Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Why you should oppose Sonia Sotomayor’s nomination to the Supreme Court
Pajamas Media ^ | May 26 | Roger Kimball

Posted on 05/26/2009 8:21:57 AM PDT by AJKauf

Brace yourself. Take a Dramamine. You’ll be hearing about Appeals Court Judge Sonia Sotomayor ad nauseam in the coming weeks. Did I say “Sonia Sotomayor”? I meant, of course, “Sonia Sotomayor, the first Hispanic nominee to the Supreme Court.” It will be a constantly recurring epithet, like “swift-footed Achilles,” “gray-eyed Athena,” or (perhaps more to the point) “honest Iago.”

That Obama would nominate a female to succeed David Souter, who retires next month, was the unanimous opinion in scribe-osphere. And of course a minority female would be particular attractive to our politically correct president, even if this particular female minority was not the brightest bulb on the billboard. The air hadn’t stopped vibrating with the news that Justice Souter was taking his quill pen and heading back to New Hampshire before Sonia Sotomayor, the first Hispanic nominee to the Supreme Court, emerged as a front-runner on the SCOTUS racing form. Comments there noted her qualifications — correct complement of chromosomes and suitable ethnic identity, above all, but also the requisite armory of left-liberal opinions without which no candidate for the Court under Obama need apply...

(Excerpt) Read more at pajamasmedia.com ...


TOPICS: Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-45 next last
To: WayneS

“No. He said close it, but have a plan.”

Well if there’s no workable plan (politically) then he isn’t supporting closing it.
He’s not the leader of the Gitmo rebellion unit.

Not the rubber stamp like NY/NJ senators.


21 posted on 05/26/2009 8:46:00 AM PDT by romanesq
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: AJKauf

Can we just now assume she met the first qualification of an Obama nominee?

Being a tax cheat that is..


22 posted on 05/26/2009 8:47:56 AM PDT by IamConservative (I'll keep my money. You keep the change.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: IceAge

PS - And the only reason Senator Porno said THAT was that he KNEW 90% of the Senate was going to oppose Obama on funding the closure of Gitmo. If the vote had appeared even remotely close on that issue, I am sure Mr. Jim “Born Toadying” Webb would have been back in Obama’s lap in a “New York minute”.


23 posted on 05/26/2009 8:49:01 AM PDT by WayneS (Respect the 2nd Amendment; Repeal the 16th)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: DWC

Yep, in 1990...


24 posted on 05/26/2009 8:50:09 AM PDT by Riodacat (Legum servi sumus ut liberi esse possimus.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: AJKauf

Of course she should opposed. She isn’t going to be stopped, nonetheless.

My main problem with her is that she’s too young. We’re not going to get anybody to her right nominated by Obama.

I do see one plus, however. If she isn’t that smart, and hires pals for her support team, her decisions may be so poorly reasoned that they can be more easily overturned if we should ever see brighter days.


25 posted on 05/26/2009 8:51:30 AM PDT by Dr. Sivana (we also have the duty to avoid prostituting our Catholic identity by appeals to phony dialogue)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AJKauf
Her votes as a justice will be so predictable in most cases.

But of one thing we can be absolutely sure.....that the Usurper vetted her in private chats and the full court accepting a case concerning his presidential legitimacy will never see the light of day.

Leni

26 posted on 05/26/2009 8:54:57 AM PDT by MinuteGal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AJKauf

She isn’t the first Hispanic — Justice Benjamen Cardozo was the first — not that anyone cares or would know since we don’t accurately portray history in this country. He was Portuguese and served on the bench from 1932 to 1938. Go figure. Another revisionist round of atta’ boys for the first black president. He and the rest of the liberals are gonna’ give themselves a dislocated shoulder ignoring the facts and patting themselves on the back.


27 posted on 05/26/2009 8:55:15 AM PDT by Constitutions Grandchild
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AJKauf

And, she’s quite a looker, too boot !!!


28 posted on 05/26/2009 8:56:30 AM PDT by MS_Steve
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AJKauf
With her on the Supreme Court - nothing much will change, except that she is younger than Souter & so will have an effect on the court for a very long time.

