BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee

Subject: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: wysiwyg
Date: 26 May 09 - 11:04 AM

I don't know a thing about her other than what I've been told, but it looks GOOD. For everyone, I hope.

Details, anyone?

~Susan

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: Bill D
Date: 26 May 09 - 11:45 AM

Go to Cnn.com Read Toobin's column and the hilarious comments by conservatives who are still convinced that Bork was the ideal candidate.

It will be fine...

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 26 May 09 - 11:49 AM

Actually Bork was the ideal candidate, but she seems to be a reasonable choice...not great, but reasonable.

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: pdq
Date: 26 May 09 - 11:56 AM

Bork was considered the foremost Constitutional scholar in the U.S. by many people. Can't have a dangerous person like that on the Supreme Court, can we?

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: Azizi
Date: 26 May 09 - 12:04 PM

Here's some information about Judge Sonia Sotomayor:

Age 55

► Raised in the Bronxdale Housing project, in the South Bronx, New York

► Die hard New York Yankee Fan!!!

► Her father was a tool-and-die maker, who passed away when she was 9.

► Raised with her brother by single-mother, who was a nurse in a methadone clinic.

► Won scholarship to Princeton University, where she graduated summa cum laude.

► She earned her law degree at Yale, where she was editor of the law journal.

► At 40, she became the youngest judge in the Southern District of New York and the FIRST judge of Puerto Rican descent.

► Divorced; no children.

► Assistant DA for Manhattan from 1979 to 1984; Partner at Pavia & Harcourt from 1984 to 1992.

► U.S. District Court judge in Manhattan in 1992-1998; U.S. Appeals Court judge in Manhattan in 1998-present.

► Board member of the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund.

from:

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/5/26/735500/-S,-Se-Puede!!!-(UPDATED-wVideo)

Sí, Se Puede!!! (UPDATED w/ Video)
by Al Rodgers
      
Tue May 26, 2009 at 08:09:32 AM PDT

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: SINSULL
Date: 26 May 09 - 12:08 PM

Bork is 80 years old - a bit long in the tooth to be first choice. 20 years ago he lost his bid for a seat on the court.

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: Azizi
Date: 26 May 09 - 12:15 PM

Here's some more information about Judge Sotomayor from a comment in another dailykos.com dairy:

"[Sotomayor] won't be accused of being a "liberal activist." Because she's not. She's a moderate/conservative. Who was originally appointed by Bush I to the district court. Who got 25 Republican votes in 1998 when she was appointed to the Circuit Court. And whose name was thrown around for awhile as a Bush II SCOTUS appointee who could make it thru the Senate"...

by Yirmiyahu on Tue May 26, 2009 at 07:13:04 AM PDT

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/5/26/735465/-Worst-Kept-Secret-In-Town-To-Be-Revealed:-Sotomayor-Announcement

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: Wesley S
Date: 26 May 09 - 12:15 PM

Hmmm - She sounds like she's smart. Summa cum laude.Editor of the law review at Yale. And female too? That will give the conservatives all sorts of reason not to trust her. And besides - she's practically a furriner....

Someone check her papers and make sure she has a green card.

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: kendall
Date: 26 May 09 - 12:43 PM

If the cement heads fillibuster they will pay the price in the next election.

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: Azizi
Date: 26 May 09 - 12:49 PM

Do the Republicans really want to oppose Sotomayo's nomination and in so doing alienate Hispanic (Latino) voters and woman voters? I guess some Republicans don't care about those considerations, but here's an excerpt from a Republican spokesperson who suggest that that Sotomayo would be hard to oppose:

"...will the social conservatives eager for a fight over Sotomayor be supported by others on the right, as they try to block the appointment of the first Latina Supreme Court justice, whose life story (from housing project to Supreme Court!) is full of triumph-over-adversity inspiration?

Not everyone on the right appears eager for a war over Sotomayor. On May 1, conservative pundit and strategist Bill Kristol gave a talk to the DC lawyers' chapter of the Federalist Society, the preeminent conservative legal group. (Members include Supreme Court Justices Antonin Scalia and Samuel Alito Jr.) He said that Sotomayor would be hard to oppose, noting her Hispanic background and pointing out that she was first appointed to the federal bench by President George H.W. Bush. Kristol called her an attractive candidate and predicted she would sail through the confirmation process, with minimal Republican resistance. He did not believe Sotomayor would galvanize a meaningful opposition and did not encourage a full-scale campaign against her. "

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2009/05/will-sotomayor-split-right

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: Bill D
Date: 26 May 09 - 12:51 PM

"Bork was considered the foremost Constitutional scholar in the U.S. by many people.

