5.27.2009

Judge Sotomayor is terrible news for GOP's lunatic fringe

When all is said and done, this nomination is terrible news for the lunatic fringe. If they keep it up, they'll lose their "Permanent Republican Majority" status. Oh, I forgot. They already have.

There were so many great pieces on Obama's nomination of Judge Sotomayor to the Supreme Court, I've decided to combine into into one post.

From Jason Linkins, GOP Frets Over Sotomayor's "Personal Politics, Feelings, And Preferences":

Here's the latest news on Sotomayor talking points, people!

Let's say you are prepping yourself to oppose Sonia Sotomayor. Or, at the very least, prepping yourself to oppose judicial activism (excepting the sort of judicial activism that would overturn the Kelo decision, of course). Or, alternatively, prepping yourself to oppose EMPATHY (by which we mean: empathy that does not specifically limit itself to empathizing with very brave, test-taking, Connecticut firefighters, WHO ALL MUST EMPATHIZE WITH, LEST THEY BE COMMUNISTS). What are you talking about, at this moment? Well, as one wag points out to me in an email, you are singing a specific refrain, today:

Orrin Hatch (R-Utah): "I will focus on determining whether Judge Sotomayor is committed to deciding cases based only on the law as made by the people and their elected representatives, not on personal feelings or politics."

Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.): "We will thoroughly examine her record to ensure she understands that the role of a jurist in our democracy is to apply the law even-handedly, despite their own feelings or personal or political preferences."

Charles Grassley (R-Iowa): "The Judiciary Committee should take time to ensure that the nominee will be true to the Constitution and apply the law, not personal politics, feelings or preferences."

John Cornyn (R-Tx.): "She must prove her commitment to impartially deciding cases based on the law, rather than based on her own personal politics, feelings, and preferences."

read more...
From Think Progress, Limbaugh on Sotomayor: ‘Do I want her to fail? Yeah.’:

Reacting to Obama’s nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court today, conservative talker Rush Limbaugh called Sotomayor a “horrible pick,” said that Republicans should “go to the mat” in their efforts to oppose her confirmation in the Senate, and — echoing his hopes for Obama’s failure — declared that he wanted Sotomayor to “fail”:

LIMBAUGH: Do I want her to fail? Yeah. Do I want her to fail to get on the court? Yes! She’d be a disaster on the court. Do I still want Obama to fail as President? Yeah. AP you getting this? He’s going to fail anyway, but the sooner the better.

read more / hear it...

Also from Think Progress, Tancredo: Sotomayor ‘Appears To Be A Racist’:

Last night on MSNBC, former Republican House member Tom Tancredo declared that Judge Sonia Sotomayor “appears to be a racist” and indicated she would only be confirmed because she’s a Hispanic woman:

read more...

From TPM, Inhofe Wants to Make Sure Sotomayor Is "Without Undue Influence" From Her Race And Gender:
Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-OK) released this statement today on the Sotomayor nomination, reminding us all that he voted against her confirmation to the appeals court in 1998 -- and apparently questioning whether she can make rulings independent of her race and gender:

"Of primary concern to me is whether or not Judge Sotomayor follows the proper role of judges and refrains from legislating from the bench. Some of her recent comments on this matter have given me cause for great concern. In the months ahead, it will be important for those of us in the U.S. Senate to weigh her qualifications and character as well as her ability to rule fairly without undue influence from her own personal race, gender, or political preferences."

read more...

Think Progress has Inholfe's lunacy as well,Inhofe worries that Sotomayor may allow ‘undue influence from her own personal race, gender.’ :
Republican members of Congress have been trying to subtly raise questions about Sonia Sotomayor’s objectivity — simply because of her non-traditional race, gender, and upbringing. Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX) said today that he is concerned Sotomayor has shown “personal bias based on ethnicity and gender.” Similarly, Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK) said in a statement today that Sotomayor may be subject to the “undue influence” of her race and gender...

[snip]

Responding to Inhofe, The American Prospect’s Dana Goldstein writes, “Yes. Because the worldviews of John Roberts, Sam Alito, John Paul Stevens, Anthony Kennedy, Stephen Breyer, and Antonin Scalia are not impacted at all by their white male identities. White men are raceless and genderless, haven’t you heard?”

read more...
And this must be killing them. The WSJ basically declares -- in a even-handed piece -- that Sotomayor is no activist. They show how she has often voted for big business while at the same time voting for employees/unions and other socially liberal causes. They also say the court's balance will not be chnage by her being on the bench: Record Shows Rulings Within Liberal Mainstream:
WASHINGTON -- Judge Sonia Sotomayor has built a record on such issues as civil rights and employment law that puts her within the mainstream of Democratic judicial appointees.

[snip]

Judge Sotomayor's most famous ruling benefited a labor union. As a district judge in March 1995, she was assigned a case that pitted the National Labor Relations Board against Major League Baseball's owners. The owners, fighting a players' strike, had unilaterally changed the game's rules on free agency and salary arbitration. Then they hired replacement players.

[snip]

Her record in more than 4,000 cases, including those from 11 years on the Second Circuit, shows her occasional siding with corporate defendants or diverting from a standard liberal position.

The judge has favored corporate defendants in suits that test when cases can be brought as class actions. Judges often must determine whether plaintiffs' claims should be pre-empted by more defense-friendly federal and international laws.

"There is no reason for the business community to be concerned" about Judge Sotomayor, said Lauren Rosenblum Goldman, a partner at Mayer Brown LLP who has represented businesses including Wachovia Corp. and Dow Chemical Co.

Read more...
And from Sam Stein, something that is certain to backfire: Sotomayor Nomination Ad Wars Begin (VIDEO)

Let the ad wars begin. The progressive-leaning Coalition for Constitutional Values is up with a new ad on Wednesday, "introducing" Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor "to the American public."

The spot, titled "Justice," uses clips of President Obama describing his ideal choice for the bench, spliced with images of Sotomayor and captions of her accomplishments...


Read more..

There is no way that reasonable people, particularly Hispanics, are going to feel comfortable being linked to a party that that express such outright racism and disdain for those scary little brown people. Obama knew exactly what he was doing and the GOP is going to be paying for it for generations to come -- unless they can keep their collective mouths shut and stay classy. Yeah, right!

I'm sure there were be a lot more pots on Judge Sotomayor and the crazy, right-winger responses, attacks and outright hate they level against her.

Bookmark and Share

blog comments powered by Disqus