Obama picks Sotomayor for high court

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

If that's the worst they have on her then I don't see many problems.

You still have not presented anything that indicates she's an activist pick.

-spence

we agree...she shouldn't have any problems...so what will the vote be?...keep in mind they're reporting that Blago got a check from Burris

you haven't produced anything that indicates she's not an activist..so there!

Obama would not have selected her if she were not an activist Spence Alynski...are you freakin' kidding me !

I requested all of her files and she hasn't gotten back to me, maybe she'll listen to you since you are "in the loop"...if it eases your troubled mind to disregard what I've written over my failure to take the considerable time that you devote to this to list all of her "activist" rulings in the past including the one currently before the Supreme Court........then so be it...you would one way or another anyway......you remind me of Danny Devito in MATILDA...where he tells Matilda..."I'm big, you're little....I'm smart, you're dumb...I'm right , you're wrong"....you need some glue in your hat

fond memories....

from WIKI
Reagan nominated Bork for the seat on July 1, 1987.

Within 45 minutes of Bork's nomination to the Court, Edward Kennedy took to the Senate floor with a strong condemnation of Bork in a nationally televised speech, declaring:

"Robert Bork's America is a land in which women would be forced into back-alley abortions, blacks would sit at segregated lunch counters, rogue police could break down citizens' doors in midnight raids, schoolchildren could not be taught about evolution, writers and artists could be censored at the whim of the Government, and the doors of the Federal courts would be shut on the fingers of millions of citizens for whom the judiciary is -- and is often the only -- protector of the individual rights that are the heart of our democracy... President Reagan is still our president. But he should not be able to reach out from the muck of Irangate, reach into the muck of Watergate and impose his reactionary vision of the Constitution on the Supreme Court and the next generation of Americans. No justice would be better than this injustice."[10]

A brief was prepared for Joe Biden, head of the Senate Judiciary Committee, called the Biden Report. Bork later said in his best-selling[11] book The Tempting of America that the report "so thoroughly misrepresented a plain record that it easily qualifies as world class in the category of scurrility."[12] TV ads narrated by Gregory Peck attacked Bork as an extremist. Kennedy's speech successfully fueled widespread public skepticism of Bork's nomination.

[spence]

You're going in circles now.

-spence

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

You're going in circles now.

-spence

not at all...we can both look at her rulings...one by one... and I will call them "activist" rulings and you will say they're not...then we will argue over the definition of activist judges and maybe after that is exhausted we can argue the merits of if in fact judges should be activists...clearly many think they should be, including this one...if you listened to the tape she was very clearly stating that courts should and do make policy and the joked because she was among "friends" that "oh, I probably shouldn't say that because I'm on tape"...in HER OWN WORDS" still doesn't matter...she'll be OK

there's a great article in THE HILL...looking at it pretty much from both perspectives "Is She an Activist" check it out...

oh, Spence, if you go there read the article detailing what attorneys have said about their experiences arguing before her and her general temprement and knowledge of the law...this might be better than I thought....

not in circles..going fishing...PEACE

[spence]

Originally Posted by scottw

...if you listened to the tape she was very clearly stating that courts should and do make policy and the joked because she was among "friends" that "oh, I probably shouldn't say that because I'm on tape"...in HER OWN WORDS" still doesn't matter...she'll be OK

I don't see how any thinking person could come to that conclusion. You still haven't actually read her words have you?

-spence

[Cool Beans]

It doesn't matter......

Some of us see it one way, while others seem to look at the world as if they were slightly out of phase with reality. Sometimes it's hard to see you over there Spence. I know we are playing on the same team, but sometimes I can't see your position "left field" from my position "right field". Do you have a "smoke machine" on or something?

I am pretty sure we are talking about the same person, but I'm seeing a racist judge who legislates from the bench and you are seeing Saint Theresa.

Did you get hit in the head your last "at bat"?

Go Sox!!!!

[spence]

Originally Posted by Cool Beans

I am pretty sure we are talking about the same person, but I'm seeing a racist judge who legislates from the bench and you are seeing Saint Theresa.

No, actually I don't know that much about her. I have looked into the key accusations against her and find them to be extremely misleading.

1) She's a racist
2) She believes the Judicial system makes policy
3) Her rulings have been overturned by the Supreme Court more times than not.

I've yet to see any substance to back up these claims, aside from ScottW's insistence that out of context statements are hard evidence

So you think she's a racist, why? because Rush called her one?

It's funny how some think this is a Right vs Left debate. I've said it before but I don't think many of you would know a real Liberal if you saw one.