The next ones he picks will definely turn the court more to the left. She can't be any worse than Souter!

29 posted on 05/26/2009 8:58:34 AM PDT by LADY J
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

Actually she was not considered the favorite of the left and did make the following comment with respect to the constitution.:
At her Senate confirmation hearing more than a decade ago, she said, “I don’t believe we should bend the Constitution under any circumstance. It says what it says. We should do honor to it.”


30 posted on 05/26/2009 9:23:31 AM PDT by WilliamPatrick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: MS_Steve
And, she’s quite a looker, too boot !!!

If you did NOT forget the < /sarcasm> tag, may I suggest you visit your nearest vision correction center.


31 posted on 05/26/2009 9:36:08 AM PDT by Arrowhead1952 (It took almost 250 years to make the USA great and 30 days for "The Failure" BO to tear it down.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: JoanneSD
...but she cannot be any worse than Souter, who was also appointed by President GHW Bush

If not for us we could have had Harriet Meires on the court. The (R)s will not fight. The corrupt "Two-Party Cartel" got another leftist to go along with a SC that won't even take on the legitimacy of Urkel. Yea, the elites are happy today.

32 posted on 05/26/2009 9:48:50 AM PDT by newfrpr04
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: WilliamPatrick

“I don’t believe we should bend the Constitution under any circumstance. It says what it says. We should do honor to it.”

-

She lied. ;-)


33 posted on 05/26/2009 9:49:07 AM PDT by NormsRevenge (Semper Fi ... Godspeed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: JoanneSD

“Latina woman” as opposed to what — a Latina man?
Latina means woman.


34 posted on 05/26/2009 9:55:06 AM PDT by kabumpo (Kabumpo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: AJKauf

I await the input of Soto’s cousin Rosa — the lady who worked for Caroline Kennedy. http://iowahawk.typepad.com/iowahawk/2008/12/senora-kennedy-is-make-very-good-senator.html


35 posted on 05/26/2009 9:59:37 AM PDT by 668 - Neighbor of the Beast (It's all resistance...and it's all good.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AJKauf

OK another moronic decision from Obama. But what did you expect from the guy? We get another third rate rack appointed to government “policy making” post and she could be in their for life. We have reaped what we soed. Now I wonder if all the Romney hater like what they get with this SCOTUS pick. And we could get others. Yes Romney (or any other Republican) might have lost as well but he had a much better chance against Obama.

Do you really think Romney would have appointed a choice this awful? This woman is the worst of the worst. I don’t’ know if Republicans can do much about this.

Pound on the people you know who appointed Obama. Let them know how stupid and foolish their decision was. This is terrible news and we are going to get more terrible news from the California State Supreme Court in about 5 minutes


36 posted on 05/26/2009 9:59:54 AM PDT by truthguy (Good intentions are not enough!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Sivana
My main problem with her is that she’s too young.

She's pushing 60. How is that possibly too young?

I do see one plus, however. If she isn’t that smart...

Well cross that plus off your list, because she is *very* smart.

37 posted on 05/26/2009 10:06:57 AM PDT by Sandy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Sandy
She's pushing 60. How is that possibly too young?

She's 54, not pushing 60. In terms of Supreme Court justices, it's not Roberts or Thomas young, but it is young. Ginsburg, by comparison, was 60 when she was appointed. Breyer and Alito were also older when they were appointed. All things being equal, women live longer on average. So yes, I wish she were older.
38 posted on 05/26/2009 10:57:06 AM PDT by Dr. Sivana (we also have the duty to avoid prostituting our Catholic identity by appeals to phony dialogue)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Sivana
She's 54, not pushing 60.

Tomato, tomaato. Look at her. She *looks* like she's pushing seventy already. Plus, she's a heart attack waiting to happen. I give her 10 years; 15 years at most.

39 posted on 05/26/2009 11:18:09 AM PDT by Sandy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Riodacat

It’s so sad. oops didn’t hillary say that.


40 posted on 05/26/2009 12:03:46 PM PDT by DWC (what do kids know about)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-45 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson