# Supreme Court Nominee



## Nuke_TRT

Please tell me I heard this wrong on the morning news. Channel 5 WCVB reported that Gov Duval is a possible for replacement for Justice Souter. #-o


----------



## NewEngland2007

*re: Supreme Court Nominee *

Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo! Nuke, I'd hate for you to be sick, but I hope you just had a fever dream! The only place I want that fagala to end up is on the college lecture circuit for schools I don't attend, if the flaming pits of hell aren't available.


----------



## Nuke_TRT

*re: Supreme Court Nominee *

_Now I know both Osama and Duval are out of there minds. :alcoholi::2up:_
*Mass. Governor Named On List To Replace Retiring Souter *

POSTED: 6:33 am EDT May 1, 2009

*WASHINGTON -- *Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick is making a preliminary list of possible replacements for retiring Supreme Court justice David Souter, who has announced he's ready to retire after 18 years on the nation's highest court.

Patrick has been named on a list of possible replacements that includes Patrick, U.S. Solicitor General Elena Kagan, a former Harvard University law professor, and Harold Koh, a Yale University law professor who was recently nominated to serve as legal adviser at the State Department and Cass Sunstein, a Harvard University law professor recently nominated to head the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs.

After 18 years in a city he loved to hate, Souter can finally bid Washington farewell.

For each of those years, Souter worked seven days a week through most of the Supreme Court's October-to-July terms, staying at his office for more than 12 hours a day.

His lunch most often consisted of yogurt and an apple eaten at his desk; his supper a quickly prepared late-night meal at the apartment he rented a few miles from work.

He once told acquaintances he had "the world's best job in the world's worst city."

"When the term of court starts I undergo a sort of annual intellectual lobotomy and it lasts until the following summer when I sort of cram what I can into the summertime," Souter said wryly during a rare public speech in March.

The comment drew laughter from the audience of humanities teachers at the American Academy of Arts and Sciences.

A history buff renowned among friends and former clerks as an excellent storyteller with a wonderful sense of humor, Souter headed for his native New Hampshire as soon as he could at the end of the court's term every year.

"He doesn't fit what I think most people would assume, that he's Silent Cal, the Calvin Coolidge-type New Englander," said Meir Feder, a New York lawyer who worked for Souter during his first Supreme Court term.

Souter was appointed to the court in 1990 by President George H.W. Bush after just a few months as a federal appeals court judge, but with many years experience as a prosecutor, attorney general, trial judge and state Supreme Court justice in New Hampshire.

Virtually unknown outside his home state, he was viewed warily both by liberals and conservatives. Liberals feared that his appointment by an abortion opponent would help spell the end of the guarantee of abortion rights. It didn't; Souter in 1992 voted to uphold Roe v. Wade. In the same year he also voted to maintain the court's longtime ban on officially sponsored prayers in public schools.

Conservatives worried that in his praise for the liberal lion he succeeded, Justice William Brennan, Souter was charting a much more moderate course than they would have liked or expected from a Republican nominee.

Eighteen years later, Souter was firmly among the court's liberals.

He resisted the spotlight that has attracted liberal and conservative justices alike.

"He doesn't believe in overexposure," said Thomas Rath, Souter's longtime friend from New Hampshire.

Of the justices who occupied the high court's middle ground, Souter was the one most likely to challenge, in exchanges of written opinions, the aggressively conservative views of Justice Antonin Scalia.

"Souter seems more passionate about taking on Scalia and combating the novelty of Scalia's more restrictive views," George Washington University law professor Mary Cheh once said of him.

When writing for the court in 1994 that a state could not create a separate public school district for Hasidic Jewish children, Souter fended off a Scalia dissent in customary fashion.

"Justice Cardozo once cast the dissenter as `the gladiator making a last stand against the lions.' Justice Scalia's dissent is certainly the work of a gladiator, but he thrusts at lions of his own imagining," Souter said.

Souter was the nation's 105th justice; only its sixth bachelor.

Although hailed by The Washington Post as the capital city's most prominently eligible single man when he moved from his native New Hampshire, Souter resolutely resisted the social whirl.

