Sotomayor's Confirmation: Republicans v. Hispanic Body Politic

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 15, 2009 3:44 PM GMT
    This is a general thread asking you to assert opinions regarding Judge Sotomayor’s upcoming confirmation—or if you prefer, her responses during recent hearings.

    However, to narrow the focus of conversation, I’m curious as-to how people feel about the [redundant] questions which focus on her “wise Latina” remark. Why is it that the [allegedly] educated members of the Senate Judiciary Committee hover around 15 seconds of a speech she gave years back?

    Listening to her speech as a whole, one would not draw the inane conclusions asserted by the GOP Senators throughout her hearing. Senator Sessions—a man not particularly known for racial sensitivity—has become the go-to quiz master, narrowly centered ON THIS issue. How many times must she repeat herself before the GOP will concede to a lack of evidence hinting towards racial bias?!?!

    She is a well educated, strongly qualified LATINA WOMAN who is being berated for things she’s said, TAKEN OUT OF CONTEXT (new in the world of politics?)!

    I feel as if we’re wasting (1) time, (2) money, and (3) energy listening to questions which don’t seem to cover any ground.

    For RJ Republicans, can you clarify this strategy (if any)? It looks as though Republicans are SEEKING a means of PUSHING Hispanic voters further from their party; sensible?


    **UPDATE:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/07/15/pat-buchanan-to-gop-forge_n_233314.html

    Pat Buchanan, a man forever relegated to the 1950's, is offering advice. I think this may have answered my question.



  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    Jul 15, 2009 8:08 PM GMT
    Because it's the Only thing they got ....

    She is MORE than highly qualified and they know it
    so they have to fall on the only thing they can trump up

    I loved yesterday when Sessions that Idiot
    who couldn't get himself confirmed for the circuit court back when
    tries to say that Sotomayor should be more like her fellow Circuit Court judge
    who he felt was more conservative

    Sonja Sotomajor just smiled because Judge Cedarbaum was one of the Judges seated behind her
    and she just said
    “My friend Judge Cedarbaum is here,” Sotomayor riposted, to Sessions’ apparent surprise. “We are good friends, and I believe that we both approach judging in the same way, which is looking at the facts of each individual case and applying the law to those facts.”

    But try to find this exchange on any of the network news services icon_confused.gif
    [url]
    http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2009/07/14/sotomayor-surprises-sessions/[/url]
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 15, 2009 8:23 PM GMT
    I bet it has something to do with the Mexican Invasion™ of the United States, the follow-up Canadian Infilitration® up north, as well as the Internal Sabotage of the Gay Agenda© and the election of a Minority President©, all to bring the destruction of the Greatest Nation of Earth™.

    Seriously. Start buying tons of guns now! The end is near.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 15, 2009 8:23 PM GMT
    I think she´s too conservative.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 15, 2009 8:37 PM GMT
    ucla_matta saidHow many times must she repeat herself before the GOP will concede to a lack of evidence hinting towards racial bias?!?!

    Actually, the only evidence of racial bias the GOP is revealing is their own. And their dogged determination to undermine a qualified nominee for the US Supreme Court simply because she is not a fanatical, white right-wing Republican.

    I hope the GOP pays the price at the polls with Hispanic voters at the next election. Their racial prejudice could not be more blatant.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 15, 2009 8:42 PM GMT
    It is funny really. Sam (Sc)Alito said very similar things about empathy during his confirmation hearing. Empathy was wonderful then. But now it is an automatic disqualification.

    Really, Republican Lindsey Graham said it best: "Unless you have a total breakdown you will get confirmed."
  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    Jul 17, 2009 4:58 PM GMT
    Red_Vespa said
    ucla_matta saidHow many times must she repeat herself before the GOP will concede to a lack of evidence hinting towards racial bias?!?!

    Actually, the only evidence of racial bias the GOP is revealing is their own. And their dogged determination to undermine a qualified nominee for the US Supreme Court simply because she is not a fanatical, white right-wing Republican.

    I hope the GOP pays the price at the polls with Hispanic voters at the next election. Their racial prejudice could not be more blatant.