The greatest constitutional scholar with a specific seriously conservative 'agenda' IS a bit dangerous.

Read the debates & hearing about Bork, and why his admitted extreme views were rejected.

I can think of 'experts' in many fields who don't have the attitude to make policy decisions.

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: Bill D
Date: 26 May 09 - 12:59 PM

Oh...and remember, Obama taught constitutional law at Chicago for awhile. He does know a bit about it, even if you don't think him the greatest expert. I am sure he is aware of the right credentials for judges.

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: Amos
Date: 26 May 09 - 01:06 PM

Despite her conservative credentials, which she has surely earned by clawing her way out of the South Bronx (you ever been there?), my suspicion is that she will be a solid balancing force against the Old White John proclivities of the court.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: katlaughing
Date: 26 May 09 - 01:07 PM

I cannot believe there are some who are actually using the fact that she has diabetes as a possible reason to vote against her! They're worried she may not last long enough without complications. Did they miss when that kind of prejudice went out the door? Reminds me of the excuse of not hiring women of child-bearing age! Maybe they will ask Ginsburg to quit before any complications from cancer! Or, let's check the heart health of all those male Supremes. Seesh!

She sounds like a good candidate. I hope they don't drag it out too long.

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: Wesley S
Date: 26 May 09 - 01:12 PM

Don't forget Kat. She's a woman - so she probably also gets those "mood swings" that y'all are so prone to having.

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: katlaughing
Date: 26 May 09 - 01:16 PM

At 54 she may have them under control, Wesley...at least we can hope, eh?**bg**

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: fretless
Date: 26 May 09 - 01:43 PM

The right wing has characterized her as a racist and sexist because, they say that she has insisted "I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male'…"

Others have referred to the above quote as being taken out of context and have instead described the following as being more typical of her:

"Let us not forget that wise men like Oliver Wendell Holmes and Justice Cardozo voted on cases which upheld both sex and race discrimination in our society. Until 1972, no Supreme Court case ever upheld the claim of a woman in a gender discrimination case. I, like Professor Carter, believe that we should not be so myopic as to believe that others of different experiences or backgrounds are incapable of understanding the values and needs of people from a different group. Many are so capable. As Judge Cedarbaum pointed out to me, nine white men on the Supreme Court in the past have done so on many occasions and on many issues including Brown.

"However, to understand takes time and effort, something that not all people are willing to give. For others, their experiences limit their ability to understand the experiences of others. Other simply do not care. Hence, one must accept the proposition that a difference there will be by the presence of women and people of color on the bench."

And that certainly sounds reasonable.

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: Amos
Date: 26 May 09 - 01:53 PM

Espousing wisdom and balance is now "racist and sexist"? Ya gotta wonder what ideal these people are looking for??? Somebody like Bull Connor?


A

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: Midchuck
Date: 26 May 09 - 02:38 PM

Being a woman, Latina, and from a poor background - that's all fine. But her having been to Yale - after the last few presidents we've had - scares me.

Peter

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 26 May 09 - 03:32 PM

A Machiavellian choice- but excellent!

A hard one to oppose.

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: Riginslinger
Date: 26 May 09 - 04:11 PM

"► Board member of the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund"



             A divider and not a uniter?

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: Ebbie
Date: 26 May 09 - 06:46 PM

"Don't forget Kat. She's a woman - so she probably also gets those "mood swings" that y'all are so prone to having." Wesley S

I've been looking for a place where I can say this (Sorry, Wesley, that you get to be the goat): Men cite a woman's menopausal hormones as a dangerous, even ugly, thing. They have never recognized or at least acknowledged that until about age 50 Men are governed by their hormones all the time. .

*BSEG

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: Peace
Date: 26 May 09 - 07:01 PM

Male hormones begin to decline by age 35. Also, about 80% of men have symptoms of low testosterone by age 40. FYI.

Mood swings are not just a function of having or not having a period. Hell, lots of stuff can cause that.

And since this thread seems to have no place to go but down, have a good day all.

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: Ebbie
Date: 26 May 09 - 07:05 PM

I picked age 50 out of a hat, Peace. :)

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: Charley Noble
Date: 26 May 09 - 10:42 PM

The Republicans will not be able to maintain a filibuster on this candidate. Maine's two Republican senators will support her, unless something really serious surfaces. A serious challenge doesn't seem likely, given her years on the bench as a judge at various levels.