"I wasn't that kind of person before I moved to Washington, and, at this age, I don't see any reason to change," the intensely private Souter told an acquaintance.

At the American academy, when asked how to approach members of Congress to ask for more money for the humanities, Souter suggested focusing on the history buffs in Congress.

But he prefaced his advice with a self-deprecating comment about the failure of judges to persuade Congress to raise their pay.

"You should know that I've been on the judicial salary committee for the last couple of years and the lesson to be learned from that is," Souter said, "whatever I tell you, do the opposite."

http://www.thebostonchannel.com/politics/19340199/detail.html


----------



## HistoryHound

*re: Supreme Court Nominee *

Sadly, I heard the same thing on Fox25. However, they are also saying that obama wants to put a woman on. My guess would be the next nominee will be whichever one of obama's friends has made the biggest "math error" when calculating their tax bill.


----------



## OfficerObie59

*re: Supreme Court Nominee *

At first glance, Deval Patrick on the court wouldn't be that bad.

He'd be a liberal replacing a liberal, who Obama will be appointing anyways. It just continues the status quo of the conservative/liberal make-up on the court--and it gets him the f*ck out of Massachusetts.


----------



## 8MORE

*re: Supreme Court Nominee *

Like anyone Obummer would pick would be any better. I do not think he's capable of choosing a qualified candidate for any office.


----------



## mpd61

*re: Supreme Court Nominee *

LMAO!!!!!!


----------



## OfficerObie59

*re: Supreme Court Nominee *

NBC: Souter to retire from Supreme Court 
Departure would give Obama his first chance to nominate a justice

NBC News and news services
updated 11:15 a.m. ET, Fri., May 1, 2009

WASHINGTON - Justice David Souter is planning to retire after nearly two decades on the Supreme Court, several government sources told NBC News.

Souter's departure, expected once the current term ends in late June, would give President Barack Obama his first chance to nominate a justice. The New Hampshire native, appointed to the court in 1990, is expected to remain on the bench until a successor is confirmed.

Neither the Supreme Court nor the White House would confirm the likely opening on the bench. "The president has not received a formal communication from Justice Souter, who deserves the right to make his own announcement," a White House aide said Friday.

Souter's retirement is unlikely to alter the ideological balance on the closely divided court because Obama is almost certain to replace the liberal-leaning justice with someone with similar views.

But the vacancy could lead to another woman on the bench to join Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, currently the court's only woman.

Souter has indicated in the past that he wanted to leave Washington and return to his native New Hampshire.

At 69, Souter is much younger than either Ginsburg, 76, or Justice John Paul Stevens, 89, the other two liberal justices whose names have been mentioned as possible retirees. Yet those justices have given no indication they intend to retire soon and Ginsburg said she plans to serve into her 80s despite her recent surgery for pancreatic cancer.

Souter, a regular jogger, is thought to be in excellent health.
Souter had no comment Thursday night, a Supreme Court spokeswoman said.

*'Justice for all'*
Interest groups immediately began gearing up for what could be a grueling battle over a high court vacancy.

"Obama's own record and rhetoric make clear that he will seek left-wing judicial activists who will indulge their passions, not justices who will make their rulings with dispassion," said Ed Whelan, president of the conservative Ethics and Public Policy Center.

"We're looking for President Obama to choose an eminently qualified candidate who is committed to the core constitutional values, who is committed to justice for all and not just a few," said Nan Aron, president of the liberal Alliance for Justice.

The Associated Press reported that potential replacements include recently confirmed Solicitor General Elena Kagan; U.S. Appeals Court Judges Sonya Sotomayor, Kim McLane Wardlaw, Sandra Lea Lynch and Diane Pamela Wood; and Leah Ward Sears, chief justice of the Georgia Supreme Court. The AP said men who have been mentioned as potential nominees include Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick, Harvard Law professor Cass Sunstein and U.S. District Judge Ruben Castillo of Chicago.

Patrick said Friday he's "120 percent" focused on being governor, but did not rule out interest in a high court appointment.