    But they are playing to the white disenfranchized white male
    I could not believe that they marched those white guys from Conn up there

    They even had them wearing their firefighter uniforms .....
    What is really sad is that the mainstream media plays along with it
    Instead of calling a kettle black they replay these republican's statements as if they have merit and are not just bloviating lies and half-truths
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 17, 2009 5:53 PM GMT
    Hm, I think she will get confirmed and be the first Hispanic supreme court judge in US history. On the "Wise Latina" comment, well she may be right about that but they took it out of context to make her look "evil" or "racist" or whatever. She's a democrat, her party will back her up. I am kind of glad to see a color woman supreme court judge for a change. Have anyone see the TV show "Judge Marilyn Milian"- now that's a hot Latina NYC judge who has brains, looks, Intelligence and she's pretty sassy too.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 17, 2009 6:13 PM GMT
    When did the white male get disenfranchized trust from where I sit, the Str8t White Men are still at the a head the class.icon_biggrin.gif

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 17, 2009 6:15 PM GMT
    This confirmation was full of smoke and mirrors and that the smoke has cleared we ccan see things more clearly. LOL!


    LATINA POWER!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 17, 2009 6:20 PM GMT
    Who? icon_eek.gif



















    ....j/k icon_cool.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 17, 2009 6:22 PM GMT
    Ducky45 saidThis confirmation was full of smoke and mirrors and that the smoke has cleared we ccan see things more clearly. LOL!


    LATINA POWER!


    Truth.


    Another classic Pat Buchanan moment.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/07/16/rachel-maddow-duels-with_n_237036.html
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 17, 2009 6:22 PM GMT
    The more the Republicans play to their racist base, the more they alienate all others. I think they just fell on the Hispanic-Latino sword with this one. It'll get those Republican Senators reelected in their own bigoted states, but they're killing Republicans elsewhere. Good.

    And that lily-white peanut gallery of firefighters the Republicans assembled to sit behind Judge Sotomayor was a total disgrace. I was wondering where the white hoods were.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 17, 2009 6:24 PM GMT
    The fact that Pat Buchanan is maintained by a GUARANTEED soapbox (a la MSNBC) makes me uneasy. He is clearly in consensus with a large population in this country, signs of a 1950's uprising? Progress be damned, America is anchored in failure by a stubborn majority--we're doomed! :-) TGIF
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 17, 2009 6:28 PM GMT
    the repubs had to show they weren't going to roll over and rubber stamp the nomination, but with nothing substantive to criticise her for, they harped on the one compromising item on her record. overall, it was painless for her, the republicans weren't especailly mean and i think it was a draw.

    furthermore the last thing a wise person does is talk about how wise they are -- it was stupid thing to say and she should have fully, clearly and unoquivically backed off the remark. if she said, "look guys i said something stupid, i don't really think that way, sorry" then the rebulicans would have NOTHING to say about her. instead she sort of tepidly backed away from the statement and left the door open to 3 days of republican criticism.

    having said that, i think she'll be good judge, but a wise one? not so much.

  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19119

    Jul 17, 2009 6:36 PM GMT
    I think the Republicans were respectful and their questioning was appropriate considering many concerns about Sotomayor. She was fairly vetted, as she should have been, by all members of the panel -- that IS their job. No one was disrespectful or out of line in their questioning, and in the end I think Sotomayor handled herself beautifully and won over most if not everybody. I suspect she will be approved overwhelmingly by Democrats as well as Republicans.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 17, 2009 6:36 PM GMT
    evilgemini saidthe repubs had to show they weren't going to roll over and rubber stamp the nomination, but with nothing substantive to criticise her for, they harped on the one compromising item on her record. overall, it was painless for her, the republicans weren't especailly mean and i think it was a draw.

    furthermore the last thing a wise person does is talk about how wise they are -- it was stupid thing to say and she should have fully, clearly and unoquivically backed off the remark. if she said, "look guys i said something stupid, i don't really think that way, sorry" then the rebulicans would have NOTHING to say about her. instead she sort of tepidly backed away from the statement and left the door open to 3 days of republican criticism.

    having said that, i think she'll be good judge, but a wise one? not so much.



    Why would she back away from a statement (citing her speech in Berkeley, "...wise Latina...") she made which was [clearly] taken out of context?

    She is by no-means obligated to distance herself from that remark--which would most assuredly demonstrate cowardice.

