I chose With everything they have to block her appointment
They should blow out the stops with this one and maybe we can get some good soundbites on her for the 2010 elections. But, I dont imagine the GOP has the rocks to do a bold move like that.
As far as political capital, they dont have any anyways or any that matters. The GOP needs to show us, the people, that they can fight. The MSM will be compliant and we need to count on the right wing talking shows and FNC to pull out the gems.
I agree with you. Sometimes, we need to take a look at the successful tactics of the other side. And the libs always throw everything - including the kitchen sink - at us. On the other hand, we play "nice." See where it gets us? Powerless. No, we need to learn how to fight as if our collective lives depend on it.
Consider this as a practice run. But conservatives need to get used to fighting for things by using absolutely everything we have. The liberals/radicals have been doing it for years and it has worked for them. Look at how we're doing in the culture wars......
candidate or his traveling buddy, LG, so be it! It is time to show some positive results, guys!!!
This comment comes from a proud Tea Party attendee, otherwise designated by Homeland Security as a Right Wing Radical Extremist! It is no dishonor to be in a minority in the cause of liberty and virtue ~ Sam Adams
The Senate Republicans need to ask some very cogent questions, but in a respectful manner, IMO.
Then, take a page out of the Bamster's book, and vote NO, as Obama did against Alito, even though Alito was eminently qualified to serve on the court. Obama voted no, not because he felt Alito was unqualified, but because he didn't like his worldview.
The democrats are looking for a near unanimous vote so they can claim "bi-partisan" support.
I should have voted other but voted that they should let her sail & not waste capital only because they have no choice. They can't do anything to stop it. Dems have filibuster proof majority.
Every single one of them should vote no though and they should still ask tough questions.
We can and should put on a good show for the base, but we can't possibly block her. The Judicial Committee is something like 12-7 democratics vs Republicans. A filibuster in the Senate is probably not possible. Democratics would get the usual suspects, -the fair ladies of Maine and maybe one or two others.
We should also consider that if she was to fail, the Bamster might come up with someone just as liberal, but a whole lot smarter and influential and with greater life expectancy. Sotomayor is the Bamster's 'Harriet Miers', and Republicans could do a whole lot worse.
However, if the GOP is seen as blocking her appointment then it will cost the GOP votes in 2010 toward reclaiming the majority in the House
I think you are buying into the type of thinking that presented us with McCain and Obama last election. It also got us a foolproof, no wait a bunch of fools, majority so the GOp has a devil of a time breaking it.
The GOP has slim backing and any agressive questioning wont hurt its chances in 2010. If anything the soundbites will be a great help. Please understand the GOP is hanging on by the skin of its teeth.
Bottom line is we need more GOP conservatives that are not afraid to stand up; remember President Bush stood up and took the critisism an was rewarded by 2 terms. Bush may have had RINO tendacies but you could always count on what he was gonna do. If he said he was gonna do it you could take it to the bank.
GW Bush was not Ronald Reagan and he barely won both elections. I am speaking about reality. Reality is that the electorate that got Reagan elected does not exist anymore. Until you get to the point of persuading latinos that Republicans have the right policies, then the perception is not good for the GOP if they go overboard and don't vote for Sotomayor.
Aggresive questioning is good and frames this woman and her party. Voting against her will be framed by Democrats that the GOP is not for latinos.
And, right now, the GOP has a very good chance of taking back control of the House in 2010 and that goal should be paramount.
Only 10 of 50 states require proof of citizenship to register to vote.
California is one of the 40 that don't.
If you seriously believe the illegals are not voting by the hundreds of thousands if not millions in this country, then I have a great deal for you on a bridge ...
Reality is that the electorate that got Reagan elected does not exist anymore - And, right now, the GOP has a very good chance of taking back control of the House in 2010 and that goal should be paramount
It is there but the conservative GOP is not. Your thinking is why the GOP got creamed last time. Lets appease the SCM and the Dems and build our base, later we can worry about the conservative message. No the reason Reagan won is because of the message and in spite of the media.
