No doubt this video will be played constantly until she's confirmed. I understand the moral compunction to fight, but I try as best as I can to spot the windmills ahead of time. Obama is a Leftist ideologue, what the hell would one expect him to nominate?
No doubt this video will be played constantly until she's confirmed.
Yeah, no doubt it will. But you do understand that she was talking about the contrast between what district courts do and what appeals courts do, don't you? She was making the entirely uncontrovesial point that it's far more interesting to clerk at the appeals level because that's where one gets to do interesting things like try to reconcile conflicts and ambiguities in the law, whereas the district courts are just desperately trying to keep up with the deluge of details in their individual cases.
Obama is a Leftist ideologue, what the hell would one expect him to nominate?
If he were such a leftist ideologue he would have nominated Kagan (my top choice) or someone even more left. Sotomayor's position is actually extremely close to Souter's - i.e. barely left of center.
Sotomayor's position is actually extremely close to Souter's - i.e. barely left of center.
That's a good thing. I don't really like any extremists on the USSC. I hope Scalia goes next.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"We are all equal, but we definitely are not the same"
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No doubt this video will be played constantly until she's confirmed.
Yeah, no doubt it will. But you do understand that she was talking about the contrast between what district courts do and what appeals courts do, don't you? She was making the entirely uncontrovesial point that it's far more interesting to clerk at the appeals level because that's where one gets to do interesting things like try to reconcile conflicts and ambiguities in the law, whereas the district courts are just desperately trying to keep up with the deluge of details in their individual cases.
Is that the spin, now? Funny how it runs completely counter to her reactions to her own words, once she realized what she said.
Obama is a Leftist ideologue, what the hell would one expect him to nominate?
If he were such a leftist ideologue he would have nominated Kagan (my top choice) or someone even more left. Sotomayor's position is actually extremely close to Souter's - i.e. barely left of center.
Well, that all goes back to the perspective thing. Remember, you think we are a nation in the center, much in need of some leftward adjustment. A stunning perspective from my view, peeking over the lip of the trenches.
In the context of the constitutional ideal of "blind justice", this remark is both racist, and sexist, and hardly in keeping with the ideal. Good grief, it is in direct contradiction to the opinions on the issue of both Ginsberg, and O'Connor!
gus.
WASHINGTON In 2001, Sonia Sotomayor, an appeals court judge, gave a speech declaring that the ethnicity and sex of a judge may and will make a difference in our judging.
In her speech, Judge Sotomayor questioned the famous notion often invoked by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and her retired Supreme Court colleague, Sandra Day OConnor that a wise old man and a wise old woman would reach the same conclusion when deciding cases.
I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasnt lived that life, said Judge Sotomayor, who is now considered to be near the top of President Obamas list of potential Supreme Court nominees. more...
Another comic-book heard from, with shared pages from Roby. *chortle*
gus.
Can't live without me, huh, gussie mae? She's right you know. You are here whenever I pass by, be it am/noon/pm/midnight. You evidently have no one in your life who cares one iota what you say. It's actually sad. You really need to get a life. *Pffft, snort, chortle, fart*
(edited for a minor typo which gus would have beat me up about. After all he has nothing else to do.)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "We are all equal, but we definitely are not the same" -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This message has been edited by roby2000 on May 26, 2009 2:56 PM
Can't live without me, huh, gussie mae? She's right you know. You are here whenever I pass by, be it am/noon/pm/midnight. You evidently have no one in your life who cares onee iota what you say. It's actually sad. You really need to get a life. *Pffft, snort, chortle, fart*
Yes, sport, I know. You moonbats have to have these little constructs in your comic-books to satisfy some psychological need. Far be it from me to try and explain it, I would have to care first, and it's your shrink's job anyway. BTW, you sound like both ends need some attention. No, not *that* kind of attention, *medical* attention... *chortle*
You're still a very sad little man, gus, and you never will be happy. Whatever you say that comes out of your sad little brain just reinforces that you are the one who needs medical attention, not we who laugh at you daily. Just remember, we are not the ones who are here all day, every day. And that is because we have lives. Try it, you'll like it. ROTFLMAO!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"We are all equal, but we definitely are not the same"
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think Obama made this choice based on politics and not necessarily on judicial qualifications.
Or, as with the choice he made of Biden, he just likes people who open mouth and insert foot.
But that's his prerogative. I have a feeling the Republicans will find more "stuff" on Sotomayor, but Obama knows he's in the power position and probably doesn't give a flip.
One thing about Sotomayor, she'll be the first appointee in my lifetime with a "personality."
*****
You learn to know a pilot in a storm.
-Seneca
I think Obama made this choice based on politics and not necessarily on judicial qualifications.
Can you name any Supreme Court Justice from the past several decades who wasn't selected with an eye to the politics of the choice?
All the people I saw mentioned for this post were well qualified from a purely objective point of view. So, for that matter, are all the justices currently on the court (although Thomas is a stretch for me to concede.)
"Unencumbered by the thought process", gus attempts to hold a dialogue with jan by regergitating the most basic and immediate of hate radio's programed response for its brain dead puppets. ---Obama is a Leftist ideologue, what the hell would one expect him to nominate?------
Well little gus-bo wanna be Obama is not a leftist ideologue that just lie one of the lies you come to the board to tell. And who he nominated is a judge so centerist that she was first appointed by George the elder Bush as a democrat acceptable to both Democrats and Republicans, and then little ignorant skull full of mush she was promoted under Billy boy Clinton while the wingnut far right shut down the government, control the courts, impeach Clinton, extremist repigicans were in control of the Senate. From NYC housing project to Princeton and Yale. Its the American Dream gus. No wonder you are afraid. With none of your advantages she has far outstripped you. Like Obama she knows and respects the Constitution and will stand in the way of the rightwing judicial activists trying to destroy the 4th amendment. She honors the rule of law, and unlike your guys does not hold that the executive branch is outside of the rule of law.