She appears to be an excellent choice.

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: Neil D
Date: 27 May 09 - 04:18 AM

Azizi - PM
Date: 26 May 09 - 12:15 PM

Here's some more information about Judge Sotomayor from a comment in another dailykos.com dairy:

"[Sotomayor] won't be accused of being a "liberal activist." Because she's not. She's a moderate/conservative. Who was originally appointed by Bush I to the district court. Who got 25 Republican votes in 1998 when she was appointed to the Circuit Court. And whose name was thrown around for awhile as a Bush II SCOTUS appointee who could make it thru the Senate"...

Anyone who opposes this nomination is someone with ZERO interest in
being people of good will who would overcome their differences in order to do the work necessary to bring this country out of its current difficulties. They are obstuctionists of the first order who could just be endangering their congressional seats in the next elections.

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: Sorcha
Date: 27 May 09 - 07:50 AM

Limbaugh calling her 'racisist' is the pot calling the kettle black, no?

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: kendall
Date: 27 May 09 - 08:10 AM

She wont have to be too great to be better than Thomas.

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: Charley Noble
Date: 27 May 09 - 09:32 AM

Limbaugh's popularity polling is holding at 30%. Hopefully his latest "racist" statements will drop him below zero.

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: kendall
Date: 27 May 09 - 12:28 PM

30%? does that mean that 70% dont listen to him?

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: GUEST,Mrr at the unemployment office
Date: 27 May 09 - 01:12 PM

I thought she was Asian till I was told she was Hispanic...

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: Arkie
Date: 27 May 09 - 08:40 PM

If Limbaugh called her a racist, does that mean he endorses her?

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: Genie
Date: 28 May 09 - 04:01 AM

I thought she was of northern European, probably Germanic, ethnicity, until the media started pronouncing her name "SO-ta-may-OR" instead of "SO-da-MY-er."

Neil D, you said:
"Anyone who opposes this nomination is someone with ZERO interest in being people of good will who would overcome their differences in order to do the work necessary to bring this country out of its current difficulties. They are obstuctionists of the first order who could just be endangering their congressional seats in the next elections."

BINGO

I think it's patently obvious that those Republicans and other right wingers who are protesting so loudly about Sotamayor have one or more of these agendas:

1. Tie up the hands of the Dems and Obama with the confirmation process so they can't get much, if anything, else done this summer.

2. Taint Sotamayor's image so much, in the eyes of the right wing, that her name will make for a great anti-Obama poster in 2012 (and in Congressional races in 2010).

3. Float the meme that Sodamayor, who is actually moderate and largely pro-big-Corporation in her leanings, represents "the far left" -- so that Obama wouldn't DARE actually nominate a REAL liberal in future appointments.

Genie

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: Neil D
Date: 28 May 09 - 04:49 AM

Genie, I especially agree with your third point. Tarring moderation as liberalism has been a major Republican strategy for quite some time, hence the myth of "The Liberal Media" while in reality right-wing extremists like Limbaugh rule the airwaves.

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 28 May 09 - 10:35 AM

But her having been to Yale - after the last few presidents we've had - scares me

The last time I looked, Skull & Bones had never admitted a female, so maybe she avoided the elitist street-gang mentality universal there.

I have known a few Yalies who were quite rational, although none I've known well enough to opine about were "politically inclined" - or from "wealth" (seemingly a requirement for S&B).

John

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: pdq
Date: 28 May 09 - 11:40 AM

Parts of an interview of Alberto Gonzales by Wolf Blitzer:


Blitzer: All right. Well, now there's going to be -- well, there's a nominee, already, who's Hispanic, a woman.

Gonzales: Yes.

Blitzer: How do you feel about that?

You're the first Hispanic to serve as the attorney general of the United States. What do you think about her?

Gonzales: I think it's a proud day for the Sotomayor family. It's a historic day for the Hispanic community. I don't think that any gender group or ethnic group is entitled to representation on our courts. I don't think that the outcome of a case should depend upon the ethnicity or gender of the judge, any more than the outcome of a case should depend on the ethnicity or gender of a prosecutor or defendant.

But having said that, Wolf, this is a powerful message, a powerful message of hope and opportunity of hope through this appointment, just like there's a powerful message sent when an African-American is elected president or an African-American or Hispanic is appointed as attorney general of the United States. It's a powerful message that a president listens to, and this president obviously did.