The Obama White House began from almost its first days in office preparing for the possibility of a retirement by thinking about and vetting potential high court nominees. Those efforts only accelerated with Ginsburg's cancer surgery.

Speculation about Souter's plans swirled this week because the eight other justices were known to have hired the four law clerks who will work with them in the Supreme Court term that begins in October. Souter had been the lone holdout, hiring no one.

He has never made any secret of his dislike for the capital, once telling acquaintances he had "the world's best job in the world's worst city." When the court finishes its work for the summer, he quickly departs for his beloved New Hampshire.

He has been on the court since 1990, when he was an obscure federal appeals court judge until President George H.W. Bush tapped him for the Supreme Court.

*Reliable liberal vote*
Bush White House aide John Sununu, the former conservative governor of New Hampshire, hailed his choice as a "home run." And early in his time in Washington, Souter was called a moderate conservative.

But he soon joined in a ruling reaffirming woman's right to an abortion, a decision from 1992 that remains still perhaps his most noted work on the court.

Souter became a reliable liberal vote on the court and was one of the four dissenters in the 2000 decision in Bush v. Gore that sealed the presidential election for George W. Bush.

Yet as Souter biographer Tinsley Yarbrough noted, "he doesn't take extreme positions." Indeed, in June, Souter sided with Exxon Mobil Corp. and broke with his liberal colleagues in slashing the punitive damages the company owed Alaskan victims of the Exxon Valdez oil spill.

Souter is the court's 105th justice, only its sixth bachelor. He works seven days a week through most of the court's October-to-July terms, a pace that he says leaves time for little else. He told an audience this year that he undergoes "an annual intellectual lobotomy" each fall.

Souter earned his bachelor's and law degrees from Harvard sandwiched around a stay at Oxford University as a Rhodes scholar.

He became New Hampshire's attorney general in 1976 and became a state court judge two years later. By 1990, he was on the federal appeals court in Boston for only a few months when Bush picked him to replace Justice William Brennan on the Supreme Court.

NBC News' Pete Williams and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

URL: NBC: Souter to retire from Supreme Court - More politics- msnbc.com

While the following is definately written from a literal POV, I agree with the political anaysis, especially the take on how Obama may want an elected official on the court:



