How will this interfere with her chances? SCOTUS has overturned her more then 60% of the time.

JDW

DAILY WAVE

When people fear their government there is tyranny.

When government fears the people there is liberty.

When your own folks say you goofed on the application of the law, how is the state run media going to spin this? This is a perfect illustration of her incapability,not because of the vote, but because of the reprimand about the law, that disqualifies Sonia.

Thanks for pointing out another liberal organization who 'checks' facts for liberals in need.

Jen7 have you sought help with your dementia?

Only because I wanted to see some of the other spin machines fall to pieces, did I troll around in the sewer. I found a gem of a spin machine running so fast and going nowhere that the truth will eventually lap him. Salon.com's Glenn Greenwald today opined on the magnificance of Four Supreme Court Justices agreeing with SCOTUS nominee Sonya Sotomayor:

<blockquote>

In the now famous "white firefighter" affirmative action case -- Ricci v. DeStefano -- the Supreme Court today, in a 5-4 ruling (.pdf), reversed the decision of a unanimous Second Circuit Court of Appeals panel (which included Judge Sonia Sotomayor) and held that the firefighters were the victims of unlawful racial discrimination.  The Court split along standard ideological lines (Roberts, Thomas, Scalia, Alito and Kennedy in the majority), with Kennedy writing the Court's opinion.  Four Justices agreed with the Second Circuit's panel, including David Souter, the Justice whom Sotomayor has been nominated to replace. Several points are noteworthy about this decision:

(1)  In light of today's ruling, it's a bit difficult -- actually, impossible -- for a rational person to argue that Sotomayor's Ricci decision places her outside the judicial mainstream when: (a) she was affirming the decision of the federal district court judge; (b) she was joined in her decision by the two other Second Circuit judges who, along with her, comprised a unanimous panel; (c) a majority of Second Circuit judges refused to reverse that panel's ruling; and now: (d) four out of the nine Supreme Court Justices -- including the ones she is to replace -- agree with her.

Put another way, 11 out of the 21 federal judges to rule on Ricci ruled as Sotomayor did.  It's perfectly reasonable to argue that she {and 10 other judges} ruled erroneously, but it's definitively unreasonable to claim that her Ricci ruling places her on some sort of judicial fringe.

<blockquote>

She, and they were WRONG. PERIOD END OF DISCUSSION.

Today's SCOTUS MAJORITY opion clearly laid out the failures of the City of New Haven, The District Court and the Second Circuit Court of Appeals were WRONG in the way that they failed to look at this case, they way they were WRONG for interpretting the applicable provisions of Title VII, and they were applied the WRONG standard of measuring what law or [revious rulings applied.

For all of her insight, (using only her left eye,) even Justice Ginberg was playing in a fantasy world.

Under our Constitution, the MAJORITY of the Justices of the Supreme Court decides cases, not the number of idiotic, ill informed, empathetic judges lined up like rubber ducks in a shooting gallery.

Greenwald is so close to another name, I thought I was reading Clark Griswald:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8qc_RYm0ylA

Can't wait to read the digestion of Olberdouche on this one. I don't give NBC/MSNBC/CNBC the right to broadcast to my TVs.

If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you can read it in English, You're welcome - Deskpilot, AM(H)1 (AW), USN (Ret)