Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-16-2009, 04:29 AM
 
26,680 posts, read 28,659,127 times
Reputation: 7943

Advertisements

It's mostly a charade. Republicans ask questions they know Rush Limbaugh and the far right wing will approve of, Democrats throw softball questions, and Sotomayor does everything she can to avoid saying anything that could possibly be considered controversial.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-16-2009, 11:10 AM
 
7,138 posts, read 14,633,867 times
Reputation: 2397
Definitely a Woof Woof, and a dumb, dull, lifeless one at that. But because all the white males are tippy toeing around, in the lost hopes of hanging onto some measure of hispanic votes, they are slurping up to this corpulent cow. Will wonders never cease.


More on the suck-up sensation going on at the hearings:


American Thinker: Sonia Sotomayor's Troubled Eyes
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-16-2009, 11:39 AM
 
42,732 posts, read 29,861,612 times
Reputation: 14345
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anonymous Political Junky View Post
I did watch them and the woman has put a spin on all of her statements where she said that judges should be willing to change law and how she thought a Latina could judge better than any white man. She said that at least 6 different times in different speeches. She is going to get in and she will be really bad for this country with her views about firearms and abortion and listening to European laws.
Time to start citing, please.

6 different speeches, I challenge you to link to three different speeches.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-16-2009, 11:58 AM
 
Location: Democratic Peoples Republic of Redneckistan
11,078 posts, read 15,074,986 times
Reputation: 3937
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZGACK View Post
The Sotomayor hearings are a stark contrast to the Thomas, Bork, Alito and Roberts hearings. During these hearings the Republican Senators treat Sotomayor with the respect she deserves as an accomplished jurist. In those other hearings the democrats out and out slander the nominee. Republicans are always gracious where the left wing, dems, progressives, liberals or whatever they're called this week are always slanderous liars.
I can see by your posts that they have a perfect mix in YOUR koolaid.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-16-2009, 12:00 PM
 
Location: Democratic Peoples Republic of Redneckistan
11,078 posts, read 15,074,986 times
Reputation: 3937
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnUnidentifiedMale View Post
It's mostly a charade. Republicans ask questions they know Rush Limbaugh and the far right wing will approve of, Democrats throw softball questions, and Sotomayor does everything she can to avoid saying anything that could possibly be considered controversial.
I agree with you on your post.

I am not impressed with her in the least myself.You can't tell me that with all of the qualified folks out there for this job that SHE is the best one for it?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-16-2009, 12:20 PM
 
42,732 posts, read 29,861,612 times
Reputation: 14345
Quote:
Originally Posted by muleskinner View Post
I agree with you on your post.

I am not impressed with her in the least myself.You can't tell me that with all of the qualified folks out there for this job that SHE is the best one for it?
Well, then, let's try to name someone better qualified.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-16-2009, 12:30 PM
 
Location: Louisiana
1,768 posts, read 3,411,780 times
Reputation: 604
Quote:
Originally Posted by SimpleMan View Post
In response to some of the questions she was asked, specifically the ones about her comments that included references to ethnicity/backround, it seems to me that she did a lot of back pedalling and misdirection. She was asked a few of those questions again and/or told she didn't answer the actual question. What do you think?
Sotomayor is just another liberal dolt — who, apparently, doesn't have much of a grasp on vocabulary and diction —*who has the wool pulled over the eyes of the low IQ cretins that voted for NObama.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-16-2009, 12:32 PM
 
Location: Louisiana
1,768 posts, read 3,411,780 times
Reputation: 604
Quote:
Originally Posted by lilypad View Post
Definitely a Woof Woof, and a dumb, dull, lifeless one at that. But because all the white males are tippy toeing around, in the lost hopes of hanging onto some measure of hispanic votes, they are slurping up to this corpulent cow. Will wonders never cease.


More on the suck-up sensation going on at the hearings:


American Thinker: Sonia Sotomayor's Troubled Eyes
What a terrific post!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-16-2009, 12:37 PM
 
Location: Democratic Peoples Republic of Redneckistan
11,078 posts, read 15,074,986 times
Reputation: 3937
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge View Post
Well, then, let's try to name someone better qualified.
Who are YOU thinking? Hell....there are literally MILLIONS upon MILLIONS out there who would be considered qualified.

"The Constitution does not list or specify any formal qualifications to become a justice on the Supreme Court, just like it does not specify the number of justices that make up the Supreme Court. Our Founding Fathers left those decisions to Congress. However, from the beginning of the Court,, justices have all been lawyers and many have had legal and political careers prior to serving on the court. An "informal" qualification is that the President consult with the Senators from the state that a prospective justice is from, before making his/her nomination official. The Senate must confirm appointments to the Court so they usually take into account the legal expertise of the person nominated by the President."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-16-2009, 01:02 PM
JPD
 
12,138 posts, read 18,288,075 times
Reputation: 8004
Quote:
Originally Posted by muleskinner View Post
Who are YOU thinking? Hell....there are literally MILLIONS upon MILLIONS out there who would be considered qualified.

"The Constitution does not list or specify any formal qualifications to become a justice on the Supreme Court, just like it does not specify the number of justices that make up the Supreme Court. Our Founding Fathers left those decisions to Congress. However, from the beginning of the Court,, justices have all been lawyers and many have had legal and political careers prior to serving on the court. An "informal" qualification is that the President consult with the Senators from the state that a prospective justice is from, before making his/her nomination official. The Senate must confirm appointments to the Court so they usually take into account the legal expertise of the person nominated by the President."

The key word was better. Who do you think is better qualified? Start naming names.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:25 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top