Conservatives: Oppose Sotomayor at Your Own Risk?

Publius' Forum ^ | 5/27/09 | Warner Todd Huston

[Mobile Vulgus]

A few of our newly minted spokesmen for all those seemingly ubiquitous new Republican moderates out there are starting to say that if we oppose Sotomayor, we do so at our own risk. By this they mean that if we are seen to oppose a strong Hispanic woman we will be hurting our chances further with Hispanic voters. To this one can only say poppycock. Sotomayor should be opposed and vigorously but not because of anything other than her rather un-judicial judicial philosophy.

No one, not one conservative commentator or politician, cares a whit that Sotomayor is Hispanic. There simply is no expectation of opposing her because she is of Latino heritage. And so, because of this, there should be no reason whatever to shy from criticizing her qualifications and philosophy. Further, to allow moderates on our side or anyone on the left to equate our opposition to a racial objection is illegitimate and should be vociferously denied.

Ms. Sotomayor does not believe in the rule of law, she does not believe in precedent -- except for creating new ones based on her political/racial as opposed to judicial ideals -- and she has no interest in judicial restraint. She is not a jurist but an activist for the most liberal of causes. She will make for an unreasonable Supreme Court Justice and will surely churn out one illogical, constitutionally unsupportable decision after another. She should be opposed on these principles.

Read the rest at Publiusforum.com...

[Mobile Vulgus]

Lord I hope the GOP doesn't go soft on this crazy woman.

[Daisyjane69]

This woman is a gun grabber.

While I don’t personally own a gun (I reserve that right for the future) I’m a fierce believer in the 2nd Amendment.

For this reason alone, this nominee should be stopped.

[chatham]

What GOP ?????

This woman is a oure Racist just listen to the current video where she compares a “LATINA” to a White man where the “LATINA” , with her appropriate background would make better judgements than the EWhite man.

Pure Racism

[y6162]

“Ms. Sotomayor does not believe in the rule of law”

I think the right is showing that it won’t be cowed by identity politics. I’d rather we lose elections than be intimidated by political correctness. After all, there are still a lot of white people in America.

Hopefully the researchers will come up with something juicy to trash her. Feed it to the national Enquirer. I’d bet a drinking problem. Unpaid taxes is always a possibility.

[Glenn]

Lord I hope the GOP doesn't go soft on this crazy woman.

The Democrats have played this perfectly.

She's on the court.

[Da Coyote]

If there is risk associated with exposing a total incompetent who shouldn’t be a dog catcher, so be it.

[C210N]

hurting our chances further with Hispanic voters...

Those voters that ID based on race are likely to vote 'rat anyways. Those voters that perform due diligence based on issues are likely to vote conservative and/or republican.

[sickoflibs]

The republicans in the Senate are worthless but what we really need is 527s here to inform the voters and the R Senators need to act impartial until the hearings and then act surprised and outraged. McCain's initial response was good, but it needs to be followed up with surprise and concern.

[MrB]

Here’s the oath:
“I, XXX XXX, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as XXX under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God.”

And here’s what it’s based on:
Lev 19:15
Do not pervert justice; do not show partiality to the poor or favoritism to the great, but judge your neighbor fairly.

I see nothing about “empathy” for the poor, or about applying your life experiences to your decisions. It’s all about the law, the Constitution, and showing NO PARTIALITY.

[flowerplough]

Republicans seen to oppose a strong Hispanic woman will be hurting their chances further with Hispanic voters? Maybe Heinlein canb explain Republicans' chances with Hispanic voters, whether they oppose Ms. Policy-Made-from-Judicial-Bench:

"A perfect democracy, a 'warm body' democracy in which every adult may vote and all votes count equally has no internal feedback for self correction. It depends solely on the wisdom and self-restraint of citizens...which is opposed by the folly and lack of self-restraint of other citizens. What is supposed to happen in a democracy is that each sovereign citizen will always vote in the public interest for the safety and welfare of all. But what does happen is that he votes his own self-interest as he sees it...which for the majority translates as 'Bread and Circuses'

"Bread and Circuses is the cancer of democracy, the fatal disease for which there is no cure. Democracy often works beautifully at first. But once a state extends the franchise to every warm body, be he producer or parasite, that day marks the beginning of the end of the state. For when the plebs discover that they can vote themselves bread and circuses without limit and that the productive members of the body politic cannot stop them, they will do so, until the state bleeds to death, or in its weakened condition the state succumbs to an invader--the barbarians enter Rome."
(To Sail Beyond the Sunset, 227)

[TADSLOS]

Lord I hope the GOP doesn't go soft on this crazy woman.

