Obama To Name Sonia Sotomayor As His Supreme Court Nominee
Obama To Name Sonia Sotomayor As His Supreme Court Nominee
This morning, President Obama is expected to name Sonia Sotomayor, currently a federal judge for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, as his Supreme Court nominee. She is the first Hispanic nominee for the high court, and if chosen, would become just the third woman to serve. President George H.W. Bush nominated her for her previous post as a judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
Born to parents who came from Puerto Rico, Sotomayor grew up in a Bronx housing project. In addition to her 16 years of court experience and her time as editor of the Yale Law Review, Sotomayor also “spent five years as a prosecutor with the Manhattan District Attorney, then developed her substantial civil practice as a commercial litigator.” However, during her “wrinkle-free confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee” in 1992, senators focused on her substantial pro bono activities:
For 12 years she was a top policy maker on the board of the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund. She was also on the board of the State of New York Mortgage Agency, where she helped provide mortgage insurance coverage to low-income housing and AIDS hospices. In her leisure time she became a founding member of the New York City Campaign Finance Board, which distributes public money for city campaigns.
Last week, the well-respected SCOTUS Blog underscored the historic nature of a Sotomayor nomination and warned Republicans that it will be “hopeless” to try to block her nomination. Politically, such attacks risk “exacting a very significant political cost among Hispanics and independent voters generally.” A look at some of the likely conservative claims:
Opponents’ first claim — likely stated obliquely and only on background – will be that Judge Sotomayor is not smart enough for the job. This is a critical ground for the White House to capture. … The objective evidence is that Sotomayor is in fact extremely intelligent. Graduating at the top of the class at Princeton is a signal accomplishment. Her opinions are thorough, well-reasoned, and clearly written. Nothing suggests she isn’t the match of the other Justices. [...]
The second claim — and this one will be front and center — will be the classic resort to ideology: that Judge Sotomayor is a liberal ideologue and “judicial activist.” … There is no question that Sonia Sotomayor would be on the left of this Supreme Court, just not the radical left. Our surveys of her opinions put her in essentially the same ideological position as Justice Souter. [...]
The third claim – related to the second – will be that Judge Sotomayor is unprincipled or dismissive of positions with which she disagrees. … There just isn’t any remotely persuasive evidence that Judge Sotomayor acts lawlessly or anything of the sort.
This morning, Karl Rove was on Fox News getting started on the attacks, calling Sotomayor an “unabashed liberal.” Watch it:
I applaud the nomination of Judge Sotomayor to the Supreme Court. Her confirmation would add needed diversity in two ways: the first Hispanic and the third woman to serve on the high court. While her record suggests excellent educational and professional qualifications, now it is up to the Senate to discharge its constitutional duty for a full and fair confirmation process.
Republicans look forward to learning more about federal appeals court judge Sonia Sotomayor’s thoughts on the importance of the Supreme Court’s fidelity to the Constitution and the rule of law. Supreme Court vacancies are rare, which makes Sonia Sotomayor’s nomination a perfect opportunity for America to have a thoughtful discussion about the role of the Supreme Court in our daily lives. Republicans will reserve judgment on Sonia Sotomayor until there has been a thorough and thoughtful examination of her legal views.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
“Last week, the well-respected SCOTUS Blog undermined the historic nature of a Sotomayor nomination…”
“undermined” or “underlined”?
May 26th, 2009 at 9:27 amPresident George H.W. Bush nominated her for her previous post as a judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
Sounds like an ‘unabashed liberal’ to me….
May 26th, 2009 at 9:29 amWhy is it that the Right assumes that any judge who doesn’t rule they way they want is an ‘activist’ judge? What a crock.
May 26th, 2009 at 9:32 amI wish she WERE an “unabashed liberal.”
But, winning appointment to the bench under Papi Bush, and at least nominally a Catholic (Number SIX? on the SCROTUS) pegs her to me as a socially conservative-to-centrist.
I also wish Obama’s choice had been a westerner. Is there anybody on the SCROTUS whose home, away from the Court, is west of the Catskills?
Every SCROTUS nominee since 1971 has ‘ruled’ to the RIGHT of their predecessor.
May 26th, 2009 at 9:33 amI expect that the Republicans will threaten a filibuster and completely forget all their Roberts/Alito rhetoric about judicial nominees deserving a fair hearing and a simple “up or down” vote.
May 26th, 2009 at 9:35 amNow is the time for the Know Nothing Party to come up again with an obligatory “No!” Repugs need to be consistent. Keep being negative! Fight those women. Fight those Hispanics. Disregard judicial experience etc. because you have a moral obligation to be the Party of No. Republicans need to alienate more people! Keep heading downward. R.I.P REP.
May 26th, 2009 at 9:37 amRepublicans aren’t foaming at the mouth and predicting the end of Democracy? Sotomayor obviously isn’t liberal enough. The right choice must cause Republicans to gnash and wail.