-spence

[scottw]

well, then there's always that little tax issue...not sayin' she has one... yet...but she...IS...an Obama nominee which means she's 80% likely to not have paid her taxes....

look, here's the deal...this is the Supreme Court, this nominee is, aside from her "compelling" life story fairly unremarkable, accumulated comments from lawyers that I have read describe her at best as average and fairly competent and at worst downright mean and nasty...they would know, I think that it's wonderful that she and Obama have ascended to their ranks in life, my problem is that in both cases these are people who have had unspectacular careers (still trying to locate anything that Obama wrote while at Harvard, got some new Joe Cool smoking pics though), have ascended with advantage through the IVY League in Obama's case with the advantage of being an exotic Halfrican American and in Soto's case a Latino neither being academic standouts or we would surely hear about it...are they burying her academic records too?, and I applaude them for using every advantage offered to the to get to their respective goals..... but to arrive at your destination having travelled a road of advantage after performing at an unspectacular level and then turn and suggest that you somehow carry a higher intellect, judgment, than others when this has never been demonstrated is very distasteful...Obama displays this attribute constantly and Soto had said it plain and simple...this is akin to taking a C student and making him class president to make you, him and perhaps others feel good and then having the kid walk to the head of the class and start lecturing about how smart he is...

again, she'll be confirmed...hope it's thorough but respectful

Spence Alynski, you are really execrised on this one...

[Cool Beans]

One big thing that bothers me is her previous statements on gun control. In one case about a states right to ban weapons she stated the 2nd amendment only applies to what limitations the federal government may place on weapons control.

"It is settled law," Sotomayor and the Second Circuit held, "that the Second Amendment applies only to limitations the federal government seeks to impose on this right."

But that Second Circuit ruling ran counter to a Ninth Circuit decision last month in Nordyke v. King, which upheld the Second Amendment as a deeply held right embodied in the Constitution that transcends state law.

“We therefore conclude that the right to keep and bear arms is "deeply rooted in this Nation's history and tradition," the Ninth Circuit ruling said. “Colonial revolutionaries, the Founders, and a host of commentators and lawmakers living during the first one hundred years of the Republic all insisted on the fundamental nature of the right. It has long been regarded as the ‘true palladium of liberty.’"

As for the racist part, she stated that her experience as a wise Latina woman she would make her a more impartial and fair judge than a typical white male.

Let's switch that around, I'll be the typical white male and I've been nominated and I say this "My experience as a white man makes me a more impartial and fair judge than a Latina woman"

What would be the response? from you? from the Latino community? from the black community? From the media?

I know for a fact I would have four different people or groups of people calling me a racist and I'd be forced to step down!

Saying that someone would decide a case differently... because she's a Latina, not a white male, that statement by definition is racist.

Not to mention the firefighters case. She ruled that it was ok for the city to throw out the exam, as too few minorities would be advanced. If you passed the advancement exam set up by the city to advance, the top scorers should advance. You can't change the rules after the fact to ensure a fair balance of races.

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by spence

It's funny how some think this is a Right vs Left debate. I've said it before but I don't think many of you would know a real Liberal if you saw one.

-spence

I thought a Liberal was any person who disagrees with a Republican??

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

I don't see how any thinking person could come to that conclusion. You still haven't actually read her words have you?

-spence

listened and read...several times...it's pretty clear that you are drowning in the kool aid...what I am seeing from Soto and Obama are people who have deluded themselves into thinking that they are morally and intellectually superior to others primarily and simply due to their background and they have clearly stated this (Oh, Michelle as well, does she ever talk anymore, she was so entertaining)...Soto's opinions are superior to any old white guys and Obama is the epitome of an elitist....they are a reflection of each other in attitude and arrogance which makes her the perfect pic for the ONE, hoisted on a pedestal and heavily promoted by the media through their touching life story rather than record and accomplishments, Clarence Thomas had a far more compelling life story but strangely the media handled things far differently and really had no interest in his struggles as a young black man growing up in America and ascending to the highest court in the land, strange...no, Uncle Tom had to be destroyed......you've got to read the descriptions of her courtroom antics by the lawyers that have suffered through them, sounds like a beast...I'd cut and paste but Johnny D gets mad when it not an "original" thought and you get mad when gobs of cut and pasted evidence are not produced...tough to decide which to do...

OBAMA...to redistribute the wealth
SOTO.....to redistribute the justice


oh, and Spence..."thinking people"? that's so very liberal elitist....eeeewwwwww

[mekcotuit]

Originally Posted by scottw

, Clarence Thomas had a far more compelling life story but strangely the media handled things far differently and really had no interest in his struggles as a young black man growing up in America and ascending to the highest court in the land, strange...no, Uncle Tom had to be destroyed......

The media used kid gloves on Clarence Thomas - try to find some opinions he wrote... and they used kid gloves because Clarence Thomas is a disgrace and a pervert- ask any woman attorney who worked with him at the EEOC - when you were hired the word out was DO NOT BE ALONE IN A ROOM WITH CLARENCE THOMAS - so his story is compelling in that the EEOC employees were afraid to nail him for his sicko antics because he always would cry he was being 'lynched' and that BS....how do I know this? My aunt is a circuit judge for the EEOC in DC/Northern Virginia and knows he and his wife quite well but like many others stays far far away from him....


and for everyone questioning Sotomayor's intelliegence - let's see some of your college transcipts - especially all of you who graduated summa cum laude from Princeton or another competitive college.