Blitzer: Here's what she said back in 2001, and I'll put it up on the screen: "I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life."

That's generating some commotion out there.

Gonzales: I'm not sure what that -- what she was trying to say there. I think -- you know, I served on the Texas Supreme Court. And there were times -- there were cases in which I had to interpret a statute. I didn't like the outcome based upon that interpretation as I read the statute, the intention of the state legislature, but I felt obliged by my oath of office to honor that intent of the legislature.

I think it's dangerous when judges impose their own personal views with respect to the outcome of a particular case.

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: Bill D
Date: 28 May 09 - 12:00 PM

Something I had not realized until it was pointed out by several talk show guests, is that opposing "Liberal" Supreme Court nominees is quite a business!
   Even before her name was announced, meeting were being held and strategy planned by those who do fund raising.

And many conservative pundits and political wannabes use the topic to get themselves noticed.

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: Goose Gander
Date: 28 May 09 - 12:04 PM

She's not particularly liberal, but then neither is Obama.

"Hence, one must accept the proposition that a difference there will be by the presence of women and people of color on the bench."

Like Clarence Thomas?

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: Genie
Date: 28 May 09 - 01:34 PM

--------
Blitzer: Here's what she said back in 2001, and I'll put it up on the screen: "I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life."

That's generating some commotion out there.
---------

Sotamayor's comment is widely being quoted (and sometimes misquoted or mis-paraphrased) out of its context. She was speaking specifically about cases that dealt with issues of racial, ethnic, or gender discrimination.   
In that same context, she made a point of acknowledging that white, non-Hispanic men had often made good judgments in such cases -- that one does not HAVE to be a woman or minority to be fair in dealing with such cases.

There are a lot of qualifications in that statement.   She "would hope" that a "wise" Latina woman would be MORE LIKELY to render a fair judgment in such cases dealing with discrimination than someone whose whole experience had been as a member of the dominant societal group (white males).

And it would be very naive to think that white men do not bring the perspectives of their own life experience to bear in their judicial deliberations.

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 28 May 09 - 02:21 PM

Ans, if you read what she actually said, she was attacking the prevailing anti-feminine bias od many members of the government.

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: robomatic
Date: 28 May 09 - 10:11 PM

I think the Republicans have to be pretty careful here, but some of them are deep in the silly season. She may very well be a pretty conservative justice when you come down to it.

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: Amos
Date: 28 May 09 - 10:17 PM

SOme of them never emerge from the silly season!



A

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: Riginslinger
Date: 28 May 09 - 10:25 PM

Unfortunately, the biggest problem facing the US and the world is runaway human migration. I suspect she doesn't recognize the situation.

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: Amos
Date: 28 May 09 - 11:04 PM

She probably does not share the knee-jerk emo reactions about it that some people continuously raise in clouds, but to the degree it exists under the law I am sure she will be as cognizant as anyone. It is not the duty of the SCOTUS to address social problems, but to preserve the law. Addressing social situations by law-giving is the Congress' sphere of incompetence.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: Riginslinger
Date: 28 May 09 - 11:18 PM

Yes, of course, it should be. But I wonder about the security for Supreme Court Justices. One would think that once a new administration comes it, some members of the winning side would immediately think--"If only I could eliminate justice A, C, and F, the chances would greatly improve for my agenda to prevail."

                      One might wonder if people like David Duke or Morris Dees toys with those kinds of thoughts.

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: Janie
Date: 29 May 09 - 12:19 AM

As usual, I can not remember names, but on All Things Considered this afternoon, two congressmen, A Republican from Texas who had previously served on the Texas Supreme Court, and a Senator from New York were interviewed regarding Stotmayor. In many respects, both were very cogent, rational and fair. However, both were also obviously sparing solely for the sake of position and party power and for the purpose of manipulating public opinion. I suppose this happens because it is necessary to the political process, but I am so absolutely sick of it. It has little to do with honest discourse.

I understand that I am being quite arrogant in saying this, but so few people are capable of anything close to rational consideration, that the voting public asks to be played and manipulated. I have this fantasy of hearing knowledgeable people with different points of view simply and honestly talk out the pros and cons of different perspectives.

I am, like so many others, a frantically busy person trying to raise a kid, pay bills, be a good and responsible employee in the workplace, keep up a house, support my community.    I do not have the time to wade through all the bs, smoke-mirrors, and 40 million (yes, I know, extreme exaggeration) blogs, pundits, biased news reports, etc.

