PastaJoe Posted June 1, 2009 Posted June 1, 2009 I turned the radio on last night and it was on a station that plays one of the right wing commentators, Bill Cunningham. I listened for a couple of minutes to hear what he was ranting about, and every time he said the judge's name, he called her Judge SotoMANURE. Nice.
RkFast Posted June 1, 2009 Posted June 1, 2009 I turned the radio on last night and it was on a station that plays one of the right wing commentators, Bill Cunningham. I listened for a couple of minutes to hear what he was ranting about, and every time he said the judge's name, he called her Judge SotoMANURE. Nice. Different than Bill Maher calling Sarah Palin a "waitress" three days after the RNC how?
The Big Cat Posted June 1, 2009 Posted June 1, 2009 Different than Bill Maher calling Sarah Palin a "waitress" three days after the RNC how? Let's see, alternative (non-sex) trade vs. animal excrement... VP Candidate vs. Supreme Court Nom...
RkFast Posted June 1, 2009 Posted June 1, 2009 This is ****ing ridiculous.....all ANY sane person wants is a fair review of her work, her positions on issues and yes....clarification on the CA La Raza speech and her position on the role of judges, issues that SHE raised while an Appellate Judge. So funny. Bush couldnt appoint a new janitor to clean the Oval Office toilet without the leftards and Dems going batschitt. But now, even the standard process of Advise and Consent for a SCOTUS justice nominee is being minimized and redefined as some kind of unnecessary half-assed witch hunt.
The Big Cat Posted June 1, 2009 Posted June 1, 2009 This is ****ing ridiculous.....all ANY sane person wants is a fair review of her work, her positions on issues and yes....clarification on the CA La Raza speech and her position on the role of judges. So funny. Bush couldnt appoint a new janitor to clean the Oval Office toilet without the leftards and Dems going batschitt. But now, even the standard process of Advise and Consent for a Supreme Court judge is being minimized and redefined as some kind of unnecessary half-assed witch hunt. Well, then be a big boy and look those things up. But since I'm not sure you're capable, let me help you: Smith, Greg B. (October 24, 1998). "Judge's Journey to Top: Bronx' Sotomayor Rose From Projects to Court of Appeals". New York Daily News. http://www.nydailynews.com/archives/entert..._top______.html. McKinley, James C. (April 1, 1995). "Woman in the News; Strike-Zone Arbitrator — Sonia Sotomayor". The New York Times. http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html...757C0A963958260. Hoffman, Jan (September 25, 1992). "A Breakthrough Judge: What She Always Wanted". The New York Times. http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html...75AC0A964958260. Stolberg, Sheryl Gay (May 26, 2009). "Woman in the News: Sotomayor, a Trailblazer and a Dreamer". The New York Times. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/27/us/polit...bsotomayor.html. Retrieved on May 27, 2009. Lacayo, Richard (May 28, 2009). "Sonia Sotomayor: A Justice Like No Other". Time. http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,...1901348,00.html. Retrieved on May 30, 2009. Carter, Terry; Stephanie Francis Ward (November 2008). "The Lawyers Who May Run America". ABA Journal. http://abajournal.com/magazine/the_lawyers...n_america_obama. Retrieved on January 17, 2009. # "Times Topics: Sonia Sotomayor". The New York Times. http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/ti...?inline=nyt-per. Retrieved on 2009-05-01. Adams, Edward A. (2009-04-30). "Who Will Replace Justice Souter?". ABA Journal. http://abajournal.com/news/who_will_replace_justice_souter. Retrieved on 2009-05-01 Shepard, Scott (2008-11-24). "Speculation Already Under Way on Possible Obama Supreme Court Nominations". Cox News Service. http://www.coxwashington.com/hp/content/re...OTUS23_COX.html. Retrieved on 2009-01-17. Biskupic, Joan (2005-07-19). "The next president could tip high court". USA Today http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselect...urt-cover_x.htm McKinley, James (1995-04-02). "Tough on the Bench: Judge who issued injunction against owners gets high marks by peers". Dallas Morning News. How's that for a start. Oh, and about that speech: "Lecture: ‘A Latina Judge’s Voice’". The New York Times. May 14, 2009. <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/15/us/politics/15judge.text.html" target="_blank">http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/15/us/polit...judge.text.html</a>. Retrieved on May 31, 2009. BTW, it took 12 minutes from the time you posted to FIND these sources, copy, paste, re-format, and post them here.