    She maintained herself as a strong willed decision maker, refusing to allow the narrow focus of her Republican colleagues to hinder her views. This is a CLEAR sign of a judge who isn’t affected by the “shoulds/should-nots” of an ignorant few.

    Wise? Undoubtably so.
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19119

    Jul 17, 2009 6:50 PM GMT
    jprichva saidWhat the Republicans are doing is attempting to limit the range of "acceptable" choices for Supreme Court Justice for any future nominations that Obama may get a chance to make. .



    A party trying to limit the range of "acceptable" choices for Supreme Court Justice??? Wow! That's a new concept. We sure never saw that tactic used in the past 8 years icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 17, 2009 6:54 PM GMT
    jprichva saidWhat the Republicans are doing is attempting to limit the range of "acceptable" choices for Supreme Court Justice for any future nominations that Obama may get a chance to make.

    Yes, this is the tactic that many political commentators have noted about the Republican approach to the hearings. They can't stop her, but they'll make reelection points with their own racist base, and influence & intimidate any future Supreme Court nominee Obama may get to make.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 17, 2009 8:01 PM GMT
    Can I ask why the word "activist" is used when an appointed judge makes decisions which aren't in-line with Conservative standards?

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 17, 2009 8:07 PM GMT
    jprichva said
    CuriousJockAZ said
    A party trying to limit the range of "acceptable" choices for Supreme Court Justice??? Wow! That's a new concept. We sure never saw that tactic used in the past 8 years icon_rolleyes.gif

    Really? And what did we wind up with?
    Two of the most extreme radical right-wingers that have ever sat on the Court. Two activist judges, wasting no time in legislating from the bench.
    I thought you people didn't like that.
    Oh, right, of course---you only don't like it when a liberal does it.


    Bork and Miers: never forgive, never forget.

    crying_eagle.jpg
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 17, 2009 8:11 PM GMT
    ucla_matta saidCan I ask why the word "activist" is used when an appointed judge makes decisions which aren't in-line with Conservative standards?

    That hypocrisy has been noted by many. When Conservative judges make case law that pleases Conservatives, all is well. When case law is made that does not please Conservatives, then the judges are wicked "judicial activists." It all depends upon whose ox is being gored.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 17, 2009 8:13 PM GMT
    NNJfitandbi said
    ucla_matta saidCan I ask why the word "activist" is used when an appointed judge makes decisions which aren't in-line with Conservative standards?



    Activist is just a word to label a judge you don't like. At this point, the "activists" are the conservative justices, overturning Congress when they like, inventing ways to prevent citizens from enforcing rights against the government, reinterpreting the law of equality, disregarding precedent . . . . That's activism. The left hopes for another "activist" liberal, but it's not going to happen. We will get liberal justices like Sotomayor, who follow the law and don't use the Supreme Court to do anything other than decide cases.


    The word was thrown around so often that I wonder if it lost meaning altogether, thanks for clearing it up.

    Is it really a surprise to anyone that our elected officials would use Supreme Court positions to support/stress an "agenda"--or better said, an overall "leaning"?

    Conservatives have thrown their hands in the air and begun to spew inane garbage regarding Sonia's racial reference, completely disregarding her history/judgments.

    At what point in her career can she be considered an "activist"? She hasn't MADE policy, she's followed/ruled by it.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 17, 2009 8:35 PM GMT
    Sedative saidI bet it has something to do with the Mexican Invasion™ of the United States, the follow-up Canadian Infilitration® up north, as well as the Internal Sabotage of the Gay Agenda© and the election of a Minority President©, all to bring the destruction of the Greatest Nation of Earth™.

    Seriously. Start buying tons of guns now! The end is near.


    And you can't insure THAT with credit default swaps!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 17, 2009 8:38 PM GMT
    NNJfitandbi saidGrandstanding Republicans.

    Swooning Democrats, also grandstanding.

    Qualified nominee who evades questions, just as they all have for so many years.

    Sotomayor will be confirmed, as she should be. Let's hope she makes a great Justice.


    Agreed.

    I could only stand to watch the confirmation hearing for about 15 mins.

    It sounded like an endless cycle of stupid questions and stupid answers--I couldn't stop gagging.