Soft? Softer than what? LOL!

[Virginia Ridgerunner]

All of the Republican talk about "falling back" and letting this nominee slide through in order to better fight the next nominee is utter non-sense. The GOP needs to draw a deep line in the sand and stop this crazy lib woman now, or else we're fast-tracked into Constitutional communism.

The Republicans also need to forget about being nice, as before, and instead play by Rat rules, specifically by dropping an army of lawyers and private investigators into NYC to dig up as much trash about this woman as possible.

Fight fire with fire!

[flowerplough]

oops-—can explain Republicans’ chances with Hispanic voters, whether they oppose Ms. Policy-Made-from-Judicial-Bench or not:

[Old Teufel Hunden]

"she compares a “LATINA” to a White man where the “LATINA” , with her appropriate background would make better judgements than the EWhite man."

I still would like to know what the differences are between a lot of "LATINAs" and white people? Being that a lot of them are descended from people from Spain. About as white and western European as you can get!! Sure, there are some that are descended from Africans and some that are descended from native Americans, but looking at this judge, she's descended from Europeans. I think the term Latinos, hispanics et al is just a made up group designed to further balkanize people.

[hunter112]

Juan McLame sucked up to the Hispanic vote, what did that get him last year? And that was after Cankles had demonized Lord Zero to the Spanish-speaking population.

Forget the Hispanic vote. Show the stupid guilty white people who thought a vote for Barry was going to make all of the minority people forgive "whitey" for every perceived sin since the dawn of man just how wrong they were.

[LibFreeUSA]

Here are 45 U.S. Senators who don't mind voting against a "HISPANIC" Supreme Court nominee:

Akaka (D-HI)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bayh (D-IN)
Biden (D-DE)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Boxer (D-CA)
Byrd (D-WV)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Carper (D-DE)
Clinton (D-NY)
Conrad (D-ND)
Corzine (D-NJ)
Daschle (D-SD)
Dayton (D-MN)
Dodd (D-CT)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Durbin (D-IL)
Edwards (D-NC)
Feingold (D-WI)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Graham (D-FL)
Harkin (D-IA)
Hollings (D-SC)
Inouye (D-HI)
Jeffords (I-VT)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Kerry (D-MA)
Kohl (D-WI)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Lieberman (D-CT)
Lincoln (D-AR)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murray (D-WA)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Sarbanes (D-MD)
Schumer (D-NY)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Wyden (D-OR)

[LibFreeUSA]

Here are 45 U.S. Senators who don't mind voting against a "HISPANIC" Supreme Court nominee:

Akaka (D-HI)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bayh (D-IN)
Biden (D-DE)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Boxer (D-CA)
Byrd (D-WV)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Carper (D-DE)
Clinton (D-NY)
Conrad (D-ND)
Corzine (D-NJ)
Daschle (D-SD)
Dayton (D-MN)
Dodd (D-CT)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Durbin (D-IL)
Edwards (D-NC)
Feingold (D-WI)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Graham (D-FL)
Harkin (D-IA)
Hollings (D-SC)
Inouye (D-HI)
Jeffords (I-VT)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Kerry (D-MA)
Kohl (D-WI)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Lieberman (D-CT)
Lincoln (D-AR)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murray (D-WA)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Sarbanes (D-MD)
Schumer (D-NY)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Wyden (D-OR)

[Uri’el-2012]

I'm sure Sonia Sotomayor is a fine person

She does not seem to have the judicial temperament
one would expect in a free republic.

Her judicial temperament seems consistent
with that of of a third-world dictatorship.

By her own comments and written opinions,
she has demonstrated that she is not capable
of delivering uniform justice under the law to
all as expected under our Constitution.

This is I believe because at her core
she a confirmed racist and sexist.

[sig226]

As a conservative, I say support Sotomayor at your own risk.