Obama picks Sotomayor for Supreme Court

[Guest Aloysius]

AP source: Obama picks Sotomayor for Supreme Court

By BEN FELLER

 

WASHINGTON (AP) — Officials tell The Associated Press that President Barack Obama intends to nominate federal appeals court judge Sonia Sotomayor (SUHN'-ya soh-toh-my-YOR') as the first Hispanic to serve on the Supreme Court.

 

Sotomayor, 54, would succeed retiring Justice David Souter if confirmed by the Senate. The officials spoke to AP on condition of anonymity because Obama has not yet announced his decision.

[Mr. T]

Wasnt this his first overall pick when he first knew about Justice Souter retiring.

 

Obama wont have any opposition in confirmation, At this point he can pass anything or anybody, he could of selected Pee Wee Herman.

[Guest Aloysius]

Here's a good read:

 

The Dynamic of the Nomination of Sonia Sotomayor

 

We're going to be hearing a lot about the Ricci case.

[Westside Steve]

Well nothing can be done to stop the nomination.

 

I doubt that a no vote by Republicans will do any more long term damage than Dems voting against Roberts or Alitio or Thomas.

 

As to the Rcici case puniushing 21st century whites for old societal "ills" is not a good way to ease whatever effects of "racism" exist but it does strengthen the base.

A different and more lenienbt set of laws for black people shouldn't be the goal of the supreme court.

IMO.

 

And narrowing a search to women and Hispanics.....

Well just imagine.

WSS

[ballpeen]

Wasnt this his first overall pick when he first knew about Justice Souter retiring.

 

Obama wont have any opposition in confirmation, At this point he can pass anything or anybody, he could of selected Pee Wee Herman.

 

It isn't that bad. There still have to be a few dems who take things seriously.

 

[ballpeen]

Well nothing can be done to stop the nomination.

 

I doubt that a no vote by Republicans will do any more long term damage than Dems voting against Roberts or Alitio or Thomas.

 

As to the Rcici case puniushing 21st century whites for old societal "ills" is not a good way to ease whatever effects of "racism" exist but it does strengthen the base.

A different and more lenienbt set of laws for black people shouldn't be the goal of the supreme court.

IMO.

 

And narrowing a search to women and Hispanics.....

Well just imagine.

WSS

 

I wonder if the whites who failed the test are still in the running for promotions??

 

 

[heckofajobbrownie]

Poor white men. When will they ever get a fair shake in this country?

[Westside Steve]

Poor white men. When will they ever get a fair shake in this country?

 

You tell 'em Heck.

Though I'm surprised that you espouse the genetic inferiority theory of the Klan.....

 

That hair shirt of yours ever get itchy?

 

WSS

[calfoxwc]

Well, she may very well be a finer judge that some folks think.

 

I don't see her as being a blatant judicial activist, contrary to her

 

statement about a certain court "making law".

 

She didn't mean to condone that, I read.

 

If she's a better judge than Souter, we should be fine.

 

I applaud Obama for not nominating Angela Davis.

 

BRAVO !

[ballpeen]

And Hispanics are overwhelmingly pro life.

 

She just may pull a switch on the liberals on more than a few issues..

[heckofajobbrownie]

Steve, our very own Joe the Plumber.

 

What is this nonsense you're spouting now? I think Hispanics are genetically inferior, much like the Klan? Delightful.

 

You got all that from what I just wrote? How insightful.

 

Here's a question for you: in a country that is 50% female, 15% Hispanic, and 13.5% black, would you have any problem with all nine Supreme Court Justices being white men?

[ballpeen]

You got all that from what I just wrote? How insightful.

 

 

You said...Poor white men. When will they ever get a fair shake in this country?

 

I read that as Steve did....you don't think white men get a fair shake in this country.

 

[Guest mz.]

Remember, heck, if you're making an "ironical" statement, remember to tag the end of said statement with an to visually assist the over-50 crowd.

[Westside Steve]

Steve, our very own Joe the Plumber.

