How You Know Sotomayor Nomination's Is A Positive

by: Chris Bowers

Tue May 26, 2009 at 13:54


The negative reaction from conservatives on Sotomayor is the best indication that her nomination is a good thing for progressives. Here is a sampling:

Mitt Romney, hairdo and conservative movement suck-up:

The nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court is troubling.

Ed Whelan, President, Ethics & Public Policy Center

President Obama abided by his dismal and lawless "empathy" standard and, in his selection of Judge Sonia Sotomayor, picked a nominee whom he can count on to indulge her own liberal biases.

Mike Huckabee, Republican gaffe-master (yes, his PAC really said "Maria" Sotomayor in their first release):

The appointment of Maria Sotomayor for the Supreme Court is the clearest indication yet that President Obama's campaign promises to be a centrist and think in a bipartisan way were mere rhetoric. Sotomayor comes from the far left and will likely leave us with something akin to the "Extreme Court" that could mark a major shift.

Wendy Long, Counsel to the Judicial Confirmation Network and apparent resident inside Sonia Sotomayor's mind:

Judge Sotomayor is a liberal judicial activist of the first order who thinks her own personal political agenda is more important than the law as written.

Run of the mill right-wing radio host:

Barack Obama has nominated the viciously anti-White federal appeals judge Sonia Sotomayor to replace retiring justice David Souter for the Supreme Court of the United States.

The conservative boilerplate buzzword award goes to Connie Hair at Human Events:

It should come as no surprise to anyone that Obama would continue playing identity politics by nominating an Hispanic woman.  Sotomayor, 54, is also of the most radical liberal activist judges he could have nominated.

In a presentation that will likely lean heavily on style over substance, Sotomayor's background will allow the administration to again play class warfare with their presentation of her biography.

Don't hold your breath on conservatives offering up potential nominees who are entirely genderless and lacking in ethnicity. They aren't fans of Marilyn Mason, after all.

Please post more negative conservative reactions in the comments. I promise that doing so will make you feel good about Sotomayor.

Chris Bowers :: How You Know Sotomayor Nomination's Is A Positive

Tags: , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Limbaugh called her a racist. (4.00 / 1)
And says this shows how Obama is a racist and will conservatives have the stones to call Obama out and reveal him to the country at large.

LOL.

It's on Halperin's page, the guy is obsessive at documenting the right wing meme.

I love this. From what I can see, she doesn't have a lot of stuff they can run with right away if this is the best they got or they're waiting a few days to pounce.

Either way, I feel good about this nomination and considering the New Haven case is the only flashpoint I can see (where Sotomayor was in the majority) I'm not worried.


I wouldn't base part of my judgment on what they say (4.00 / 10)
whoever Obama appoints they will react negatively

yes (4.00 / 2)
i actually went to look at conservative reaction just to feel better about Sotomayor. But I actually found quite a few who were relieved at this relatively centrist pick. They know Dems have the votes to ram through just about anyone.

And the "what an extremist Obama is" would have come from certain Republicans no matter what.


[ Parent ]
I don't read much into it. (4.00 / 2)
Conservatives use SC nominations to fire up their base and raise funds. It's what they do. I don't think it says much about the actual nominee.

miasmo.com

[ Parent ]
Here's Gary Bauer (bible-thumping half-man half-deer) identifying (4.00 / 2)
2 quotes we'll hear a million times:

"Sotomayor's appointment proves what we already knewthat President Obama is committed to packing our federal courts with activist judges who will make policy according to their 'feelings' rather than the requirements of the Constitution.

"Judge Sotomayor admitted in a panel discussion at Duke University Law School in 2005 that she believes the courts are 'where policy is made.' In a 2002 speech at Berkeley, she suggested justice might be better determined by some races than others, saying, 'I would hope that a wise Latino women 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.'

http://news.yahoo.com/s/usnw/2...

I wonder how they react if Obama nominated an actual, you know, liberal.



I can answer that (4.00 / 3)
They'd respond in precisely the same way.  

[ Parent ]
btw, that's some awful transcription (4.00 / 2)
"a wise Latino women"

Something ain't right.

As far as I can tell, the right today is focusing on her alleged radicalism, as opposed to her temperament and intelligence. Apparently they think that's a better approach than the racist "dumb and obnoxious" line of attack.  


[ Parent ]
So "radical" .. that Poppy Bush (4.00 / 2)
.. first appointed her to the Federal bench

[ Parent ]
Right (4.00 / 3)
You know the drill: the woman the world sees during her hearings won't jibe at all with the picture painted by Republicans, who'll spend the next month portraying her as a combination of Bella Abzug and Charo.