The GOP will continue to lose if it fields losers but will win if the message and the canditates are conservative.
ok, then - All senators, regardless of party, should handle this vote just like all other votes.
Those who vote no should note specific reasons for their vote and backup those reasons with documentation and references. Not providing specific reasons leads to speculation and being labeled as an obstructionist.
and just like we dont need the osamaone, America doesn't need another unqualified judge setting on the highest court in the land ruling by feelings instead of the law.
It used to be obama must go now it's obama and sotomayer both must go!!!!!
She is a shoo-in, and they shouldn't waste the political capital trying vainly to block her. If anything, you have to allow her to destroy herself -- give her enough rope, so to speak.
This is a teaching moment, giving Republicans the opportunity to express the reasons why a political activist should not be made a Supreme Court Justice.
Sadly, these GOP dinosaurs continue to operate under the flawed premise that they'll anger a minority group (in this case Hispanics), and thus cost them this particular groups vote.
WHO THE HECK CARES!!!
Seriously, I'm absolutely sick and tired of our spineless Republican leaders (yeah right!!) who constantly give up their conservative values to reach out to liberal minorities!!
Hey GOP Senate and House members: These minority groups aren't going to vote for you no matter what you do, so why are you sacrificing your core beliefs?
John McCain tried this tactic with comprehensive illegal immigration...and boy did that work out well! He had droves of Hispanics coming out to vote for him...NOT!!
If reaching out to minorities means giving up our conservative principles to the liberal lie; let these minorities stay in the Democrat Party!
and we will not shut up. All we heard about when the libs were in the minority, was the minority must be heard, the minority must have a say in the matter. Now we are the minority and the libs are telling us that we should shut up because they won. OH HELL NO. We need somebody with enough Conservative nads to go in there and demand we be heard, to replay for them declarations made by Libs, when Libs were in the minority. To fight everything that this President tries to do to the last moment, just like they did against Bush. I am sick and tired of the people that are "representing" me, laying down and taking whatever the Libs decide to do to them without a damn fight. Knock off this I ain't worth nothin cause I am the minority crap. Represent me, or get the hell outta the way for somebody that will
-rant off
...how about we have a recall vote on Senator/Congressperson so and so....
It is important for Senate Republicans to go after Sotomayor on a substantive basis. They need to draw out of her whether or not she will stand by the Constitution and the law or violate her oath if she were to be sworn in as a Supreme Court justice.
In fact, this morning's Heritage Foundation Morning Call contained a number of very substantive questions that Sotomayor needs to be asked. I'll be keeping tabs on this.
--
We already have term limits. They are called elections. We can & should vote out those who do not represent & serve us! - Me
We're fighting for the future of our country, yet we should be worried about some phony sense of decorum? Screw that! It's about time that these reality-detached Republican Senators grew spines and put their principles and their constituents ahead of their personal ambitions. When you consider that the Senate is riddled with partisan parasites like Schumer, Dodd, Durbin, Boxer, Levin, Kennedy, Kerry, Feingold, Harkin and Leahy who win every time they're up for re-election, Republican Senators must learn that standing on principle and securing re-election are NOT mutually exclusive. Put up a fight, for once.
"I spent a lot of money on booze, birds and fast cars. The rest I just squandered." -George Best
I voted to hammer her. What are the options? The jellyfish Republicans tick off a lot of folks that will no way in hell vote for them. Or, solidify their base, or just maybe, bring in some folks that would like to vote for them but haven't because they are so damn weak.
But no, they'll play by the rules the dems set up once again and then cry 'ain't it awful' when an election comes up. I guess those knuckleheads and others who want to play nice forgot David Souter. That worked out pretty good for Conservatives didn't?
So by all means continue to play nice and civil, oh yeah, and be real firm with her, so the Sunday shows won't talk bad about you. Hell those shows might invite you on if you do a real good job of kissing the dems butt. And also, continue losing elections. That's the added benefit of being real 'civil, but firm' to dems.