 

What is this nonsense you're spouting now? I think Hispanics are genetically inferior, much like the Klan? Delightful.

 

You got all that from what I just wrote? How insightful.

 

Here's a question for you: in a country that is 50% female, 15% Hispanic, and 13.5% black, would you have any problem with all nine Supreme Court Justices being white men?

 

Heck, our very own Janeane Garafalo.

 

I know your scope is limited Heck but Alo had 2 things in his post.

One was the Ricci case.

Then you attacked white people for daring to copmplain that minorities get extra help in a job search.

I know it's all a blur to you.

 

I just assumed you meant minorities were actually inferior and needed special assistance to gain meaningful employment.

No?

 

And answering your question I say no.

Are you upset that there aren't even more women?

Why?

WSS

[heckofajobbrownie]

"I just assumed you meant minorities were actually inferior and needed special assistance to gain meaningful employment.

No?"

 

That made me laugh. I love your "No?" statements. Never fail to amuse.

 

"I just assumed that meant you hate Jews in your spare time. No?"

 

As for your answer, that's what I figured you'd say.

[Westside Steve]

"I just assumed you meant minorities were actually inferior and needed special assistance to gain meaningful employment.

No?"

 

That made me laugh. I love your "No?" statements. Never fail to amuse.

 

Good. Your stunted sense of humor is tough to please. Gosh there might have been another reason to think so poorly of people.

 

 

"I just assumed that meant you hate Jews in your spare time. No?"

 

No. I hate Muslims. Don't you remember?

 

As for your answer, that's what I figured you'd say.

 

And as for your pointedly missing answer I counted on that too.

Wanna try again?

I ask YOU Heck.

Are you offended by the fact the SC is NOT at least 4 women?

\Why or why not?

 

WSS

 

~facetious remark for you to ignore~

"Heck is offended ONLY if Obama tells him to be."

 

[heckofajobbrownie]

No, I don't feel that there needs to be exactly four women on the court. Nor is it a matter of being "offended".

[calfoxwc]

I don't know the significance of this....

 

but it's surprising..

 

http://www.washingtontimes.com/polls/2009/...udge-s/results/

 

President Obama announced he will nominate U.S. Court of Appeals Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court. Do you think she was a good choice?

 

Thanks for your vote.

 

Response Percent Votes

 

Yes 12% 199 votes

No 74% 1172 votes

 

Undecided 12% 203 votes

 

Other 0% 5 votes

 

1579 total votes

 

 

 

[We need Tom Tupa]

My guess is that it signifies that the readers of the WashTimes online is even further Right than those of the print version.

[heckofajobbrownie]

Cal, how many times do we have to explain the difference between scientific polling and online polls like these?

 

We must have gone over this at least three times already.

[ballpeen]

My guess is that it signifies that the readers of the WashTimes online is even further Right than those of the print version.

 

I agree Tom, and for the most part, I don't pay much attention to what the public thinks as they usually don't have a cliue as to what makes a good SCJ.

 

For most it is their stance on 2-3 issues, and what most don't understand is once confirmed, they don't have to worry about any political payback.

 

As I said somewhere in the near past, for the most part most justices tend to take a few steps towards the middle once appointed. Radical leaning one way or the other are usually moderated once in a panel with other, equally qualified colleagues.

 

I don't know much about the woman other than she seems very qualified and has a good understanding of the law.

 

I trust she will consider the weight of the position as most have and not feel like she owes anybody anything and renders her opinion as best she can and abide by the laws of the land and not consider her opinion more important than the people who proceeded her.

[heckofajobbrownie]

And 95% of what we're going to hear about in the next few weeks will be about one single case in a career than spans a few decades.

 

In the end, it's not going to matter much. She's got the votes unless something major turns up.

[Guest mz.]

My guess is that it signifies that the readers of the WashTimes online is even further Right than those of the print version.

 

Yes.

 

Exactly.

 

I don't know why it's so difficult to grasp the difference between scientific and non-scientific polls.

