Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Sotomayor will be the first Latino/a on the Supreme Court. In my opinion, Obama made a really wise and judicious choice. Clearly many republicans are not happy with this choice. I am wondering if much of this unhappiness stems from the fact that Obama chose a Latino/a. I mean, republicans have to tread very carefully on how they attack her for fear of alienating the Latino/a community. Stated another way, this choice creates a "tricky" dilemma for republicans -- and they obviously hate it. So, my question is: Is part of this anger that republicans are expressing related to the fact that they were again "trumped" by Obama?
Sotomayor will be the first Latino/a on the Supreme Court. In my opinion, Obama made a really wise and judicious choice. Clearly many republicans are not happy with this choice. I am wondering if much of this unhappiness stems from the fact that Obama chose a Latino/a. I mean, republicans have to tread very carefully on how they attack her for fear of alienating the Latino/a community. Stated another way, this choice creates a "tricky" dilemma for republicans -- and they obviously hate it. So, my question is: Is part of this anger that republicans are expressing related to the fact that they were again "trumped" by Obama?
Are you sure it was the Republicans that were trumped. After all this woman is PRO LIFE!
Sotomayor was originally a Republican appointee (Bush Sr.). As such, many Republicans in the Senate will be voting for her confirmation.. However, in case you didn't notice, all potential SC justices are relentlessly scrutinized, it is part of the process. Seems to me that Obama did in fact reach across the isle on this one. And while I may not necessarily agree with his choice, at least she is experienced, unlike some other appointees I could mention..
..And as tempting as it may be to call it an affirmative action choice, she is well qualified for the job, so the point is moot. Sotomayor is a hell of a lot better than some of the others he could have chosen for the job..
Whay? You don't want to hear how this woman is against abortion and against government money being spent on abortion? How many would that make on the Supreme Court that oppose abortion?
I am willing to put up with a racist if they are against the killing of babies.
Sotomayor was originally a Republican appointee (Bush Sr.). As such, many Republicans in the Senate will be voting for her confirmation.. However, in case you didn't notice, all potential SC justices are relentlessly scrutinized, it is part of the process. Seems to me that Obama did in fact reach across the isle on this one. And while I may not necessarily agree with his choice, at least she is experienced, unlike some other appointees I could mention..
..And as tempting as it may be to call it an affirmative action choice, she is well qualified for the job, so the point is moot. Sotomayor is a hell of a lot better than some of the others he could have chosen for the job..
Hi Frankie. I was not implying that she was not qualified. Of course she is. My post is more regarding the fact that part of the anger that republicans are expressing stems from the fact that this choice creates a dilemma for them. And, that's, in part, why they hate it.
Sotomayor will be the first Latino/a on the Supreme Court. In my opinion, Obama made a really wise and judicious choice. Clearly many republicans are not happy with this choice. I am wondering if much of this unhappiness stems from the fact that Obama chose a Latino/a. I mean, republicans have to tread very carefully on how they attack her for fear of alienating the Latino/a community. Stated another way, this choice creates a "tricky" dilemma for republicans -- and they obviously hate it. So, my question is: Is part of this anger that republicans are expressing related to the fact that they were again "trumped" by Obama?
What evidence do you have that supports that conservatives would be upset at her race? That seems to be injecting a bit of libelous assumption on your part does it not?
Notice that you keep spinning it more and more to a race issue. This is a fallacy used to setup an opponents argument in a bad light in order to suggest bias in their position.
So, if someone objections to her policy or positions, it can be easily claimed that they are only making that claim because they are racist.
This is a tired argument, an uneducated and emotional one. It is one used by people who can not argue the issue and must jump to emotional subjective arguments to make their case.
Now I am not saying you are intending this, but please look over what you are saying as you are following that exact line of reasoning.
The general disagreement with her for many is that she believes in legislating from the bench even when she claims she is not, her mention supports that she does.
Another is her stance on the 2nd amendment to which she believes no citizen has the right to bare arms, that it is of the governments duty to do so. This is in direct conflict with founders statements on the 2nd amendment as well as the circumstantial support of the people dissolving and refreshing the government for their own protection.
Those concerned about this stance fear this because the steps to an oppressive government is disarming its people and reinterpreting the protections afforded to them. Legislating from the bench through living interpretations of our protections sets up a government nicely for this progression.
Those are some of the reasons people object, race is irrelevant in this discussion.
The way I see it, she represents one vote. One liberal vote. Souter was a liberal vote, so it's all awash. She'll be vetted to the core, but at the end of the day, she's still only a single vote.
As far as her judicial record goes, I hope she's got the nuts to withstand the scrutiny she's about to receive. That glass house thing can get in the way sometimes.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