May 26th, 2009 at 9:37 amWhile I would have loved to see Obama nominate someone that truly IS an “unabashed liberal,” to offset in a stronger way Alito, Roberts and Scalia. However, the chances of getting such a nominee confirmed would be slim to none. I’m pleased with his selection and relieved he didn’t select Kagan, who is definitely much more a center-right individual and a pretty strong proponent of executive power. I was NOT happy with her selection as Solictor General.
May 26th, 2009 at 9:40 amGOOD! The Rethuglican conservative wingnuts can just eat dirt and die!
May 26th, 2009 at 9:45 amThe RNC better be careful here. If they attack her, they risk losing the Hispanic vote, not to mention women too. The so-called Conservatives also have to contend she was elected with Republican support too. So, go ahead right-wingers! Attack if you dare!
May 26th, 2009 at 9:56 amThis morning, Karl Rove was on Fox News getting started on the attacks, calling Sotomayor an “unabashed liberal.”
Good. Anything that Rove dislikes has got to be good for the country. Far too many “unabashed conservatives” have been appointed. Suck it Karl.
May 26th, 2009 at 9:56 amA nice Catholic woman on the Supreme court.
I wonder if she believes in science and evolution?
May 26th, 2009 at 9:59 am“Is there anybody on the SCROTUS whose home, away from the Court, is west of the Catskills?”
tokin librul, there’s nothing wrong with someone being from southern NY. ;)
May 26th, 2009 at 10:06 amThe ‘gop’ will no doubt trash her ruthlessly, this ensuring further basement level support in the latino/a demo as well as further losing ground with women:
http://blahgblog.wordpress.com/2009/05/26/what-are-they-thinking/
May 26th, 2009 at 10:08 amAnd so it begins. Conservative pundits are already claiming that “anonymous clerks who have worked with her in the past” (fictional strawmen) say that she is known for “not working very hard.”
Thinly veiled racist buzzwords for their base never get old, right? The GOP sticking to their true party principles, one of which being their fight against fictional, lazy minorities.
May 26th, 2009 at 10:11 amI also wish Obama’s choice had been a westerner. Is there anybody on the SCROTUS whose home, away from the Court, is west of the Catskills?
I believe that would be Justice Kennedy.
May 26th, 2009 at 10:11 amDon’t bother researching for yourself or anything. Uninformed musings based on vapid stereotypes are always so much more enlightening.
May 26th, 2009 at 10:12 amYou got it right lebowski – This is a great move. I hope the Republicans fight this tooth and nail. They will go on record opposing the first Latino and a woman on the court. This might be a final nail in their coffin.
May 26th, 2009 at 10:13 amThere won’t be any problems with the thinking women out there, as far as the Latino vote goes, they are already Liberals.
Nothing will change except the Dem party has lost 6% of it’s base since Jan 20th and the Independents have increased 6% to be in the majority now at 39%.
Dems=33%
Repubs=22%
Independents = 39%.
Looking good.
May 26th, 2009 at 10:13 amThis will be the standard objection from every Repub and the Blue Dog Dems. But, so disregard and move the process forward. Many of the Repubs have already indicated they will object to anyone who is nominated, thus demonstrating that the process is really about continuing as the party of “no.”
May 26th, 2009 at 10:13 am#19
ralph the wonder locust Says:
jay Says:
A nice Catholic woman on the Supreme court.
I wonder if she believes in science and evolution?
Don’t bother researching for yourself or anything. Uninformed musings based on vapid stereotypes are always so much more enlightening.
————————————————————-
If jay had bothered doing some research, or knowing anything, s/he’d know that the catholic church, for all the criticism i have of it, is pro evolution…
May 26th, 2009 at 10:15 amSWBob are you a liberal “parrot”?
May 26th, 2009 at 10:15 amjay @ 21,
given your fact filled smear of catholics, you don’t have a lot of cred…
May 26th, 2009 at 10:17 amIt appears that our rough treatment of jay in the past has turned him mean. He now no longer even pretends to offer decent arguments, and instead simply flings his own feces at the wall.
(Hard to tell the difference, I know, but just watch his face when he does it now. He used to try to mask his anger.)
May 26th, 2009 at 10:18 amSo you say. Are you a catholic? Do you believe in the bible?
What do you say?
I was just asking the question like they did on MSNBC, your trusted source for politics.
May 26th, 2009 at 10:19 amWhat smear? I just asked the question that was asked on MSNBC, your trusted source for politics.
May 26th, 2009 at 10:20 amIn your mind kiddo.
LMAO
You amuse me here that’s all. Especially you little boy.
May 26th, 2009 at 10:21 amspecial jay is here to dance for us again
how sweet
May 26th, 2009 at 10:21 amPope John Paul II Embraces Evloution
There’s this new thing called Teh Google, jay. Check it out. It’s pretty dope.
May 26th, 2009 at 10:21 amjay @ 27,
that’s the best you can do?
it’s not for you to demand to know my religious affiliation or lack thereof.
it’s just a fact that the catholic church supports evolution. if you want to dispute that, go ahead.
a literal belief in the self contradicting words of the bible is not the test of chrisitianity.
you do belief catholics are christians, don’t you?