> *First thoughts: On to the next campaign *
> 
> *Posted: Friday, May 01, 2009 9:17 AM by Mark Murray*
> *Filed Under: First Thoughts *
> 
> *From Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, and Domenico Montanaro*
> *** *On to the next campaign*: Late yesterday afternoon -- after an exhausting week in politics that included the release of our NBC/WSJ poll, Arlen Specter's switch, Obama's 100th day in office, the president's press conference, and Chrysler's bankruptcy -- this thought popped into our heads: Just what are we going to write about Friday morning? Well, that's not a problem anymore. Last night, several government sources told NBC's Pete Williams that Supreme Court Justice David Souter plans to retire once the current term ends in June. That news, of course, means that we're about to embark on our next political campaign: Obama's first Supreme Court pick. To us, it's amazing how the campaign has moved on seamlessly from the presidential primaries, to the general election, to the transition and run-up to the inauguration, to the first 100 days, and now to our first SCOTUS battle -- with little rest in between.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _*Video:* __After nearly two decades on the U.S. Supreme Court, Justice David H. Souter is said to be retiring in June, giving President Obama his first appointment to the nation's top court. NBC's Pete Williams reports._
> 
> *** *Here comes the culture war, maybe*: Also yesterday, we wrote how Obama so far has been able to duck thorny social issues like abortion and immigration. Well, no longer. The fight to replace Souter will undoubtedly elevate many of the social issues that he has largely been able to avoid due to the primacy of the economy, as well as wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and now even the swine flu. However, this might not turn into the battle royale some may be expecting. Why? For starters, Souter has been one of the more reliable liberal justices, so Obama replacing him really won't transform the composition of the court -- which currently includes four usually liberal members (Breyer, Ginsburg, Souter, Stevens), four usually conservative members (Alito, Roberts, Scalia, Thomas), and one usually swing vote who leans conservative (Kennedy). The real political battle will come if Obama gets to replace Kennedy or one of the conservatives. Second, now that it looks like Democrats will eventually have 60 members in the Senate, Dems have a stronger chance of beating a GOP filibuster. (A little reminder, though: The Minnesota Supreme Court won't hear Norm Coleman's appeal until exactly a month from now&#8230 Third, does the GOP really want to have an ideological/culture fight at the very time it's having an internal debate about what it is to be a Republican anymore?
> *** *The replacements*: So who are the possibilities to replace Souter? Here's our list, per NBC's Williams, that we unveiled back in February, after we learned about Ruth Bader Ginsburg's pancreatic cancer: Johnnie Rawlinson (9th Circuit Court of Appeals, African American woman), Leah Ward Sears, (chief justice of the Georgia Supreme Court, African American woman), Sonia Sotomayor (2nd Circuit Court of Appeals, Hispanic woman), Kim McLane Wardlaw, 9th Circuit, Hispanic woman), Diane Wood, (7th Circuit, woman, knows Obama from her time teaching at the University of Chicago), Jennifer Granholm (Michigan governor, woman), Merrick Garland, U.S. Court of Appeals, DC Circuit), Deval Patrick (Massachusetts governor, African American, Obama friend), Cass Sunstein (University of Chicago law professor, Obama friend).
> *** *Sotomayor the front-runner?* There appear to be four categories of candidates Obama will consider: Two have to do with identity politics (a woman and a Latino), and two have to do with life experience (an experienced legal scholar and a politician). As a candidate, the president seemed to hint that he wanted somebody with a ton of intellectual bona fides, as well some normal life experience. Still, the pressure he'll receive from Hispanics is going to be enormous -- bigger than the pressure women's groups might put on him. Of course, there's one candidate that checks both boxes: Sonia Sotomayor. She's got to be the pundit front-runner, and folks will be Googling to death over the next few hours. And note this: Hispanic Democratic leaders are pleased, but not necessarily ecstatic with the number of Latino appointments Obama has made so far. If he bypasses a Latino, what will the political fallout be? Will it be greater than if he bypasses a woman? Then again, if he picks the first Latino to sit on the Supreme Court, what will that mean for a Democratic Party that's already winning the GROWING Hispanic vote by a 2-to-1 margin.
> *** *The politician*: Also remember that this current Supreme Court is the first in the modern era that doesn't have a single justice who has ever run for political office. Sandra Day O'Connor was a state senator in Arizona for a short time. Why is it important to have a justice on the Court with elective office experience? Some believe it gives a perspective that helps them understand how a decision could cause major political fallout. So don't be surprised if the president takes a serious look at candidates with political experience. Then, of course, there's the president's own legal background, which will obviously play a role. He'll definitely want to be more hands on in this interview process than normal. And while Vice President Biden will probably play a prominent vetting role to winnow the list, Obama will likely have himself a good time playing constitutional law professor when he interviews potential candidates. One other thought: Because SCOTUS fights can be such good political theater, this could be the type of shiny metal object that allows the White House to do some other things without the same level of media attention.
> *** *And some fun speculation*: Had Clinton been president and Obama been in the Senate, would he be the favorite to fill the first SCOTUS opening? How about Clinton? Had she not been tapped for Secretary of State, would she be our focus right now? Who will be the first columnist to write: Could Barack Obama's post-presidential career be on the Supreme Court?


----------



## GeepNutt

*re: Supreme Court Nominee *



HistoryHound said:


> Sadly, I heard the same thing on Fox25. However, they are also saying that obama wants to put a woman on.


Oprah!


----------



## Guest

*re: Supreme Court Nominee *

Whoppi Golberg, at least the name sounds jewish.


----------



## OfficerObie59

*re: Supreme Court Nominee *



OfficerObie59 said:


> While the following is definately written from a literal POV...


Sorry, I meant LIBERAL...whoops


----------



## CJIS

*re: Supreme Court Nominee *

Does it really matter who he picks? There is a 99.9% Probability that whomever he picks will suck no matter what.