I don't have time to sort thru' the bullshit to try to get the information and perspective I need to have an informed opinion. Pisses me off that politicians play voters like they do with spin and propaganda.   Pisses me off even more that citizens, in general, insist that they be played.

I wish we were ready to drop the labels, and just get on with doing what needs done to run the country and be responsible world citizens, individually, and as a nation.

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: Riginslinger
Date: 29 May 09 - 07:36 AM

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=99420

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: pdq
Date: 29 May 09 - 10:25 AM

Sonia Sotomayor 'La Raza member'

American Bar Association lists Obama choice as part of group

Posted: May 27, 2009
11:20 pm Eastern

By Joe Kovacs
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

As President Obama's Supreme Court nominee comes under heavy fire for allegedly being a "racist," Judge Sonia Sotomayor is listed as a member of the National Council of La Raza, a group that's promoted driver's licenses for illegal aliens, amnesty programs, and no immigration law enforcement by local and state police.

According the American Bar Association, Sotomayor is a member of the NCLR, which bills itself as the largest national Hispanic civil rights and advocacy organization in the U.S.

Meaning "the Race," La Raza also has connections to groups that advocate the separation of several southwestern states from the rest of America.

Over the past two days, Sotomayor has been heavily criticized for her racially charged statement: "I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experience would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life."

The remark was actually made during a 2001 speech at the University of California's Berkeley School of Law.

The lecture was published the following year in the Berkeley La Raza Law Journal.

Could Mexico retake the southwestern United States? Get the DVD that says the invasion is already happening!

The comment is being zeroed in on by voices from the political right.

"I'm not saying she's a racist, but the statement sure is," columnist Ann Coulter said on ABC's "Good Morning America."

"Imagine a judicial nominee said 'my experience as a white man makes me better than a latina woman,'" blogged former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, R-Ga. "Wouldn't they have to withdraw? New racism is no better than old racism. A white man racist nominee would be forced to withdraw. Latina woman racist should also withdraw." 

Radio's Rush Limbaugh noted, "And the libs of course say that minorities cannot be racists because they don't have the power to implement their racism. Well, those days are gone because reverse racists certainly do have the power to implement their power. Obama is the greatest living example of a reverse racist, and now he's appointed one. ..."

But others are suggesting Sotomayor's racial views will have little impact on her confirmation to the bench.
"She's gonna get confirmed. Get out of the way of the truck," political analyst Dick Morris said tonight on Fox News' "The O'Reilly Factor."

Host Bill O'Reilly responded, "The core conservative person ... does not understand that the GOP is shrinking and needs to expand."

The NCLR is applauding the Obama for his selection of Sotomayor.

"Today is a monumental day for Latinos. Finally, we see ourselves represented on the highest court in the land," said Janet Murguia, NCLR's president and CEO.

La Raza also praised former President George W. Bush for nominating Alberto Gonzales to succeed John Ashcroft as attorney general.

As WND previously reported, La Raza was condemned in 2007 by former U.S. Rep. Charles Norwood, R-Ga., as a radical "pro-illegal immigration lobbying organization that supports racist groups calling for the secession of the western United States as a Hispanic-only homeland."

Norwood urged La Raza to renounce its support of the Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlan – which sees "the Race" as part of an ethnic group that one day will reclaim Aztlan, the mythical birthplace of the Aztecs. In Chicano folklore, Aztlan includes California, Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico and parts of Colorado and Texas.

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: Amos
Date: 29 May 09 - 11:24 AM

Well, they're gonna have to pay for subsequent improvements, and I doubt they can afford them. The road system alone is worth billions, and that doesn't include plumbing or signage. Then there's shopping centers, parking lots, electrical, housing...baseball parks, military bases, laboratories...factories, refineries, and so on. I can't imagine all the Hispanics in the world combined being able to put down 50 percent down on the lot, and no bank would lend on less than that these days. This isn't the nineties, you know.

So I don't think we have to worry too much.



A

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: robomatic
Date: 29 May 09 - 04:11 PM

The lastest politics of defamation by out-of-context quotation will not work on Sotomayor. She made a statement indicating that her experience was informed by her background. So did Alito.

Sotomayor's best recommendation seems to be a wealth of experience and an inclination to get deep into legal argumenation without fear.

We still don't have a picture of her core beliefs as to legal interpretation. She may be pretty conservative.

