Well, that would take care of the woman and hispanic issues. How will the NOpers react?

More on Sotomayor...

Sotomayor is a self-described "Newyorkrican" who grew up in a Bronx housing project after her parents moved to New York from Puerto Rico. She has dealt with diabetes since age 8 and lost her father at age 9, growing up under the care of her mother in humble surroundings. As a girl, inspired by the Perry Mason television show, she knew she wanted to be a judge.

A graduate of Princeton University and Yale Law School, a former prosecutor and private attorney, Sotomayor became a federal judge for the Southern District of New York in 1992.

As a judge, she has a bipartisan pedigree. She was first appointed by a Republican, President George H.W. Bush, then named an appeals judge by President Bill Clinton in 1997.

Without knowing much about her I think I can already tell you what I see the NOper's attacking.

1. They will call her a far left activist judge even though the American Bar Association calls her a political centrist.
2. They will say Christianity is under attack
3. They will say she has a hot temper and is hard to work with.

After reading her bio, she seems very qualified and is apparently considered a political centrist. My guess is there will not be much of a fight over her confirmation. Republicans need to pick their battles, and given that they could have seen a nominee far to the left of Sotomayor, they should be happy with that pick.

as I said with the Bush picks, this is one of the critical reasons in making a decision for voting for a POTUS. There really is no reason to argue over the selection of a SCOTUS unless the person is seriously unqualified (miers) or complete Idealogue (Bork). if the person is qualified the people and the senate should support the selection. The opportunity to "control" the pick is at the Voting booth and if the result is someone with a political slant you disagree with then the POTUS vote is where the disagreement occurred. One should not be surprised when Bush picks a rightie and the court shifts to the right. Wish them well and hope they use their judgement wisely.

Sotomayor's status as the first Hispanic nominee for the Supreme Court in history makes her an exceptionally tough pick for the Republicans to oppose.

She's got an enormous amount of experience on the bench and was originally appointed by President George H.W. Bush, so I have trouble seeing how the Republicans get very far in opposition.

sympathy for the Diablo

Sotomayor's status as the first Hispanic nominee for the Supreme Court in history makes her an exceptionally tough pick for the Republicans to oppose.

#6 | Posted by rcade

But here we go anyway...

"Leave it to Karl Rove to attack a Democratic nominee even before her name has been released or announced.

The former Bush adviser and White House Deputy Chief of Staff attacked Obama Tuesday morning after it leaked that Obama would be announcing his selection to the Supreme Court at 10:15 AM ET. He accused the new president of being hasty in his selection and then went on to suggest that Obama was making his announcement Tuesday because of a fundraiser for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV)

'I think this is precipitous, not necessary,' Rove said on Fox News Tuesday morning. 'The Obama White House saying we've got to get this done quick, we are going to tick it off before he goes out to raise money for Harry Reid, and they may come to regret this.'

'You're not saying that they would do it on purpose?' a Fox host quipped. 'I'm sure they think they've '

The 'White House would love someone young, would love to have someone that could bring about change," Rove said later. "Sonia Sotomayor fits a lot of that, but she is also an unabashed liberal.'"

If I were president, I would try to sneak my grandma through the way Bush tried. Yeah he took some heat and in the end he failed but worth a shot. At least everyone knows he loves his grandma.

Leave it to Karl Rove to attack a Democratic nominee even before her name has been released or announced.

Gee. Karl Rove is going to scrutinize her?

Let me guess......Limbaugh and Hannity will jump on it also????

Not exactly a shocker to anybody.

Karl Rove is going to scrutinize her?

#10 | Posted by eberly

"Scrutinize"? Or find ways to criticize the President without actually commenting on the qualifications of the candidate herself, except to deliver the obligatory "unabashed liberal" epithet?

semantics. Use whatever term you want.

semantics.

#12 | Posted by eberly

LOL!

The Right Wing Rag "THE NEW REPUBLIC", is being used by Fox News, to be critical of Justice Motomayor, this magazine is used by the Conservative's to attack what this woman has accomplished. BRING IT ON, YOU MISERABLE SCUMBAGS....If anyone needs to know what wrong with the Republican Party listen to how they attack this WOMAN, this PUERTO RICAN woman has done with her life.

The Republican Party talks about personal responsibility accomplish something on your own, well she has done that now what you REPUBLICANS fucks!!!!

YEA Obama this is change that we can believe in........

On Fox This morning Karl Rove said that she has been overturned many, many times another LIE by this FUCK!!!! Why does anyone listen to this War Criminal FUCK?????

scrutinize......criticize.

quit crying.

It's Karl Rove.

If Groucho Rove approved of her selection, that would spell trouble.

From the article: 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."

How will the NOpers react?
#1 | Posted by SanAntonioRogue

This rightie is on board with this nominee. Smart pick, President Obama.

This will be a critical issue for the GOP. They should think this one through carefully.

If they fight her appointment they can kiss the Hispanic vote goodbye for the foreseeable future, but they may figure they are already gone and go for broke with the base.

The woman herself seems imminently qualified and may not even have a nanny.

Politically, Obama has just handed the GOP another live round for their foot-shooting pistol.

Will they use it?

"Why does anyone listen to this War Criminal FUCK?????"

Because their favorite network gives him air time.

The NOPers are kinda stuck here because their Big Plan for the summer has been to vigorously oppose whichever Commie Pinko Fag that Obama appointed, and now they are going to be stuck bashing a Hispanic woman, a centrist judge originally picked by Poppy Bush.

Poor NOPers just can't catch a break.

War Criminal FUCK
#14 | Posted by celisary

Link?
Oh that's right...you lefty's just like spouting BS..
Carry on..

The country has gotten so screwed up the last 4 months that it doesn't matter who is selected. Laws aren't followed, spending is out of control, redistribution of wealth, screwing retirees by giving their retirement to the UAW, promises broken, lied to every day, blaming America for everything under the sun (real and imagined), just to name a few.

quit crying.

#15 | Posted by eberly

Boy, you're really on today!

The article seems to indicate the proper qualifications but the GOP will still fight like hell if only on general principals.A Hispanic well seasoned in maters judicial with an apparent desire to see the constitution firmly upheld seems an ideal choice. Just to show their power, I am betting the GOP will fight against her like mad gophers in a veggie patch.

"The One" is reading to the people right now on TV. One of these days they will move the teleprompter right in front of his face so he can pretend to look the American people in the eye.

"The One" is reading to the people right now on TV.

#25 | Posted by KBM

Ride that pony for all its worth, One Trick.

You know I wonder and ponder if Obama were pure white would Republicans be calling Him "The One" Highly Doubtful.

Larry

OK, Obama got the woman and hispanic angles covered. Is she gay?

-"The One" is reading to the people right now on TV

Bet it's not "My Pet Goat".

Which was a cover-up btw, as we found out later from Laura Bush. GW's fav was, "My Pet Stallion".

Which was a cover-up btw, as we found out later from Laura Bush. GW's fav was, "My Pet Stallion".

#29 | Posted by Corky

You really shouldn't "milk" that anecdote, Corky.

"OK, Obama got the woman and hispanic angles covered. Is she gay?"

She's certainly ugly enough to be gay.

It's nice that the truly noisy rigid righties remain to be heard from. I presume that's because Rush has not yet disseminated the party line gospel. herm

I take it back. Joe waded in with the irrelevant. herm

The "we report, you decide" network has already decided.

Sonia Sotomayor, President Barack Obama's nominee to the Supreme Court, is the "most liberal" of any of his candidates and was chosen to "appease the far left."

Speaking directly after the announcement, Fox legal analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano (no relation to Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano) declared Sotomayor "the most liberal of everybody on that group of the six or eight finalists."

Fox host Gretchen Carlson, meanwhile, remarked, "It's one thing to appease the far left with day-to-day ongoing developments. It's a whole another thing to appease the far left with a Supreme Court pick."

Later Napolitano said her "track record is unambiguously liberal," called her a "deep liberal," "not just liberalway left," and then repeated that she was "way left" again.

-Is she gay?

She used to be this guy, Agador, the gay Puerto Rican from the movie The Birdcage.

One supposes that NOPers would have preferred a Righty Prez to make yet another SC pick that they would later disparage as Liberal, eh?

Politically, Obama has just handed the GOP another live round for their foot-shooting pistol.
....Will they use it?
.........#18 | Posted by silver_ironist

.......of course they will.......

.......that's who they are.......

"Speaking directly after the announcement, Fox legal analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano (no relation to Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano) declared Sotomayor "the most liberal of everybody on that group of the six or eight finalists."

Fox host Gretchen Carlson, meanwhile, remarked, "It's one thing to appease the far left with day-to-day ongoing developments. It's a whole another thing to appease the far left with a Supreme Court pick."

Prepared comments, they just had to insert the name of the nominee.

Is she gay?

#28 | Posted by 101Chairborne

Divorced. No kids.

Although I guess she could just smell bad.

.....I can just hear the GOP objections......

1. She puts ketchup on her hamburger, just like Lenin did..
2. She went to Yale, but wasted time studying to be at the top of the class, instead of cheerleading. Such Elitism.
3. She's from New York for God's sake, no REAL American comes from there.
4. She has a 'terrorist' hair-do favored by socialists.
5. Takitez has a copy of her birth certificate from Ulan Bator.
6. There's a 'Gringo Whitey' tape in circulation that Hannity will play as soon as he can get his hands on a copy.

I thought she was the least likely. Maybe she's bi or lesbian. It's "Their Time" - oh, She's Hispanic. A Liberal Catholic? Por Dios! Let's dig into Roe v Wade. Beating heart and functional brain - is that a Child?

Deny her the Alter Holy Pope. Order her mother to make a Novena for her failure to properly instruct this child. Where's Wild Bill Donohue?

Hopefully the knives will come out. She's plump as a roasting pig and as long as everyone is going to vote for her you might as well get in some digs. Another ObamaMama with the requisite level of hypocrisy and political capital.

She's Sooooo Qualified.

The Right Wing Rag "THE NEW REPUBLIC" ...

The New Republic is left-wing, at most left-center.

The "we report, you decide" network has already decided.

why are you so fixated on what Fox reports?

Do you even know what other networks are reporting? Or do you just watch Fox and get all bent out of shape over it?

I suppose you will listen to Limbaugh when he comes on and report that also.

LOL

She's Sooooo Qualified.

#41 | Posted by OzarkAggie

Gee, you managed to type all those words without actually addressing her qualifications, or lack thereof.

Surprise.

5. Takitez has a copy of her birth certificate from Ulan Bator.

LOL. That is actually hilarious. I wouldn't be surprised if there is something ridiculous like that to come out.

Prepared comments, they just had to insert the name of the nominee.

#38 | Posted by danni

Newsworthy!

why are you so fixated on what Fox reports?

#43 | Posted by eberly

I'm not. My initial question was how the right will react to this nomination. I am now addressing that question as responses start coming out.

Get over it.

Tighties will try to make hay about her firefighters decision. The only problem I have with her is that she saved baseball.

"She's Sooooo Qualified."

As the President said, she has more judicial experience than anyone now sitting on the SC had when they were nominated. Apparently she graduated Summa Cum Laud from law school. WAs a prosecutor, worked in private practice. So....yes, she does seem quite qualified.

