Posted on 06/06/2009 6:29:35 PM PDT by paul in cape
This woman is losing ground every day. A potential blockbuster, as reported by Cybercast News Service.
The Judicial Confirmation Network (JCN) says Judge Sonia Sotomayor failed to disclose to the Senate Judiciary Committee a controversial document arguing that the death penalty is "racist" and a violation of the present "humanist" thinking of society.
The 1981 memo, they say, should have been disclosed as required under Question 12 (b) of the questionnaire that the Supreme Court nominee turned in Thursday.
Question 12(b) requires a nominee to "(s)upply four (4) copies of any reports, memoranda, or policy statements you prepared or contributed to the preparation of on behalf of any bar association, committee, conference, or organization of which you were or are a member or in which you have participated."
JCN Counsel Wendy Long sent a letter Friday to Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and members of the committee arguing that Sotomayor had not properly complied with this requirement because she had not submitted the 1981 memo on capital punishment.
"It is . . . clear that (Sotomayor) has omitted controversial material from her past in which she asserts that '[c]apital punishment is associated with evident racism in our society' and advocated public opposition to restoring the death penalty in New York state," Long wrote to the committee.
Sorry, my mistake.
I was taught that race and gender have no baring whatsoever on one’s ability to do anything. So those that think it’s the ultimate qualifier or disqualifier and those that try to push that mentality confuse me.
Since Sotomayors judgement history and comments clearly state that she has not the experiance, mentality or ability to fullfill the job of a member of the scotus those who support her cling to race and gender as their only viable option support.
While I know there are racists and sexests, I still don’t understand the mentality behind it. Everytime I ask someone who makes racial comments they tend to respond only with personal attacks. I thought I might get an honest answer here.
This “person” has far, far, far to great a fixation on “RACE” and IMO she is not qualified to sit on such an important position as SCOTUS.
Only if it's their race.
With this crowd 75-79 votes
The honest answer is that Liberal are hypocrites.
They are racist and sexist. That is nothing new.
Troll Be Gone!
The mentality, as you put it, behind racism and sexism -- as the left practices it -- is as a means to their end, power. The left's power derives from what's called "identity politics" -- treating Hispanics, women, blacks, etc. as discreet, homogeneous groups -- and pandering to their wants and needs.
That's why the only credential the left can cite for Sotomayor's candidacy is "her life story" -- i.e., as a Latina woman. So far as they are concerned, judicial qualifications don't mean squat -- so long as she will be a reliable liberal vote on the bench.
And that amounts to the only reason why they're supporting her -- because they believe she'll be a reliable vote in advancing their agenda. Her race and gender "qualifications" are designed to appeal to their voter base. And browbeat a few Republican Senators into voting for her because they're fearful of being called "racists" if they don't.
Hope that helps...
How many babies think Obama is a mistake, and what punishment do the little ones propose?
It's not just you. But what has happened recently is that there is no longer a shred of honesty on the Left. It is all about power and nothing but power.
Go read the history of the Germans from 1993 on (or even starting a little earlier). I suggest a book titled "They Thought They Were Free" (long out of print, suggest you ask a librarian to obtain a copy via "interlibrary loan"). If we haven't already gone over the tipping point into totalitarianism, we're more than dangerously close.
All newbies are trolls?
LOL As a new poster, I sometimes get that treatment, too, usually when somone disagrees with me and wants to take a cheap shot.
Not too long ago, rather than make a rational argument, someone posted my signup date and said “Enjoying Free Republic, newbie?”
I was tempted to say, “Why yes, thank you! Of course, I get the occasional nitwit who thinks a new member is automatically a troll, but luckily those idiots are few and far between. Most Freepers I’ve found to be reasonable, and it’s good to be around likeminded conservatives.”
Next time some blowhard tries that crap, that IS what I’ll say!
:-)
LOL see post #35
I like your response. We were all newbies once.
Enjoying Free Republic, newbie?
Signed, Blowhard
;-)
She’ll practically skate through her confirmation - it’s the THIRD time she’ll be confirmed by the Senate. I heard a Republican strategist on CNN say that whatever she’s said is irrelevant - you have to look at her rulings. He said she’s a moderate and will end up with 72 votes. Yeah, this was a Republican strategist on Lou Dobbs! I had to look twice because he sounded just like the Democratic strategist who spoke just before him!
:-)))
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.