May 26th, 2009 at 10:22 amjay – Americans won’t be fooled by republicanscum hiding out as indepenedents, like sheep in wolves clothing.
Sotomayor’s belief in evolution or science is irrelevant!
May 26th, 2009 at 10:24 amoops like wolves in sheeps clothing – LOL
May 26th, 2009 at 10:25 amI didn’t demand anything from you little boy.
I just asked a question that you don’t seem to want to answer.
So you don’t believe in the bible. That’s fine by me. You can believe what you want.
So what parts of the bible do you disagree with?
May 26th, 2009 at 10:25 amand jay, have you got from limbaugh your talking point attacks on the topic of this post, sotomayor yet?
http://blahgblog.wordpress.com/2009/05/26/what-are-they-thinking/
May 26th, 2009 at 10:25 amHe’s doing more of a punk thing today.
Kind of reminds me of Emilio Estevez in The Breakfast Club.
May 26th, 2009 at 10:26 amKarl Rove probably doesn’t even know who she is yet, and he’s already calling names.
This may become interesting – the R’s have been claiming to have chomping at the bit for a SCOTUS Nom fight for a while now. Apparently they feel that their party rallies around rage, so they need to come up with something to get angry about. However, it’s just possible they might not actually be able to muster any enthusiasm for it. The trick they need to pull off is to find a reason to dislike her without sounding completely incoherent. It’s quite possible that no such reason may be forthcoming, in which case they’ll at “best” find themselves jumping up and down, screaming and flinging poop about literally nothing at all. Which I will enjoy immensely.
May 26th, 2009 at 10:26 amLook for this woman to be a part of the middle, slightly to the left of Kennedy. The biggest issue is her votes on reigning in “corporate democracy” and the status quo of the financial mess we find ourselves in. We need someone who will stop the lax enforcement of anti-trust laws, the looting of pensions and other financial gimmicks bringing our country to its knees. I don’t know about her Catholicism but I sure hope she doesn’t worship in the temple called Wall Street. I feel she may not understand the true power is not the vote but who buys the voters. I wish her God’s speed and Gandhi’s consciousness.
May 26th, 2009 at 10:26 amone of my all-time favorite movies, ralph
May 26th, 2009 at 10:28 amIs it now? Why do you liberals always bring it up when talking to Republicans, or anyone who disagrees with you. It’s your hang-up not mine.
LMAO
Dems, the party of 33%. Deal with it.
May 26th, 2009 at 10:28 amjay used to be amusing, but now he’s just a bore. Same old, same old every time.
May 26th, 2009 at 10:29 amlol, special jay’s dance is looking more like a face-plant
poor little guy, he tries so hard
May 26th, 2009 at 10:30 amShouldn’t you know everything there is to know about the person who will be deciding the fate of the Nation before you comment on her?
I know, why don’t you?
LMAO
May 26th, 2009 at 10:30 amralph the wonder locust @ 42,
he obviously is just trying to disrupt the thread because he doesn’t have the limbaugh/foxnews talking points yet.
so he relapses into bashing catholics by claiming, nevermind the facts, that the catholic church is somehow anti evolution.
typical repub right winger — facts are optional and malleable.
May 26th, 2009 at 10:32 amRight on topic little boy.
You are what you are.
LMAO
You once again make it all about me like the dancing fool that you are.
Ha Ha Ha Ha
May 26th, 2009 at 10:32 amjay — what, specifically, are your criticisms of sotomayor…?
May 26th, 2009 at 10:32 amUnlike Tommy, I’m on topic. I’m not disrupting anything here. I just have my opinions to express.
Keep on topic.
LMAO
May 26th, 2009 at 10:34 amI didn’t think I made any criticisms of her. What are yours?
I just asked the same question that MSNBC asked a catholic in an interview the other night.
May 26th, 2009 at 10:36 amLooks like school’s out for summer. The third grade insults from little jaybird are fast and furious. I know you are but what am I?
It’s a sick ego that thrives on abuse. Better to pity the weak little shit than to feed it the abuse it craves.
May 26th, 2009 at 10:37 amjay continues to face plant
too funny
what a typical right wing coward
May 26th, 2009 at 10:38 amjay @ 49,
please see the topic of this post. i’m sure the sky is multi colored polka dotted in your world. but saying so doesn’t make it so in the real world.
you are very far off topic. that shows that your ignorance spreads way beyond you fact free cashing of catholics and that you don’t have original thoughts.
we all know that’s why you’re trying to derail this thread. it’s typical for the rightwing and ‘gop.’
May 26th, 2009 at 10:40 amWhat’s wrong, you intelligent “Progressives” can’t keep on topic?
LMAO
You make it all about me but I’m not the topic here unless you want it to be.
Grow up children.
May 26th, 2009 at 10:41 amSo little jay, you say you come here to express your opinions, so you were asked ” whats you criticisms of Sotomayor”. Please give us your reason why you think she is a bad choice, since you say, you stay on topic.