#14 | Posted by celisary at 2009-05-26 10:05 AM | Reply

"I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE'RE YELLING ABOUT!!!"

#14 | Posted by celisary at 2009-05-26 10:05 AM | Reply

"LOUD NOISES!!!!!"

So....yes, she does seem quite qualified.

#49 | Posted by danni at 2009-05-26 10:48 AM | Reply

She's a woman. She's hispanic. She's divorced. She has empathy. She's qualified!
-Obama

Come on, do you think anyone expected the Obama-mammas to speak out, criticize, or second guess his pick? It doesn't matter who he nominates, you sycophants will cheer and approve.

My initial question was how the right will react to this nomination.

That shouldn't be a question to anyone.

I don't expect OzarkMikey to approve... unless it can be proven that she was, like him, at one time a man.

It doesn't matter who he nominates, you sycophants will cheer and approve.

I did? You still drinking? Weekend's over man.

This may be a sore spot and trip her up a bit...

"the court of appeals is where policy is made."

Gonna have to explain that one, I'll bet.

That shouldn't be a question to anyone.

#53 | Posted by eberly

But it is, and that fact speaks volumes.

Come on, do you think anyone expected the Obama-mammas to speak out, criticize, or second guess his pick? It doesn't matter who he nominates, you sycophants will cheer and approve.

Exactly. There is nothing surprising here. Sanan seems to think it is news that Karl Rove refers to her as liberal. The hard left like Danni will find it quite easy to support this nomination but folks like her would support any nomination though.

Sanan seems to think it is news that Karl Rove refers to her as liberal.

Posted by eberly

And Eberly seems to think it is his job to excuse or dismiss what the right-wing pundits have to say about the nomination.

Did I voice disapproval?

Didn't I say she's sooooo qualified?

5 "O's" and yet the lefty loosers remain unsatisfied.

It's Their Time.

LMAO

But it is, and that fact speaks volumes.

So you are saying that you didn't know how Fox News would react?

You have got to be kidding.

She looks like the dude in "Balls of Fury".

She's a SOCIALIST!!!
The Right

"It doesn't matter who he nominates, you sycophants will cheer and approve."

Sorry, your side lost the right to make that comment with the nomination of Clarence Thomas.

#52 | Posted by 101Chairborne

did you hear snowjobama espousing the fact she brings more to the supreme court than all the justices put together? LMAO! that comment will go over like a fart in a spacesuit with scotus.

if she's good, let her prove her mettle. best of luck to her.

" lefty loosers"

Er...we haven't lost in a while now. I think kyou must mean "lefty winners." That's why our guy gets to make an SC nominee.

these days it is "rightie sore losers."

WELCOME TO THE SCREW UP LEGAL LIBERAL WORLD!

Yay Oozie! You tell 'em!

"did you hear snowjobama espousing the fact she brings more to the supreme court than all the justices put together?"

I already knew Nanc can't read well but now she can't hear well either. Poor thing, must be sad to be so out of touch with the real world.

did you hear snowjobama espousing the fact she brings more to the supreme court than all the justices put together?

#65 | Posted by nanc

Did he really say that, or did he say that she has more experience than any of them did AT THE TIME THEY WERE NOMINATED?

You know She looks like George Lopez's sister. I see nothing wrong with Her looks Myself.

Larry

Nanc caught lying once again

From what I've read so far it could be a lot worse. Could hardly be more of a disappointment than Souter.

Clear sailing. And at least she isn't an ACLU freak like Ginsburg.

Mike Huckabee says "Maria"(sic) Sotomayor will change the Supreme Court to the "Extreme" Court.

Good one Mike - right on top of things.

I listened to her speech, and she sounds like a boring windbag.

I listened to her speech, and she sounds like a boring windbag.

#75 | Posted by rightisright

So then, perfect for the Supreme Court.

The Dynamic of the Nomination of Sonia Sotomayor

Nanc caught lying once again

#72 | Posted by rastaninja

It's the Christian in her.

How will the NOpers react?

#1 | Posted by SanAntonioRogue at 2009-05-26 08:36 AM | Reply | Flag:

HE CALLED HER UGLY...

#77 | Posted by Corky

Great analysis. Thanks for the link.

"I listened to her speech, and she sounds like a boring windbag."

#75 | Posted by rightisright

So you are suggesting she would be a better fit in the executive or legislative branches?

HE CALLED HER UGLY...

#79 | Posted by afkabl2

But given your track record, you'd hit it, right?

She seems like a "safe" pick by the President more than any ideologue. Her education is first rate. I just wish the presidents would get away from the use of court picks to fill quotas and go for the best candidates instead. That said, I'd rate her as in the best catagory as far as qualifications.
What Obama really does not need right now, and I think he knows it, is some sort of Earl Warren activist appointment. That would only feed the Republicans ammunition in future elections.

did anyone else catch his statement that 'for 200 centuries"

I guess then that each of our 57 STATES have been around for 2000 years
just imagine if bush had made these fuckups..
THAT would be the headline here...

-Great analysis. Thanks for the link.

Sure. Now I suppose you want breakfast?

;^)

"I listened to her speech, and she sounds like a boring windbag."

Translation: too many big words.

What a great choice. Fully qualified. The rightwing will only succeed in smashing itself trying to fight her nomination.

But given your track record, you'd hit it, right?

#82 | Posted by SanAntonioRogue at 2009-

just think about it
I wouldnt have to pay another fine or ticket again

but I cant believe its apparrantly okay with you that he called her ugly...hhhhhhhhmmmmmmmm

Ness Gadol would hit it for sure RIO

"What Obama really does not need right now, and I think he knows it, is some sort of Earl Warren activist appointment."

OMG!!! Right wing crazy talk from a previous decade!

-just think about it
I wouldnt have to pay another fine or ticket again

That's a definite ' "YES!".

but I cant believe its apparrantly okay with you that he called her ugly...hhhhhhhhmmmmmmmm

#88 | Posted by afkabl2

I just consider the source.

a great american story

HOWEVER>..this same great american story as pertains to a white male...
and we would have never heard about it, much less read all the swooning going on.

It should be interesting to see how the case that she ruled on that is on appeal before the SCOTUS is decided....

Nobody expected him to appoint Bork. Let's hope we find out she actually is qualified.

OMG!!! Right wing crazy talk from a previous decade!

#90 | Posted by danni at 2009-05-26

I remember the billboards all over the place

"IMPEACH EARL WARREN NOW"

didnt know at the time that he would be reborn...

"did anyone else catch his statement that 'for 200 centuries""

No.

DAMMIT SA

COME ON IM waiting to finish the joke about bho calling her ugly....

you are a really bad straight man.......

this same great american story as pertains to a white male...
and we would have never heard about it, much less read all the swooning going on.

#93 | Posted by afkabl2

I think you haven't read the story. It would be compelling regardless of who it was.

let me beat some of you EGGHEADS to the punch here..

yes she was first appointed by H bush but remember
THAT WAS A COURTESY appoitment to a states governor...something the right does but the left doesnt care all that much for and its a practice that is probably past its time anyway
And then she was appointed BY BLOW JOB to the appeals court
WONder how many trips to the oval office THAT TOOK...wink wink...........

"I remember the billboards all over the place

"IMPEACH EARL WARREN NOW"

I do too, but today, thankfully even in the South most people accept that seperate is not equal and don't believe in miscegnation laws.

ARTICLE from new republic, I believe it is..

court clerks call her

"NOT ALL THAT SMART"
and "A BULLY"

and dont forget

SHE JUST GOT OVERTURNED ON her firefighter decision I believe it was........

With the projected gains for the Dems in the Senate in 2010, just wait to see how left Obama's next 2 picks are.

You righties really ought to save some of your angst. You're gonna need it later.

I think you haven't read the story. It would be compelling regardless of who it was.

#98 | Posted by SanAntonioRogue

I HAVE READ her story..,,and heard all about it this morning..thought I was listening to some soap opera or lifetime movie..

I SAID AND I MEant it ,..a great american story..
but my next statement still stands.

if this persons name were george smith with the exact SAME story and qualifications..none of us would be talking about him now.

WHAT ABOUT HER TAXES??????

if this persons name were george smith with the exact SAME story and qualifications..none of us would be talking about him now.

Posted by afkabl2 at 2009-05-26 11:28 AM | Reply

waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

notable quotes from both

"where policy is made"

her from a panel at duke

"doesnt matter what they look like'

obama.

fuckin liar......

main reason she is there........her vagina and skin color.

SHE JUST GOT OVERTURNED ON her firefighter decision I believe it was........

#101 | Posted by afkabl2

Of course you do. It's because you are not very smart.

where policy is made"

in talking about the court of appeals..

and so now we have yet antother case of obama telling us

FUCK THE CONSTITUTION..........

SHE JUST GOT OVERTURNED ON her firefighter decision I believe it was........

#101 | Posted by afkabl2

Of course you do. It's because you are not very smart.

#108 | Posted by Manypaths at 2009-05

maybe not but I didnt just post a comment to something that has nothing to do with the comment
tell me oh wise sage..
what the fuck are you trying to say here???

AND HERES SOMETHING ELSE TO WATCH FOR

I will be looking forward to hearing the fuckin liar in the white house to start pontificating about how no one should filabuster such a qualified candidate and all that bullshit when it wasnt that long ago that as senator hE SANCTIONED filabusters regardless.............

and the other dems wont call him on it and the media will pretty much ignore all of those facts

YOU READ IT HERE FIRST

but as we all know..I dont make predictions.

SHE JUST GOT OVERTURNED ON her firefighter decision I believe it was........

#101 | Posted by afkabl2

You 'believing' something that isn't true.

It's part of what makes you so stupid.

if this persons name were george smith with the exact SAME story and qualifications..none of us would be talking about him now.

Or he would've already been on the Supreme Court, or a senator, or any number of other opportunities that have historically been available to white male Ivy Leaguers who graduate at the top of their class, like she did.

If Sotomayor was able to achieve this much after being born a Hispanic female in a housing project and raised by a single mother after her father died, what would she have achieved if she'd been born in a rich white family like George W. Bush?

It's highly offensive to suggest that a qualified minority candidate is a token. Sotomayor is more than qualified for the job. The most the right can argue is that she's not the proper pick because of her decisions on the bench, but to suggest she fails at qualifications is dead wrong.

It's highly offensive to suggest that a qualified minority candidate is a token. Sotomayor is more than qualified for the job. The most the right can argue is that she's not the proper pick because of her decisions on the bench, but to suggest she fails at qualifications is dead wrong.

#113 | Posted by rcade at 2009-05-26 11:37 AM | Reply | Flag

So she got in to those schools and it had nothing to do with being poor, hispanic, and her father being gone?

What could have become of the white or asian student that was kept out of those schools so that she may have been admitted?

-main reason she is there........her vagina and skin color

You've turned into quite the obnoxious POS, BL2.

where policy is made"

in talking about the court of appeals..

#109 | Posted by afkabl2

I'll be you'd be surprised to learn (since you obviously didn't read) that I brought that very thing up way before you arrived on the scene, as a potential problem for her.

By the way, I just watched the announcement again, I I still didn't hear Obama say anything about "200 centuries". Need batteries again, Ish?

it may be highly offensive to you but its a fact when you remember that each and every candidate talked about all had that same thing in common..
a vagina........(I just like typing that too)

and you are making the exact same arguement that was made against the last two as it pertains to your qualifications....and when OBAMA was all set to filabuster even though there was agreement on qualifications....
I will stand by my statment.........there was a reason why only woman candidates were even talked about...and her background......more of the same.