----------



## Mad-Dog24

*re: Supreme Court Nominee *

he isn't my Governor nor will he be my Supreme Court Justice. Good Riddance asswipe.


----------



## Guest

*re: Supreme Court Nominee *

The good news is that there wouldn't be much of an idealogical shift between Coupe Deval and David Souter.

Of course, this will be touted on the Communist News Network as the best possible nomination, even though Coupe has no judicial experience. Anyone else remember the absolutely vicious attacks on G.W. Bush's nomination of someone else with no judicial experience....Harriet Myers?

Everyone say a prayer tonight for the continued good health of John Roberts, Antonin Scalia, Samuel Alito, and Clarence Thomas.


----------



## irish937

*re: Supreme Court Nominee *



Delta784 said:


> The good news is that there wouldn't be much of an idealogical shift between Coupe Deval and David Souter.
> 
> Of course, this will be touted on the Communist News Network as the best possible nomination, even though Coupe has no judicial experience. Anyone else remember the absolutely vicious attacks on G.W. Bush's nomination of someone else with no judicial experience....Harriet Myers?
> 
> Everyone say a prayer tonight for the continued good health of John Roberts, Antonin Scalia, Samuel Alito, and Clarence Thomas.


Thank God Roberts, Alito and Thomas are still young. Scalia will need prayers to outlast the Obamination. Sad thing is Obama will probably be able to appoint two more.


----------



## CJIS

*re: Supreme Court Nominee *

*Obama Set to Seek Jurist With a Vision *

Wall Street Journal - ‎14 minutes ago‎
By JESS BRAVIN WASHINGTON -- President Barack Obama is likely to seek a nominee for the Supreme Court who will not only defend the liberal jurisprudence that reshaped American society in the mid-20th century, but who may also aim to build a progressive *...*
Diversity, Not Politics, Key to Court Pick ABC News

US senators weigh in on Supreme Court selection Reuters


----------



## Guest

*re: Supreme Court Nominee *



> "who shares my respect for constitutional values on which this nation was founded and who brings a thoughtful understanding of how to apply them in our time."


Obama quote from the above article. This is the DANGER folks. I will translate this liberal speak for those of you who don't follow politics:

"who shares my disgruntled following of an old document that if I really spoke my true feelings about, the American people would shit on me... and brings an unprecedented ability to speak the 'living document' double speak that will pull the wool over the eyes, and give a double shot of rohypnol to the sheeple"


----------



## dcs2244

*re: Supreme Court Nominee *

Nuke, I heard that, too, but I think they were talking about Robert "LonesomedoveIlovethesmellofnapalminthemorningitsmellslikevictory" Duval.


----------



## kwflatbed

*re: Supreme Court Nominee *

*Report: Deval Patrick Next U.S. Attorney?*

BOSTON (WBZ) ―Will Gov. Deval Patrick replace Michael Sullivan as the new U.S. Attorney in Massachusetts?

*The New York Post* is reporting "Badly sagging in the latest polls, Patrick will be rescued with an appointment to the vacant US attorney job in Massachusetts."

Sullivan, a Republican, resigned last month.

He was appointed in 2001 by President Bush.

There was plenty of speculation last week that Patrick was on the list of possible replacements for retiring Supreme Court Justice David Souter.

Patrick has consistently said he plans to run for re-election.

A spokesperson told WBZ the governor's office would have a response to the story on its *Twitter page* Tuesday. 

Report: Deval Patrick Next U.S. Attorney In Massachusetts? - wbztv.com


----------



## 263FPD

*re: Supreme Court Nominee *

That would be one way to get him the hell out of Massachusetts. Bah-Bye Liar!!!


----------



## OfficerObie59

*re: Supreme Court Nominee *

Whatever...you know what? I'll take a lack of ICE prosecutions if it'll get him the hell out of the State House.


----------



## 8MORE

This is not surprising. About what was expected by the community activist in chief. Obama to Nominate Sotomayor to Supreme Court Tuesday - Presidential Politics | Political News - FOXNews.com And a short note on her history.
BIO: Judge Sonia Sotomayor - Presidential Politics | Political News - FOXNews.com 
She is one of the most liberal members of the federal bench.


