was clear; New Haven ran a test VETTED to be race neutral and then threw out the results WITHOUT even considering any evidence to support a racist test (if that's even possible these days) because it didn't achieve a racial quota that they liked.

Sorry, but that's racist.

She's a joke. You'll/we'll choke on her.

400 [deleted]  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 3:41:53pm
401 Charles Johnson  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 3:42:04pm

re: #399 jjag

You'll/we'll choke on her.

I doubt it.

402 ~Fianna  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 3:43:08pm

re: #396 tradewind

Here's the thing: She's bo-ring. Can't write. Her opinions tend to be dense and impenetrable. It's gonna be a long lifetime term...
[Link: lawprofessors.typepad.com...]
Clarence Thomas may not talk a lot during oral arguments, but his opinions are elegantly written, as are Scalia's.

Scalia's used to be, but lately I haven't enjoyed them as much.

The best writer on the Court, IMO, is the Chief. When his appointment was first announced, I was not thrilled, but his confirmation won me over and his rulings, although I do disagree with many of them, are absolutely delightful and his reasoning is unimpeachable.

403 ~Fianna  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 3:45:39pm

re: #399 jjag

#391 Charles,

There's a lot of evidence then that you've missed about her. She's repeated the racial "Latina" quote several times and in print. Its nonsense to think she doesn't have a major chip on her shoulder.

The proof is in her dismissal, without hearing, of the Ricco case. She got ripped a new one, rightfully, by KENNEDY of all people. The issue was clear; New Haven ran a test VETTED to be race neutral and then threw out the results WITHOUT even considering any evidence to support a racist test (if that's even possible these days) because it didn't achieve a racial quota that they liked.

Sorry, but that's racist.

She's a joke. You'll/we'll choke on her.

First, it's the Ricci case.

Second, she applied Connecticut law. The Supreme court decides on whether or not a law is Constitutional. The appeals courts rule on whether current law was correctly applied in the originating court.

Third, she wasn't the only person who ruled on Ricci. She was part of an appellate panel.

404 hazzyday  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 3:52:54pm

We need a free press.

405 tradewind  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 3:53:31pm

re: #404 hazzyday

re: #404 hazzyday

She gets a free pass.

406 tradewind  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 3:56:55pm

re: #403 ~Fianna

The contrast in her demeanor on the 2005 tape where she breezily and sarcastically says ' I know, I know, we don't make law ' (wink wink) and her meek, humble-little-me pose in committee today makes me feel like we'll have a real hypocrite on the bench, and I hate that.

407 Ojoe  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 4:16:27pm

re: #404 hazzyday

This is one.

408 Ojoe  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 4:19:52pm

re: #391 Charles

Fine and good, but both actuality and appearance are important in a judge.

409 jayzee  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 4:22:10pm

I have no doubt she's an activist. I have no doubt Obama thinks so too. In his own words, Roberts lacked "empathy" though was qualified to sit on the bench (which prompted his no vote) and Sotomayor has plenty of empathy.
She herself repeated the "latina" line a number of times and the general sway at Yale Law was legal realism.

That being said, is that something that should disqualify a nominee? I really don't know the answer. Though apparently President Obama thought it was if one were against judicial activism.

410 Adrenalyn  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 4:59:22pm

re: #257 SanFranciscoZionist

Because people very rarely blow their own heads off while poking holes in a ballot.

don't get me wrong, I have no problem with a safety test for guns because we all know how stupid people are

like Bob Barr, who loosed a round into the floor at a gun show

but...it's the "right" thing that bothers me
the background check AND test are infringements

also, people fought poll taxes as discrimination
gun fees, etc. are unfair also, no ?

411 Alan Furman  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 5:14:53pm

Randy Barnett:

If you suspect this week's Senate confirmation hearings for Sonia Sotomayor will be, like "Seinfeld," a show about nothing, you are probably right...In the 1930s, academics developed a philosophy they called "legal realism" to undercut judicial resistance to "progressive" statutes such as laws restricting the hours a baker or a woman could work. Legal realism elevated just results over the rule of law. It saw analysis of "the law" as an after-the-fact rationalization that allowed reactionary judges to conceal their empathy for the oppressed. Because legal realists believed judges inevitably made law when they ruled, they thought judges should decide cases with progressive ends in mind.

