Tags: nominations, Sotomayor, supreme court
Sotomayor Open
Comments
Comments and respectful debate are both welcome and encouraged.
Comments are the sole opinion of the comment writer, just as each thread posted is the sole opinion or post idea of the administrator that posted it or of the readers that have written guest posts for the Blogmocracy.
Obscene, abusive, or annoying remarks may be deleted or moved to spam for admin review, but the fact that particular comments remain on the site in no way constitutes an endorsement of their content by any other commenter or the admins of this Blogmocracy.
We're not easily offended and don't want people to think they have to walk on eggshells around here (like at another place that shall remain nameless) but of course, there is a limit to everything.
Play nice!
Good job, ‘m’
This should be rich. Al Franken is going to speak after the lunch break. I hope he goes into his Smalley character.
re: #2 by song_and_dance_man
You made me LOL with the genie repossession joke last night. That was perfect, I just didn’t get a chance to log on and say so.
OOOH!
A caption this.
B-HO:I appreciate the richness of your experience.
Soto:My lip got caught in your zipper.
Mrs. Latinaaaaa! Where are your hands?!
re: #3 by m
Thanks.
re: #4 by no2liberals
Yes…a caption this pic.
If she walks away can I compel myself to not look at her tush?
BHO: So Sonia, when we put through that unread 3000 page bill striking down the 2nd Amendment – and the law is fought and brought before the Supreme Court as being unconstitutional, how will you rule?
Sonia: Ha ha ha ha ha hah ha ha ha ha! Good one, comrade!
BHO: Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!
i dont know anything about this woman.
is she a bleeding heart liberal, or what is the problem with her.
Did y’all see Senator “porky little taxes” Shumer talk?? My Gawd, talk about SHRILL! And he kept screwin’ up her name in his whiny accent, “S-O-T-O-MAY-YORRR”. Ick. The dems are coddling her and clucking over her like hens. I can’t WAIT to hear from Franken with HIS whiny voice/. Gawd, someone please put forks in my eyes. That would be more pleasant than watching this slobber-fest.
And what’s up with Graham saying she WILL get confirmed barring a meltdown. He can be so passive and conciliatory sometimes. I mean, he IS McCain’s BFF after all.
re: #7 by InsubordinateNonCom
LOL
Caption:
Obama: “We are SOOOO going to change this country” *smirking*
Sotomayor: “You KNOW I got yer’ back homie” *smirking more*
re: #8 by justin case
Here is your starting point.
After you scroll down, there are a multitude of links, in order of dates, that will reveal who she really is. A racist, judicial activist, liberal ideologue.
re: #8 by justin case
She believes that as a white Anglo Saxon male, you simply would not have the same capabilities as a similarly qualified “wise Latina woman.”
Here’s my contribution to the caption this:
Get that dress off and dance for me, you fucking bitch!
re: #8 by justin case
She’s a pile of shit that has had about 40 pct of her rulings overruled by higher courts.
B-HO:Is that clown make-up or baby powder caked up on your neck?
Soto:You think anyone will notice?
B-HO:No, they only look at me.
Soto:Say it ain’t so, B-HO!
B-HO:It’s so, ho’.
re: #16 by no2liberals
Dayam, that sounds like a conference call from the North Pole
re: #15 by savage
She is 2 for 6, that makes 60% overturned.
re: #17 by savage
It was a dialogue caption, not a monologue.
so why does obama want her, to put his agenda into law, or just to make a minority statement.
re: #20 by justin case
She’s a goddamn Communist, just like Comrade Barry and all the rest of the traitors in the US Government.
re: #20 by justin case
Justin, she hates the Constitution, just as The Obama does and besides, he owes his Hispanic voters.
re: #19 by no2liberals
It was pretty cool I think
re: #20 by justin case
They are just replacing one liberal judge with another. She is just a classic example of what the leftist want in this country. Someone who will legislate from the bench, that is a classic affirmative action lawyer that couldn’t have gotten into law school if she weren’t a minority, and someone they feel will help the liberals with the latino vote, especially if the GOP pushes too hard on her.
She is as unqualified as anyone they could have found, but she brings them a pliant judge, who will faithfully follow the liberal agenda, irrespective of the constitution.
re: #24 by no2liberals
If that skank gets in, I hope Roberts, Alito and Thomas pop her opinions like a swollen tick.
If they want a Latino judge so bad, I nominate Marilyn Milian as Justice.
