Comments on: So, which disqualifies her the most: racial bigotry, stunning incompetence, or disrespect for the Constitution?

By: Mike gamecock DeVine

Mike gamecock DeVine — Fri, 29 May 2009 16:42:10 +0000

that O’Connor was part of the majority on.

By: E Pluribus Unum

E Pluribus Unum — Fri, 29 May 2009 16:32:41 +0000

I’d bet DeMarcus Ware on it.

By: Achance

Achance — Fri, 29 May 2009 16:01:19 +0000

A Democrat nominated her, therefore any conscious Republican should oppose her. No person who could affiliate themselves with the conservative movement or with the Republican Party could in good conscience support ANYONE that Comrade Obama would nominate. Any part of that unclear, troll?

By: E Pluribus Unum

E Pluribus Unum — Fri, 29 May 2009 15:48:46 +0000

So which part of what I said was incorrect? And by leaving out mention of the 380 cases or so, if you find that misleading, so be it. The left media does that 50,000 times per day.

But since you brought up this topic, let me ask you this, since according to you, 75% of cases reviewed by scotus get overturned. Since Sotomayor is 0-for-7, in essence, there simply MUST be some Appeals Court Judges who batted at least .500, wouldn’t you think?

Might one of THOSE be a better pick than Miss 0-for-7?

By: Mike gamecock DeVine

Mike gamecock DeVine — Fri, 29 May 2009 15:47:56 +0000

and the US Sup Ct is doing the final bit on Ricci as we speak!

By: E Pluribus Unum

E Pluribus Unum — Fri, 29 May 2009 15:45:05 +0000

If you are able to find a paragraph that is not revolting for you, then good for you. I didn’t, including this one.

Everything she says or does is obviously colored by her self-identification as a Latina. I have a problem with that in a Supreme Court justice. I want a justice for whom the Constitution and the law are her overriding, all-consuming concerns.

By: E Pluribus Unum

E Pluribus Unum — Fri, 29 May 2009 15:41:55 +0000

One of my links shows the seven cases overturned/rejected conclusions. A review of some of her other work would be very fruitful I bet. Too much detail to put into this particular essay though.

By: DONTREADONME

DONTREADONME — Fri, 29 May 2009 05:04:22 +0000

did I just put out some bait or what, how many here actually clicked on the comment just to see where I was going with this. Anytime you need to bring up your heritage tells me you never fully have come to grips with your status as an American. You do not hear me every having to bring up the fact that I am a redheaded-American, and the whole discrimination I have experienced in my life. I am being serious, people treat red heads with utter contempt and what is worse my fellow Americans think I am being paranoid. Oh really, I thought racism only depends on the person who is subjected to it and not proof that the other person was in fact being racist.

By: McKinley

McKinley — Fri, 29 May 2009 04:58:13 +0000

Despite eight years of incumbency

Despite an unpopular president

Despite a war unpopular with many segments of the population

Despite a tanking economy

Despite all the media support in the world

Despite one of the worst campaigns a Republican has ever ran

47% of voters voted against Barack Obama. He’ll never have the deck so stacked in his favor again.

By: Mike gamecock DeVine

Mike gamecock DeVine — Fri, 29 May 2009 04:52:29 +0000

I suspect that what is more troubling are all the cases not reversed where she was affirmed for following liberal precedents that she agrees with!

By: Vegas_Rick

Vegas_Rick — Thu, 28 May 2009 20:58:15 +0000

according to Bagdad Bob Gibbs,

“White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said Thursday that Obama was “very comfortable with her interpretation of the Constitution being similar to that of his.”

We’ve gotten a pretty good look at his interpretation. Scary.

By: JLenardDetroit

JLenardDetroit — Thu, 28 May 2009 20:53:07 +0000

Now THAT is a Dismissal lol How can I not step up and applaud that!?!?!

By: JLenardDetroit

JLenardDetroit — Thu, 28 May 2009 20:48:09 +0000

that can be chosen from.... but this is all about the "Historic" (read: hysterical Identity Politics) Style Over Substance that got us the current Obama Disaster and setting up a PERMANENT disaster on the SCOTUS in the form of SoSo.... It is NOTHING to do with "Her" and all to do with Liberal-Activism..... SCOTUS Empathy - SCOTUS Empathy 2001 Redistributive Justice video Obama's 2001 Redistributive Justice video Identity Politics - Identity Politics Hispanic SCOTUS nominee - first Hispanic on SCOTUS? SoSo NOT the first (Benjamin Cardozo) - Yahoo: Is Sotomayor the First (or Second) Hispanic Pick for the Supreme Court? A:second (First was a Republican appointment) Obama Legislation list - the 14 Legislative agenda items (and other things) Obama wants to distract from O failure - How Obama's FAILURES are the country's SUCCESSES - since we have to spell it out

By: Mike gamecock DeVine

Mike gamecock DeVine — Thu, 28 May 2009 19:57:12 +0000

Many bigots are good judges as they repress it in their legal evaluations. “Incompetence” and “intelligence” are nebulous concepts that we shouldn’t touch. Yes, it appears that she often is incompetent in couching her raw unconstitutional opinions in cover language, but what matters most is her decisions, and who wins before her is driven by politics, not law. That is what matters and is what we should emphasize.

Her bigoted statements will speak volumes for themselves and very well could sink her.

By: The Political Class

The Political Class — Thu, 28 May 2009 19:44:22 +0000

Thomas Jefferson quote. it was great.

By: eburke

eburke — Thu, 28 May 2009 19:39:50 +0000

By: Streiff

Streiff — Thu, 28 May 2009 18:51:14 +0000

when it isn’t frightening

Whether born from experience or inherent physiological or cultural differences, a possibility I abhor less or discount less than my colleague Judge Cedarbaum, our gender and national origins may and will make a difference in our judging.

By: JadedByPolitics

JadedByPolitics — Thu, 28 May 2009 18:43:21 +0000

By: Aaron Gardner

Aaron Gardner — Thu, 28 May 2009 18:42:01 +0000

By: wesmorgan1

wesmorgan1 — Thu, 28 May 2009 18:34:36 +0000

“Each day on the bench I learn something new about the judicial process and about being a professional Latina woman in a world that sometimes looks at me with suspicion. I am reminded each day that I render decisions that affect people concretely and that I owe them constant and complete vigilance in checking my assumptions, presumptions and perspectives and ensuring that to the extent that my limited abilities and capabilities permit me, that I reevaluate them and change as circumstances and cases before me requires. I can and do aspire to be greater than the sum total of my experiences but I accept my limitations. I willingly accept that we who judge must not deny the differences resulting from experience and heritage but attempt, as the Supreme Court suggests, continuously to judge when those opinions, sympathies and prejudices are appropriate.”

That sounds entirely reasonable to me, and puts her previous statements (in the same lecture) in quite the different context.

Seriously, give the entire lecture a serious read.