[Cool Beans]

Originally Posted by mekcotuit

and for everyone questioning Sotomayor's intelliegence - let's see some of your college transcipts - especially all of you who graduated summa cum laude from Princeton or another competitive college.

My scholarship to Princeton was given to a Hispanic woman, they had too many white boys with 1500+ SAT scores.

[fishbones]

Originally Posted by mekcotuit

and for everyone questioning Sotomayor's intelliegence - let's see some of your college transcipts - especially all of you who graduated summa cum laude from Princeton or another competitive college.

I haven't looked too much into her qualifications because the fish are in and I'd rather be out on and in the water chasing them than reading about her. I'm sure she is very intelligent. Even affirmative action couldn't have gotten her to where she is today if she wasn't very bright.

But, keep in mind that intelligence doesn't always translate into making prudent decisions. Just because someone is smart, doesn't make them the right person to be hearing and deciding Supreme Court cases.

By the way, Richard Nixon graduated from Duke University Law School with honors.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by mekcotuit

The media used kid gloves on Clarence Thomas - try to find some opinions he wrote... and they used kid gloves because Clarence Thomas is a disgrace and a pervert- ask any woman attorney who worked with him at the EEOC - when you were hired the word out was DO NOT BE ALONE IN A ROOM WITH CLARENCE THOMAS - so his story is compelling in that the EEOC employees were afraid to nail him for his sicko antics because he always would cry he was being 'lynched' and that BS....how do I know this? My aunt is a circuit judge for the EEOC in DC/Northern Virginia and knows he and his wife quite well but like many others stays far far away from him....


and for everyone questioning Sotomayor's intelliegence - let's see some of your college transcipts - especially all of you who graduated summa cum laude from Princeton or another competitive college.

this is extremely low brow...hope you feel better

noone had questioned her intelligence...that's a favorite assault of the left...

how is it that Ted Kennedy kills a woman (not to mention his other "issues") and is elected over and over for a life time all the while being hailed and celebrated as one of the greatest dems ever?

yet

Clarence Thomas is savaged by scurrilous accusations which were pretty well refuted by others, was confirmed despite them and has served in exemplary fashion since that time despite the cartoon image of him created by the left and the media and is still viciously attacked to this day...

maybe he should have killed someone ? is this JUSTICE? in Thomas' case you can pick sides based on who you believe, Kennedy definitely killed her...


I don't listen to Hannity...I like The Big Show...don't get the Fox network either in case you are taking a poll JD

hey Cool Beans..remember..Spence admitted that he teaches others to formulate agenda into a coherent and effective message...he's just practicing on you...

I'll show you my college records when you show me Obama's...bring the birth certificate too

I keep asking myself...self..."why is the left...the dems ...so freakin' angry?"...you got a radical leftist pres...the senate and congress with whack job dems in charge...the media has completely prostituted itself to the O and the entire left agenda...the government is now imposing itself into every aspect of American life making every citizen and industry either dependent on or beholden to the federal govt.....you'll get to stand in line for rationed health care any time now, we'll get VAT, carbon taxes, tiny cars, excessively high energy costs, we are on the verge of liberal socialist utopia in this country and the left should be in a constant state of orgasm, they're getting everything they ever wanted.....but they're still angry...especially if you disagree with them openly...ask Mrs. California...this is becoming scary and tyrannical....you guys need to be more tolerant....and happy....life is too short...even shorter with socialized healthcare

does anyone recall previously where members of congress and spokesmen for the president have openly threatened and warned the members of the other party against opposing a SC nominee?....this is becoming very thuggish...is this the "Chicago Way"?

[Swimmer]

Originally Posted by mekcotuit

The media used kid gloves on Clarence Thomas - try to find some opinions he wrote... and they used kid gloves because Clarence Thomas is a disgrace and a pervert- ask any woman attorney who worked with him at the EEOC - when you were hired the word out was DO NOT BE ALONE IN A ROOM WITH CLARENCE THOMAS - so his story is compelling in that the EEOC employees were afraid to nail him for his sicko antics because he always would cry he was being 'lynched' and that BS....how do I know this? My aunt is a circuit judge for the EEOC in DC/Northern Virginia and knows he and his wife quite well but like many others stays far far away from him....


and for everyone questioning Sotomayor's intelliegence - let's see some of your college transcipts - especially all of you who graduated summa cum laude from Princeton or another competitive college.

Your post doesn't say much for the backbone of the EEOC employees and the standards they swear to uphold. Most of them have to be attorneys, right. They not only protected/harbored him, as one of thier own fellow lawyers (and because he is a fellow lawyer), but they allowed him to ascend to this nations highest court by being cowards, that is of course what you say is not just hearsay, or third or fourth person half truths. The post is sad commentary.