May 26th, 2009 at 10:43 amI was totally on topic until people like you changed the discussion.
Don’t let your stupidity show little child.
I said that she was a nice Catholic Woman and wondered if she believed in Science and Evolution. Very relevant for a person who will soon become a member of the SCOTUS.
It’s a decision making thing you know.
Now your bitterness of someone who has a view other than yours is quite evident. Tommy and all the other spammers also.
Do you think that her belief in science will have an affect on her decisions or will she make here decisions based solely on the Constitution Of The United States? A valid question to ask. Will her religion have an affect on her decisions when so many don’t believe as she does.
Another valid question.
Grow up little child. There are tough questions to be asked and answered here. The Nation is in crises.
May 26th, 2009 at 10:48 amblood from turnips is more likely than honest, thoughtful and on topic input from jay.
until and unless he comments on sotomayor, don’t feed the stunted and starved for attention troll.
what do people think of sotomayor…?
i’m afraid she might be too moderate for my tastes, but, for a first scotus pick, i’m not too overly troubled. as long as his likely future picks are from further to the left.
i’m also looking forward to the continued implosion this will cause the repubs to descend into.
http://blahgblog.wordpress.com/2009/05/26/what-are-they-thinking/
May 26th, 2009 at 10:50 amI don’t recall ever saying that she was a bad choice. Do you think she is a bad choice? I also didn’t express any criticisms of her.
Can you read?
I love how you people put words in my mouth.
Grow up little girl.
May 26th, 2009 at 10:51 amI was totally on topic until people like you changed the discussion.
Don’t let your stupidity show little child.
I said that she was a nice Catholic Woman and wondered if she believed in Science and Evolution. Very relevant for a person who will soon become a member of the SCOTUS.
It’s a decision making thing you know.
Now your bitterness of someone who has a view other than yours is quite evident. Tommy and all the other spammers also.
Do you think that her belief in science will have an affect on her decisions or will she make here decisions based solely on the Constitution Of The United States? A valid question to ask. Will her religion have an affect on her decisions when so many don’t believe as she does.
Another valid question.
Grow up little child. There are tough questions to be asked and answered here. The Nation is in crises.
May 26th, 2009 at 10:52 amjay @ 56,
(ignoring my own advice here because of the cross posting.)
we already addressed your catholic bashing. how many times do you need to hear it? the catholic church supports evolution.
May 26th, 2009 at 10:52 amjay Says:
As usual Jay you show how stupid you are and how worthless your posts are. The latino vote is far from liberal they tend to be socially conservative. As to the rest as usual you are a liar and a fool
http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1207/republican-party-identification-slips-nationwide-pennsylvania-specter-switch
Over the first four months of 2009, the Republican Party has continued to lose adherents. Interviews with over 7,000 respondents nationwide so far this year found fewer than a quarter (23%) of the combined total identifying themselves as Republicans. This is down from 25% in 2008, and from 30% in 2004. In total, the GOP has lost roughly a quarter of its base over the past five years.
But these Republican losses have not translated into substantial Democratic gains. So far in 2009, 35% of adults nationwide identify as Democrats, about the same as in 2008 (36%). While GOP identification has fallen seven points since 2004, the Democrats have gained only two points over that period. Instead, a growing number of Americans describe themselves as independents, 36% in 2009 compared with just 32% in 2008 and 30% in 2004.
Could you BE stupider more irrelevant and any more of a basic punkass troll?
May 26th, 2009 at 10:54 amYet you constantly make posts off topic. You try to make it all about me like everyone else does.
You’re pathetic in your attacks.
Get back on topic, will you?
LMAO
May 26th, 2009 at 10:54 amjay Says:
SWBob are you a liberal “parrot”?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What is certain Jay is that YOU are a conservative MORON
May 26th, 2009 at 10:55 amjay: You really are stupid aren’t you? If you had answered any of the questions I asked you, I wouldn’t have had to ask. If you don’t think she is a bad choice, and you say you stay on point. then why are you hear bashing people who think she is a good choice?
May 26th, 2009 at 10:57 amOnce again, jay takes time off from running his highly successful company (hee hee) to hijack a thread and get all the attention he so desperately needs.
DNFTT
May 26th, 2009 at 10:58 amYou should use the numbers from Jan 20th on like I reported.
Repubs=23%
Dems=33% down from 39%
Independents= 39% up from 33%
You are a minority party.
May 26th, 2009 at 10:59 amWhich Republican Senator will be dishonestly critical of Sotomayor and later be found to have illegally hired a Hispanic woman that he financially and verbally abused?
HT to jay for the inspiration for this question.
May 26th, 2009 at 11:00 amnotice how jay @62 omitted the rest of my comment on the topic of this post (@ 57).
i’m done with this hollow fact free shell.
it’s best to ignore him and comment on the wisdom of picking sotomayor.
as i wrote above (@57), i think she’s a bit too centrist, but i’m willing to let this pass for a first scotus pick. and their is the benefit of watching the repubs and rightwingers go into full blown meltdown over this.
