it's Sotomayor - Page 6 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 05-29-2009, 01:19 PM   #76
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 10:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by anitram View Post
Why use Bush when you've got better.

Ronald Reagan:



But it's the evil libruls that are about identity politics.
Er, no, see the difference is that conservatives make appointments based on merit - including people from minorities - but don't run around seeking pats on the back for so doing in the way that liberals do. It's the hypocrisy and holier than thou attitudes that some liberals adopt that pisses off us conservatives.

As I've pointed out before, the Bush cabinet featured a lot of racial diversity but no-one ever made a big deal of it.

Clinton appointed an out lesbian to a very senior role to appease the far left, unfortunately she proved to be a disaster.
__________________

__________________
financeguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2009, 01:35 PM   #77
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,493
Local Time: 04:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
Er, no, see the difference is that conservatives make appointments based on merit - including people from minorities - but don't run around seeking pats on the back for so doing in the way that liberals do. It's the hypocrisy and holier than thou attitudes that some liberals adopt that pisses off us conservatives.

As I've pointed out before, the Bush cabinet featured a lot of racial diversity but no-one ever made a big deal of it.

Clinton appointed an out lesbian to a very senior role to appease the far left, unfortunately she proved to be a disaster.



__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2009, 02:31 PM   #78
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 01:15 PM
I really think Reagan appointing the first woman to ever sit on the Supreme Court is more historical and praise worthy.
Especially when you take into account her voting record.
__________________
deep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2009, 02:37 PM   #79
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,493
Local Time: 04:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by deep View Post
I really think Reagan appointing the first woman to ever sit on the Supreme Court is more historical and praise worthy.
Especially when you take into account her voting record.


but the important thing to remember is that when conservatives do it, it's because they are the "most qualified" person for the job.






liberals only nominate and then vote for minorities out of guilt.


__________________
Irvine511 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2009, 02:44 PM   #80
Blue Crack Addict
 
daygloeyes2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: No Emily's Allowed
Posts: 26,459
Local Time: 04:15 PM
Glenn Beck posted a classy twittee update about Sotomayor's diabetes.

Glenn Beck: Can Messiah Obama Heal Sotomayor's Diabetes? | TPMDC
__________________
daygloeyes2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2009, 02:56 PM   #81
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 01:15 PM
Quote:
Republicans Divided Over How to Attack Sotomayor

Republicans are battling each other over how to attack President Obama's Supreme Court nominee, Sonia Sotomayor, because of fears that Hispanic voters will revolt against her opponents at the polls.

Sonia Sotomayor, President Obama's nominee to replace Justice David Souter on the U.S. Supreme Court, is posing a conundrum for Republicans who are struggling to unite against a woman they presume will be a reliable vote for liberal causes.

The GOP doesn't want to give Sotomayer a free ride, because they believe she is a judicial activist who will legislate from the bench.

But they're also concerned that if they launch a no-holds barred attack on Sotomayor, the first Hispanic to be nominated to the court, they risk alienating a growing minority they want on their side in the voting booth.

The White House warned earlier this week that detractors should be careful as they scrutinize Sotomayor's record and background.

"It is probably important for anybody involved in this debate to be exceedingly careful with the way in which they've decided to describe different aspects of this impending confirmation," White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said.

Elected Republican officials have heeded that warning so far, holding fire as they continue to dig into the judge's past.

But two unelected Republican stalwarts, Rush Limbaugh and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, haven't been as restrained. They have labeled Sotomayor a "reverse racist" for saying in a speech in 2001 that she hopes 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."

Their comments have drawn pushback from Republican elected officials and other commentators.

"I think it's terrible. This is not the kind of tone that any of us want to set when it comes to performing our constitutional responsibilities of advice and consent," Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, told National Public Radio on Thursday.

"Neither one of these men are elected Republican officials," Cornyn said. "I just don't think it's appropriate and I certainly don't endorse it. I think it's wrong."

Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, told CNN that he disagrees with Gingrich.

"Frankly, I think it is a little premature and early, because she hasn't had a chance to explain some of these comments that she has made," Hatch said.

"I think we have to be fair. I think we have to do what is normally done, and that is scrutinize the record, look at the opinions, the unwritten opinions, the articles, the speeches, the various comments that have been made and so forth, and do it fairly."

In her Wall Street Journal column on Friday, conservative commentator Peggy Noonan panned Gingrich for twittering that Sotomayor should withdraw because a white judicial nominee would have to if he made a similar statement on race.

"Does anyone believe that?" Noonan wrote. "[Gingrich] should rest his dancing thumbs, stop trying to position himself as the choice and voice of the base in 2012, and think."

She urged Republicans to act like grownups as they challenge Sotomayor's nomination, which she called a "brilliant political pick" because the GOP has struggled to attract and retain Hispanics and women, and because Sotomayor's rags-to-riches story is so moving.