At the same time, and somewhat inconsistently, realist progressives also condemned judges who declared progressive federal and state laws to be unconstitutional as judicial activists who were thwarting the will of the people. Never mind that the Supreme Court was only tepidly enforcing the original meaning of the Constitution and was upholding the vast majority of enlightened regulations. Any interference of the will of the people was deemed to be undemocratic...

...Today we live in a legal world in which...justices must be chosen who will reach the politically correct results or opposed because they will reach the wrong results...

...So senators and nominees opine about two empty concepts. The first is "stare decisis" or precedent: Will the nominee follow the hallowed case of U.S. v. Whatchamacallit or not?...No one thinks justices should follow every precedent, so the crucial issue is picking and choosing which to follow and which to ignore. But how? Well, by the results, of course...

...The second empty issue to be discussed is the bugaboo of "judicial activism"...But what exactly is "activism"?...

[J]udicial activism means thwarting the "will of the people" when critics agree with the people, while they complain about the "tyranny of the majority" when they disagree.

We can do better.

Supreme Court confirmation hearings do not have to be about either results or nothing. They could be about clauses, not cases. Instead of asking nominees how they would decide particular cases, ask them to explain what they think the various clauses of the Constitution mean...

...Don't ask how the meaning of these clauses should be applied in particular circumstances. Just ask about the meaning itself and how it should be ascertained...

412 ~Fianna  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 5:35:25pm

re: #406 tradewind

The contrast in her demeanor on the 2005 tape where she breezily and sarcastically says ' I know, I know, we don't make law ' (wink wink) and her meek, humble-little-me pose in committee today makes me feel like we'll have a real hypocrite on the bench, and I hate that.

Honestly, what she said in the 2005 tape is exactly right - they don't make the law, but the interpretation part is equally important. The advice she gave to the law school students is the advice that law school advisers give all the time.

413 strangelove  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 6:26:19pm

This scares the living hell out of me:
A 2004 opinion she joined also cited as precedent that "the right to possess a gun is clearly not a fundamental right."

"Last year, the Supreme Court held in Heller that the Second Amendment guarantees the right of individual Americans to keep and bear firearms. But that ruling was a fiercely-contested, 5-4 split decision. Justice Kennedy joined the four conservatives on the Court to make the majority, with the four liberal justices writing passionate dissents about how the Second Amendment does not apply to private citizens.

Bluntly speaking, the Second Amendment survived by a single vote. Had one justice voted differently, the Second Amendment would have been erased from the Bill of Rights forever. Today in the Supreme Court, the right to bear arms hangs by a single vote.

The next question the Supreme Court will decide is whether the Second Amendment is a "fundamental right" that applies to cities and states, thus preventing them from restricting gun rights. Even the liberal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held earlier this year in Nordyke v. King that the Second Amendment is a fundamental right, yet Judge Sotomayor disagrees."[Link: gunowners.org...]

Without the teeth of the Second Amendment (thank you mr. Patrick Henry)...all the others are flowery rhetoric.

Feinstein, Boxer, Schumer in the legisltaive branch, Obama and his lefties in the Executive branch...and now an anti-individual rights judge in the Judicial?...the perfect storm for a gun-grabbing nightmare.

Charles, you nee to re-think your position on this nominee.

414 Charles Johnson  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 7:10:48pm

Oh brother. Anybody smell a moby around here?

415 Shug  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 7:44:29pm

I am very late to the party

1. Sotomayor confirmed before this grandstanding circus began
2. this is a mercy killing for the republicans. methinks Obama was playing nice. He has 60 seat majority, and could have appointed and had so something radical far left leftist judge in filibuster proof senate
3. sotomayor may be to the right of that midnight park lurker Souter.
4. republicans stop whining and pick a battle worth winning

the end

416 Shug  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 7:46:27pm

forgot one

6. the dems on the senate judiaciary committee are pieces of shit partisan hacks. the worsrt I have ever seen.
The republicans need to win back control to keep these maniacs in the minority. these deranged fools are dangerous for America

417 efuseakay  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 8:08:07pm

re: #13 Charles

That's just it... just like a gigolo... tell the ladies (in this case, America) what you know they want to hear. Now that she's under intense scrutiny, she will be less forthright.