No need to sink down to the level of the liberals. I would like to think Republicans can evicerate people without the crassness and loudmouth, talk over your opponent tactics of the juveniles.
The Obama Administration: THE most fiscally irresponsible Administration EVER
Try 10 Articles and 27 Amendments. This woman will urinate on the Constituion, as demonstrated by her decision that the Second Amendment applies only to the Federal government, and not to the states. In which case, why did the states have to ratify it?
She is just a slippery, double-talking leftist and deserves to have that exposed. Let the Democrats show the American people seating a judge the majority of the American people cannot support.
"What experience and history teach is
this - that people and governments never have learned anything from history,
or acted on principles deduced from it."
SC and other nominations are primarily the president's job, and the Senate should only interfere if there is something extremely disqualifying. Sonia might have said stupid stuff, but has it affected her rulings? She has ruled with the other judges on her court 95% of the time, so it's not as if she is extremely radical. Nominations should not turn into political circus like the Democrats tried to do to Bush's.
If Edison were to invent the light bulb today, the head- lines would read, '200,000 candle makers lose their jobs.'
Nominations should not turn into political circus like the Democrats tried to do to Bush's
No they should not, but we are in a fight for America and the facisits are winning. I know the Democrats have the votes and that is why we should pull out the stops, do whatever it takes to throw her off her game and get the all important soundbite.
I dont think it should be a circus but they made teh rules and its time we abide by them. I used to think if a President made a nomination then go with it, but with this administration I think all bets are off.
I would not have thought so if Duh One had not taken over teh banks, the car companies and soon amny other industries. If ACORN was not in his back pocket and soon to make us a third world country in voting and such. Or if he had not dropped the suits against ACORN and the Black Panthers and a host of otehr irregularities.
We are fighting for our freedoms and Obama will soon have a lock on SCOTUS if we dont guard against it.
Her ruling in the case of the fire fighters disqualifies her in my book. She has said a lot of stupid things, but I don't buy for a moment that these were poorly worded statements that are taken out of context. Just as I don't believe that Barry-o was unaware of the racist bile that his preacher man from Chicago was spewing.
"With everything they have..." It will all prove futile however. Sotomayor is a shoo-in. These "confirmation" hearings are a joke...The Dems have done and will do nothing but throw roses at her feet, and the Repubs, while bringing up serious and legitimate questions and concerns about her judicial history, simply don't have the numbers to stop her confirmation. Period.
"The problem is not that people are taxed too little...the problem is that government spends too much." ~President Ronald Reagan
One of the people thrown out of the Sotomayor hearing today was Norma McCorvey, aka Jane Roe. For that reason the protest story is unlikely to get much play in the liberal media.
just like the Dems handled Bork, Thomas, and the judges they left twisting in the "never-never-land" on confirmation. Fight with every technique they have.
"What experience and history teach is
this - that people and governments never have learned anything from history,
or acted on principles deduced from it."
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
I chose With everything
July 13, 2009 - 09:01 ET by Dan The Man 2I chose With everything they have to block her appointment
They should blow out the stops with this one and maybe we can get some good soundbites on her for the 2010 elections. But, I dont imagine the GOP has the rocks to do a bold move like that.
As far as political capital, they dont have any anyways or any that matters. The GOP needs to show us, the people, that they can fight. The MSM will be compliant and we need to count on the right wing talking shows and FNC to pull out the gems.
I agree with you.
July 13, 2009 - 10:40 ET by StogieGuyI agree with you. Sometimes, we need to take a look at the successful tactics of the other side. And the libs always throw everything - including the kitchen sink - at us. On the other hand, we play "nice." See where it gets us? Powerless. No, we need to learn how to fight as if our collective lives depend on it.
Consider this as a practice run. But conservatives need to get used to fighting for things by using absolutely everything we have. The liberals/radicals have been doing it for years and it has worked for them. Look at how we're doing in the culture wars......