So far I think Rush Limbaugh has been a swell leader of the Republican meanistream (if you're a DEMOCRAT)

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: Amos
Date: 29 May 09 - 06:35 PM

"The radical right wing has launched a vicious campaign of racist and sexist attacks against Judge Sonia Sotomayor, President Obama's selection to replace the retiring Justice David Souter on the Supreme Court. Sotomayor's "compelling life story" involves a brilliant legal career after being raised in a South Bronx public housing project by parents who moved from Puerto Rico. Sotomayor graduated from Princeton University summa cum laude, edited the Yale Law Journal, then served as a "fearless and effective" New York City prosecutor and corporate lawyer before being appointed to the bench by President George H. W. Bush in 1992. "Since joining the Second Circuit in 1998, Sotomayor has authored over 150 opinions," only three of which have been overturned by the Supreme Court's conservative majority. During her time as an appeals judge, "her influence has grown significantly." Public reaction to the nomination of the first Latina and third woman to the nation's highest court is "decidedly more positive than negative." Former Bush adviser Mark McKinnon remarked, "If Republicans make a big deal of opposing Sotomayor, we will be hurling ourselves off a cliff." However, "the same right-wing extremists who drove the country into the ground," Salon's Glenn Greenwald writes, "continue to attack Sonia Sotomayor with blatant and ugly stereotypes." Right-wing pundit Pat Buchanan called Sotomayor an "affirmative action candidate," and Weekly Standard editor Fred Barnes claimed she "has benefited from affirmative action over the years tremendously." As hate-radio extremist Glenn Beck described the nomination: "Hey, Hispanic chick lady! You're empathetic ... you're in!"

'WISE LATINA WOMAN': "[L]ess than 24 hours after President Obama's nomination of Sotomayor," right-wing hate merchants seized on a 2001 speech about her Latina heritage and the courts, calling her "a racist" and a "bigot." In a 2001 speech before the Berkeley La Raza Law Journal's annual symposium, Sotomayor argued that judges' gender and race can influence their decisions on gender and race discrimination cases, saying she "would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life." However, she cautioned she owes the parties who appear before her "constant and complete vigilance in checking [her] assumptions, presumptions and perspectives." Pulling out the "wise Latina woman" phrase, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich attacked Sotomayor on his Twitter feed as a "Latina woman racist." "Obama is the greatest living example of a reverse racist," hate-radio host Rush Limbaugh complained, "and now he's appointed one...to the U.S. Supreme Court." Former Republican House member and anti-immigration extremist Tom Tancredo agreed that Sotomayor "appears to be a racist" and called La Raza the "Latino KKK without the hoods or the nooses." Curt Levey, executive director of Committee for Justice, "a conservative legal group active in judicial nominations," said that "I wonder whether she knows the difference" between being a Puerto Rican advocate -- Sotomayor served on the board of the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund in the 1980s -- and being a judge. Some of the racist attacks on Sotomayor are simply absurd. Mark Krikorian of the right-wing Center for Immigration Studies blogged on the National Review's Corner about his outrage over people "[d]eferring" to Sotomayor over the "unnatural pronunciation" of her own name.

'SORT OF A SCHOOLMARM': Right-wing extremists have also launched vicious attacks on her intelligence, temperament, and demeanor.  Karl Rove, President Bush's "political brain," has led the sexist slurs, claiming that Sotomayor is "not necessarily" smart and has acted "like sort of a schoolmarm" on the Second Circuit. "I'm not really certain how intellectually strong she would be," he opined on Fox News. In the Wall Street Journal, Rove argued she is one of those judges selected "for their readiness to discard the rule of law whenever emotion moves them." Citing anonymous attacks promoted by the New Republic, Weekly Standard executive editor Fred Barnes said that Sotomayor was "not the smartest." The New York Times writes that "to detractors, Judge Sotomayor's sharp-tongued and occasionally combative manner -- some lawyers have described her as 'difficult' and 'nasty' -- raises questions about her judicial temperament and willingness to listen." But a fellow Second Circuit judge, Guido Calabresi, "kept track of the questions posed by Judge Sotomayor and other members of the 12-member court" and found that her "behavior was identical." "Some lawyers just don't like to be questioned by a woman," Judge Calabresi added. "It was sexist, plain and simple."
" (The Progressive Report)

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: Riginslinger
Date: 29 May 09 - 06:55 PM

Sotomayor and Condescending Identity Politics

Froma Harrop,

Identity politics are not good for the country or for the groups they purport to advance. This is not to undercut Sonia Sotomayor, who, as the news reports all start out, is the first Hispanic nominated to the Supreme Court and, if confirmed, would be the third female justice. From what we know about her so far, she seems qualified for the job.