May 26th, 2009 at 11:01 amGood Morning youngsters…Can’t comment much on President Obamas pick as I know nothing about her past rulings.It would be nice of someone here would post some of the cases and how she ruled, until then I will reserve my thought’s….I don’t care what relegion or lack there of a nominee has…I also don’t care if they are male, female, have 3 head;s, 8 legs and are four shades of purple…The only thing I am concerned with is their stand for the constitution, rule of law and working for all the people, not big business and paid for vote’s..
Not suprised with rover blasting anyone..I still wish he was in jail with a gag order instead of spewing his hateful words all over our air way’s…P.B. & J
May 26th, 2009 at 11:01 amDo trolls have a closet full of spare a**ses? I don’t see any other way they could so frequently LMAO on TP.
May 26th, 2009 at 11:02 amI should use numbers from Jan instead of April? What an ignorant punkass troll you are. You dont care about truth reality or facts only about annoying us. You are ignorant worthless and nothing but an organ grinders monkey spewing whatever stupidity you are told to think.
May 26th, 2009 at 11:03 amWhat, my answer wasn’t good enough for you?
I never bashed anyone. It’s your friends that are trying to change what I said (like you tried to do) and of course the name calling is always there. All tactics used by “Progressives” when confronted with an opposing view.
You are what you are.
I didn’t say I was for nor against her. I just had a few questions about how she might make her decisions. That is a relevant question and concern for any nominee for the SCOTUS.
It’s too bad that you don’t have the intelligence to know that.
May 26th, 2009 at 11:04 amSlapping the mentally challenged Jay around is too boring for me today. He is too stupid to be anything but what he is a troll with no interest in dialogue. Just trolling. Making every thread about him. Insulting any dem or liberal he can and being the petulant child with the IQ of an icecube. Not worth my time today
May 26th, 2009 at 11:07 amRun away little boy. You can’t stay on topic anyway.
LMAO
May 26th, 2009 at 11:09 amEugeneDebs @ 73,
the truth of your assertions has been demonstrated beyond refutation. let’s ignore the fact free troll from now on, at least until and unless he comments on the topic of this post in a fact based and bullshit free manner…
May 26th, 2009 at 11:09 amC’mon Angel, why do you think she’s a bad choice?
May 26th, 2009 at 11:09 amjay, just couldn’t come clean could ya? keep playing your little word games, thinking you are cute, when what you really are, is just some dumb kid with a computer.
May 26th, 2009 at 11:09 amHey jaybird, I think she is a great choice, and don’t bother answering my question as to what you think, because I really don’t care.
May 26th, 2009 at 11:11 amI apparently know more than you do and have expressed my concerns which is far more than the childish game that you played.
I’m sorry that you don’t have the capacity or the knowledge to ask the tough questions of a person who has been nominated to this high post that lasts forever.
Go hide under your blanket until it’s all over little girl.
May 26th, 2009 at 11:13 amright wingers are knee-jerk reactionaries
which is why they can’t discuss things, they just do their troll dance
May 26th, 2009 at 11:14 amI did three times here already. So you can’t read. That’s not my fault. You keep that bias dogma alive. It’s what people like you do here.
Little girl with childish games. Pathetic but very funny.
LMAO
May 26th, 2009 at 11:15 amRight on topic.
Little childish games from the school yard. Keep on topic little boy.
All that from a sock named Ranting. Another rant I see.
Your are what you are. Funny though.
May 26th, 2009 at 11:17 amjay, why are you here?
May 26th, 2009 at 11:18 amI’m a member here. Why are you here?
May 26th, 2009 at 11:20 amhe’s here to entertain liberals with his parody of a right wing ignorant coward
unless, of course, he really believes the crap he spews, in which case, he’s just a childish moron
May 26th, 2009 at 11:20 amIntelligent one Tommy.
LMAO
May 26th, 2009 at 11:22 amDoesn’t answer the question dummy, and exactly what are you a member of?
May 26th, 2009 at 11:22 amIt’s wrong to call jay a dummy because it’s redundant.
May 26th, 2009 at 11:23 amdon’t feed the troll. the vapidness of his comments show the hollowness of the repubs and rightwingers.
May 26th, 2009 at 11:25 amI agree.
Nicely done, Tommy. Even jay acknowledges you nailed him.
May 26th, 2009 at 11:26 amWell I’ll leave little jay to the rest of you. Unlike jay, I have a real job in the real world, so I have to go. Have fun folks.
May 26th, 2009 at 11:26 amNow Angel you asked a question and I answered it. You call me a “dummy” but refuse to answer my question after I answered yours.
I’m a member of this site and have been one for quite some time. I enjoy the humor that people like you and Tommy provide.
You are unable to consider a person’s opposing view though I didn’t offer one in this topic.
I just asked a few questions that you tried to change the meaning of.
You are what you are but I luv ya anyway.
Why are you here? Is it to be stroked by like minded “Progressives” or is it just to make yourself feel important? What is it?
Try and answer a question honestly for once.
May 26th, 2009 at 11:27 amYou run away little girl.