Any republican who votes for Sotomayor should be recalled
July 13, 2009 - 09:05 ET by R D HelmIts time to take the gloves off for good. Playing nice with these people has only brought us perilously close to costing us our country.
-Dave
"Obama's health care 'reform' plan is to blow up the building in order to fix a leak in the roof." -
AGREE - and if that happens to include our last presidential
July 13, 2009 - 09:08 ET by Cape Conservativecandidate or his traveling buddy, LG, so be it! It is time to show some positive results, guys!!!
This comment comes from a proud Tea Party attendee, otherwise designated by Homeland Security as a Right Wing Radical Extremist! It is no dishonor to be in a minority in the cause of liberty and virtue ~ Sam Adams
Other, yet again
July 13, 2009 - 09:16 ET by BlondeThe Senate Republicans need to ask some very cogent questions, but in a respectful manner, IMO.
Then, take a page out of the Bamster's book, and vote NO, as Obama did against Alito, even though Alito was eminently qualified to serve on the court. Obama voted no, not because he felt Alito was unqualified, but because he didn't like his worldview.
The democrats are looking for a near unanimous vote so they can claim "bi-partisan" support.
I hope he fails, too.
I agree, B....I voted
July 13, 2009 - 09:31 ET by motherbeltI agree, B....I voted "other."
They can't block her appointment, but neither should they roll over and play dead. Or nice.
They should speak their minds, ask the tough questions and vote "no."
Obama will get his nominee, but he should remember "What goes around comes around."
I didn't think it was physically possible, but this both sucks and blows. -Bart Simpson
Go figure, mb
July 13, 2009 - 09:35 ET by BlondeWe don't need to turn this into a circus, or another "high tech lynching" a la the Thomas confirmation.
Neither should we cave and vote to affirm. They have the votes to do it all by themselves. Let them.
I hope he fails, too.
I agree with Blonde and MB
July 13, 2009 - 09:57 ET by Dee BunkI should have voted other but voted that they should let her sail & not waste capital only because they have no choice. They can't do anything to stop it. Dems have filibuster proof majority.
Every single one of them should vote no though and they should still ask tough questions.
Make a good show
July 13, 2009 - 09:17 ET by slickwillie2001We can and should put on a good show for the base, but we can't possibly block her. The Judicial Committee is something like 12-7 democratics vs Republicans. A filibuster in the Senate is probably not possible. Democratics would get the usual suspects, -the fair ladies of Maine and maybe one or two others.
We should also consider that if she was to fail, the Bamster might come up with someone just as liberal, but a whole lot smarter and influential and with greater life expectancy. Sotomayor is the Bamster's 'Harriet Miers', and Republicans could do a whole lot worse.
Other
July 13, 2009 - 09:55 ET by Gat New YorkUnless she makes an error in her testimony and does not stay on message, she will win appointment no matter what Republicans wish to do.
I am in favor of framing her aggressively so that it is clear she is far to the left of all justices.
However, if the GOP is seen as blocking her appointment then it will cost the GOP votes in 2010 toward reclaiming the majority in the House.
However, if the GOP is seen
July 13, 2009 - 10:47 ET by Dan The Man 2However, if the GOP is seen as blocking her appointment then it will cost the GOP votes in 2010 toward reclaiming the majority in the House
I think you are buying into the type of thinking that presented us with McCain and Obama last election. It also got us a foolproof, no wait a bunch of fools, majority so the GOp has a devil of a time breaking it.
The GOP has slim backing and any agressive questioning wont hurt its chances in 2010. If anything the soundbites will be a great help. Please understand the GOP is hanging on by the skin of its teeth.
Bottom line is we need more GOP conservatives that are not afraid to stand up; remember President Bush stood up and took the critisism an was rewarded by 2 terms. Bush may have had RINO tendacies but you could always count on what he was gonna do. If he said he was gonna do it you could take it to the bank.