----------



## Kilvinsky

Well, really, no surprises there. At least we get to keep Deval! Yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay!:jump:


----------



## OfficerObie59

*Obama picks Sotomayor for Supreme Court* 
She's a self-described 'Newyorkrican' who grew up in a housing project

BREAKING NEWS
The Associated Press
updated 10:39 a.m. ET, Tues., May 26, 2009

WASHINGTON - President Barack Obama tapped federal appeals judge Sonia Sotomayor for the Supreme Court on Tuesday, making her the first Hispanic in history picked to wear the robes of a justice.

Obama made the formal announcement Tuesday morning in the East Room of the White House.

Calling her "inspiring," the president said, "Judge Sotomayor has worked at almost every level of our judicial system."

"She has never forgotten where she began," added Obama, who praised Sotomayor for her "wisdom accumulated from an inspiring life's journey."

Sotomayor said she was "deeply moved" by her nomination. "My heart today is bursting with gratitude."

If confirmed by the Senate, Sotomayor, 54, would succeed retiring Justice David Souter.

Administration officials say Sotomayor would bring more judicial experience to the Supreme Court than any justice confirmed in the past 70 years.

Obama had said publicly he wanted a justice who combined intellect and empathy - the ability to understand the troubles of everyday Americans.

Democrats hold a large majority in the Senate, and barring the unexpected, Sotomayor's confirmation should be assured.

If approved, she would join Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg as the second woman on the current court.

*'Newyorkrican'*
Sotomayor is a self-described "Newyorkrican" who grew up in a Bronx housing project after her parents moved to New York from Puerto Rico. She has dealt with diabetes since age 8 and lost her father at age 9, growing up under the care of her mother in humble surroundings. As a girl, inspired by the Perry Mason television show, she knew she wanted to be a judge.

A graduate of Princeton University and Yale Law School, a former prosecutor and private attorney, Sotomayor became a federal judge for the Southern District of New York in 1992. She became an appeals judge in 1998 for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit, which covers New York, Vermont and Connecticut.

As a judge, she has a bipartisan pedigree. She was first appointed by a Republican, President George H.W. Bush, then named an appeals judge by President Bill Clinton in 1997.

At her Senate confirmation hearing more than a decade ago, she said, "I don't believe we should bend the Constitution under any circumstance. It says what it says. We should do honor to it."

*Notable rulings*
In one of her most memorable rulings as federal district judge, Sotomayor essentially salvaged baseball in 1995, ruling with players over owners in a labor strike that had led to the cancellation of the World Series.

As an appellate judge, she sided with the city of New Haven, Conn., in a discrimination case brought by white firefighters after the city threw out results of a promotion exam because too few minorities scored high enough. Ironically, that case is now before the Supreme Court.

Obama's nomination is the first by a Democratic president in 15 years.

His announcement also leaves the Senate four months - more than enough by traditional standards - to complete confirmation proceedings before the Court begins its next term in the fall.

*Republican intentions*
Republicans have issued conflicting signals about their intentions. While some have threatened filibusters if they deemed Obama's pick too liberal, others have said that is unlikely.

Given Sotomayor's selection, any decision to filibuster would presumably carry political risks - Hispanics are the fastest-growing segment of the population and an increasingly important one politically.

During the White House announcement, Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell released a statement saying, "Senate Republicans will treat Judge Sotomayor fairly. But we will thoroughly examine her record to ensure she understands that the role of a jurist in our democracy is to apply the law even-handedly, despite their own feelings or personal or political preferences."

The Republican National Committee also commented, adding, "Republicans will reserve judgment on Sonia Sotomayor until there has been a thorough and thoughtful examination of her legal views."

Abortion rights have been a flashpoint in several recent Supreme Court confirmations, although Sotomayor has not authored any controversial rulings on the subject. 
Sotomayor's elevation to the appeals court was elayed by Republicans, in part out of concerns she might someday be selected for the Supreme Court. She was ultimately confirmed for the appeals court in 1998 on a 68-28 vote, gathering some Republican support.