But turning such appointments into political payback for an ethnic group or gender makes an unseemly spectacle. It undermines real achievements and infantilizes the candidate.

The important part of Sotomayor's time at Princeton wasn't her struggle as a Bronx-raised, working-class Puerto Rican among the Ivy League flowers. After all, Sotomayor did attend a good private Catholic high school. (And had she been born of poor Chinese immigrants, little fuss would have been made of her academic success.) The essence of Sotomayor's Princeton experience was that she graduated summa cum laude and went on to Yale Law School, where she was an editor on the law journal.

In recounting Sotomayor's "extraordinary journey," though, President Obama treats her as a daughter, not a colleague. His mention of her girlhood passion for Nancy Drew mysteries draws sweet laughter from the audience. And he repeatedly refers to Celina Sotomayor as "Sonia's mom."

Could you imagine a formal nomination speech that talked of John Roberts' mother as "John's mom"? And would anyone note that the chief justice enjoyed "Winnie the Pooh" as a boy, which he probably did?

When President Bush named his two male Supreme Court nominees, he invariably called them "Judge Roberts" and "Judge Alito." Sotomayor is every bit as much a judge, but Obama calls her "Sonia."

As in: "Well, Sonia, what you've shown in your life is that it doesn't matter where you come from, what you look like or what challenges life throws your way — no dream is beyond reach in the United States of America." That hackneyed line would feel right in place at a high school graduation.

Obama no doubt reasons that he has picked someone whom the Republicans would not dare attack, given their recent poor electoral showing among Latinos.
Embedded in this assumption is that Hispanics vote as a unit and on ethnic grounds.

Latinos are themselves a diverse group and don't all agree, even on immigration. Yet in writing of the politics of this nomination, Politico repeats the accepted wisdom that Republican stands on immigration "dramatically increased" the Democratic Party's share of the Hispanic vote last November.

Harsh, ethnically tinged comments during the immigration debate surely turned off some Latino voters. But what about the collapsing economy, which has disproportionately hurt Hispanic families? Democrats made significant gains among blue-collar Americans of all ethnic backgrounds.

It helps to remember that in the 2003 race for California governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger won 30 percent of the Latino vote — even though he was a Republican opposed to granting driver's licenses to illegal immigrants. A third candidate to Schwarzenegger's right took another 9 percent. Furthermore, the Democrat, Cruz Bustamante, was an open-borders advocate who would have been California's first modern Latino governor.

As for Puerto Ricans in New York, a New York Times-CBS News poll that same year found that only 19 percent wanted even legal immigration increased, while 36 percent said it should be reduced. Puerto Ricans are automatically American citizens.

And so identity politics can be misinformed as well as patronizing. This particular narrative turns the female nominee into everyone's little girl. And its treating of high achievement in only some groups with awe is offensive. Let's examine Sotomayor's record with a straight gaze, and leave identity politics at home. Won't happen, but let's try.

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: Janie
Date: 29 May 09 - 09:42 PM

Spin from the left
Spin from the right
Stand up. Sit down.
Fight, fight, fight!

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: Riginslinger
Date: 29 May 09 - 09:54 PM

Froma Harrop is neither left nor right. She just doesn't think identity politics is a good idea. If confirmed, however, she would be the third Roman Catholic in a row.

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: Genie
Date: 30 May 09 - 06:36 PM

Though Sotamayor is obviously highly qualified and having another woman (the third in all) and Hispanic would be a plus in terms of the diversity of the court, I think it would be poetically ironic if the Republicans could successfully block her appointment to the court. That would clear the way for Obama to nominate a true progressive, in the vein of Thurgood Marshall, in her place.   
Just as Harriet Miers (sp?) turned out to be a sort of sacrificial lamb for Dubya so he could put another true corporatist right-wing activist ideologue on the court, Sotamayor could draw the fire of both the Right and the far Left and give Obama license to name someone who truly is a left-leaning activist.

The court right now is not populated with either true "strict constructionists" or moderates. If at least 4 of the 5 justices are clearly ideologues on the right, why try to temper their power by putting more "moderates" on the court?

Genie

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: Art Thieme
Date: 30 May 09 - 06:42 PM

This nomination could be a start in the correct direction.

