Why? I don’t get it. Why was her word choice poor if "she was simply
saying that her life experiences" gave her "information about the
struggles and hardships" of people?

Maybe because an appreciation of the struggles and hardships of people [should] have no bearing on the interpretation of the constitutionality of laws?

Even Judge Judy doesn't bend the law just because she feels bad for someone's circumstances!

Are we headed for a Supreme Court where feelings about "fairness" matter more than the Constitution?

I didn't think it was physically possible, but this both sucks and blows.  -Bart Simpson

Extending Sotomayor's logic, what the hell does Roger Simon, an old white guy, think he's doing in expressing an opinion on this subject.  We need to hear from Geraldo Rivera, not this stupid honky.  What on earth could he possibly know?

"An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last."  - Sir Winston Churchill

If you are not white, you have to be careful what you say.

This is a monumentally stupid comment. What country is Simon living in? Has he not witnessed the effect of his own profession on our culture? Does he live in such a bubble that he has lost touch with reality? These are all rhetorical questions, of course.

Thanks Simon for confirming the trope liberals believe and the empathy they have for all people, some people are more equal than others.  Obama picked a person with empathy and now we see that empathy is a liberal code word for racism by Simon's de facto admission.  Newt, you were correct the first time.

Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, starving the poor one gallon of ethanol at a time. Fill your tank with E85 and cull a village.

Liberals (and therfore most journalists) think that the role of judges is to make law from the bench. Deciding for who or in what circumstances the law will be upheld or not. This is why they think the statement by Sotomayor is OK. After all that's the role that they see her having. Applying this to the US Supreme Court, they see it as a justices job to decide what rights they can give to people and what rights it's OK to take away, sometimes from only certain segments of the people. This is why "empathy" is seen as an esential quality.

Conservatives on the other hand see the judges role as using the law to rule in the specific circumstances. Applying this to the US Supreme Court, they see it as a justices job to read the Constitution and use that as the absolute benchmark for laws passed by Congress. That is why they see empathy as the wrong quality because in a Constitutional issue, the particulars of the plantiff and defendant are immaterial and the impact on the country as a whole are the question. Constitutional justice should always be blind.

It really comes down to whether you think we are appointing a judge or a queen.

Hey, I got the wrong "CHANGE"!

www.loyaltoliberty.com

Why is it that white male liberals always believe that it is all the rest of the white males not themselves that are evil, incompetent, and/or stupid?  

Tell you what Roger when you admit that latina females are better writers and understand the political systems of this nation better then white males and you resign your position to allow a more deserving minority to have your job then come and lecture to us you bigot.

Jack

"If at age 20 you are a conservative then you have no heart.  If at age 30 you are a liberal then you have no brains."   Sir Winston Churchill

I am a judge sitting before the Case of SGT Smith vs. Roger Simon.  SGT Smith is a US Army soldier who was evicted from his apartment by landlord Simon because he fell 3 months behind in his rent.  Smith was not deployed during the period, and never contacted the landlord to discuss difficulties with meeting the terms of the lease.

And I am a veteran of 24 years of military service.

Here's my decision ---

JUDGE ELDARD:  While the facts of the case do establish that SGT Smith was in violation of his lease of the apartment, it is evident that the Mr. Simon does not appreciate the hardships of a soldier's life, and that junior military personnel are not well-compensated for the arduous duties they must perform -- often away from family and home, and sometimes under the most hazardous of conditions.  The landlord, Mr. Simon, could have shown more empathy toward SGT Smith, but obviously is unfamiliar with the circumstances under which SGT Smith must perform his duty daily, protecting us from deadly threats.    Patriots would understand.

Therefore, I am going to rule in favor of SGT Smith, under the condition that he pay his obligated debt under the terms of the lease, if and when it is possible.

 Now Mr. Simon, did I make a better decision than the generic "old white guy."

Case dismissed.

"I have read those words over and over, and I still fail to see what is wrong with them."

That's because you're a freaking moron.

"I have read those words over and over, and I still fail to see what is wrong with them."

This summarizes what is so abjectly wrong with the left.  Simon is completely unable to appreciate that Sotomayor's claim to superior judicial judgement is based upon her race and gender is an expression of racism and sexism.  Were we to rephrase the claim thusly:  "wise descendent of European Kings with the richness of his experiences", no doubt Simon would recoil at such a remark and label it bigoted, and he would be right.  Hi own prejudice is why he doesn't recognize Sotomayor's statement for the bigotry it so clearly is.

"We all know why. If you are not white, you have to be careful what you say. You cannot hint that you may actually know more than white people."

Really?  Then why is the MSM (or to borrow Rush's new phrase, the state-controlled media) repeatedly warning the GOP about the perils of opposing a Hispanic female for the Supreme Court?  If the GOP were truly color blind, they'd state in no uncertain terms that neither sex nor race is a qualification for the judge, and that being unbiased means focusing on her record.

Simon's statement is idiotic.  

When you put the clowns in charge, don't be surprised when a circus breaks out.

a book  "The Rise if America" by John D Diamond. It is subtitled, "Fighting the Next American Revolution and the Constitutional Crisis".

I keep it here beside my PC. I, very often, open it at random and review. In his preface John's bullet #2 is:

"How the Supreme Court has illegally and unconstitutionally ripped powers from the hands of a predominantly Judeo-Christian people and has essentially outlawed the system of government that our founding fathers had created".

Today when a Supreme Court decision is handed down, it is adopted. In other words, the judiciary is in effect , legislating. That is not the responsibility of the Supreme Court.  They are supposed to make decisions on the legality of issues relative to the Constitution. The Legislative and Executive branch were to make any laws or rules relatuive to the court's interpretation. They also had  the power toreject making any laws or rules based on the judicial opinions. Under theTenth Amendment, the states have the right to reject these opinions too.

The admiration and respect I feel for what our founding fathers put together via the three branches of government is unbounded . What a shame we let it change.

To seat this obviously prejudiced person (Sotomayor)on the bench, who, like our president has in ingrained hatred for this country is no just foolhardy, it is traitorous.

We already have seated so many judges over the years who had axes to grind that I was surprised there were not mass uprisings by the people. In the past two years since  the beginning of the presidential campaigns, I am no longer surprised. America is populated with fools who either do not know what the Constitution is or do not understand it.

If they spent 1/100th the time they spend watching American Idol to taking a peek at the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution, we would be a much better country.

Garofolo them!