GW Bush was not Ronald
July 13, 2009 - 13:05 ET by Gat New YorkGW Bush was not Ronald Reagan and he barely won both elections. I am speaking about reality. Reality is that the electorate that got Reagan elected does not exist anymore. Until you get to the point of persuading latinos that Republicans have the right policies, then the perception is not good for the GOP if they go overboard and don't vote for Sotomayor.
Aggresive questioning is good and frames this woman and her party. Voting against her will be framed by Democrats that the GOP is not for latinos.
And, right now, the GOP has a very good chance of taking back control of the House in 2010 and that goal should be paramount.
most Latinos are illegal
July 13, 2009 - 13:54 ET by SouthJersey1953Ignore the Latino block....most of them are here illegally and can't vote, so why cater to them?
"Maybe if we keep our heads buried in the sand, this will blow over" - The Congressional Republicans
Wake up and smell the
July 13, 2009 - 14:04 ET by NL207Wake up and smell the coffee.
Only 10 of 50 states require proof of citizenship to register to vote.
California is one of the 40 that don't.
If you seriously believe the illegals are not voting by the hundreds of thousands if not millions in this country, then I have a great deal for you on a bridge ...
Reality is that the
July 13, 2009 - 15:19 ET by Dan The Man 2Reality is that the electorate that got Reagan elected does not exist anymore - And, right now, the GOP has a very good chance of taking back control of the House in 2010 and that goal should be paramount
It is there but the conservative GOP is not. Your thinking is why the GOP got creamed last time. Lets appease the SCM and the Dems and build our base, later we can worry about the conservative message. No the reason Reagan won is because of the message and in spite of the media.
The GOP will continue to lose if it fields losers but will win if the message and the canditates are conservative.
with empathy
July 13, 2009 - 10:00 ET by mom_roxWhat? 'With Empathy' wasn't a choice? <sarc>
ok, then - All senators, regardless of party, should handle this vote just like all other votes.
Those who vote no should note specific reasons for their vote and backup those reasons with documentation and references. Not providing specific reasons leads to speculation and being labeled as an obstructionist.
~~save your tea, dump congress~~
Being labeled as
July 13, 2009 - 10:19 ET by bassndudeBeing labeled as obstructionists dosent seem to have hurt the dems none. Seems it helped them. I say filibuster. Feed the dems their own tactics.
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
what? a dem was labeled an
July 13, 2009 - 19:31 ET by mom_roxwhat? a dem was labeled an obstructionist? I hadn't heard that by the msm ;)
~~save your tea, dump congress~~
I think with the same
July 13, 2009 - 10:17 ET by bassndudeI think with the same kindness the dems used or past SC nominees. An Iron Fist and a filibuster.
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
Sometimes you have to go for it all
July 13, 2009 - 10:28 ET by RD Kingand just like we dont need the osamaone, America doesn't need another unqualified judge setting on the highest court in the land ruling by feelings instead of the law.
It used to be obama must go now it's obama and sotomayer both must go!!!!!
stop being nice
July 13, 2009 - 10:33 ET by foolnomorestop working for the other side,an make it as hard for them as they did for the last group of do nothings.
Do not treat her like Dems treated Clarence Thomas
July 13, 2009 - 10:36 ET by ekslibBe clear. Stick to the facts. Don't stress sordid details or pry into her private life.
I left the liberal party because of what the Dems (and NPR and PBS) did to Thomas.
Too bad Sarah Palin won't get to ask some questions.
July 13, 2009 - 10:38 ET by ekslibI'd love to see that.
She is a shoo-in, and they
July 13, 2009 - 10:43 ET by Mike SargentShe is a shoo-in, and they shouldn't waste the political capital trying vainly to block her. If anything, you have to allow her to destroy herself -- give her enough rope, so to speak.
This is a teaching moment, giving Republicans the opportunity to express the reasons why a political activist should not be made a Supreme Court Justice.