You couldn’t answer a single post from me and you call me a “dummy”.
See ya little girl, luv ya, now go hide somewhere.
May 26th, 2009 at 11:29 amKids stuff.
Typical “Progressive”.
May 26th, 2009 at 11:31 amYour comment is right on topic. Geeze you must be a smart fella.
It belongs in the TP hall of fame.
Kids stuff like most of the crap posted here.
Real funny though.
LMAO
May 26th, 2009 at 11:33 amWhat questions do you think should be asked of a potential Supreme Court Nominee?
Is the fact that Obama nominated her enough for you?
Some real questions for ya, not the crap that you have asked me.
May 26th, 2009 at 11:36 amI think we all ought to let jay have the floor. After all, 30 posts in the first 100 says quite a lot about one’s need for attention.
May 26th, 2009 at 11:36 amI’m just replying to your nonsense.
How about you answering my questions that are on topic instead of you nonsense postings about me?
May 26th, 2009 at 11:38 amCheck that — 31 posts in the first 100.
May 26th, 2009 at 11:39 amI didn’t think so. Typical little child response from a little boy.
LMAO There you have it. A chance for a real discussion and Ralph hides from it.
What questions do you think should be asked of a potential Supreme Court Nominee?
Is the fact that Obama nominated her enough for you?
May 26th, 2009 at 11:41 amThe bigot RHF is here.
May 26th, 2009 at 11:43 amC’mon Ralph. Step up.
I didn’t think so. You are what you are.
May 26th, 2009 at 11:44 amYa right. So now you are admitting that you are RHF.
Liars are always liars.
LMAO
It’s not an attack if it’s true.
May 26th, 2009 at 11:54 amNothing to add that’s on topic little girl?
May 26th, 2009 at 11:57 amRHF’s new “Sock Puppet” ARN. She can change her name but can’t change who she is.
LMAO
SOOOoooOOO funny. Really. Ha Ha Ha
May 26th, 2009 at 12:01 pmI knew the right wing kooks would be kookier than ever this morning! :-D
May 26th, 2009 at 12:15 pmAw, you guys blew it.
We had jay muttering to himself, all alone in the room, thinking people were still listening to him. It was quite comical.
jay can be spun that way pretty easily. He loves to watch himself dance in the mirror.
May 26th, 2009 at 12:18 pmRepublicans look forward to learning more about federal appeals court judge Sonia Sotomayor’s thoughts on the importance of the Supreme Court’s fidelity to the Constitution and the rule of law.
Fidelity to the Constitution and rule of law coming from a Republican. That’s rich!
May 26th, 2009 at 12:25 pmWho’s this “jay” character?
May 26th, 2009 at 12:39 pmJay does not come here to express opinions. He’s made it clear several times that he is only here to make people angry. That’s it. Just ignore him.
May 26th, 2009 at 12:49 pmHe is what he is…
May 26th, 2009 at 12:54 pmAnd once again you nuts make it all about me.
Keep on topic if you can. I know you can’t.
What a joke you people are.
Very amusing.
LMAO
Answer the questions Ralph. What, you can’t? Not surprising.
You are what you are.
Ha Ha Ha Ha.
May 26th, 2009 at 1:05 pmCan’t answer the tough questions as usual.
LMAO
You people are so intelligent.
May 26th, 2009 at 1:06 pmHow many of Sotomayor’s rulings have been overturned by the SCOTUS?
How many?
It’s not a tough question for so many intelligent “Progressives”.
LMAO
May 26th, 2009 at 1:09 pmCan you only post nonsense or do you want to stay in the dark?
Hey Ralph, take a crack at that one.
You’re a joke on a nothing “Progressive” site.
I bet it makes you feel important though.
Ha Ha Ha Ha.
How about you, bigot?
Any answers?
May 26th, 2009 at 1:11 pmAre you angry little girl or don’t you know the answers?
Your post is right on topic.
Ha Ha Ha Ha.
LMAO
May 26th, 2009 at 1:12 pmAre you angry little girl or don’t you know the answers?
Your post is right on topic.
Ha Ha Ha Ha.
LMAO
You told me that yourself. Nice try though!
May 26th, 2009 at 1:20 pmNo answers from the little girl?
Typical liberal.
May 26th, 2009 at 1:23 pmhttp://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/05/26/sotomayor.resume/?iref=hpmostpop
May 26th, 2009 at 1:26 pmBah I’m done with you. You’re not going to upset me into arguing. Face it, you failed.
May 26th, 2009 at 1:26 pmYa, right.
Run from the question little girl.
Why won’t you stay on topic?
May 26th, 2009 at 1:28 pmNo arguments from me.. I posted the facts.
It must be dark inside a closed mind.
May 26th, 2009 at 1:29 pmSo the Constitution has nothing to do with this nomination.
Now that’s rich.
LMAO
Soooo funny what you people think of this country.
May 26th, 2009 at 1:34 pmAll tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent. “Thomas Jefferson”
May 26th, 2009 at 1:37 pmSshhhhhhh…. jay’s talking to himself again.