AND AGAIN>>>I say....a great AMERICAN story, there is no denying any of that......but its the same as when some military hero speaks out on liberal causes..their dedication and story THERE doesnt make them always right on everything like the left keeps telling us

MANY>.you still arent making any sense

SHE WAS overturned on the firefighter issue...YES?
NO?

You've turned into quite the obnoxious POS, BL2.

#115 | Posted by Corky

Too many tea bags.

I'm praying for her.

Gotta say, it's rough to consider that W had 8 years in office and it was like 6 years before he made his first SCOTUS pick and only got 2....

...And now President Obama gets a pick a few score days into his first term.

As former President George W Bush so sagagiously said,
"Elections have consequences."

"Court of appeals is where policy is made." - token hispanic nominee to SOTUS

Explain that away libtards. I am sure you can because the obamaide flows strong in you.

SOTUS=SCOTUS

You've turned into quite the obnoxious POS, BL2.

#115 | Posted by Corky at 2009-05-26 11:40

I learned at the hands of masters of chraracter assination and name calling and personal attacks being here on the ole retort for the past 8 years........

NOBODY can be a bigger piece of shit than a DR liberal.........

You've turned into quite the obnoxious POS, BL2.

#115 | Posted by Corky

Ain't it great!?!

WHAT ABOUT HER LAST SEVERAL TAX RETURNS???

remember this administration ISNT THE textbook reference for vetting..........

NOBODY can be a bigger piece of shit than a DR liberal.........

#122 | Posted by afkabl2 at 2009

Ain't it great!?!

#123 | Posted by Manypaths at 2009-05-26

OH OH>..what great timing.........couldnt have pasted it better myself...LOL

SHE WAS overturned on the firefighter issue...YES?
NO?

#117 | Posted by afkabl2

As far as I know, NO. The case is still on appeal.

WHAT ABOUT HER LAST SEVERAL TAX RETURNS???

remember this administration ISNT THE textbook reference for vetting..........

Remember, it's their vetting that keeps catching everyone you fucking moron.

But, I do understand that you just don't get it.

Sonia the Hut.

"Court of appeals is where policy is made." - token hispanic nominee to SOTUS

Explain that away libtards. I am sure you can because the obamaide flows strong in you.

#120 | Posted by ELCIDCE90

Nobody is trying to explain it away. As previously mentioned, at least twice, that could be a problem and SHE'LL have to explain it.

MORE WRITING OF SONYA showing the double standard today

she wrote that " a wise latina woman" would be able to relate on issues better than some "WHITE MALE".

holy shit..

TURN THAT statement around and then measure the heart beats of libs around the country and INFESTED in the media......

oh my........

Do you agree with President Obama's selection of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to be the next U.S. Supreme Court justice?
Yes 70% 39114
No 30% 16744
Total Votes: 55858

she wrote that " a wise latina woman" would be able to relate on issues better than some "WHITE MALE".

#130 | Posted by afkabl2

Using your newly found powers, please link that opinion for us.

A black President nominating a Hispanic Justice!

Interesting times indeed.

Glad to be here!

have to go pay car note..

SA>..want to take care of that for me??

okay

so let me leave you with this little REQUOTE from another source

"EMPATHY thy name is santamayro"

in other words..she apparently doesnt GIVE A SHIT about the consitution if faced with a case of the little guy against the big guy.......

see how I used that LIT reference........lol

SA>..I will be back later...so save your best stuff for later...

SA

BY THE WAY

my date with the 'california girl'

I was the perfect gentleman

DAMNIT..

Remember, it's their vetting that keeps catching everyone you fucking moron.

But, I do understand that you just don't get it.

#127 | Posted by Manypaths

what a load of crap from a piece of shit....

do you REALLY think we would have known about TAX CHEAT GAITHNER because obama would have told us ANYTHING ABOUT IT AT ALL..

what a DUPE

Taylor Marsh has a preview of the coming smears...

she wrote that " a wise latina woman" would be able to relate on issues better than some "WHITE MALE".

#130 | Posted by afkabl2

Using your newly found powers, please link that opinion for us.

#132 | Posted by SanAntonioRogue at

it was posted all over fox news this morning and it hasnt yet made its way to that site.
you can trust me on it though.......I read it while laying in bed this morning
and its not like I had ANYTHING else to do...lol

-As previously mentioned, at least twice, that could be a problem and SHE'LL have to explain it.

SA, check the above TM link for that quote IN CONTEXT.

damn I wish I didnt have to leave as I am sure all of you are equally disappointed
THE adrenelin really GETS PUMPING ON SHIT LIKE THIS
doesnt it RETORT MATES

OOPS...SORRY SA AND LARRY...didnt mean to use the word 'mates' here........lol

AND...

Taylor Marsh has a preview of the coming smears...

www.taylormarsh.com

#137 | Posted by Corky at 2009-05

TYPICAL LIBERAL BULLSHIT

on the last two...it was 'vetting and gathering truth' and now its "coming smears'

you knuckleheads are so easy to see through

"In the coming nomination fight, we won't allow conservatives to truncate quotes or take things Sotomayor has said out of context, which is their first stop before swiftboating fine people who deserve what they're being given, because they've earned it. Currently that's being done with one particular quote about Latino women having better judgment than a white male. Sotomayor's full speech, entitled "A Latina's Judge's Voice," is powerful, the money quote being used against her, but offered in full context, below:

Justice O'Connor has often been cited as saying that a wise old man and wise old woman will reach the same conclusion in deciding cases. I am not so sure Justice O'Connor is the author of that line since Professor Resnik attributes that line to Supreme Court Justice Coyle. I am also not so sure that I agree with the statement. First, as Professor Martha Minnow has noted, there can never be a universal definition of wise. Second, 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 hasn't lived that life.

Let us not forget that wise men like Oliver Wendell Holmes and Justice Cardozo voted on cases which upheld both sex and race discrimination in our society. Until 1972, no Supreme Court case ever upheld the claim of a woman in a gender discrimination case. I, like Professor Carter, believe that we should not be so myopic as to believe that others of different experiences or backgrounds are incapable of understanding the values and needs of people from a different group. Many are so capable. As Judge Cedarbaum pointed out to me, nine white men on the Supreme Court in the past have done so on many occasions and on many issues including Brown. [...]"

This whole teleprompter thing is ridiculous as all newsman, general speaker annd politicians(sorry) use one normally. What is the big deal about making such a none issue such a panty wetter?

A short Wiki bio:

but here is a line from over the weekend

when you take all of obamas comments about what he was looking for and apparently who he has now found
talking about all of his feel good shit and all.
GEORGE WILL it was on sunday

as he said...you have just described the SC justice who wrote the majority decision on the

DREAD SCOTT CASE...........

"What Obama really does not need right now, and I think he knows it, is some sort of Earl Warren activist appointment."

"OMG!!! Right wing crazy talk from a previous decade!"

Just so you know, I am a labor Democrat and not a right wing nut. Warren was a boob in many ways, although he made a couple of decent decisions. It took three decades to temper some of the activist decisions he led that literally helped abet the surge in crime of the 60's and 70's. What I meant about Obama's pick, which I support, is that she will not treat the law as some sort of chance to implement social experiments. At least I hope she will not. The reason you saw "Impeach Earl Warren" billboards back then was because he was a lousy chief justice. Even Eisenhower, who appointed him, said so. I'm just glad a Democrat did not appoint him. He was a disaster.

So she got in to those schools and it had nothing to do with being poor, hispanic, and her father being gone?

I don't know how she got in, and you don't either, but once there she won the highest award given to undergraduates and graduated second in her class.

It's either racism or absurdity to suggest she shouldn't have been there.

bart

again nice try...next thing we will hear from the left is that repubs shouldnt filabuster such a wonderfull selection when OBAMA Himslef SANCTIONED the filabuster when it came to appointments he didnt like.......

AND no amount of talking about how she was conferred before makes a differnce now..or at least not as much
we are talking about a possible 30 years or so of far left voting on her part......in the other jobs..NOT to make light of them.,...THE sc could overturn her bad votes

AND as many have said..she WILL NOT BE A CONSENSUS voice on the court........

but again.....DAMN...this has my blood flowing.,..

just not in the right place........

she will not treat the law as some sort of chance to implement social experiments.

I disagree completely

again...refer to the firefighers issue.......

MANY,,,,,damn,,,you read this morning like you have sucked your dogs nose or something........lol

(dont you just love those TRANS-THREAD comments)

"next thing we will hear from the left is that repubs shouldnt filabuster such a wonderfull selection when OBAMA Himslef SANCTIONED the filabuster when it came to appointments he didnt like......."

You mean the same Republicans who said that when Democrats talked about but did not filibuster????

As I recall the "nuclear option" was threatened by the Republicans at the time. I say bring it on, it would end the Republican's only method of obstructing change because once they blow up the filibuster it's gone. Can't put it back togehter again. Trust me, they won't do it.

AND as many have said..she WILL NOT BE A CONSENSUS voice on the court........

#147 | Posted by afkabl2

Is it as obvious to everyone else as it is to me that before today Ish had never heard of Sonia Sotomayor, and has formed his fiery opposition based almost entirely on Fox News snippets this morning?

"With that kind of support, I don't see any way for the Reps to effectively oppose this nomination. Doing so would make their opposition seem petty and, well, retarded. They should definitely vet her, but outright opposition just to oppose would be stupid."

#143 | Posted by bartimus

Didn't most Democrats support Bork's appointment to the circuit court?

Here's information on Sotomayor's admission to Princeton:

You said it RCADE.

Bush Lover is just a racist.

The more he spits on himself out of blind anger the happier I am.

So Obama picked a judicial activist. Is that any surprise?

She has at least the qualifications--unlike the others he was considering.

And she has been overturned by the SCOTUS on some of her decisions.

What is more important in the short term--as she will be confirmed--unless there is something aggregious in her background--highly unlikely.

What is important is that since she threw out the New Haven firefighter case--and that is on Appeal to the SCOTUS--she will have to recuse herself from that case.

Sotomayor for the Court [Wendy Long]

Judge Sotomayor is a liberal judicial activist of the first order who thinks her own personal political agenda is more important that the law as written. She thinks that judges should dictate policy, and that one's sex, race, and ethnicity ought to affect the decisions one renders from the bench.

She reads racial preferences and quotas into the Constitution, even to the point of dishonoring those who preserve our public safety. On September 11, America saw firsthand the vital role of America's firefighters in protecting our citizens. They put their lives on the line for her and the other citizens of New York and the nation. But Judge Sotomayor would sacrifice their claims to fair treatment in employment promotions to racial preferences and quotas. The Supreme Court is now reviewing that decision.

She has an extremely high rate of her decisions being reversed, indicating that she is far more of a liberal activist than even the current liberal activist Supreme Court.

"Is it as obvious to everyone else as it is to me that before today Ish had never heard of Sonia Sotomayor, and has formed his fiery opposition based almost entirely on Fox News snippets this morning?"

Definitely it is to me. But then, that is how he makes all of his opinions. Most are just poor repititions of what he has heard.