RkFast Posted June 1, 2009 Posted June 1, 2009 Well, then be a big boy and look those things up. But since I'm not sure you're capable, let me help you: Smith, Greg B. (October 24, 1998). "Judge's Journey to Top: Bronx' Sotomayor Rose From Projects to Court of Appeals". New York Daily News. http://www.nydailynews.com/archives/entert..._top______.html. McKinley, James C. (April 1, 1995). "Woman in the News; Strike-Zone Arbitrator — Sonia Sotomayor". The New York Times. http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html...757C0A963958260. Hoffman, Jan (September 25, 1992). "A Breakthrough Judge: What She Always Wanted". The New York Times. http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html...75AC0A964958260. Stolberg, Sheryl Gay (May 26, 2009). "Woman in the News: Sotomayor, a Trailblazer and a Dreamer". The New York Times. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/27/us/polit...bsotomayor.html. Retrieved on May 27, 2009. Lacayo, Richard (May 28, 2009). "Sonia Sotomayor: A Justice Like No Other". Time. http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,...1901348,00.html. Retrieved on May 30, 2009. Carter, Terry; Stephanie Francis Ward (November 2008). "The Lawyers Who May Run America". ABA Journal. http://abajournal.com/magazine/the_lawyers...n_america_obama. Retrieved on January 17, 2009. # "Times Topics: Sonia Sotomayor". The New York Times. http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/ti...?inline=nyt-per. Retrieved on 2009-05-01. Adams, Edward A. (2009-04-30). "Who Will Replace Justice Souter?". ABA Journal. http://abajournal.com/news/who_will_replace_justice_souter. Retrieved on 2009-05-01 Shepard, Scott (2008-11-24). "Speculation Already Under Way on Possible Obama Supreme Court Nominations". Cox News Service. http://www.coxwashington.com/hp/content/re...OTUS23_COX.html. Retrieved on 2009-01-17. Biskupic, Joan (2005-07-19). "The next president could tip high court". USA Today http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselect...urt-cover_x.htm McKinley, James (1995-04-02). "Tough on the Bench: Judge who issued injunction against owners gets high marks by peers". Dallas Morning News. How's that for a start. Oh, and about that speech: "Lecture: ‘A Latina Judge’s Voice’". The New York Times. May 14, 2009. <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/15/us/politics/15judge.text.html" target="_blank">http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/15/us/polit...judge.text.html</a>. Retrieved on May 31, 2009. BTW, it took 12 minutes from the time you posted to FIND these sources, copy, paste, re-format, and post them here. Are you asking ME to review her positions and make a decision? Thanks for the links, but thats what the Senators are going to do, not me. Duh.
The Big Cat Posted June 1, 2009 Posted June 1, 2009 Are you asking ME to review her positions and make a decision? Thanks for the links, but thats what the Senators are going to do, not me. Duh. This is ****ing ridiculous.....all ANY sane person wants is a fair review of her work, her positions on issues and yes....clarification on the CA La Raza speech and her position on the role of judges, issues that SHE raised while an Appellate Judge. I assume you just didn't find any straws to grasp at, or else you're insane.
Max Fischer Posted June 1, 2009 Posted June 1, 2009 This is ****ing ridiculous.....all ANY sane person wants is a fair review of her work, her positions on issues and yes....clarification on the CA La Raza speech and her position on the role of judges, issues that SHE raised while an Appellate Judge. So funny. Bush couldnt appoint a new janitor to clean the Oval Office toilet without the leftards and Dems going batschitt. But now, even the standard process of Advise and Consent for a SCOTUS justice nominee is being minimized and redefined as some kind of unnecessary half-assed witch hunt. If the GOP talked about concern for her positions on the issues and the other things you mention, then the Party would be in MUCH better shape than it is now. Unfortunately, the party is essentially led by those who called her a racist, an affirmative action selection and dismissed her as unqualified (which is ridiculous). Your anger should be directed at the idiots who couldn't keep their feet our of their mouths. (BTW, the GOP senators on Sunday morning did a good job, too bad for them it was four days, and quite a few points in polling points too late). Maybe you should tell the nutjobs to shut up and let the adults speak for the Party.