"Politically she's like a beautiful doll containing a canister of poison gas: Break her and you die," Noonan wrote.

Noonan questioned the wisdom of critics who want to use an attack on Sotomayor as a way to excite the base.

"Excite the base? How about excite a moderate, or interest an independent?" she wrote. "How about gain the attention of people who aren't already on your side?"
.
__________________
deep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2009, 03:06 PM   #82
Resident Photo Buff
Forum Moderator
 
Diemen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Somewhere in middle America
Posts: 13,237
Local Time: 03:15 PM
Quote:
Noonan questioned the wisdom of critics who want to use an attack on Sotomayor as a way to excite the base.

"Excite the base? How about excite a moderate, or interest an independent?" she wrote. "How about gain the attention of people who aren't already on your side?"
This.
__________________
Diemen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2009, 03:07 PM   #83
Blue Crack Distributor
 
VintagePunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: In a dry and waterless place
Posts: 55,732
Local Time: 04:15 PM
Wise comments by Noonan.
__________________
VintagePunk is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2009, 03:29 PM   #84
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,290
Local Time: 04:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
Er, no, see the difference is that conservatives make appointments based on merit
I think you'd like to think that this is the difference.

Condoleezza Rice was a disaster.

Sonia Sotomayor is as meritocratic as you can get. But I guess she ended up graduating 2nd in her class at Princeton because she was a Latina.
__________________
anitram is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2009, 03:35 PM   #85
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,493
Local Time: 04:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by anitram View Post
Sonia Sotomayor is as meritocratic as you can get. But I guess she ended up graduating 2nd in her class at Princeton because she was a Latina.


it's clear that the only way a poor girl from the Bronx could do that would be if her grades were inflated by liberal professors who felt the crushing weight of historical guilt.
__________________
Irvine511 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2009, 03:37 PM   #86
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
U2DMfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: It's Inside A Black Hole
Posts: 6,637
Local Time: 03:15 PM
When Bush picked Harriet Miers, all I could think was "well at least he picked her based on merit and not outright fucking cronyism"
__________________
U2DMfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2009, 03:41 PM   #87
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,684
Local Time: 03:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by daygloeyes2 View Post
Glenn Beck posted a classy twittee update about Sotomayor's diabetes.

Glenn Beck: Can Messiah Obama Heal Sotomayor's Diabetes? | TPMDC

The guy's a real class act. He made sure he informed the world(his little world) that a comedian had made a joke about Rush's health and how that was crossing the line. He made sure to point out that liberals are all really just mean heartless people underneath.


But that was last week, maybe he hopes we all have as short of a memory as he does
__________________
BVS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2009, 03:41 PM   #88
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
U2DMfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: It's Inside A Black Hole
Posts: 6,637
Local Time: 03:15 PM
Although it should be noted, Bush isn't much of a conservative.
He was sort of just the caricature and not much else.

But it's hard to pass up the Harrier Miers reference.

I will say, that conservatives with a brain are more principled on such things.
Bush 41 appointed Souter and Sotomayor. Maybe hs staff was fucking up but perhaps the fact that he wasn't just a Jesus Conservative meant he was able to stay with his principles instead of forced by magic to be ignorant on certain things.

ETA
What I mean is, Bush 41 didn't seem to have a litmus test of XYZ on certain issues, so he just picked on certain principles, which meant he 'apparently' made some political mistakes in his appointments.
__________________
U2DMfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2009, 03:49 PM   #89
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,493
Local Time: 04:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by U2DMfan View Post
When Bush picked Harriet Miers, all I could think was "well at least he picked her based on merit and not outright fucking cronyism"


this is true. why?

1. she is white
2. she was picked by a conservative (which negates the whole "she's a woman" thing)

thus, we can rightly conclude that she was selected out of merit, and nothing else.
__________________
Irvine511 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2009, 03:59 PM   #90
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,290
Local Time: 04:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by U2DMfan View Post

ETA
What I mean is, Bush 41 didn't seem to have a litmus test of XYZ on certain issues, so he just picked on certain principles, which meant he 'apparently' made some political mistakes in his appointments.
I don't think this is really true.

It certainly doesn't ring true with respect to Souter.

First of all, Souter was nominated as a replacement to maybe the most leftist justice on the SCOTUS of all time, and Bush 41 most certainly aimed for as large a shift to the right as he could. Second, if you look at the confirmation process, there was really very little in Souter's past. He came in as a very young justice and without a caseload that could properly be ascertained for leaning. In short, the conservatives took a gamble on this guy (it was absolutely political) and lost.

The fact that he turned out different than they expected isn't a testament to how principled Bush 41 was.

But generally speaking, he was far more pragmatic in his approach than his son, that much is true.
__________________

__________________
anitram is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:15 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com