Sonyia’s a shoe-in, as far as I can discern. She seems fair-minded.
Frankly, these confirmation hearings have become made-for-television, dog-and-pony shows in recent years. Many of the politicians preen for the controversy-thirsty, 24/7 TV networks, asking one insipid question after the next. I envisage an hour glass, with valuable time and taxpayer dollars slipping away by the minute, when these clowns could be putting their time to better use.
Please, approve this lady already, so the networks can get to their next scandal-dujour, and Congress can get to something a speck more important during this national time of crisis. I mean, what would be the sense of NOT approving her? It’s not like Obama & Co. would offer up Phyllis Schlafly as a substitute, if Sotomayor were to be shot down in flames. - James
Thanks, Murph. Yeah, I was up-down like a yo-yo last night. Grogginess finally dissipated by 8 a.m., when I got up "for good". And the headache/nausea were gone. I feel great. It’s 70, sunny, and a nice, gusty breeze. Glad to be alive! Hopefully, my hearing will improve now! They take the internal packing out of the ear at post-op next week.
Speaking of hearing, that Sotomayor hearing has gotten bizarre.
James…all of your "girls" are wishing you a speedy recovery ;] Hope all goes to plan! But then…no more excuses for "selective male hearing"!!!
On the Sotomayor hearing….I do not respect that she has attempted to minimalize her infamous "wise Latina" statement. She repeated that exact sentiment over 6 separate times…in numerous situations. She must be very invested in that sentiment to go back to it, time and time again. A one time mis statement, it is not.
Like it or not, she obviously practices identity politics. That much is clear. We are stuck with her and nothing will change that, now.
In my opinion, the second amendment is the reason that Sotomayor was the Obama pick….
"The most interesting exchange thus far occurred when Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., asked Sotomayor about a 2004 opinion, which she signed, that found that ‘the right to possess a gun is clearly not a fundamental right.’
“Coburn wondered how courts cannot see the explicitly stated Second Amendment ‘right to keep and bear arms’ as fundamental, yet can hold as fundamental the unexpressed right to privacy. Sotomayor answered: ‘Is there a constitutional right to self-defense? And I can’t think of one. I could be wrong, but I can’t think of one.’
“For eight years, Democrats attacked the Bush administration for giving short shrift to personal liberties. As Obama wrote in ‘Audacity,’ the Bush picks ‘showed a pattern of hostility toward civil rights, privacy and checks on executive power.’
“Now the Obama pick for the Supreme Court can’t think of a right to defend yourself. That is arguably extraordinary.”
— Debra J. Saunders, San Francisco Chronicle Syndicated Columnist
Yeah, Coburn is the voice of respect and integrity, invoking the ‘Ricky Ricardo’ imitation. Sotomayor made the point that the words ‘self-defense’ did not appear in the Constitution. One should remember that George H W Bush appointed her to the district court. The word ‘Education’ also does not appear in the Constitution.
beth…I could care less who appointed her to the district court…we are talking about a lifelong appointment here. Nothing in your response spoke to her position on the 2nd amendment…I see a problem with that and her numerous racial comments.
I also do not like what she did with the firefighters. There is a problem there with her, in my opinion.
It does seem like our precious elected stand on ceremond, doesn’t it, James. But, it isn’t doing much for the detractors, seems a deliberate attempt to detract, and retract. It hasn’t feathered their nests one bit. In fact, I wanted to fax 1 or 2 of them, "WAKEUP!"
You’re right, Andrea! Never thought of that! In fact, I’m surprised we haven’t heard an announcement of the new "MTV" network (Michael television). And I liked his dancing; I’m no M.J. hater.
88 Reader Comments (so far…) Sign In or Register to comment
Sonyia’s a shoe-in, as far as I can discern. She seems fair-minded.
Frankly, these confirmation hearings have become made-for-television, dog-and-pony shows in recent years. Many of the politicians preen for the controversy-thirsty, 24/7 TV networks, asking one insipid question after the next. I envisage an hour glass, with valuable time and taxpayer dollars slipping away by the minute, when these clowns could be putting their time to better use.
Please, approve this lady already, so the networks can get to their next scandal-dujour, and Congress can get to something a speck more important during this national time of crisis. I mean, what would be the sense of NOT approving her? It’s not like Obama & Co. would offer up Phyllis Schlafly as a substitute, if Sotomayor were to be shot down in flames. - James
Thanks, Murph. Yeah, I was up-down like a yo-yo last night. Grogginess finally dissipated by 8 a.m., when I got up "for good". And the headache/nausea were gone. I feel great. It’s 70, sunny, and a nice, gusty breeze. Glad to be alive! Hopefully, my hearing will improve now! They take the internal packing out of the ear at post-op next week.
Speaking of hearing, that Sotomayor hearing has gotten bizarre.
James…all of your "girls" are wishing you a speedy recovery ;] Hope all goes to plan! But then…no more excuses for "selective male hearing"!!!
On the Sotomayor hearing….I do not respect that she has attempted to minimalize her infamous "wise Latina" statement. She repeated that exact sentiment over 6 separate times…in numerous situations. She must be very invested in that sentiment to go back to it, time and time again. A one time mis statement, it is not.
Like it or not, she obviously practices identity politics. That much is clear. We are stuck with her and nothing will change that, now.
Thanks James…wow…so many beautiful views of one bridge! (that wasn’t a veiled suggestion for me to go jump off one, was it?)
Xo…
In my opinion, the second amendment is the reason that Sotomayor was the Obama pick….
"The most interesting exchange thus far occurred when Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., asked Sotomayor about a 2004 opinion, which she signed, that found that ‘the right to possess a gun is clearly not a fundamental right.’
“Coburn wondered how courts cannot see the explicitly stated Second Amendment ‘right to keep and bear arms’ as fundamental, yet can hold as fundamental the unexpressed right to privacy. Sotomayor answered: ‘Is there a constitutional right to self-defense? And I can’t think of one. I could be wrong, but I can’t think of one.’
“For eight years, Democrats attacked the Bush administration for giving short shrift to personal liberties. As Obama wrote in ‘Audacity,’ the Bush picks ‘showed a pattern of hostility toward civil rights, privacy and checks on executive power.’
“Now the Obama pick for the Supreme Court can’t think of a right to defend yourself. That is arguably extraordinary.”
Yeah, Coburn is the voice of respect and integrity, invoking the ‘Ricky Ricardo’ imitation. Sotomayor made the point that the words ‘self-defense’ did not appear in the Constitution. One should remember that George H W Bush appointed her to the district court. The word ‘Education’ also does not appear in the Constitution.
Peace and grace
beth…I could care less who appointed her to the district court…we are talking about a lifelong appointment here. Nothing in your response spoke to her position on the 2nd amendment…I see a problem with that and her numerous racial comments.
I also do not like what she did with the firefighters. There is a problem there with her, in my opinion.
It does seem like our precious elected stand on ceremond, doesn’t it, James. But, it isn’t doing much for the detractors, seems a deliberate attempt to detract, and retract. It hasn’t feathered their nests one bit. In fact, I wanted to fax 1 or 2 of them, "WAKE UP!"