[ballpeen]

And 95% of what we're going to hear about in the next few weeks will be about one single case in a career than spans a few decades.

 

In the end, it's not going to matter much. She's got the votes unless something major turns up.

 

 

Is that all you are interested in...she has the votes??

 

Really man, you shouldn't be so shallow. You should look at everything the government does with a inquisitive eye.

[heckofajobbrownie]

Really, man. You shouldn't take one sentence in a quick post and assume that's the entirety of my opinion on the subject.

[ballpeen]

Really, man. You shouldn't take one sentence in a quick post and assume that's the entirety of my opinion on the subject.

 

Fair enough...I had been talking with mz the pussy and his childish manner rubbed off on me for a moment.

 

You have my reply before and will leave it at that....at least until people start saying stupid stuff...and I expect that will happen .

 

 

 

 

[Westside Steve]

No, I don't feel that there needs to be exactly four women on the court. Nor is it a matter of being "offended".

 

 

Why not Heck?

You sneered when I said I wouldn't be pissed off ot it were 9 white men.

Tell me why I should.

I probably wouldn't bitch if it were 9 Italian men like Alito or Black men like Thomas.

You listed percentages I assumed you wanted to see.

 

So why attack me for it if you don't care?

 

And for the record guys I was being facetious with Hecks attack on White men.

See if you believe in affirmitive action and set asides you mseem to be sayng Blacks are actually inferior and need extra points.

WSS

[heckofajobbrownie]

No, that's what you think it means. Wanting organizations that represent America to look at least vaguely like America, or to believe that there's a benefit to diversity, as in on college campuses, is hardly the same thing as saying that you believe that minorities are genetically inferior.

 

Jeez. What kind of binary nonsense is that?

 

That might as well have been another one of your "No?" propositions.

 

Oh, wait. It already was.

 

Nor is having a specific numerical goal in mind for each race and gender on the Supreme Court the same thing as saying that, when picking from a host of qualified nominees (after all, nobody is saying Sotomayor is not qualified for the job) that diversity can be one of the factors in their selection.

 

As for Thomas, he clearly was not the most qualified - or even close to the most qualified - potential justice when he was nominated by Bush I. He was a diversity hire. An affirmative action hire, if you will. Did you oppose that one?

 

 

 

 

[ballpeen]

So now you are against diversity hires??

[calfoxwc]

Cal, how many times do we have to explain the difference between scientific polling and online polls like these?

 

We must have gone over this at least three times already.

**************************************************

 

1. Stop being immature. Show me where I said it was a scientific poll. Do you know how

 

to THINK at all?

 

2. Golly Gee, Heckleberry Finne, of course it's an online poll. I was the one who

 

posted the accompanying link.

 

3. I thought it was interesting, since I'm pretty conservative, and I don't know that

 

she's a bad choice. Not my preference, but not my decision.

 

4. Heck, you are stooping to avoiding real questions, and cherry picking points that

 

you can twist into a "gotcha". It isn't working.

 

5. I don't need your permission to post an oline poll, your whiningness.

 

6. Just once, answer Steve's questions instead of running another diversion.

 

7. Just once, answer ballpeen's questions instead of running another diversion. 8. Why do you think there has to be women or blacks or whites or whoever on the court? Hint: It is better to nominate the very most qualified. The Supreme Court is not on a minority quota system. Yes, you didn't know that. 9. This is a ridiculous statement when you disregard the best qualifications:

 

"Wanting organizations that represent America to look at least vaguely like America, or to believe that there's a benefit to diversity, as in on college campuses"

 

10. So, you want a court to look like America? So, it should have a redneck possum hunter on it.

I don't even care if the redneck possum hunter is male or female or black or yellow or white or green

or purple or red or brown.

 

But you do, Heck. "diversity" means a nominee that is politcally what you want.

 

Ballpeen is right. You are way, way shallow to be so arrogant and wrong at the same time. Life isn't like that in the real world.