I prepared for this discussion gus. Last week I picked up the voice of rational (oxymoron if there ever was one) conservative viewpoint, Buckley's book SUPREME COURTSHIP (great footnote on page 183 btw) So I am able to appreciate the concerns and manovering now going on. It took me an hour or two of my spare time to read it, so you should be able to get through it in time for the confirmation hearings. (ie a month or so)
Then perhaps, you will be able to hold an informed discussion and explain how you could be so stupid to confuse classic liberal, middle of the road icons of the American Dream with leftists.
"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be." -- Thomas Jefferson
We live in a society exquisitely dependent on science and technology, in which hardly anyone knows anything about science and technology. - Carl Sagan
I believe that every right implies a responsibility, every opportunity an obligation; every possession, a duty. - John D. Rockefeller, Jr.
It's their job. They were elected to serve their constituency....And the political world turns..
It's their job to delay a nomination beyond what is necessary to review her record? Or are you saying two and a half months isn't long enough to do that? Both Roberts and Alito were confirmed in a little less than two and a half months from their nominations.
Given the membership on the Senate Judiciary Committee, I believe she'll be given a thorough but fair look. The statement from the NYT article, posted above ["I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasnt lived that life, said Judge Sotomayor"] is somewhat questionable, but I've no doubt the committee members will do a thorough analysis of her rulings.
This message has been edited by Carolyn826 on May 26, 2009 7:32 PM
Left leaning is interpreting the Constitution by assuming what the Founders should have said. Right leaning is interpreting the Constitution as it is written.
Therefore, When Obama says the Court should interpret rather than write the law, he is on safe ground because the Constitution will be interpreted according to what the Constitution should say.
"Unencumbered by the thought process", gus attempts to hold a dialogue with jan by regergitating the most basic and immediate of hate radio's programed response for its brain dead puppets. ---Obama is a Leftist ideologue, what the hell would one expect him to nominate?------
Well little gus-bo wanna be Obama is not a leftist ideologue that just lie one of the lies you come to the board to tell. And who he nominated is a judge so centerist that she was first appointed by George the elder Bush as a democrat acceptable to both Democrats and Republicans, and then little ignorant skull full of mush she was promoted under Billy boy Clinton while the wingnut far right shut down the government, control the courts, impeach Clinton, extremist repigicans were in control of the Senate. From NYC housing project to Princeton and Yale. Its the American Dream gus. No wonder you are afraid. With none of your advantages she has far outstripped you. Like Obama she knows and respects the Constitution and will stand in the way of the rightwing judicial activists trying to destroy the 4th amendment. She honors the rule of law, and unlike your guys does not hold that the executive branch is outside of the rule of law.
I prepared for this discussion gus. Last week I picked up the voice of rational (oxymoron if there ever was one) conservative viewpoint, Buckley's book SUPREME COURTSHIP (great footnote on page 183 btw) So I am able to appreciate the concerns and manovering now going on. It took me an hour or two of my spare time to read it, so you should be able to get through it in time for the confirmation hearings. (ie a month or so)
Then perhaps, you will be able to hold an informed discussion and explain how you could be so stupid to confuse classic liberal, middle of the road icons of the American Dream with leftists.
General, you need to get yourself a next-size bigger bus driver hat. When I get under your skin like this, the throbbing at your temples is constricted by a too-small hat, and foam-flecked screeds such as this one are the result. No need to thank me, I'm always glad to help.
under my skin? gus now you are calling yourself a wood tick. No I was just making fun of you. Low hanging fruit and all that old gus-bo. But thanks, if you don't post nonesense, I can't mock you.
"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be." -- Thomas Jefferson
We live in a society exquisitely dependent on science and technology, in which hardly anyone knows anything about science and technology. - Carl Sagan
I believe that every right implies a responsibility, every opportunity an obligation; every possession, a duty. - John D. Rockefeller, Jr.
Both Roberts and Alito were confirmed in a little less than two and a half months from their nominations.
So? Does that make it the "expected time of completion"? ....why did it take them that long? Does that make it the status quo? It took 4 and a half months to confirm Clarence Thomas. May that should be the expectation.
~~life isn't about how to survive the storm but how to dance in the rain~~
When the character of a man is not clear to you, look at his friends.
Japanese Proverb
So? Does that make it the "expected time of completion"? ....why did it take them that long? Does that make it the status quo? It took 4 and a half months to confirm Clarence Thomas. May that should be the expectation.
Nope. Thomas was nominated July 1, 1991 and confirmed October 15, 1991. That three and a half months. And that was including a significant unexpected wrinkle (Anita Hill) coming up in the middle of the confirmation process.
I'm fine with it taking that long if something unexpected that requires extensive additional investigation comes up. What I don't think appropriate is foot-dragging - especially given the huge Republican cry-fest about the unconstitutionality of filibustering judicial nominations and the endless nattering about "up-or-down" votes.
![[linked image]](http://www.network54.com/Realm/JansRealm/wfelix.gif)