What is important is that since she threw out the New Haven firefighter case--and that is on Appeal to the SCOTUS--she will have to recuse herself from that case.

#154 | Posted by MURPHY

Yeah, REAL fucking important there. Stop the presses. A judge is going to have to recuse oneself from a case.

Breaking Fucking News there sweetheart.

The more he spits on himself out of blind anger the happier I am.

Hilarious!

Thank God she has experience on the bench. I was worried he was going to appoint some Acorn community organizer who doesn't know shit about the job.

"Is it as obvious to everyone else as it is to me that before today Ish had never heard of Sonia Sotomayor, and has formed his fiery opposition based almost entirely on Fox News snippets this morning?"

S.O.P. for righties.

Ill bet she hasn't paid her taxes

"the current liberal activist Supreme Court."

Translation: party hack, intent on sensationalization.

Take everything else with a ton of salt.

Hatch, Up for a Fight? [Kathryn Jean Lopez]

He's voted for her before, but here's former judiciary chair Senator Hatch's statement:

"I congratulate Judge Sotomayor on her nomination and commend President Obama for nominating the first person of Puerto Rican heritage to the United States Supreme Court. The confirmation process must focus on determining whether Judge Sotomayor is qualified to serve on the Supreme Court. Qualifications for judicial service include not only experience and character but, most importantly, a proper understanding of the power and role of judges in our system of government. Judges must decide cases based on the law, not on their personal views or opinions. Judges swear an oath to decide cases impartially, without regard to the identity of the parties before them. I will focus on determining whether Judge Sotomayor is committed to deciding cases based only on the law as made by the people and their elected representatives, not on personal feelings or politics. I look forward to a fair and thorough process."

Same link

Sotomayor's "Where policy is made" Comment Explained

"She would be the Court's sixth Catholic" [Kathryn Jean Lopez]

Pete Williams announced this a little earlier on MSNBC.

The New York Times has noted that her mother worked hard to send her and her brother to Catholic school. Cardinal Spellman high school in the Bronx, the high school she attended, is reportedly celebrating. I don't know if Sotomayor identifies herself as Catholic today. But, regardless: She may be enough for President Obama to continue weaving his quilt of cover on the road to a Freedom of Choice Act.

#157 | Posted by Manypaths

Roberts had to recuse himself as SCOTUS from some case he decided on while on the Federal Appeals Court.

This New Haven case is quite important--as are all the cases they decide to hear.

There will be a handful of people who do not vote for her--but she will be confirmed.

"Judges must decide cases based on the law, not on their personal views or opinions."

Someone ought to inform Scalia, and his clone Mini-Me.

"Roberts had to recuse himself as SCOTUS from some case he decided on while on the Federal Appeals Court."

And were you concerned about that, or does your concern only arise when the nominator has a (D) after his name?

Quite the Endorsements [Kathryn Jean Lopez]

Besides the outrageous New Haven details, Jeffrey Rosen has written about Sotomayor:

despite the praise from some of her former clerks, and warm words from some of her Second Circuit colleagues, there are also many reservations about Sotomayor. Over the past few weeks, I've been talking to a range of people who have worked with her, nearly all of them former law clerks for other judges on the Second Circuit or former federal prosecutors in New York. Most are Democrats and all of them want President Obama to appoint a judicial star of the highest intellectual caliber who has the potential to change the direction of the court. Nearly all of them acknowledged that Sotomayor is a presumptive front-runner, but nearly none of them raved about her. They expressed questions about her temperament, her judicial craftsmanship, and most of all, her ability to provide an intellectual counterweight to the conservative justices, as well as a clear liberal alternative.

The most consistent concern was that Sotomayor, although an able lawyer, was "not that smart and kind of a bully on the bench," as one former Second Circuit clerk for another judge put it. "She has an inflated opinion of herself, and is domineering during oral arguments, but her questions aren't penetrating and don't get to the heart of the issue." (During one argument, an elderly judicial colleague is said to have leaned over and said, "Will you please stop talking and let them talk?") Second Circuit judge Jose Cabranes, who would later become her colleague, put this point more charitably in a 1995 interview with The New York Times: "She is not intimidated or overwhelmed by the eminence or power or prestige of any party, or indeed of the media."

Her opinions, although competent, are viewed by former prosecutors as not especially clean or tight, and sometimes miss the forest for the trees. It's customary, for example, for Second Circuit judges to circulate their draft opinions to invite a robust exchange of views. Sotomayor, several former clerks complained, rankled her colleagues by sending long memos that didn't distinguish between substantive and trivial points, with petty editing suggestionsfixing typos and the likerather than focusing on the core analytical issues.

--but she will be confirmed.

True, so why all the fuss?

NOPers need to spend the summer ginning up the base, and what better way than bashing a liberal Hispanic woman who has the temerity to accept appointment as a SC judge?

She has an extremely high rate of her decisions being reversed, indicating that she is far more of a liberal activist than even the current liberal activist Supreme Court.

bench.nationalreview.com

#155 | Posted by MURPHY

As near as I can find, she's only been reversed 4 times as an appellate judge.

#168 | Posted by Danforth

Dan--she didn't even bother to hear the New Haven case and threw it out.

What is wrong with a SCOTUS recusing themselves from a case?

Roberts did it--It happens.

Sotomayor will have to recuse herself on this case.

#171 | Posted by SanAntonioRogue

I think they are comparing the appellate cases.

When you take the all of the cases--the batting average is quite good.

Let Murphy feel better with her lies SA.

Her lies are all she has.

Anyone else notice the moment nanc stops lying, Murphy shows up to take over for her?

the N.A.N.C.s have got to stick together I guess.

"although an able lawyer, was "not that smart and kind of a bully"

Not that smart?

Summa cum laude from Princeton, editor of Yale Law Journal. What a dummy!

And a bully? You mean she kept control of her courtroom and didn't allow a bunch of nonsense from opposing attorneys? She should just withdraw now!

What is wrong with a SCOTUS recusing themselves from a case?

Roberts did it--It happens.

Sotomayor will have to recuse herself on this case.

#172 | Posted by MURPHY

Nothing. YOU are the one that called it "important".

That is all from the same link San--

"What is wrong with a SCOTUS recusing themselves from a case?"
~Murphy

Why don't you ask yourself?

"What is important is that since she threw out the New Haven firefighter case--and that is on Appeal to the SCOTUS--she will have to recuse herself from that case."
~Murphy

So which is it: is it bad, because Sotomayer might have to do it, or is it okay, because Roberts did it? Or is your judgement based on their political bent?

For that New Haven case it is important Many.

wtf?

She will have to recuse herself from the case!

Why are you picking an arguement which is just a state of fact.

Sotomayor won't be able to hear the case as SCOTUS.

Dan--she didn't even bother to hear the New Haven case and threw it out.

#172 | Posted by MURPHY

Murphy - SHE did nothing of the sort. She was part of a 3 judge panel that voted to dismiss the case. That decision was later upheld by the full appellate court.

It could certainly be reversed, but trying to lay the whole thing at her feet is silly, at best.

For that New Haven case it is important Many.

#179 | Posted by MURPHY

What is 'important' is that nobody fucking cares about that case in here. 1000 bucks says you hadn't heard of it before this morning.

Now it is Very Fucking Important?!?!?!?!?

You're a joke Murphy.

"1000 bucks says you hadn't heard of it before this morning."

Damn... I could of made 1,000 bucks.

As for her being labeled a bully or having temperament issues--so what!

Like attorneys aren't big boys and girls who can handle some heat from the judge on the bench.

If she were a male--no one would say too much--but because she is tough and a woman--she gets labeled.

She will be confirmed.

"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 hasn't lived that life," said Judge Sotomayor

"Whether born from experience or inherent physiological or cultural differences," she said, for jurists who are women and nonwhite, "our gender and national origins may and will make a difference in our judging."

"Why are you picking an arguement which is just a state of fact."

Because it was "important" when Sotomayer would have to recuse herself, but no big deal when Roberts had to do the same thing. Logical observers would conclude you're a hack.

BS Many--the case was also posted on the DR.

Obama won. And he gets to pick the next Supreme Court nominee.

Sotomayer will make an outstanding Supreme Court Justice. She has vast legal and judicial experience as well as a compelling life story.

Confirm her and lets move on.

If she were a male--no one would say too much--but because she is tough and a woman--she gets labeled.

She will be confirmed.

Posted by MURPHY at 2009-05-26 12:36 PM | Reply

I Love Tough Women. Who wants a mousy lil waif that cries every time they break a nail or chip their nail polish.

Larry

Dan--if you can remember the case that Roberts was recused from--have at it.

The New Haven case is memorable--and she threw it out.

She's too legalistic.

I don't think anyone would label her milquetoast.

;o)

Dan--if you can remember the case that Roberts was recused from--have at it.

The New Haven case is memorable--and she threw it out.

Posted by MURPHY at 2009-05-26 12:39 PM | Reply

Roberts Recused Himself on a GITMO detainee case. He had previously ruled for the Bush Administration and Could not as Chief Justice. IIRC

Larry

Judge Sotomayor upheld the rejection of a lawsuit by white firefighters, one of them Hispanic, claiming race discrimination and, as part of the full appeals court, she declined to rehear the case.

www.nytimes.com

isn't it ironic that reverse racism is so openly accepted in this country? sad is maybe a better adjective than ironic.

#185 | Posted by Yodar013

The underlying argument in that case was the the city of New Haven found that the test itself was inherently flawed and therefore invalid. The 3 judge panel agreed, and the full appellate court later concurred.

"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 hasn't lived that life."

In context, this quote is part of a speech about how the experiences of a justice inform their decisions when the cases relate to those experiences. She's not saying that female Hispanic judges are better than white male judges in all cases.

The New Haven case is memorable--and she threw it out.

#190 | Posted by MURPHY

THEY threw it out.

i mean, do even the most left/liberal here really think that the lawsuit brought by the white firefighters claiming racial discrimination was BS? do you know about the case? i'm sure i missed a thread of two on it so simple answer would be nice.

As we've just learned from Washington Journal Justice Sotomayor is Catholic, bringing the count up to five, 2 Jews and Roberts is the Protestant.

SA, did they decide it was inherently flawed based on the results or based on the actual questions? sorry, catching up here obv.

whats your opinion?

"-if you can remember the case that Roberts was recused from--have at it."

That's not the point. Recusal is "important" when Sotomayer may have to do it, but nothing of concern to you when Roberts did it -- multiple times, none the less. Add to that the admission you don't know which cases Roberts recused himself from, and your suggestion this is somehow more "memorable" is ludicrous at best.

rcade, very true it was taken out of context. i still don't understand the logic behind her adjevtives 'better' and 'richness.... that a white male could not'. etc. it reeks of bitterness.

i mean, do even the most left/liberal here really think that the lawsuit brought by the white firefighters claiming racial discrimination was BS? do you know about the case? i'm sure i missed a thread of two on it so simple answer would be nice.

#197 | Posted by Yodar013

Not a single black firefighter ever qualified under that test. The city investigated and ruled that the test was flawed and biased.

So yes, it is possible there was no basis for the discrimination suit.

SA, did they decide it was inherently flawed based on the results or based on the actual questions? sorry, catching up here obv.

whats your opinion?

#199 | Posted by Yodar013

As far as I know, the results triggered the investigation into the test by the city and they determined the questions and the construct were inherently flawed.

#195 | Posted by rcade

That is part of her "temperament".

Actually I don't find too much wrong with her statement.

Notice she didn't say "different" conclusion. She said 'better' conclusion.

There is more to learn about her decisions and the Senate will vet her--I hope fairly and completely.

There are so many other issues that have to be talked about.

What about national security issues or commerce issues?

-----

Larry--Good find there on Roberts recused case.

Bush Lover is just a racist.

The more he spits on himself out of blind anger the happier I am.

#153 | Posted by Manypaths at 2009-

funny how you imagine this because of shit you THINK you know when this woman is a racists and who is about to be on the SC.............
but Im sure that doesnt mean shit to you now does it.

the speech in question was given in berkley.......WHEW>...thats a real diverse and open thinking place now isnt it??...

and there is even more there than in my small part of her speech proving her racism.

Larry--Good find there on Roberts recused case.

Posted by MURPHY at 2009-05-26 12:54 PM | Reply

I was just using My mind but shhhhhhhhhhhh don't tell anyone OK??

Her resume' seems sound. While she is more liberal than I'd prefer, she's replacing a liberal--so the court's balance is the same. With a Democrat President she's what we'd expect. This rightie hopes the GOP just allows the vote to proceed after the hearings are concluded.

#200 | Posted by Danforth

Dan--given that Roberts was off the Gitmo case--you probably thought at the time to be really important?

Sorry I couldn't remember the case from talks four years ago off the top of my head.

;o)

tips from rush

and your opinion about him doesnt mean shit.
facts

OVERTURNED FOUR TIMES BY THE SC

and on three of those the court called her on her 'statues'....
isnt that her knowledge of the LAW.....or is it something else NOW all of a sudden...

AND IN this case before the court now
she was chastized IN WRITING for the very same thing by another hispanic judge who was appointed by BLOWJOB so we all know HE CANT BE WRONG........

The more he spits on himself out of blind anger the happier I am.

Hilarious!

#158 | Posted by Zap at

yeaH IM still laughin...

The more he spits on himself out of blind anger the happier I am.

Notice how he ran to Rush for his talking points?

Too funny.

"As far as I know, the results triggered the investigation into the test by the city and they determined the questions and the construct were inherently flawed."

The test was created by IOSolutions. It has been petitioned to be heard by the Supreme Court..

Lots of good info on the test from the link

Sotomayor's "Where policy is made" Comment Explained

www.drudge.com

#164 | Posted by Corky at 2009-05-

explained?? please...you mean rewritten so as to not tell us the truth would be a better way of putting it.

check out her RACISTS speech from berkely when IT comes out and then tell us all about what she REALLY meant...

check out her RACISTS speech from berkely when IT comes out and then tell us all about what she REALLY meant...

#213 | Posted by afkabl2

I KNEW there had to be a "whitey" tape somewhere!

and I guess the hispanic judge who chewed her out IN WRITING was a racists too

BUT HEre is where you people are falling RIGHT INTO rush's TRUTH

one purpose of the appointment

TO margenlize moderate republicans who ARE TOO BIG OF PUSSIEs to even talk about her yet for fear of the being called racists..
and now you are all rounding up the wagons and calling me and others racists for bringing up HER OWN WORDS>

it wont work here even though powell and ridge might get away with SAYING NOTHING ON SUNDAY morning......

BL2 You are making complete idiots look.... incomplete.

The thread article is an in context quote from the Berkeley speech.

Summa cum laude from Princeton, editor of Yale Law Journal. What a dummy!

And a bully? You mean she kept control of her courtroom and didn't allow a bunch of nonsense from opposing attorneys? She should just withdraw now!

#175 | Posted by SanAntonioRogue at 2009-

oh please...

remember that obama was called this same smart fellow and he doesnt know how many states are in the union.
he doesnt know when his own plane is in the air and he cant even control the VP.......

but he looks good with his shirt off and he can shoot some hoops and he's cool

and read what jeff greenwald said about him in salon.com....I kept wondering why greenwald didnt just kiss his ass and be done with it
to compare obama to MISTER SPOCK...please ..isnt that sacriligeous?

"It's highly offensive to suggest that a qualified minority candidate is a token."

That's funny, I've never seen you mention that in the daily threads in which a lefty calls Clarence Thomas a "token," "Uncle Tom," etc. even though he went to Yale (same law school as Sotomayor), was an Assistant Attorney General (similar to Sotomayor's job as Assistant D.A.), a legislative aide, Chairman of the EEOC and was a US Court of Appeals judge (just like Sotomayor). Is it only "highly offensive" to suggest that a qualified minority candidate is a token when they are appointed by a Democrat?

--but she will be confirmed.

True, so why all the fuss?

NOPers need to spend the summer ginning up the base, and what better way than bashing a liberal Hispanic woman who has the temerity to accept appointment as a SC judge?

#170 | Posted by Corky at 2009-05-26 12

WRONG AGAIN....as RUSH SO aptyly put it
THIS is where the REAL obama will be shown to people who still dont get it.
he is the most liberal and possibly DANGEROUS president we have ever had.
and this will also expose the moderates in the gop who the left and media WANT DESPERATELY to take over thus insuring dems in office for some time to come.

and THAT ALONE is enough reason to fight this OUTRAGEOUS attack against the justice system.....

rush's words.........

rush's words.........

#219 | Posted by afkabl2

And THAT is all I need to know on the subject!

- Ish Kabibble

It could certainly be reversed, but trying to lay the whole thing at her feet is silly, at best.

#181 | Posted by SanAntonioRogue

AND YET

SHE is the one who recieved the written reprimand from another judge...hispanic appt by BJ....
because of SHODDY judging......

AND YES...that link is coming....so keep your panties from wadding up

The more he spits on himself OUT of blind anger the happier I am.

Notice how he ran to Rush FOR his talking points?

Too FUNNY.

The more he spits on himself out of blind anger the happier I am.

Notice how he ran to Rush for his talking points?

Too funny.

#211 | Posted by Manypaths at

here is what seperates you from people like SA and others and just more retort DUPES like yourslef

what you meant to say is here is where I went running to rush for facts...you just dont want to hear the facts so you call them talking points..

THE more he spits on himself out of blind anger the happier I AM.

Notice HOW he ran to Rush for his talking points?

TOO funny.

BL2 You are making complete idiots look.... incomplete.

The thread article is an in context quote from the Berkeley speech.

#216 | Posted by Corky at

I am just reading and watching things as they come out
but you have to admit, there is more than just a COUPLE of small problems with this pick...at least there should be
will depend on if republicans want to really STOP THIS ASSAULT On our freedoms or are they just jerking off.

And THAT is all I need to know on the subject!

- Ish Kabibble

#220 | Posted by SanAntonioRogue

thats right..and I put that there so I wouldnt be accused of being a fuckin LIAR like well renown libs like NO dowd and others at the times and such......

he said them and I agree with them...if thats a problem...take it to the supreme court IF in the future obama gets another couple of appointments with racists like this woman

WHO HE CALLED UGLY this morning........

MANYPATHS if that old fart has a heart attack it's on your head!!!

WHO HE CALLED UGLY this morning........

#226 | Posted by afkabl2

You know, I've seen it twice now and didn't hear him call her "UGLY", nor did I hear him say "200 centuries" as you've claimed.

If we're going to have to listen to nothing but whining and bitching anytime one may speak out against, or disapprove of, any of Socomayer's future rulings simply because she is "untouchable" as a female Latina, then don't put her on the Supreme Court. Being a female, or a Latina, does NOT allow her (or anyone else) a lifetime free pass against criticism of any future judicial decisions she may make.

what would she have achieved if she'd been born in a rich white family like George W. Bush?
........#113 | Posted by rcade

......she would have had to follow the strict Bush tradition.......

1.....cheerleading & drug induced stupor in University-where you get accepted and graduated because of who your family is.
2......avoid serving in a war zone, that's for common fols, don't even bother showing up for your National Guard service, dad will cover for you.....
3.....be given a million dollar business that you run into the ground....twice.....
4.....and then be made a puppet President while you stay in Texas on vacation and let someone honest and reliable....like....say Cheney and Rove....run the country into ruin on your behalf...

........yup.....I don't think she's up to the tradition........

FINNALY YOU played the straight man

he DID call her ugly..
he said..it doesnt matter what you look like

GEESH...that was a long way to go for that...you are going to have to snap it up as a straight man.......

-STOP THIS ASSAULT On our freedoms

You should really consider relying on sources other than drug-addled radio talk show hosts or mind-frozen 21 percenters there, Dudley.

"a female Latina"

Posted by CalifChris at 2009-05-26 01:19 PM | Reply| Flag: redundant

There's another kind?

MANYPATHS if that old fart has a heart attack it's on your head!!!

#227 | Posted by danni at 2009-05-26 01:17

AHHHHHH

ALMOST a good one Im just glad you werent referring to ME as that old fart..........

STOP THIS ASSAULT On our freedoms

You should really consider relying on sources other than drug-addled radio talk show hosts or mind-frozen 21 percenters there, Dudley.

#232 | Posted by Corky at 2009-05

and so its not unusual for you to think that erasing the 2nd amendment, completly ignoring the 10th amendment and the 9th amendment and soon to come..the end of the `1st amendment for some of us..... isnt a loss of freedoms.

and while you are at it
go ahead and remove that blindfold off of lady justice because where she is oncerned >.IN HER OWN WORDS....it does matter whether you are poor, or a minority when it comes to her interpertation of the constitution.

Sodomayor was overturned 4 times by the Supreme Court?...three of which the court called her on her "statutes"???

WOW! Talk about qualified! What a wonderful resume enhancer this is!

Imagine promoting to "Boss" someone in the company who has been rejected by the Board 4 times, 3 of those times being for incompentance...ie. inadequate knowledge of her subject?

Sounds like good Democratic policy to me. Appoint tax cheats over finances, and legal incompetants as supreme court judges.

Welcome to the circus folks!

(If he keeps this up, I am going to run out of words to randomly capitalize.)

The MORE he spits on himself out of blind anger THE happier I am.

NOTICE how he ran to Rush for his talking POINTS?

Too funny.

-the end of the `1st amendment for some of us.....

Paranoids are bad enough, but hysterical paranoids are.... kinda cute. In a bed-wetting sort of way.

Just check under that bed for Commie Pinko Fags before you go to sleep at night and you'll feel better in the morning.

WOW! Talk about qualified!

Says the retard that helped get a lush with a slew of bankruptcies on his resume into the White House

A liberal judge being overruled by a conservative court?

How surprising is that?

Roberts Recused Himself on a GITMO detainee case. He had previously ruled for the Bush Administration and Could not as Chief Justice.

And Roberts was overturned by the SC in this case.

Yep, the sitting Chief Justice was overturned by his own fucking court.

Just so that you know...........

oh corky

you are so funny sometimes....

what you call paranoid I call being prepared for what theses people have been known to support and do time after time after time.

and I guess you dont call the silencing of talk radio censuring and an attack on the 1st amendment

and HEY that little pesky 10th...lets just ignore that one......because if we give states money, they will HAVE TO do whatever we tell them too....

I think we should start with the 17th amendment and get the selection of senators back where it is supposed to be rather than where one of the first progressive presidents...WW...put them...

the founders were right about everything else pretty much

Yep, the sitting Chief Justice was overturned by his own fucking court.

Just so that you know...........

#241 | Posted by Manypaths

its that way for a reason......so how then can you deny that this racists has problems when overturned MORE TIMES THAN NOT.............

Now that Obama has picked a racist for the Supreme Court he can get back to bowing to Kim Jong Il, bankrupting the country and destroying the health care system.

That's funny, I've never seen you mention that in the daily threads in which a lefty calls Clarence Thomas a "token," "Uncle Tom," etc. even though he went to Yale (same law school as Sotomayor), was an Assistant Attorney General (similar to Sotomayor's job as Assistant D.A.), a legislative aide, Chairman of the EEOC and was a US Court of Appeals judge (just like Sotomayor). Is it only "highly offensive" to suggest that a qualified minority candidate is a token when they are appointed by a Democrat?

#218 | Posted by JOE at 2009-05-26 01:09 PM

Frankly Witless Thom.

So, how many other ruling by Roberts have been overturned by the SC. It appears that the talking point of the hour is about her 4 cases being overturned and that is is a big fucking deal.

What's the average number?

Was Roberts overturned for his lack of knowledge? Ieep trying....maybe your ilk will be able to bail out incompetance too?

Nice try, but apples and oranges don't mix.

GREAT POST LIVE AND yoU TOO JOE....

the double standard of these two people are stark reminders of the media machine repubs will be facing in this case.
there will be attacks from all quarters of the liberal attack machine as well as the daily morning WHITE HOUSE ENEMIES LIST phone call to carville and begayla.......

so here is more date on the firefighters case
A REAL Look into why I made the comment about removing the blindfold off of lady justice with people like this on the SC

I admit, I haven't read all the comments yet, simply because they are being added at a break-neck pace. I have more things to do than constantly read this one thread to try and keep up. Judging by the DR history, my guess would be that most lefties are cheering the pick on, and most righties are slamming the pick. How did I do?

As for me, her qualifications SOUND pretty rock solid, however there are a few things that give me serious pause:

What's the average number?

#247 | Posted by Manypaths at 2009

good question

especailly for a biased, prejudices, political hack like you.........

OOPS>.forgot...for a socialists, red commie pinko .....

there..did I get them ALL IN

The more he spits ON himself out of blind anger the happier I am.

Notice how he ran to Rush and HANNITY for his TALKING points?

Too funNY.

BTW... Being a Supreme Court Justice isn't about compassion or empathy... it is about interpreting the law. When doing the job properly, empathy and compassion are actually a hindrance since thy interfere with objectivity and lean towards policy making.

#250 | Posted by moomanfl at 2009

good post.,..pretty evenly divided along lines

good for you..

I agree particurally with your last paragraph..
as ROBERTs said when asked if a question was between a little guy and a big guy which one would he come down on and he replied that it depended upon which one was protected by the constitution
I believe its very clear that this woman doesnt believe the same way...

and another point you are right on

FAST AND FURIOUS>

aint it fun????

and this just happens to overshadow the little runt in north korea too doesnt it???

ONCE AGAIN...telling the UN and his THIRD US president in a row to eat shit....that he'll do what he wants..

The more he spits ON himself out of blind anger the happier I am.

Notice how he ran to Rush and HANNITY for his TALKING points?

Too funNY.

#252 | Posted by Manypaths at

and here is something I notice.

THIS is all you can come up with??

I guess so since you KNOW these are FACTS IM relaying to you

I wanted a radical loose constructionist who would reassert the power of the court to force changes for the benefit of the people, changes whose time have come but which politically are too difficult to enact.

grump

there are plenty of ways to do what you said..if was made hard on purpose

have to leave but DAMN THIS was fun

at least if she is on the court she wont be able to sell nukes to iran or taliban like the little runt in NK is about to be able to do.....

have a great day

SA....get busy doing something..

changes whose time have come but which politically are too difficult to enact.

In other words, you want the few to dictate to the many. Duly noted.

Why bother complaining about the minority Republicans being "obstructionist" then? By your own words, you seem to approve of the tactic.

The more he spits ON himself out of blind anger the happier I am.

(I don't think you understand how profound I am being.)

(I don't think you understand how profound I am being.)

I think your profundity is in your own mind.

She is definetly qualified and has a wonderful background

But, She ruled against the working men who studied hard in New Haven Connecticut to get ahead in life in favor of the PC bureacracy of New Haven

She voted that even though the Supremes said the second amendment is true for all citizens no matter where they live, she said cities and minuicpalities can still ban them.

She is an activist, and dangerous to individual liberty. But that is what a lot of people want,

So really, are the Right Wing loons up in arms over this selection?

So really, are the Right Wing loons up in arms over this selection?

About as much as the Left Wing loons are cheering it on.

rcade, very true it was taken out of context. i still don't understand the logic behind her adjevtives 'better' and 'richness.... that a white male could not'. etc. it reeks of bitterness.

Sotomayor should be asked to explain that speech at her hearings, and undoubtedly will be asked. It's difficult to understand what she meant by that controversial sentence, but I think it's a big stretch to think she was touting Hispanic female supremacy over other races and genders. It goes against her conduct over many years as a judge to think she'd be stupid enough to advocate the view that her own race and gender makes her superior to others.

I gotta repeat an earlier post that the sputterers don't seem to have received their material from Rush yet. The REAL hate, the kind aimed at our half-white president, has yet to hit in full force. If I know my Bogus Paratroopers, Cidneys and Snipers, my TakeIts and Nancies, it will. herm

#258 - They are being obstructionist in the wrong direction.

I'm just saying that we never would have had BvBoE without a court willing to make new policy.

"at least if she is on the court she wont be able to sell nukes to iran"

Are you warning us that allowing Rummy to be unemployed is dangerous????

The more he spits ON himself out of blind anger the happier I am.

(I don't think you understand how profound I am being.)

#259 | Posted by Manypaths at 2009-05-26 01:50 PM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e

(I don't think you understand how profound I am being.)

I think your profundity is in your own mind.

#260 | Posted by moomanfl at 2009-05-

just passing by on my way out but couldnt leave this alone

manypaths..

give it up........just try and counter a point or two with something a little more substanive than..

oh oh...he's spiting on himslef..
ITs CALLED DROOL numbnutts.

Who would that be Moon?

Who is cheering?

KEN BLACKWELL: Obama Declares War on America's Gun Owners With Supreme Court Pick

WAR huh? I guess I found the answer to my first question.

Ok, now that she bunches the panties of the right wing loons, I like her.

at least if she is on the court she wont be able to sell nukes to iran"

Are you warning us that allowing Rummy to be unemployed is dangerous????

#267 | Posted by danni at 2009

naw...I dont know where in the recesses of that mind of yours you came up with that one.
I was just pointing out that this issue could be many times more important than this racists on a 9 member court.........

the bullshit from korea is downright scarey.......

and all the UN will do is go.

oh please dont do that.....

It goes against her conduct over many years as a judge to think she'd be stupid enough to advocate the view that her own race and gender makes her superior to others.

I'm not sure it does go against it, RCADE. Actually, from some of the cases I have seen, like the firefighters case, and the other comments she has made, it points to a bit of bigotry on her part.

I don't think this necessarily means that Republicans should take a "block at any cost" stance, but it should give some pause to anyone that takes justice seriously.

I don't think this necessarily means that Republicans should take a "block at any cost"

And how would they go about that if it did?

Remind me again of how powerless the gop is these days?

YEAH............See you at the polls!

Sotomayor should be asked to explain that speech at her hearings, and undoubtedly will be asked. It's difficult to understand what she meant by that controversial sentence, but I think it's a big stretch to think she was touting Hispanic female supremacy over other races and genders. It goes against her conduct over many years as a judge to think she'd be stupid enough to advocate the view that her own race and gender makes her superior to others.

#264 | Posted by rcade at 2009-

well I dont know about that...read some of the firefighter case

and my charge of racists is probably more correct to be something like reverse racist because of the power thing...but LATELY that definition is changing....as in have to have power to be a racists..........

#258 - They are being obstructionist in the wrong direction.

Ok, Grumpy. We have established that you are a hack.

Evidently the tactic is only valid when you agree with the aim.

Your position is duly noted, and dismissed.

Sotomayor should be asked to explain that speech at her hearings, and undoubtedly will be asked. It's difficult to understand what she meant by that controversial sentence, but I think it's a big stretch to think she was touting Hispanic female supremacy over other races and genders. It goes against her conduct over many years as a judge to think she'd be stupid enough to advocate the view that her own race and gender makes her superior to others.

Posted by rcade at 2009-05-26 02:01 PM | Reply

Think about it the rulings the 95% of the rulings that come out of the Court below the SCOTUS settle the question about what was being argued at that level. So in effect they set the Policy in which the Unityed States adheres to until that decision is overturned. Least thats how I inturperate it.

Larry

And how would they go about that if it did?

Underestimating your opponent is the first step down the road to defeat.

Keep it up.

A person that thinks their enemy doesn't have any teeth is an enemy that isn't paying attention.

I gotta repeat an earlier post that the sputterers don't seem to have received their material from Rush yet.
Posted by herm

Just before his last commericial break, he claimed you're an idiot.

Three words for BL2: irritable bowel syndrome

I hope its worth it.

and my charge of racists is probably more correct to be something like reverse racist because of the power thing

"Reverse racism" is racism... pure and simple. The "power" argument is a weak deflection.

If my kid calls an adult a "poopy head" I don't just let it go because the adult is too mature to have it bother them. Instead I ground her because it was wrong regardless of who might or might not have been hurt.

It is the same with racism. Either it is wrong or it isn't. Who has a thin skin and who doesn't, or who is damaged and who isn't has no bearing on whether it is defined as racism.

okay I PUT THIS HERE because THIS is where the action is

DID ANY OF YOU hear the SOUP on the E network with joel mchale

he played a tape of two media types GOOING all over the obamas and one of them said how great it was that they were touching each other all the time and even had a good time fisting...

a scream

rcade- you actually read afkabl2's crap?

For the love of God, why?

Your position is duly noted, and dismissed.

I'm dismissed? Can I go outside and play now?

he played a tape of two media types GOOING all over the obamas and one of them said how great it was that they were touching each other all the time and even had a good time fisting...

Well it is good at least to see they aren't talking about "teabagging".

I'm dismissed? Can I go outside and play now?

Would you? Please?

"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 hasn't lived that life," - nothing racist here please move on - The Wrong (opposite of the Right).

Lets substitute a few words and see how it sounds:

"I would hope that a wise white man from the appalachians with the richness of his experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a Latina woman who hasn't lived that life,"

Hmmmm. This Newyorkian should stay on the New York circuit and only make racial decisions in New York courts - not national ones like the SCOTUS.

comments she has made, it points to a bit of bigotry on her part.

Ok, Grumpy. We have established that you are a hack.

Who's a hack?

Even with a strong majority in Congress and popular support from the public, boring, unimaginative, soft-spoken, middle-of-the-roaders is all we will ever get on the bench from here out. No more Earl Warrens, no more Brandies, no more Marshalls ever again. Only witless twits remain, folks you can shuffle past the pit bulls without too much noise.

