• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Sotomayor cool under Republican grilling

Councilman

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 25, 2009
Messages
4,454
Reaction score
1,657
Location
Riverside, County, CA.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Sotomayor cool under Republican grilling | Reuters
Tue Jul 14, 2009 7:53pm EDT
Reuters

By Andrew Quinn and James Vicini

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Barack Obama's Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor fended off Republican attacks on Tuesday, saying "diversity on the bench is good for America" and promising rulings based on law, not racial bias.

Grilled by Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee, Sotomayor -- who would become the first Hispanic on the U.S. top court -- coolly explained the context for one of her most controversial comments: that a "wise Latina" might reach a better legal decision than a white man.

==========================================================
The lies she has been telling from the moment she was sworn in alone should disqualify her from the Judges position she currently holds let alone from the Supreme Court. Her record on the bench, her own statements, her affiliation with Racist organizations all largely being glossed or denied out right and she's being given a pass because the Republicans seriously fear being called racists if they go around asking real questions and then hold her to the same standard Ted Kennedy with Robert Bork back in 1986. Oh wait. Ted Kennedy made up all the lies he spewed from the Senate floor to discredit Bork. Everything that Kennedy said was proved latter to be lies but by then the Liberals got their way and the term Borked was born. So we need to keep our heads above the low level Kennedy set ans stick to the truth of her own record not to Bork her. No but to point out the facts and the truth before the unthinking Liberals ignore the truth and facts and rubber stamp her nomination because it's the Barack thing to do.
 
Grilling? They call that grilling?


If she were a burger, she'd still be raw meat in the middle, if that were "grilling". :mrgreen:


Republicans have forgotten how to "grill" someone. They could take a lesson from the Dems, and google "Bork".
 
Grilling? They call that grilling? If she were a burger, she'd still be raw meat in the middle, if that were "grilling". :mrgreen: Republicans have forgotten how to "grill" someone. They could take a lesson from the Dems, and google "Bork".
One of the big problems in the "grilling" is that righties try to oversimplify thier questions to the point of near meaninglessness, which is where they need to be for the average American to understand it. Then Sotomayer keeps launching into the most boring indecipherable language possible and both opponenents and supporters don't have the foggiest idea what they just heard, and committee members can't unwind the answers in the allotted time.
 
Grilling? They call that grilling?


If she were a burger, she'd still be raw meat in the middle, if that were "grilling". :mrgreen:


Republicans have forgotten how to "grill" someone. They could take a lesson from the Dems, and google "Bork".
Maybe Biden could give them some lessons, he was always a real bastard during Senate hearings. :mrgreen:
 
Ok, I feel compelled to defend Sotomayer to some extent despite the fact that I am a conservative and may disagree with her. She was of Puerto Rican decent herself, as a lawyer she would obviously be interested in joining an organization that defended those of like decent. Now what you have to understand is that, as a lawyer and a member and officer of the firm, she has to pursue the defense of those people who come to the organization for protection on legal issues. She doesn't get to choose what her client is suing for if the organization decides to defend said client, she can only do her best to defend that client. This is the duty of ANY lawyer, when they are tasked with defending a client. Also, as a officer in that organization, she does not write or approve all the briefs or make the opinions of the organization. The mere fact that she was a member and officer of the Puerto Rican Defense Fund, should not disqualify her from our nations highest court. As a Republican Congressman pointed out, our nation should not strive to discourage today's lawyers from standing up for what they believe in in the courtroom, because it might be held against them by a Senate Committee if they ever are appointed to a federal bench.

For another thing, when Sotomayor ruled against the firefighters in a recently overturned Supreme Court case, she was ruling on the basis of both Supreme Court and District Court precedent. The Supreme Court changed this precedent in its recent decision and set forth a new test for lower courts to use in this type of case. She has said that there is a good chance her court and she herself would have ruled differently had this new precedent been in place when she made her decision.