What is needed is a resurrection of the Earl Warren led Supreme Court--in all it's glory.

Art Thieme

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: Bobert
Date: 30 May 09 - 06:52 PM

What, and Alito is Menza stuff... I'd put Sotomayer up against his lame ass any day of the week... Alito is just a white Clarence Thomas... Hey, Scalia is a jerk but at least he's a bright jerk... Thomas and Alito are like Mo and Curly yes-men...

And I agree with her that with he background that she will be able to bring a perspective to the court that the white guys can't... That ain't racism... That's reality...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: Genie
Date: 30 May 09 - 11:01 PM

Mo Alito and Curly Thomas -- Love it!!   LOL

Genie

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: Azizi
Date: 31 May 09 - 08:05 AM

Excerpt from http://www.politico.com/arena/perm/Thomas_C__Goldstein_74F06E35-B146-4FD4-B8B5-F0E24BD5AFB9.html:

Sotomayor's record on race-related cases

..."in an eleven-year career on the Second Circuit, Judge Sotomayor has participated in roughly 100 panel decisions involving questions of race and has disagreed with her colleagues in those cases (a fair measure of whether she is an outlier) a total of 4 times. Only one case (Gant) in that entire eleven years actually involved the question whether race discrimination may have occurred. (In another case (Pappas) she dissented to favor a white bigot.) She particulated in two other panels rejecting district court rulings agreeing with race-based jury-selection claims. Given that record, it seems absurd to say that Judge Sotomayor allows race to infect her decision making."

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: Bobert
Date: 31 May 09 - 08:25 AM

Not to mention but if I have it correct, Ms. Sotomayer just might be responsible for single-handedly saving thr national past time, professional baseball... Hey, sports fans... Doesn't she get credit for that???

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: Uncle_DaveO
Date: 31 May 09 - 10:25 AM

Bobert, that's the one thing I hold against her.

Dave Oesterreich

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: Bobert
Date: 31 May 09 - 10:57 AM

Not a baseball, fan, Dave???

Actually, it's no fun on TV but being at the games is much different... Well, that's my recollection seein' as I haven't been to game in a hundred or so years...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: Riginslinger
Date: 31 May 09 - 11:00 AM

Okay, I'll bite: how did she save baseball?

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: Bobert
Date: 31 May 09 - 11:14 AM

Well, Rigs... Back whenever it was tghat baseball players went on strike she was the judge who ordered everyone back to work with an additional court order to continue negotiating a settlement... Had she not done that then the baseball season would have been lost and that wouldn't have been a good thing for anyone...

Just MO... I like baseball...

B;~)

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: Riginslinger
Date: 31 May 09 - 11:31 AM

Yeah, well we can put that one in the plus column for Judge Sotomayor.

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: Bobert
Date: 31 May 09 - 12:06 PM

... that is if ya' like baseball... Which I do... Even being a Nationals fan (lol)...

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: Genie
Date: 02 Jun 09 - 12:58 AM

As I understand it, her ruling in the baseball suit appeal, like her ruling in many other appeals, was basically procedural. The appeals courts seldom (if ever?) attempt to retry lower court cases. Their role is, at least usually, to determine whether proper legal procedures were followed in the lower-court cases -- e.g., whether a fair trial was had. Sometimes when a case is brought before them, their ruling is as to whether the plaintiff has "standing" to bring the case. Anyway, it's often not on substantive issues.
Her ruling in the baseball case doesn't necessarily reflect on her evaluation of the relative merits of the players v. the owners/managers of baseball teams.

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: Riginslinger
Date: 02 Jun 09 - 10:28 PM

Personally, I hate free-agency. The idea of having the same guys playing for the same team year after year made the whole thing a lot more exciting for me. Though I know labor people will hate me for saying that.

Subject: RE: BS: Sonia Sotomayor, US Supremes Nominee
From: Bobert
Date: 03 Jun 09 - 07:41 AM

Can't argue with that, Rigs... I just hate it when you get all these warm and fuzzy feelings for certain players 'cause they seem to be such team guys and then they bolt for more money so "they can take care of their family"... What??? Ya' can't live on the the $30M our team is offering??? Maybe you need some financial advice...

Or they say, "Well, ___________ (pick a sport), this is afetrall a business." Yeah, I'm tired of rich players parroting those lines as if they made them up themselves...

Don'g get me started on free agancy... Grrrrrrrrrr!!!

B~