I love that feisty little Cuban! hehe
Caption:
We won beotches, deal.
re: #25 by savage
If she gets in, she is in for life, just like her eugenics supporting admirer, Judge Ginsberg.
There will be nothing they can do about her inability to function at that level, they can’t fire her.
It could’ve been Shrillary, remember he gave her a choice?
re: #28 by no2liberals
They can keep slapping her shit opinions down hard, as far as I know.
re: #27 by vagabond trader
re: #30 by savage
Not if she joins their club, they can’t.
They can only offer their opinions on the case, not on her lack of scholarship.
re: #29 by vagabond trader
Wouldn’t her hearing have been a hoot.
re: #33 by no2liberals
n2, right about now we could use some hearty gaffaw material.Especially if the Rs decided to call BJ as a witness. Oh yeah!
re: #34 by vagabond trader
A SCOTUS nominee with an impeached former president husband.
OHHHH, how I wish it were so.
Y’all have a good’un.
Back to the mine.
Would someone please tell me why the demons are so terrified of Frank Ricci? I mean Sonia is a shoe in. What is this, some kind of congenital need to destroy the “common man” they profess to represent? Working Americans do not want to hear this bs coming from elites.
re: #32 by no2liberals
Then the only solution is NEVER allow her out of committee, EVER.
Otherwise, this Republic of ours, the nation I pledged to fight and die for, will end up being only a rumor.
grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
re: #36 by no2liberals
Take care!
We’ve seen that smirk before
re: #38 by savage
That’s the key, to keep her bottled up in committee.
I worry that Lindsey Graham will pick up where Specter left off, and give the one minority yes vote needed.
re: #39 by vagabond trader
You too, young lady.
re: #41 by no2liberals
Oh, LG will sign off on her, he wants to be liked so badly by the Dems. I’ve seen this before out of that RINO.
She’ll make Harriet Myers look like the second coming of Judge Robert Bork intellectually.
In other words, she’s a fuckin’ ignorant racist Latina dolt, with an affirmative action law degree (which also happens to be what Obama and his wife have), which is why The Zero™ nominated her.
He didn’t want to nominate anyone who might actually think for themselves, and who might actually respect the constitution AS IT WAS WRITTEN!
Doesn’t even give a hatip to Clarence Thomas who grew up in a sharecropper shack, raised by his beloved grandpa.Cause in their tolerant minds he’s an Uncle Tom, a black conservative. An eeeeevil one.
Democrats are trying to give her a lifetime achievement award, republicans are interviewing her for a job.
Specter is a ratfink.
Interpret The ConstitutionHistoric!re: #43 by savage
I know. Basically he should have said “Don’t worry Sotomayor, I’ll nominate you as long as you don’t say something so outrageous that there would be NO WAY for me not to”. His vote is already in because he’s like the kid on the playground who doesn’t want to be disliked by anyone. They were usually the biggest butt-kissers.
I’m sort of ignorant about these proceedings. What’s going on now just seems to be a big waste of time.
Are these just opening statements from everybody involved?
It seems to be more about the committee than the nominee.
It’s like they all did a little report on her life over the weekend and are showing it off.
Shouldn’t all of their viewpoints be obvious in their questions for the nominee?
It’s not like these people don’t get enough facetime with the media.
As a Hispanic what pisses me off the whole Sotomayor is that when a Leftist Latin is nominated they say its historic that it is a success story. When its a Rightwing Latin, The Left uses racial attacks.
Kennedy called Estratd back in 2001 a Neanderthal, this is racist.
They called Alberto Gonzales, Gonzo or Speedy Gonzales, clearly racist.
Its a double standard and I will say this again.
White Progressives are the most racist people on Earth.
Barry’s speechwriters worked overtime on the soaring rhetoric huh?
An alarming number of people involved in this process seem to think that the basis of success in America has almost everything to do with a college education.
While admirable and in many professions important, I’ve always found American success stories about those who didn’t have the best of educations still succeed through hard work and a street-smart, common-sense education to be the most inspirational.
Maybe they want to turn America into one big liberal-arts university.
re: #51 by Rodan
I know — I dislike these racial deliniations anyway. It seems to be ok to do so, unless you’re white. All other “colors” seem to have free reign to call out what color everyone is. It’s ridiculous. Let’s just stick to judging people based on the “content of their character”, as Dr. King so eloquently stated.
re: #54 by Intravenousdemilo
What??? Why that would be inclusive and so American!
/
re: #51 by Rodan
Look what they did to Clarence Thomas for being a conservative.Leftist tolerance is not a two way street.