I know that Judge Sotomayor leans to the left, but this is not a reason for her to be barred from serving on the court. I for one, support her nomination as a intelligent, fair, successful, and legally grounded judge for the highest court in our nation, even though she may make rulings I disagree with. I know that others have valid reasons for disagreeing, but racism is not one of them, and should not be part of any INTELLIGENT debate. I do not ask that all my fellow conservatives support her, but I do ask that they give her a fair look and not resort to the use of vile and unsupported propaganda.
 
One of the big problems in the "grilling" is that righties try to oversimplify thier questions to the point of near meaninglessness, which is where they need to be for the average American to understand it. Then Sotomayer keeps launching into the most boring indecipherable language possible and both opponenents and supporters don't have the foggiest idea what they just heard, and committee members can't unwind the answers in the allotted time.

The confirmation hearings of today have become more of a photo-op and chance for Senators to connect with their constituency. The last 4 picks (Alito, Roberts, Ginsburg, Breyer) learned how to properly give an answer without answering the question. Which is actually quite fair considering that the Senate is not truly probing, but rather campaigning. I understand, and agree with the idea of having open hearings. But you do have to wonder if we would get a different result should the hearings be closed?

Lindsey Graham was quite honest in his assessment yesterday when he said elections have consequences, and more specifically this is liberal-conservative politics. Kudos to Graham for honesty, for this is how the system works.
 
Yeah, they have their 60 votes. They could confirm Joseph Stalin. Good thing he's dead.

Shows how little you know, sheesh. I thought you would have figured out by now that we had Stalin's DNA extracted, and had him grown in a tube in a top secret DNC funded Global Warming institute. We did alter his DNA just a tweak or two, you know got rid of the mustache, made him a little taller, gave him a new name....
 
The sad part is that they didn't attack.

Yeh, I'd love to see the Repugs attack Sodomayor, and instantly lose every potential vote from Hispanic Americans. They are working on it, though.
 
The lies she has been telling from the moment she was sworn in alone should disqualify her from the Judges position she currently holds let alone from the Supreme Court. Her record on the bench, her own statements, her affiliation with Racist organizations all largely being glossed or denied out right and she's being given a pass because the Republicans seriously fear being called racists if they go around asking real questions and then hold her to the same standard Ted Kennedy with Robert Bork back in 1986. Oh wait. Ted Kennedy made up all the lies he spewed from the Senate floor to discredit Bork. Everything that Kennedy said was proved latter to be lies but by then the Liberals got their way and the term Borked was born. So we need to keep our heads above the low level Kennedy set ans stick to the truth of her own record not to Bork her. No but to point out the facts and the truth before the unthinking Liberals ignore the truth and facts and rubber stamp her nomination because it's the Barack thing to do.

Would you please substantiate your above allegations with evidence? I certainly would appreciate it. For example, what lies has she been telling? Upon what evidence do you base your conclusion that she's lying?

What organizations that she has been a part of indicate she is a racist?

What lies did Ted Kennedy make up that discredited Bork?
 
Yeh, I'd love to see the Repugs attack Sodomayor, and instantly lose every potential vote from Hispanic Americans. They are working on it, though.

It is tough to beat Democrats these days, who completely lack an ounce of integrity and are fine with just pandering to every minority out there through lies and victimization tactics.
 
Would you please substantiate your above allegations with evidence? I certainly would appreciate it. For example, what lies has she been telling? Upon what evidence do you base your conclusion that she's lying?

What organizations that she has been a part of indicate she is a racist?

What lies did Ted Kennedy make up that discredited Bork?

SHE IS A RACIST SOCIALIST WELFARE QUEEN GUN GRABBER

that hates Jesus and babies (via killing them).

and nowhere near as qualified as Harriet Miers.
 
SHE IS A RACIST SOCIALIST WELFARE QUEEN GUN GRABBER

that hates Jesus and babies (via killing them).

and nowhere near as qualified as Harriet Miers.

I was enjoying your post and smiling--right up until I saw Harriet Miers. Now that made me LOL! :rofl
 
SHE IS A RACIST SOCIALIST WELFARE QUEEN GUN GRABBER

that hates Jesus and babies (via killing them).

and nowhere near as qualified as Harriet Miers.

Well that just confused me...all those excellent sources. Thanks...so much factual....data...mind blowing.
 
Yeh, I'd love to see the Repugs attack Sodomayor, and instantly lose every potential vote from Hispanic Americans. They are working on it, though.

I don't think people have a long memory to remember stuff like this. I'm guessing that the majority of the Hispanic Americans are not watching the hearings or reading about the hearings and the treatment she has received from Sessions (talk about a jerk). I don't see that happening.

I thought Lindsey Graham's questions about 9-11 and al Qaeda were weird. I thought his statement about how he doesn't like bully judges was obnoxious--just because she said she asked tough questions? These cases are addressing REAL people. I would like to think a judge would ask tough questions.

I wonder what Graham thought of Rehnquist. I personally witnessed an oral argument where the attorney before the Supreme Court was having problems answering a question. Rehnquist got frustrated and yelled, "You're not answering the question!" The guy was so shocked, he sat down. Rehnquist yelled, "ARE YOU DONE, COUNSELOR?" I thought it made Rehnquist look like a complete a-hole.
 
Grilling? They call that grilling?


If she were a burger, she'd still be raw meat in the middle, if that were "grilling". :mrgreen:


Republicans have forgotten how to "grill" someone. They could take a lesson from the Dems, and google "Bork".

I agree. I saw them asking her some simple yes or no questions yesterday and instead of answering yes or no she made the long drawn out little speech. If that was me asking the questions I would be like "excuse me I didn't say give me a speech or book report to throw me off guard ,I asked a simple ****en question so please answer it."
 
Why? It's futile.

It doesn't mean they should go down without a fight.Basically they should give the democrats the same grief as the democrats did with the Bush ,that is why there were elected. They were not elected to be democrats.
 
It doesn't mean they should go down without a fight.Basically they should give the democrats the same grief as the democrats did with the Bush ,that is why there were elected. They were not elected to be democrats.

That's the problem. Tit for tat. It's pathetic.

As Graham told Sotomayor, "I can assure you that if I applied Sen. Obama's standard to your nomination, I wouldn't vote for you, because the standard that he articulated would make it impossible for anybody with my view of the law and society to vote for someone with your activism and background when it comes to lawyering and judging."

The judicial confirmation wars are like conflict in the Middle East, with a never-ending cycle of attacks and recriminations over grievances past. Sotomayor ought to be confirmed by an overwhelming vote, and perhaps Graham's colleagues will heed his counsel that "elections matter."

washingtonpost.com
 
I'm no fan of Lindsey Graham, too much of a RINO to suit me. However, he did nail one thing in this dog'n-pony show. He asked Sotomayor about the "wise latina making better decisions than a white man" thing. She gave another one of her long, boring, mush-mouth non-answers. His reply was "You DO realize that if I had said anything remotely like that, they would have had my head?"
 
I have a healthy respect for Puerto Ricans. :)

puerto-rican-parade.jpg
 
I'm no fan of Lindsey Graham, too much of a RINO to suit me. However, he did nail one thing in this dog'n-pony show. He asked Sotomayor about the "wise latina making better decisions than a white man" thing. She gave another one of her long, boring, mush-mouth non-answers. His reply was "You DO realize that if I had said anything remotely like that, they would have had my head?"

That "latina" comment of hers was porrly stated but if anyone does posses any intellectual honesty and is not just puking partisan poop read it within the context that it was said in and it is not racist or sexist. But we all know that the partisans will spin it in the worst possible way. The Democrats and the left did just that with Clarence de Thomas's foibles. This is just political theatre but I hope that not too much horse pockey will fall in this dog and pony show !!!
 
I have a healthy respect for Puerto Ricans. :)

puerto-rican-parade.jpg

A couple pairs of those thighs look as if they could crunch you but two of them do appear to have intelligent asses. And that is not meant to be an oxymoron. That's my on the street political opinion.
 
Back
Top Bottom