Back in the day, when nobody knew her, and she wasn't getting any attention, she felt free to be honest.

I'm more than willing to listen to what she has to say... but actions do speak louder than words... I will listen, but carefully.

418 efuseakay  Mon, Jul 13, 2009 8:09:50pm

re: #416 Shug

forgot one

6. the dems on the senate judiaciary committee are pieces of shit partisan hacks. the worsrt I have ever seen.
The republicans need to win back control to keep these maniacs in the minority. these deranged fools are dangerous for America

You heard it here first (well, maybe not):

When the Repubs re-take the Senate/Congress, they will be even worse with their partisanship.

419 SalsaNChips  Tue, Jul 14, 2009 5:56:43am

re: #53 Charles

Fact is, it could have been much worse. There are real dyed-in-the-wool judicial activists who could have been picked. If the GOP squanders its political capital by attacking someone who is essentially a moderate -- and going by her own statements, a pretty strict Constitutionalist -- then when the Obama administration nominates a Ninth Circuit moonbat next time out, the GOP will have no credibility left.

Sotomayor :
"the right to possess a gun is clearly not a fundamental right" (United States v. Sanchez-Villar)
America has a "deadly obsession" with guns (from her senior thesis at Princeton University)
Ruled that the Second Amendment does not apply to the states (Maloney v. Cuomo). Only applies to the District of Columbia? Right...

"In a speech given at Duke University in 2005, she made it abundantly clear that judges are involved in making policy. Realizing that this did not sound very judicial (even though most judges act on this basis), Sotomayor tried to laugh off her brazen admission: "I know this is on tape and I should never say that, [audience laughing], because we don't make law -- I know. Um, okay. I know, I'm not promoting it, I'm not advocating it." The audience continued to laugh. They got the joke." (Link)

IMHO, doesn't sound very moderate, especially if you happen to believe that firearm ownership for law-abiding, responsible Americans is a fundamental, individual right.

420 tyree  Tue, Jul 14, 2009 6:42:19am

So she gave a good speech. President Obama gave a few of them, as did President Bush.
I was denied a raise once because they needed to promote more women. The woman who got my spot went on to loose the Disneyland account. I went on to be ranked #4 in the world. The lag in my income caused by that so called "reverse discrimination" hurts my family to this day.
If Sotomayor believes it is legal to hold back qualified white men today because of the need for diversity, perhaps we need a few judges who believe in justice more than the law. Discrimination against this generation because of their skin color is not justice.

421 hanoch  Tue, Jul 14, 2009 6:58:50am

And prior to taking office, Obama said much about bringing unity and moving beyond a partisan world. Is anyone actually surprised that he has advanced a far-left agenda?

There is a difference between political rhetoric (which is what is taking place in the Senate) and action. You can expect, no matter what Sotomayor says before the Senate, her judicial philosophy will remain consistent with what it was in the past.

422 hanoch  Tue, Jul 14, 2009 7:11:19am

re: #53 Charles

There is no need to attack Sotomayor. Given that this is a high profile event, at a minimum, the Republicans can and should use it to educate the public on the proper role of the judiciary, which is applying existing law to facts, not acting as super-legislators and deciding cases based on "empathy".


This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT
LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal
Cash.app
Recent PagesClick to refresh
Why Did More Than 1,000 People Die After Police Subdued Them With Force That Isn’t Meant to Kill? An investigation led by The Associated Press has found that, over a decade, more than 1,000 people died after police subdued them through physical holds, stun guns, body blows and other force not intended to be lethal. More: Why ...
Cheechako
Yesterday
Views: 33 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 0
A Closer Look at the Eastman State Bar DecisionTaking a few minutes away from work things to read through the Eastman decision. As I'm sure many of you know, Eastman was my law school con law professor. I knew him pretty well because I was also running in ...
KGxvi
Yesterday
Views: 87 • Comments: 1 • Rating: 1