Sadly, these GOP dinosaurs
July 13, 2009 - 10:46 ET by SvenSadly, these GOP dinosaurs continue to operate under the flawed premise that they'll anger a minority group (in this case Hispanics), and thus cost them this particular groups vote.
WHO THE HECK CARES!!!
Seriously, I'm absolutely sick and tired of our spineless Republican leaders (yeah right!!) who constantly give up their conservative values to reach out to liberal minorities!!
Hey GOP Senate and House members: These minority groups aren't going to vote for you no matter what you do, so why are you sacrificing your core beliefs?
John McCain tried this tactic with comprehensive illegal immigration...and boy did that work out well! He had droves of Hispanics coming out to vote for him...NOT!!
If reaching out to minorities means giving up our conservative principles to the liberal lie; let these minorities stay in the Democrat Party!
-rant on -- Fight with everything, because we are the minority
July 13, 2009 - 10:50 ET by spmcintyreand we will not shut up. All we heard about when the libs were in the minority, was the minority must be heard, the minority must have a say in the matter. Now we are the minority and the libs are telling us that we should shut up because they won. OH HELL NO. We need somebody with enough Conservative nads to go in there and demand we be heard, to replay for them declarations made by Libs, when Libs were in the minority. To fight everything that this President tries to do to the last moment, just like they did against Bush. I am sick and tired of the people that are "representing" me, laying down and taking whatever the Libs decide to do to them without a damn fight. Knock off this I ain't worth nothin cause I am the minority crap. Represent me, or get the hell outta the way for somebody that will
-rant off
...how about we have a recall vote on Senator/Congressperson so and so....
one more thing
July 13, 2009 - 10:52 ET by spmcintyreanybody who votes yes for her, I dont care what party they are in.
Anybody that votes yes for Sotomayor, has now and forever lost the right to complain about judicial activism. Period. Not a peep. ZIP IT
...how about we have a recall vote on Senator/Congressperson so and so....
My Vote: Respectfully...
July 13, 2009 - 11:23 ET by Wildcatter1980...but firmly enough to block her appointment
It is important for Senate Republicans to go after Sotomayor on a substantive basis. They need to draw out of her whether or not she will stand by the Constitution and the law or violate her oath if she were to be sworn in as a Supreme Court justice.
In fact, this morning's Heritage Foundation Morning Call contained a number of very substantive questions that Sotomayor needs to be asked. I'll be keeping tabs on this.
--
We already have term limits. They are called elections. We can & should vote out those who do not represent & serve us! - Me
We're fighting for the
July 13, 2009 - 11:34 ET by fitzfongWe're fighting for the future of our country, yet we should be worried about some phony sense of decorum? Screw that! It's about time that these reality-detached Republican Senators grew spines and put their principles and their constituents ahead of their personal ambitions. When you consider that the Senate is riddled with partisan parasites like Schumer, Dodd, Durbin, Boxer, Levin, Kennedy, Kerry, Feingold, Harkin and Leahy who win every time they're up for re-election, Republican Senators must learn that standing on principle and securing re-election are NOT mutually exclusive. Put up a fight, for once.
"I spent a lot of money on booze, birds and fast cars. The rest I just squandered." -George Best
I voted to hammer her.
July 13, 2009 - 12:19 ET by ConservativeRexI voted to hammer her. What are the options? The jellyfish Republicans tick off a lot of folks that will no way in hell vote for them. Or, solidify their base, or just maybe, bring in some folks that would like to vote for them but haven't because they are so damn weak.
But no, they'll play by the rules the dems set up once again and then cry 'ain't it awful' when an election comes up. I guess those knuckleheads and others who want to play nice forgot David Souter. That worked out pretty good for Conservatives didn't?
So by all means continue to play nice and civil, oh yeah, and be real firm with her, so the Sunday shows won't talk bad about you. Hell those shows might invite you on if you do a real good job of kissing the dems butt. And also, continue losing elections. That's the added benefit of being real 'civil, but firm' to dems.