Max Fischer Posted June 1, 2009 Posted June 1, 2009 Im "INSANE" becuase I want Sotamayor to get a fair, unboased hearing before the Senate and have the proper questions asked of her about her record, her opinions and her qualifications???!!!?? A hearing which Im more than confident she will calrify her positions and she will be found utterly qualified and will be confirmed?????!!!!!???? Go away. Just.....go away. You're insane if you think the GOP's Sotomayor predicament is the fault of the media and Democrats.
Max Fischer Posted June 1, 2009 Posted June 1, 2009 I cant argue with this. But lets admit...its NOT discussion of her comments, that speech in CA, her views on judicial activism that should be cast aside. That is fair game for an open debate and dicussion during hearings. The Gingrich-type "shes a racist!!!" stuff? Yeah...no reason for that. Gingrich has been a steady stalwart and strong, rational voice of the right for a while now and he dropped himself more than a few pegs on credibility ladder with that. And Bill Cunningham and Tancredo are idiots. Even "we" know that. There is nothing to "admit," that's all fair game and I'm just as curious as you how she'll answer that line of questioning.
The Big Cat Posted June 1, 2009 Posted June 1, 2009 Im not trying to "grasp at straws", you idiot! Im saying lets give the woman the fair hearing she deserves and stop with the sensationalist nonsense. Geez.....Im "INSANE" becuase I want Sotamayor to get a fair, unboased hearing before the Senate and have the proper questions asked of her about her record, her opinions and her qualifications???!!!?? A hearing which Im more than confident she will calrify her positions and she will be found utterly qualified and will be confirmed?????!!!!!???? Go away. Just.....go away. Well then what are you asking for, nay, demanding? The Senate hearing that hasn't happened yet? There will be a Senate hearing, it's part of the process. You wanted to know if it was too much to ask for to get this that and the third implying that said information is inaccessible and/or not being touched upon. What is your problem?
Kelly the Dog Posted June 2, 2009 Posted June 2, 2009 My "problem" is that Im dealing with you, a retard with zero ability to comprehend and digest whats been put in front of him. You idiot...I'll try smaller words this time. Forget the identity (too big?) politics bull and lets discuss the issues that matter. Her actual (too big?) work. Got it? Good. Now....go away. If you look at the work it's very difficult to find much judicial activism or much if any racial discrimination or even ideology. Most of the major issues she seems to have ruled on the opposite side of the one you would assume. The major case everyone is pointing to, the firefighters case, it would have been judicial activism to rule otherwise. She really does seem to not be pigeonholed in her actual cases. Of course there are 3000 of them so surely one would be able to select a couple here or there to try to make a case for anything. What i objected to was the automatic assumption that because she was a liberal, or left leaning, that she automatically would be more of a judicial activist or side with minorities or rule in favor of abortion, etc, and the right automatically and instantly started making those claims. But her record doesn't seem to show that at all, and in fact, more often the opposite.
VABills Posted June 2, 2009 Posted June 2, 2009 If you look at the work it's very difficult to find much judicial activism or much if any racial discrimination or even ideology. Most of the major issues she seems to have ruled on the opposite side of the one you would assume. The major case everyone is pointing to, the firefighters case, it would have been judicial activism to rule otherwise. She really does seem to not be pigeonholed in her actual cases. Of course there are 3000 of them so surely one would be able to select a couple here or there to try to make a case for anything. What i objected to was the automatic assumption that because she was a liberal, or left leaning, that she automatically would be more of a judicial activist or side with minorities or rule in favor of abortion, etc, and the right automatically and instantly started making those claims. But her record doesn't seem to show that at all, and in fact, more often the opposite. I actually agree with you here. Seems like there isn't a lot known. I keep wondering as an Hispanic Catholic if this might not bite Obama like Souter did to Bush. She may actually lean right more than most folks believe with her background. Or maybe more of a Mid-West Catholic. Fiscally liberal, morally conservative.
Recommended Posts