[ Parent ]
And the Conservatives hate (4.00 / 2)
both Obama and Reid, so they both must be fabulous progressive politicians, right?

The enemy of your enemy is sometimes no great shakes.


Correct conclusion correctly derived (0.00 / 0)
from a knowledge of human nature.

Marilyn Mason.... (0.00 / 0)
or Anita Hill, alternative jurists on the short list.

Aren't They Both The Same Person? (4.00 / 1)
I saw it on cable somewhere.

I mean, think about it.  Marilyn Mason... Anita Hill.
Has anyone ever seen both of them in the same room?

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
Marilyn Manson? (4.00 / 1)
I assume he meant Marilyn Manson as an example of someone "entirely genderless and lacking in ethnicity".


[ Parent ]
Speaking of gaffe-mastery ;-) nt (0.00 / 0)


[ Parent ]
Unlike Bush I With Clarence Thomas (4.00 / 4)
Connie Hair at Human Events:
    In a presentation that will likely lean heavily on style over substance, Sotomayor's background will allow the administration to again play class warfare with their presentation of her biography.

Fish shoots self in barrel.  Millions flee flood.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


Silly post (4.00 / 2)
Sorry, but this seems to be a silly post, IMO. As someone familiar with Greater Wingnuttia, you should know better than to assume that anything they disapprove of is necessarily liberal. The cut and paste right wing criticism has been long ready and would have have greeted any Obama nomine with the possible (and I repeat possible) exception of a member in good standing of the Federalist Sociey who began his/her day with prayers to the twin gods of Reagan and Scalia. From all indications, and pending further information, Sotomayor is a reasonable nomination and certainly not disappointing in the way many of Obama's cabinet and sub-cabinent picks were., However, it seems clear that she was not the most liberal nominee on the short list, let alone the universe of conceivable SCOTUS nominees from a Democratic president. However, the fact that this nomination is sort of a smack in the smug puss of "liberal" Jeffrey Rosen is a definite plus.

Rosen's been dishonestly trying to back off that hit piece (0.00 / 0)


[ Parent ]
worse than silly (0.00 / 0)
Judging anything by right wing reactions exposes just how bankrupt even left-liberal discourse is. Can't we do a little better than this?

[ Parent ]
Unfortunately, (4.00 / 3)
Some of Obama's choices haven't upset anyone on the right.  And damn sure should have been upsetting a lot more people on the left.... Or even smack dab in the center.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
Schadenfreude (0.00 / 0)
It's healthy to indulge in it once in a while.

[ Parent ]
What's noteworthy here (4.00 / 1)
is that on this one, Obama is consciously sailing into the teeth of right-wing spin instead of trying to appease it.

Of course, I could quibble that he's already come some distance towards it by NOT picking someone who is known to be itching to mix it up with Scalia, Roberts and Thomas, a true liberal.

But still, given the squishy, "bipartisan", turn-the-other-cheek Obama we all grit our teeth at, this move is an improvement.

sTiVo's rule: Just because YOU "wouldn't put it past 'em" doesn't prove that THEY did it.


[ Parent ]
Heh, "empathy" is the new "liberal" (4.00 / 1)
Having apparently replaced--or put alongside--"socialist". Can't wait to see how they spin that as bad and scary. Mommy mommy, that man said empathic things at me!

Everyone, hide the childrens. How will they learns?

"Those who stand for nothing fall for anything...Mankind are forever destined to be the dupes of bold & cunning imposture" -- Alexander Hamilton


Empathy (4.00 / 3)
Since "empathy" really is what liberalism is all about, it works for me.  My other favorite complaint is "do-gooders".

If liberals are empathic go-gooders, I guess that makes conservatives cold-blooded evil-doers.


[ Parent ]
Maybe he's waiting (0.00 / 0)
to replace Ginsburg with a nominee that will really drive the winguts...nuts.

It's a nice punch line I've used myself (4.00 / 1)
that "Hey, all the right people are against it, so it must be good", but I think to actually factor that into your judgement is simply to invoke crass tribalism. Which is exactly what the GOP leadership is doing as well.

When you stand back and look at it all, it's amazing how much people are toyed with by politicians...

For myself, I'm neither for nor against Sotomayor. I'm glad that a Hispanic woman was nominated, but that's not my primary concern...in fact it rankles me that it seems to be a lot of people's only concern. I want to know where she actually stands on things...when we keep focusing on identity politics, we shouldn't be surprised when we get judges who say that "money is free speech" or that Exxon was unfairly penalized for the the Valdez, or that prosecutors can use confessions that may have been made under duress...where does she stand on civil liberties, and corporate power, that's what I want to know.


USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS
Powered by: SoapBlox