Respectfully, but block her
July 13, 2009 - 12:37 ET by Scuba DudeRespectfully, but block her appointment.
No need to sink down to the level of the liberals. I would like to think Republicans can evicerate people without the crassness and loudmouth, talk over your opponent tactics of the juveniles.
The Obama Administration: THE most fiscally irresponsible Administration EVER
There is LOTS of need to "stoop" to the liberals level
July 14, 2009 - 21:28 ET by TheHistorianTry 10 Articles and 27 Amendments. This woman will urinate on the Constituion, as demonstrated by her decision that the Second Amendment applies only to the Federal government, and not to the states. In which case, why did the states have to ratify it?
She is just a slippery, double-talking leftist and deserves to have that exposed. Let the Democrats show the American people seating a judge the majority of the American people cannot support.
"What experience and history teach is
this - that people and governments never have learned anything from history,
or acted on principles deduced from it."
G. W. F. Hegel
Respectfully but firmly enough to block her appointment
July 13, 2009 - 13:11 ET by hetookuazyUmmm, haven't we had enough of being mister nice guys, who always lose, respectfully?
SC and other nominations are
July 13, 2009 - 13:25 ET by Mitchell BlattSC and other nominations are primarily the president's job, and the Senate should only interfere if there is something extremely disqualifying. Sonia might have said stupid stuff, but has it affected her rulings? She has ruled with the other judges on her court 95% of the time, so it's not as if she is extremely radical. Nominations should not turn into political circus like the Democrats tried to do to Bush's.
If Edison were to invent the light bulb today, the head- lines would read, '200,000 candle makers lose their jobs.'
Nominations should not turn
July 13, 2009 - 15:33 ET by Dan The Man 2Nominations should not turn into political circus like the Democrats tried to do to Bush's
No they should not, but we are in a fight for America and the facisits are winning. I know the Democrats have the votes and that is why we should pull out the stops, do whatever it takes to throw her off her game and get the all important soundbite.
I dont think it should be a circus but they made teh rules and its time we abide by them. I used to think if a President made a nomination then go with it, but with this administration I think all bets are off.
I would not have thought so if Duh One had not taken over teh banks, the car companies and soon amny other industries. If ACORN was not in his back pocket and soon to make us a third world country in voting and such. Or if he had not dropped the suits against ACORN and the Black Panthers and a host of otehr irregularities.
We are fighting for our freedoms and Obama will soon have a lock on SCOTUS if we dont guard against it.
Tell that to the fire fighters who were discriminated against
July 13, 2009 - 17:47 ET by ThermistoclesHer ruling in the case of the fire fighters disqualifies her in my book. She has said a lot of stupid things, but I don't buy for a moment that these were poorly worded statements that are taken out of context. Just as I don't believe that Barry-o was unaware of the racist bile that his preacher man from Chicago was spewing.
I voted...
July 13, 2009 - 15:49 ET by PrairieSky"With everything they have..." It will all prove futile however. Sotomayor is a shoo-in. These "confirmation" hearings are a joke...The Dems have done and will do nothing but throw roses at her feet, and the Repubs, while bringing up serious and legitimate questions and concerns about her judicial history, simply don't have the numbers to stop her confirmation. Period.
"The problem is not that people are taxed too little...the problem is that government spends too much." ~President Ronald Reagan
Jane Roe
July 13, 2009 - 17:11 ET by slickwillie2001One of the people thrown out of the Sotomayor hearing today was Norma McCorvey, aka Jane Roe. For that reason the protest story is unlikely to get much play in the liberal media.
Sotomayor
July 13, 2009 - 19:26 ET by BaabooWhat republicans ????
Republicns should handle Sotomayor
July 14, 2009 - 21:20 ET by TheHistorianjust like the Dems handled Bork, Thomas, and the judges they left twisting in the "never-never-land" on confirmation. Fight with every technique they have.
"What experience and history teach is
this - that people and governments never have learned anything from history,
or acted on principles deduced from it."
G. W. F. Hegel