Let’s watch.
May 26th, 2009 at 1:38 pmRight on topic Ralph.
Typical.
Answer the question.
May 26th, 2009 at 1:39 pmYou go and cry and whine that a person with an intelligent post is bothering you.
Childish attempt to shut down a person who you disagree with.
Typical little boy schoolyard games.
If you can’t answer the questions then ban the messenger.
LMAO all day.
May 26th, 2009 at 1:48 pmSooo, how many of her rulings were overturned by the SCOTUS?
I posted the answer but you refuse to read the facts.
You are all about the facts, aren’t you?
May 26th, 2009 at 1:50 pmPoor little Jay. Too bad the facts don’t support your silly posts, dearie…
Obama’s approval rating:
64%
Hmmmm. Dems 33%, Indies 39%…that equals 72%, which means that 89% of that total SUPORT OBAMA.
Dear me. Jay – you lose. :o)
Don’t bother to thank me. It was my pleasure to point this out to you!
xoxoxo
~A
May 26th, 2009 at 2:36 pm(tossing 2nd “P” up to SUPORT)
May 26th, 2009 at 2:37 pmI never mentioned Obama’s ratings or approval in my statement. Nice Liberal try. Spin all you want.
You are what you are.
May 26th, 2009 at 2:42 pmOf course you are.
May 26th, 2009 at 2:44 pm33% plus 39% plus 22% = 94%. You left out the Republicans.
Nice try to spin my posts. You also forgot to include the 6% of others in your silliness.
May 26th, 2009 at 2:46 pm**snort**
jay, you’re pathetic.
May 26th, 2009 at 2:47 pmRight on topic Zooey. Just what is expected from you.
LMAO
Maybe you would answer my question. It seems that the others here can’t even after i posted the information and the facts.
How many rulings of Sotomayor’s were overturned by the SCOTUS?
May 26th, 2009 at 2:50 pmIsn’t funny how all we have to do is drop one little comment into the cage, and jay gets up and starts dancing again? And then when we all leave, he keeps going, muttering to himself about all the “typical liberals” and “little boy” and practicing his soft-shoe in the mirror.
May 26th, 2009 at 3:09 pmHow typical of you Ralph to avoid the questions and to post completely off topic.
LMAO
You make it all about me and you dance like a little boy.
May 26th, 2009 at 3:11 pmWhat is with you and dancing little boys, Jay?
May 26th, 2009 at 4:15 pmMan your creepy.
…you’re…
May 26th, 2009 at 4:16 pmKarl Rove was on Fox News getting started on the attacks, calling Sotomayor an “unabashed liberal.”
Hah! If Attila the Hun were the Democratic pick, Rove would say he was too liberal. ANYBODY chosen by Obama is going to get sliced and diced as too liberal….even those that are to the RIGHT of Attila the Hun. GOP–Stil the party of NO approvals, NO ideas, NO bipartisanship.
May 26th, 2009 at 5:08 pmNah. KKKarl would nod solemnly and proclaim Attila a “centrist” and a good mainstream choice, even if he is a little too liberal.
May 26th, 2009 at 5:24 pmHow many rulings of Sotomayor’s were overturned by the SCOTUS?
May 26th, 2009 at 5:28 pmOh good. jay’s back to dance for us.
Let me turn up the music.
May 26th, 2009 at 5:35 pmI see jay has upped his percentage of posts from 30% to 36% (56 out of 155).
Nice work jay. All those dance lessons are paying off.
May 26th, 2009 at 5:38 pmAnother post that is off topic from Ralph.
Answer the question.
May 26th, 2009 at 5:41 pm“I, [NAME], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as [TITLE] under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God.”
May 26th, 2009 at 5:46 pmSo why is the fact that she is a Hispanic and a woman important?
How many of here rulings have been found to be “Unconstitutional” and were reversed by the SCOTUS?
Answer the question.
May 26th, 2009 at 5:50 pmjay Says:
So why is the fact that she is a Hispanic and a woman important?
How many of her rulings have been found to be “Unconstitutional” and were reversed by the SCOTUS?
Answer the question.
May 26th, 2009 at 6:11 pmStatement from RNC Chairman Michael Steele:
Republicans look forward to learning more [...]. Republicans will reserve judgment on Sonia Sotomayor until there has been a thorough and thoughtful examination of her legal views.
that UPDATE needs a time stamp – didn’t take long to learn more,
’cause they’ve been passing ‘judgement’ all day long…
imagine that…
doesn’t sound like steele wrote that statement anyway…
May 26th, 2009 at 7:17 pmhttp://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/05/26/sotomayor.resume/?iref=hpmostpop
Try this one.
May 26th, 2009 at 7:34 pmThe SCOTUS is not there to make policy, it is only to render decisions on the LAW and how it is stated in the Constitution of the United states.
She will have a tough time explaining this statement in the approval process.
Half of her decisions were overturned by the SCOTUS.
A persons gender or race are not to be considered in any ruling of the SCOTUS. How they apply to the Constitution is the only deciding factor of any ruling.