Only a politician can extol on his own greatness while supposedly praising another.
Since this is an open thread….
I just got back from Guitar Center with my copy of Sonar 8 Studio. It’s recording, sequencing and mastering software. And I got it for 60% off. It usually sells for $399, but I got it for less than 2.
My home recording studio is now almost completely rebuilt and I should be producing new music in a couple weeks. Yah, I’m in a good mood today.
re: #58 by song_and_dance_man
conservative punk?
re: #59 by WrathofG-d
Nah, I’m classic rock all the way with heavy Beatles influence.
re: #56 by vagabond trader
it isn’t a street at all, but a cancerous black hole.
re: #60 by song_and_dance_man
Too bad. I’ve always wanted to start a non-Nazi conservative punk band here in LA.
Lady Justice is blind. A poor black woman should face the same law as a rich white man.
she rules otherwise.
Obama could not have picked someone worse. She will get in and we will suffer.
where do you draw the line?
re: #55 by vagabond trader
re: #57 by newsjunkie_ky
True! They might as well wrap up their comments with “Well, enough about me….what do you think about me?”
re: #63 by LanceKates
The progressive Lady Justice is no longer blind, she is now sympathetic.
Capitol engineers are being sent out there now to remove the repressive blindfold from her eyes and replacing the sword in her hand with a tiny violin, and the scales of justice with a bleeding heart.
Change!
re: #65 by WrathofG-d
when Justice is sympathetic, she is no longer Justice.
Where do you draw the line?
re: #66 by LanceKates
That is correct.
I took a very interesting class once that stated that we would end up exactly here. This step is the result of a long slide away from actual Constitutional interpretation. It wasn’t the first and I fear it won’t be the last. It was about the differences in general between women and men. This type of judicial behavior is typical Female. Emotional. Sympathic. etc. Logic, and Law don’t really play a part. They feeeeeel for the person, so they overturn any real Justice (which should be the same for rich, poor, black, white, European, Latino, blind, seeing, etc.) Men tend to be more hard nosed, unforgiving, etc.
The “line” will now be determined, and drawn by feelings of each new political appointment, and the winds of expediency and societal whim. (ie: there is no longer a line)
I was listening a bit this morning to a Congressman express how great it was that the Court has gone off the reservation throughout History to overturn the existing Law. The examples given were, of course, slavery, civil rights, right for women to vote, etc.
What that Congressidiot and most people miss is that the end did not excuse the means. Although I agree that Women should have the right to vote, as should blacks; that slavery should have been abolished, etc, these events should have (and were) in many instances) changed due to legislative means, not Judicial. Using the Courts to overturn actual existing law is a perversion of the system and accordingly does not represent the Democratic will of the people (for better or worse). It puts our system on its head and allows the few to dictate to the many, and overturn the actual laws of our Country without vote or rebellion. This is probably exactly why the Liberals love it -as this is their m.o.
re: #67 by WrathofG-d
Hey, wait a minute. Women’s suffrage wasn’t a court decision, it was an amendment to the Constitution passed by the requisite number of states. You know, following procedure as opposed to activist courts.
re: #65 by WrathofG-d
Progressives are about Fascistic justice. Groups they consider superior will be treated better than those they consider inferior and outdated. That is Progressive Justice.
re: #68 by RickMZ
I just report what I heard. If I got it wrong, then oops, I appologize.
Oddly as well was that he put “a woman’s right to choose” in the same category as slavery, civil rights, and woman’s suffrage.
Wrath,
I’m not saying you got it wrong. You most likely did get it right, you being so diligent and all. It does go to show how completely historically illiterate too many Congresscritters are. I think the cries of ‘taxation without representation’ will make a comeback, especially considering these congressbastards can’t be bothered to read a bill before voting on it.
Franken told Sotomayor that she was “the most experienced Supreme Court nominee in 100 years.”
He wasn’t funny as a comedian, but he sure is funny as a US Senator.
Way to go Minnesota. Two for two. Franken & Ventura.
caption this.
OB “I’m not going to keep from guffawing over how we pulled this this one off”.
Sota “Cinco de Mayo will become a national holiday”
re: #2 by song_and_dance_man
re: #67 by WrathofG-d
No, you misunderstand.
Where do YOU draw the line? When will the American People take up arms and have their Third Revolution for Freedom from Oppresion and Tyranny?
We won the first, lost the second and the time is coming for the third.
For reference:
That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
- Declaration of Independence
JaneSotomayor you ignorant slutChanneling Dan Aykroyd
/