You show me someone with true scholarship, real judicial service, and a logbook of writing case law and I'll show you someone completely incapable of surviving the nomination process--even if they have a vagina and an abundance of melanin.

"our gender and national origins may and will make a difference in our judging." - Newyorkian

What the fuck happened to "justice is blind" - oh yeah - libruls and "diversity".

"And I wonder whether by ignoring our differences as women or men of color we do a disservice both to the law and society."

"to judge is an exercise of power" and that "there is no objective stance but only a series of perspectives."

You libtards can defend this? She is a fucking nightmare - so what if she went to IVY league schools - so did Bush.

She is an angry newyorkian who feels slighted by her past and lets that affect her objectivity - see firefighter case. No way she should sit on the highest court. What if a white male said those words - libtards do not need answer. I will do it for you -insert standard slavery/racist librul comment here-

It is not bigotry when someone draws on their experiences of being discriminated against, it might even call for reaching all the way beyond the actual words of the constitution and going all the way back to the declaration of independence to interpret what the founding fathers really wanted for this country.

Who's a hack?

#286 | Posted by grumpy_too at 2009-05-26 02:24 PM

That would be you.

It is not bigotry when someone draws on their experiences of being discriminated against

Discrimination is against the law.... that has nothing to do with experiences. Empathy and compassion simply cloud objectivity.

Of course, being a hack, I don't expect you to either understand, nor admit this.

Move along.

ever notice how the Democratic attorney women are so fugly

ever notice how the Democratic attorney women are so fugly

#291 | Posted by reinsurelaw

Sure have!

- Harriet Miers

Ever notice how ugly most christian bible thumpers are?

ever notice how the Democratic attorney women are so fugly

Not sure why that is relevant... or even sure that it is universally true.

But, hey! To each their own.

I hate GA women. Most are ignorant rednecks.

ever notice how the Democratic attorney women are so fugly

#291 | Posted by reinsurelaw at 2009-05-26 02:48 PM | Reply | FlagPining to give mAnn Coulter a prostate massage.

Harriet Miers is a real looker.

Ever notice how ugly most christian bible thumpers are?

LOL... don't worry, Rasta, nobody is trying to take away your crown as Queen of the Winter Carnival.

It is not bigotry when someone draws on their experiences of being discriminated against,

Who said bigotry. I said racist, but it is not judicial either. It is legistlating from the bench.

Discrimination is against the law.... that has nothing to do with experiences.

This statement makes no sense. Being discriminated against is not a real experience?

Empathy and compassion simply cloud objectivity.

Pure objectivity is not the only thing called for at the SC level.

Oh well.

I would like to offer some words of advice to any and all that do not like this slection.

For those of you who hate the idea of this person being in one of the highest offices in the land and making decisions that will probably affect your life, I have this to say:

You will learn to live with it. Trust me. And there isn't a God Damn thing you can do about it.

You wanted facts. Well, there you fucking go.......

It seems as though the minority right thinks that if the volume of their objections and the vulgarity of their attacks is increased enough it will make up for their minority position in the Senate.

Fact is, shor of a filibuster, this lady is already confirmed. The right may consider the filbuster but they will probably also recall their own threats to use the nuclear options and think twice.
It is also possible that Al Franken will be seated and the filibuster threat may be irrelevant.

Interesting times.

Way to go Lord Zero! Stick it to whitey!

Moonman I highly recommend this place. It is the best place for wings in GA

I beg to differ, Rasta. With my deep frier and my homemade wing sauce, the best place for wings in GA is my house. :)

too bad it can't be proven moonman unless you invite several DR posters over to test it. It hink you should invite Lisa and Larry over to test your claim.

Interesting times.

#302 | Posted by danni

no not really. Its the same shit as usual.
also this is a wash. this mexican lady will be replacing the liberal ( that's right liberal) Souter.

this is all much ado about nothing.

I think we also can assume that the whacky Ginsberg will be next for replacement ....and this will also be a wash.

As long as Scalia, Thomas, Alito, and Roberts are on the bench things are generally fine, watch out for that Stevens guy, if he retires, THEN things get interesting.

Moonman I highly recommend this place. It is the best place for wings in GA

But who wants to go to Douglasville?

Being discriminated against is not a real experience?

It only makes no sense because you are a moron and still trying to foist your idea that somehow compassion and empathy have a place in a high court.

Discrimination is already illegal... no need to inject experiences into ruling on that. If the judge is ruling based on the law, then the experiences of the judge are irrelevant.

The only way experiences would be relevant is if you wish to rule on something other than the law.

Pure objectivity is not the only thing called for at the SC level.

Yes it is. Their job is simply to make a judgment on whether the law is being followed, and whether a particular law is Constitutional. Period.

Goat and I will be enjoying Carne Asada in Laredo come next month while drinking Tecate. Then off to Nuevo Laredo to rip off some Narco's

It hink you should invite Lisa and Larry over to test your claim.

Believe it or not, I have no beef with Lisa, and while I may not always agree with Larry, I have no beef with him either.

BTW... there is CERTAINLY another way to test whether my wings are good... try my recipe:

"this mexican lady will be replacing the liberal"

Your belief that she is a Mexican makes me suspect you know very littel about anything.

Your belief that she is a Mexican makes me suspect you know very littel about anything.

Self-retort, moron.

Happy extinction!

--Zatoichi

"this mexican lady will be replacing the liberal"

Your belief that she is a Mexican makes me suspect you know very littel about anything.

The fact you ignore her pick because of race and gender can't look that well on you either. If in fact your original assumption is valid.

I think he just meant 'a brown person'.

You know how uptight righties can be.

How one interprets can be influenced by experience. And attitude.

#287 Great post, bears repeating

Even with a strong majority in Congress and popular support from the public, boring, unimaginative, soft-spoken, middle-of-the-roaders is all we will ever get on the bench from here out. No more Earl Warrens, no more Brandeis, no more Marshalls ever again. Only witless twits remain, folks you can shuffle past the pit bulls without too much noise. You show me someone with true scholarship, real judicial service, and a logbook of writing case law and I'll show you someone completely incapable of surviving the nomination process

"The fact you ignore her pick because of race and gender can't look that well on you either."

Prove it was based on that. She has excellent qualifications, far superior BTW to the token member Thomas who none of you objected to.

too bad it can't be proven moonman unless you invite several DR posters over to test it. It hink you should invite Lisa and Larry over to test your claim.

#305 | Posted by rastaninja

'smatter, ninja..... haven't snared a victim yet?
still talking about invitations to meet up with posters, I see.

Michael Steele said Obama is president because of his race.....and is too stupid to figure out why everyone laughed at him.
This is just more of the same.

Just following the other branches of Government. Instead of the best, we get whoever is politically, racially or socially acceptable.

Prove it was based on that. She has excellent qualifications, far superior BTW to the token member Thomas who none of you objected to.

#316 | Posted by danni at 2009-05-26 03:34 PM

'smatter, ninja..... haven't snared a victim yet?
still talking about invitations to meet up with posters, I see.

Well I did tell Rasta to shoot me an email and I would consider it. I have yet to get a mail from him though despite the fact that it is listed in my profile.

"I would hope that a wise white man from the appalachians with the richness of his experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a Latina woman who hasn't lived that life,"

Does anyone remember some of the more infamous rulings by all-white juries. The same hypotheses exist on the judge level.

#321

You would consider it???

Mooman, post a picture of yourself.
You know, so we will be able to identify your head ....when it is found in a cardboard box in the third bathroom stall of the Greyhound station in Topeka, Kansas.

Your belief that she is a Mexican makes me suspect you know very littel(sic)about anything.

#311 | Posted by danni

Well if she ain't Mexican then she's what? Colored?

BTW... there is CERTAINLY another way to test whether my wings are good... try my recipe:

For the best wings, fry them right out of the freezer. DO NOT THAW prior.

I believe she is from Puerto Rico.

Which isn't Mexico BTW.

For the best wings, fry them right out of the freezer. DO NOT THAW prior.

For how long? They get cooked into the bone this way?

I find myself both agreeing with Danni that Sotomayor is not a token and well qualified, and thinking she's a stupid partisan hack for suggesting that Thomas is a "token member."

Not that I have read up on the advice and consent of the Senate... I know Clinton and Schumer lobbied hard for her nomination, Geitner headed up the selection team, she is from New York. Of course Obama never interviewed her...

For the best wings, fry them right out of the freezer. DO NOT THAW prior.

That is usually my method, Many. Nice and crispy on the outside, juicy on the inside. Yum!

Had my wife pick up two bags of wing pieces at the store earlier today.

Of course she likes the BBQ wings (she doesn't like spicy). For those, if you don't have a homemade BBQ sauce recipe, I would recommend Sticky Fingers brand. I am partial their Habanero Hot BBQ sauce. She likes the Tennessee Whiskey sauce.

For how long? They get cooked into the bone this way?

Depends on the oil temperature.

If you go for 350-375 degrees.... cooking time for normal sized frozen wings would be about 20 minutes.

The outside will be crispy and the inside will be perfect and juicy.

For the best wings, fry them right out of the freezer. DO NOT THAW prior.

For how long? They get cooked into the bone this way?

Well as I always answered as a Chef, "Until they are done."

In an industrial fryer at 375-400 a dozen jumbo wings takes about 12-15 minutes.

But it locks in all the juices giving you a nice plumb and juicy wing with a crispy skin.

Sorry, I should have specified that the above time assumes a medium to large deep frier and about a dozen wings or so in the batch.

Or what Moon said.

You use Franks Hot Sauce?

I;ll try that next time I'm home.

I make killer fried chicken (and even better gravy) but the bird is always thawed so I am not familiar with fry times for frozen meat.

I believe she is from Puerto Rico.

Which isn't Mexico BTW.

#326 | Posted by Manypaths

Hmmmmm..Rican, Mexcian ....same thing ,
BUT she is FROM Peurto Rico.
Does that mean she is FROM the United States?
PR is what - a territory?
DO SCOTUS judges need to be from the USA?

Is this another half assed non USA born appointment based on technicality thing here?
Is this the goal?
( i am referenceing the fact that Obama is a Kenyan and claims to have been born in Hawaii)
Are we TRYING to remove Americans from the executive and judicial branch?
Is this part of the plan to achieve NWO???

what is going on around here?

Many,

What type of fryer are you using? Mine is the Rival 4 liter deep fryer.

You use Franks Hot Sauce?

#333 | Posted by Manypaths

I used Franks for wings style sauce last night.

what is going on around here?

#335 | Posted by 8roper

Just you chasing your tail.

Speaking of homemade BBQ sauces, the only sauce recipes I can find on the internet are sauces with a lot of brown sugar or other sweetening ingredients in them.

I'd like to make a less sweet sauce, but don't know how.

Last I tried was "all right" with smoked romas, onion and garlic, chipotles, oregano, cumin, and lime juice.

It was tasty but had a pulpy consistency and wasn't quite what I'm looking for.

LIVE_OR_DIE = sauce noob

You use Franks Hot Sauce?

Was this addressed to me?

No, Louisianna hot sauce and butter as the base for my sauce. The recipe (for quick and long versions) is linked to above in my #310 post.

I was using a commercial fryer.

chasing my tail I dont think so

we have a Kenyan in the Oval office.

and soon a puerto Rican on the SCOTUS

you libs must be SO PROUD

let's put a Canadian in Congress. and a Swede.