May 26th, 2009 at 7:47 pmThree bigoted posts from you in a row.
You need new material little girl.
LMAO
Ha Ha Ha Ha
I didn’t mislead anything. I posted the complete story in the URL that you obviously didn’t take the time to read.
You are what you are.
Here it is again little bigot.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/05/26/sotomayor.resume/?iref=hpmostpop
May 26th, 2009 at 9:20 pmYou are ignorant aren’t you? I was referring to the decisions of the SCOTUS. Those decisions are to be made on the Constitutionality of the argument only.
You know crap about the Constitution.
You are so stupid, your bigotry is clouding your mind.
LMAO Funny though.
May 26th, 2009 at 9:23 pmRHF=Arn
PWNED again.
May 26th, 2009 at 9:41 pmBarack Obama’s selection of Sonia Sotomayor is excellent.
Sonia Sotomayor is a racial minority and will add racial diversity to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Respectfully Submitted by Andrew Yu-Jen Wang
May 27th, 2009 at 2:04 amB.S., Summa Cum Laude, 1996
Messiah College, Grantham, PA
Lower Merion High School, Ardmore, PA, 1993
jay Says:
She will have a tough time explaining this statement in the approval process.
Not so tough. Just listen to the entire statement in context:
Explained.
jay Says:
Half of her decisions were overturned by the SCOTUS.
That’s a lie. You’re lying. You lied there. Produce facts or STFU.
.
jay Says:
A persons gender or race are not to be considered in any ruling of the SCOTUS. How they apply to the Constitution is the only deciding factor of any ruling.
Therefore, old white guys shouldn’t be allowed on the SCOTUS since they’ll obviously vote in the old/white/guy interest. No? Works both ways, b!tch.
May 27th, 2009 at 2:58 amElBruce Says:
I already posted the complete statement but you are too stupid to read it.
For the fourth time for the ignorant: http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/05/26/sotomayor.resume/?iref=hpmostpop
I also posted the overturned rulings by the SCOTUS and you were also too stupid to read that either.
That is under the Constitution of the United States.
Those decisions are to be made on the Constitutionality of the argument only.
You know crap about the Constitution.
Your stupidity and bias dogma has come to the forefront.
Your comments show your level of knowledge and ignorance, I suggest that you educate yourself or STFU.
LMAO another liberal who thinks he knows what he’s talking about.
PWNED like all the others.
May 27th, 2009 at 9:12 amIf you say so. Just as long as she doesn’t make her decisions based on that racial makeup.
Those decisions are to be made on the Constitutionality of the argument only. That is what the Supreme Courts job is. It’s not to make law but to interpret the law under the Constitution.
If you are what you brag about being, then you should know that, right Wang?
May 27th, 2009 at 9:18 amElBruce, if you want any credibility you have to stop quoting the Huffington Post, a leftist Liberal web site.
There is more garbage there than in the Jersey land fill.
LMAO
You’re so funny I can hardly stand it.
May 27th, 2009 at 9:22 amNIce work, ElBruce! You got jay to dance a little more, exhausted as he was.
I’ve noticed that when jay gets bushed, he relies a little too heavily on the “jazz hands!” in order to add energy to his performance, but, hey, he’s made almost 40% of the posts on this thread (68 out of 173 = 39.3%) so his fatigue is understandable.
Nice work, jay! This has truly been a Troll Hall of Fame™ performance!
May 27th, 2009 at 10:16 amAnother post off topic by Ralphie.
LMAO.
Nothing to say Ralphie?
Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha
May 27th, 2009 at 10:28 amI didn’t think so.
Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha
LMAO You liberals slay me. Too funny. One guy shuts you all up. Sorry but I’m not intimidated by morons and bigots. You are what you are.
Ha Ha Ha Ha
May 27th, 2009 at 10:32 amjay Says:
ElBruce, if you want any credibility you have to stop quoting the Huffington Post, a leftist Liberal web site.
Dude, it was a video. Of her saying the thing. What, you think they CGI’d it or something?
May 27th, 2009 at 10:36 amAnd I posted the complete transcript plus her total resume including her decisions. So what’s your point? Your info is half *ss biased information and my post was a complete resume.
I think you went to a site that is totally left wing and bias.
I posted the complete history of the person.
That is the difference between you and me.
May 27th, 2009 at 10:43 am71 out of 178.
39.8%… almost there, jay! You can get to 40%! Just gotta keep hoofin’!
–
–
But remember — jazz hands!
May 27th, 2009 at 10:51 amBruce, I could have gone to U TUBE and posted the same video that you posted. I chose to find out about the person, you chose to go for sensationalism and a video.
You are a Liberal who has to defend your fellow liberals by any means necessary. I’m an open minded free thinker who wanted to find the truth about the person. You went to a bias site with a video, my information comes from a somewhat credible news source.
You are what you are.
May 27th, 2009 at 10:51 amThanks for keeping score Ralphie.
Jump in when you have something to say.
Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha LMAO
May 27th, 2009 at 10:52 am