Comments on: Sotomayor’s Discriminating Defense

By: The_Gadfly

The_Gadfly — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 17:33:58 +0000

I can’t help thinking about the N.I.C.E every time I read something new about the political scene these days, and thinking to myself, ‘it was supposed to be fiction!’

By: Warrior

Warrior — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 20:53:04 +0000

signature quote. That’s a fantastic trilogy…

By: Warrior

Warrior — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 20:47:56 +0000

It was only after Sotomayor shouted that Latinas were “wiser”than white men.

Indeed, to make such a statement in today’s racially charged political environment can be described in many ways, but “wise” is not one of them…

By: Flagstaff

Flagstaff — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 18:36:45 +0000

“If all of the plaintiffs in this case had been black and the city had not promoted anybody, would you have let the results stand or would you have supported the disappointed black firefighters?”

Her legal reasoning is faulty, and it needs to be exposed. But we need a straight-thinking conservative senator to ask it, not a mush-brained “open minded” senator like Orrin Hatch, good friend of Pat Leahy. She’ll have an answer ready, but she can’t be allowed to pretend that she wouldn’t have voted differently for black plaintiffs than she did for white plaintiffs.

And if her answer is “I would have ruled the same,” she’s lying and would need some further examination to make that clear.

By: The_Gadfly

The_Gadfly — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 17:00:02 +0000

diversity indoctrination, I mean training class: only members of legally covered “protected classes” can be discriminated against. As you are not a member of an “protected class” you are not permitted to allege discrimination. Furthermore, your post completely ignores the self-evidently true corollary that “protected classes” can’t discriminate because they lack the power to do so.

/end snark.

By: Stan(ley) Pruss

Stan(ley) Pruss — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 00:51:11 +0000

Roland Burris (Il) can be beaten. His apointment ends in 2010.

By: randy streu

randy streu — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 00:46:55 +0000

It is a means of exposing the Lefty leadership for the racists and misogynists they are.

By: Neil Stevens

Neil Stevens — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 23:54:46 +0000

The more you attack, and the more you make them defend her, the more it starts to dull that luster Obama has.

We don’t need a knockout. We just need to score points every round.

By: snewb098

snewb098 — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 23:48:36 +0000

Doesn’t matter anymore.
She seems like a nice lady,nice smile.
Just let her be confirmed.
I’m a Caucasian native American (Redneck)
and I think we are wasting our time fighting this one.
Cap & tax, Health Scare reform and shamnesty will
have a more definitive impact so we need to focus on those IMO.
These senators below are up for re-election in 2010.
It’s not important which party they represent since they are the basically the same now and work for lobbyists and special interests not the voters and constitution.
Blanche Lincoln (Arkansas)-home office 501-375-2993 / D.C. office (202) 224-4843
Barbara Boxer (California)-home office 415-403-0100 / D.C. office (202) 224-3553
Daniel Inouye (Hawaii)-home office 808-541-2542 / D.C. office (202) 224-3934
Evan Bayh (Indiana)-home office 317-554-0750 / D.C. office (202) 224-5623
Barbara Mikulski (Maryland)-home office 410-962-4510 / D.C. office (202) 224-4654
Harry Reid (Nevada)-home office 702-388-5020 / D.C. office (202) 224-3542
Chuck Schumer (New York)-home office 212-486-4430 / D.C. office (202) 224-6542
Byron Dorgan (North Dakota)-home office 701-239-5389 / D.C. office (202) 224-2551
Ron Wyden (Oregon)-home office 503-326-7525 / D.C. office (202) 224-5244
Patrick Leahy (Vermont)-home office 802 863-2525 / D.C. office (202) 224-4242
Russ Feingold (Wisconsin)-home office 414 276-7282 / D.C. office (202) 224-5323
Richard Shelby (Alabama)-home office 205 731-1384 / D.C. office (202) 224-5744
Lisa Murkowski (Alaska)-home office 907 271-3735 / D.C. office (202) 224-6665
John McCain (Arizona)-home office 602 279-5146 / D.C. office (202) 224-2235
Johnny Isakson (Georgia)-home office 770 661-0999 / D.C. office (202) 224-3643
Mike Crapo (Idaho)-home office 208 334-1776 / D.C. office (202) 224-6142
Chuck Grassley (Iowa)-home office 515 288-1145 / D.C. office (202) 224-3744
Jim Bunning (Kentucky)-home office 859-341-2602 / D.C. office (202) 224-4343
David Vitter (Louisiana)-home office 318-448-0169 / D.C. office (202) 224-4623
Kit Bond (Missouri)-home office 573-634-2488 / D.C. office (202) 224-5721
Judd Gregg (New Hampshire)-home office 603-622-7979 / D.C. office (202) 224-3324
Richard Burr (North Carolina)-home office 828-350-2437 / D.C. office (202) 224-3154
George Voinovich (Ohio)-home office 216-522-7095 / D.C. office (202) 224-3353
Tom Coburn (Oklahoma)-home office 405-231-4941 / D.C. office (202) 224-5754
Arlen Specter (Pennsylvania)-home office 215-597-7200 / D.C. office (202) 224-4254
Jim DeMint (South Carolina) (not relevant..true American)
John Thune (South Dakota)-home office 605 334-9596 / D.C. office (202) 224-2321
Bob Bennet (Utah)-home office 801 524-5933 / D.C. office (202) 224-5444
Christopher Dodd (Connecticut)-home office 860 258-6940 / D.C. office (202) 224-2823

By: Flagstaff

Flagstaff — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 22:21:58 +0000

the outrage is that it even got to the Supreme Court, and when it did that four “judges” voted not to overturn.

The simple questions, “If one of the high scorers had been black, would you have allowed the results of the test to stand?” and, “If all of the high scorers had been black, would you have let the results stand?” If the answer to either question were “yes,” the decision to negate the promotions would be clearly based on race alone, and therefore illegal.

Inability to recognize that indicates a very low grade of “judging.”

Of course, IANAJ.

By: Flagstaff

Flagstaff — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 22:09:40 +0000

By: penguin2

penguin2 — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 22:07:38 +0000

I think open and liberal is an oxymoron. And “seems” and “tries” are not good enough for a Supreme Court justice. I expect surety in my judges for true, impartial justice.

And how will she determine cases between two Hispanics or a Hispanic and African-American. Or any other ‘races’ excluding whites. That day is going to come.

By: Jack_Savage

Jack_Savage — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 21:52:48 +0000

From Fox News online:

‘Powell said Sotomayor has “an open and liberal bent of mind, but that’s not disqualifying. But she seems to have a judicial record that seems to be balanced and tries to follow the law.”

Powell, a Republican who supported Obama, said his party still is not sensitive enough toward minorities.

He noted that Obama had a significant advantage with Hispanics and African-Americans in the November elections. He criticized Republicans who are not elected to office and “immediately shout racism” against Sotomayor, while accusing Powell of supporting Obama because both men are black.

“We still have a problem,” he said.’

By: bk

bk — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 21:46:27 +0000