Of course Obama never interviewed her...

#328 | Posted by crispee_oc

He interviewed her last Thursday.

I also used to dehydrate Habenero Peppers and grind them in a coffee grinder for when anyone 'challenged' my ability to make them really hot.

Prayed for Splashbacks, each and every one of them.......

Last I tried was "all right" with smoked romas, onion and garlic, chipotles, oregano, cumin, and lime juice.

It was tasty but had a pulpy consistency and wasn't quite what I'm looking for.

Try pureed tomato rather than the standard tomato sauce. It is smoother. Add a little V8 to thin it out a little more. This will smooth it out, but it may be too thin. This will be fixed as you cook it down some.

If you don't have a smoker to properly smoke your sauce, liquid smoke is the way to go. My favorite brand is Colgin Liquid Smoke (Hickory).

He interviewed her last Thursday.

Obama: "SO where you from?"
Sotomayor: "Meheeco,seenyor"
Obama: "You hate whitey?"
Sotomayor: " Ay yes very much seenyor."
Obama: "You're hired."

Ok, I think we are getting a little to corgile here.

Back to the baby killing Spic shall we........

wow......

Try pureed tomato rather than the standard tomato sauce. It is smoother. Add a little V8 to thin it out a little more. This will smooth it out, but it may be too thin. This will be fixed as you cook it down some.

If you don't have a smoker to properly smoke your sauce, liquid smoke is the way to go. My favorite brand is Colgin Liquid Smoke (Hickory).

#345 | Posted by moomanfl at 2009-05-26 04:15 PM

The smoke aspect of the sauce was great, but aside from the pulpiness, I don't think it balanced out well. I'm not sure how to make the starting base I guess. What and how much to start with, like the tomatoes, water, etc..., still eludes.

He interviewed her last Thursday.

www.ksl.com

#343 | Posted by SanAntonioRogue at 2009-05-26 04:11 PM

Guess it wouldn't have mattered if I clarified as of the 17th. What about the rest of the post? Any merit? Or rightwing paranoia? lol

I'm not sure how to make the starting base I guess. What and how much to start with, like the tomatoes, water, etc...

Instead of pureeing then, you might want to try juicing them. Just a suggestion.

Ketchup, chili powder, sugar, red pepper. Add onions, tomato sauce, chili ready diced tomatoes, and season to taste with salt and garlic.

If you can't taste it a recipe won't do you any good.

I've been marinating in a sweet vinaigrette. Doesn't that sound fancy? It's a cheap way to tenderize meat, and you can baste it or not with the red sauce. Either way it's good for pork or chicken.

LoD -- speaking of smoking tomatoes -- did you try the chili recipe I posted. I think you said you were going to.

Ok, I think we are getting a little to corgile here.

Back to the baby killing Spic shall we........

#347 | Posted by Manypaths

HUH?

I throw out a few typos every now an then, but that butchery of the word "cordial" clearly indicates high school drop out.

did you try the chili recipe I posted. I think you said you were going to.

#353 | Posted by goatman

speaking of CHILIs, Sotomayor is sure gonns do what she can to make the illegals situation worse in this country, wanna bet?

I throw out a few typos every now an then, but that butchery of the word "cordial" clearly indicates high school drop out.

Hence:

wow......

#348 | Posted by Manypaths

It's a true talent to surprise oneself....

What about the rest of the post? Any merit? Or rightwing paranoia? lol

#350 | Posted by crispee_oc

Well, since the search was headed by WH Chief Counsel Greg Craig, not Tim Geithner, that makes 2 strikes in your post.

LoD -- speaking of smoking tomatoes -- did you try the chili recipe I posted. I think you said you were going to.

#353 | Posted by goatman at 2009-05-26 04:25 PM

I wrote it down and plan to give that a go later in June when I can have some family come down and some home brew ready to drink with it.

I will definitely let you know how that turns out; it looks like an amazing recipe.

try adding some minced tasso to your chili.

Nobody will be able to tell what it is and it adds a ton of flavor.

Oh, and I will be going the extra mile and do the second day slow cooking outside on a fire, per your suggestion, Goatman.

Also, Mooman, thanks for the suggestions. Guess I'll keep trial-and-error-ing it.

Epazote is another 'secret' ingredient for chilii and other Mexican food. I always put some in pintos when I am making a pot.

I don't know if I can get tasso in Iowa.

Throw some Cajun seasoning on a pork shoulder or pork butt and smoke it in a little chief or something. Coat it with the seasoning.

I like to mince it into a paste in a food processor before adding it to the chili. All I am looking for is the flavor.

Without knowing much about her I think I can already tell you what I see the NOper's attacking.

1. They will call her a far left activist judge even though the American Bar Association calls her a political centrist.
2. They will say Christianity is under attack
3. They will say she has a hot temper and is hard to work with.

#3 | Posted by johnny_hotsauce
------------------
No Johnny,

I'm not going to say anything of the such. I'll say she is anti-constitution. She believes in racial quota's. Look at her record and see how many times her arguments have been overturned.

Her latest case that is going to get overturned is she ruled in favor of conn city that turned down white firefighters for promotion because they divided the positions by ethnicity. The guys who are suing had higher scores than the ones who got the positions. That violates US law yet she didn't have a problem ruling in favor of conn. In case you missed it, it's illegal to discriminate against anyone based on racial quotas. Personally I don't give a damn what color they are as long as they know what they are doing. Clearly the ones who got the positions aren't the best qualified. Who suffers? The citizens!

As such she thinks her job is to make laws instead of ruling on the ones in existence. Of course, I've got to give it to Obama. He made sure that she was hispanic so that any criticisms of her job performance can be yelled as racist. So I'm sure I'll be called a racist even though I'm advocating fairness. Justice is supposed to be blind but in her case, she sees the colors from the bench!

Lonnie

Oh, and I will be going the extra mile and do the second day slow cooking outside on a fire, per your suggestion, Goatman.

It does make a difference.

Epazote is another 'secret' ingredient for chilii and other Mexican food. I always put some in pintos when I am making a pot.

#361 | Posted by goatman at 2009-05-26 04:35 PM

This have anything to do with it?

Well, since the search was headed by WH Chief Counsel Greg Craig, not Tim Geithner, that makes 2 strikes in your post.

Sorry for not stipulating Geitner headed up the transition and his associate the confirmation. I guess that makes the question irrelevent. Otheriwse you would be all over the query.

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner's top communications strategist will head up White House efforts to guide President Obama's Supreme Court nominee through the confirmation process, a senior Democrat familiar with the decision told FOX News.

Stephanie Cutter will move to the White House as part of a temporary assignment, one that is only for this confirmation task and does not suggest Cutter will be moving permanently into the West Wing.

At this point, the source said, it appears Cutter will return to the Geithner portfolio after Obama's Supreme Court pick is confirmed.
Sunday, May 17, 2009

Puerto Rican chicken wings.

...ability to prevent flatulence caused by eating beans

Actually, that is absolutely correct. I had completely forgotten that that is how I started to use it. My wife read about it somewhere and bought some from Penzey spices (BTW, best spices I've ever found. They're on the web) and insisted I put them in the beans. I liked the taste so much that I kept on using it and had forgotten about its magical properties. Thanks for reminding me!

It does make a difference.

Do you have a tripod? I got mine here many years ago. But I got it right at their store in South Pittsburgh, TN (near chattanooga) when I live in Georgia.

#365 | Posted by goatman at 2009-05-26 04:40 PM

I was going to see if I could fit the pot on my grill by removing the top rack.

I have a pretty large charcoal grill / smoker I just haven't measured it up yet.

Here's my tripod in use

#369 | Posted by goatman

No thanks.......

No thanks.......

Why not? It makes for better chili and is kind of a centerpiece at a party -- you know gathering around the fire and all that jazz

Beautiful female politicians. Sarah is 24th, and Hillary is 34th. Peru, Austria, NZ, Mexico, and Japan have each got a real beauty.

I have never really cared for tamarind (yes, I know I am weird). However I could see some possibilities for modifying that puerto rican wing recipe.

I guess my 'tripod' differs from yours GM.

Try tamarind and apricot preserves as a base.

"world champion of Rhythmic Gymnastics"

Well... considering I don't like tamarind....

Apricot sounds interesting though... as does a mango/papaya mix.

I guess my 'tripod' differs from yours GM

How is yours different?

I think she's the greatest Supreme Court pick EVER. I would probably say that even if it weren't the greatest President of the United States EVER who made it. She's qualified in every key respect we're looking for: minority, female, and she says "I know" a lot, unless she's reading from a prepared script.

We were all concerned that Obama's election would have sucked all the air out of the room of affirmative action and quota hiring. Thankfully, David Souter made it possible to squeeze in one more.

First, she'll make it through the Senate confirmation..

Second, her rulings will have little to do with the constitution, will be generally idiotic, and the majority of Americans won't like them.

But when you elect uber liberals, you get uber liberals on the court.. that's the system.

"Second, her rulings will have little to do with the constitution, will be generally idiotic, and the majority of Americans won't like them."

Explain Bush v Gore and then I might take you seriously.

Coulda been worse. Obammy coulda gone with the lesbo.

Explain Bush v Gore and then I might take you seriously.

Yeah that 7-2 ruling is a real stumper.

Coulda been worse. Obammy coulda gone with the lesbo.

#384 | Posted by 8roper

This one likes dick?

How is yours different?

#380 | Posted by goatman at 2009-05-26 05:05 PM | Reply | Flag: Slow on the Uptake

(Obviously, no one has ever accused Goatman of being a tripod. I guess being hung like a tic-tac will do that.)

#387 | Posted by mOntecOre at 2009-05-26 06:19 PM | Reply | Flag: Disappointed

You promised you wouldn't tell if I let you put it in your mouth

For all those dwelling on the hand full of opinions that were overturned, you realize that in her time on the 2nd cir bench, she wrote over 200 opinions, and had 4 or 5 overturned by the SCOTUS, and all but one of those were split opinions (Souter was in the dissent in most of them). So please do, "Look at her record and see how many times her arguments have been overturned." How about less than 2.5%, with less than .5% with a unanimous court.

rcade- you actually read afkabl2's crap?

For the love of God, why?

#281 | Posted by Alexandrite at

maybe he is interested in more than the same old shit that you have been throwing around here for almost as long as I have....

it COULD HAPPEN

(Obviously, no one has ever accused Goatman of being a tripod. I guess being hung like a tic-tac will do that.)

I thought it was hung like an "elevator button".

Fact is, shor of a filibuster, this lady is already confirmed. The right may consider the filbuster but they will probably also recall their own threats to use the nuclear options and think twice.
It is also possible that Al Franken will be seated and the filibuster threat may be irrelevant.

Interesting times.

#302 | Posted by danni at 2009

we are all well aware of this but just as rush said

THIS is the time for repubs to show the country just what an extremist thier obamamania really is
and to also give the differences between that extreme left and what has worked for over two hundred years.

HEY DANNI

its also going to be the most fun hearing since the left made up all that shit about coke cans and pubic hair...........LOL

MP

shit son....still here??

get a fuckin life...Im too far gone so its too late for me but shit........go out and do something.....

Yeah. 3:32 out here on the west coast. Need to dig some more fence posts at the house when I get home, so no real hurry. It's fucking hot today.