Among those voting against her was Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions, now the top Republican on the Judiciary Committee that will hold sway over her confirmation.

Now, more than a decade later, Sotomayor possesses credentials Sessions said he wanted in a pick for the high court - years of experience on the bench.

Obama had talked openly about the upside of choosing someone outside the judiciary - every single current justice is a former federal appeals court judge - but passed on at least two serious candidates who had never been judges.

*Latina heritage*
Sotomayor has spoken openly about her pride in being Latina, and that personal experiences "affect the facts that judges choose to see."

"I simply do not know exactly what the difference will be in my judging," she said in a speech in 2002. "But I accept there will be some based on my gender and my Latina heritage."

From the moment Souter announced his resignation, it was widely assumed Obama would select a woman to replace him, and perhaps a Hispanic as well.

Others known to have been considered included federal appeals judge Diane Wood, who was a colleague of the president's at the University of Chicago law school, as well as two members of his administration, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano and Solicitor General-nominee Elena Kagan.

If confirmed, Sotomayor is unlikely to alter the ideological balance of the court, since Souter generally sides with the so-called liberals on key 5-4 rulings.

But at 54, she is a generation younger that Souter, and liberal outside groups hope she would provide a counterpoint to some of the sharply worded conservative rulings.

*Name:* Sonia Sotomayor 
*Age-Birthdate-Location:* 54; June 25, 1954; New York, N.Y. 
*Experience:* Judge, U. S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, 1998-present; judge, U. S. District Court Southern District of New York, 1992-1998; private practice, New York City, 1984-1992; assistant district attorney, New York County, 1979-1984 
*Education:* B.A., Princeton University, 1976; J.D., Yale Law School, 1979. 
*Quote:* "I don't believe we should bend the Constitution under any circumstance. It says what it says. We should do honor to it." - during a 1997 nomination hearing.

I don't think it was all that bad of pick, considering the circumstances. I was expecting someone further left than Vladimir Lenin. Don't me me wrong; she's no improvement over the status quo, but she's not much worse, and holds a slight possibility of judicial drift in the future; hispanics, until recently, have usually been a Republican bloc.

Time will tell. Certinly wouldn't be my first choice, but as good as could be expected.


----------



## kwflatbed

OBAMA PICKS LATINA

[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OfC99LrrM2Q"]YouTube- Judge Sonia Sotomayor: Court is Where Policy is Made[/nomedia]

*Sotomayor: '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'...*

*Prospect's Résumé...*

*Self described 'Newyorican'...*

*MAG: The Case Against...*

*NBC: Would Republicans dare vote against first Hispanic Woman?*

*McConnell: 'Senate Republicans will treat Judge Sotomayor fairly. But we will thoroughly examine her record'...*


----------



## CJIS

OfficerObie59 said:


> "I simply do not know exactly what the difference will be in my judging," she said in a speech in 2002. "But I accept there will be some based on my gender and my Latina heritage."
> 
> .


WTF where is Impartiality!!!! That paragraph alone should sink her.


----------



## Killjoy

Is she actually a strict constructionist as she claims to be or is she a liberal court activist? I don't care about her gender, race or views as long as she remains faithful to the constitution and doesn't let any bias leak in.


----------



## CJIS

Killjoy said:


> Is she actually a strict constructionist as she claims to be or is she a liberal court activist? I don't care about her gender, race or views as long as she remains faithful to the constitution and doesn't let any bias leak in.


Read that Paragraph and sure looks like Bias to me.


----------



## OfficerObie59

While she's said this...


> "I don't believe we should bend the Constitution under any circumstance. It says what it says. We should do honor to it."


...this worries me more--after all, it was in the New York Times, her hometown paper:


> May 15, 2009
> 
> A Judge's View of Judging Is on the Record
> 
> By CHARLIE SAVAGE
> WASHINGTON - In 2001, Sonia Sotomayor, an appeals court judge, gave a speech declaring that the ethnicity and sex of a judge "may and will make a difference in our judging."
> In her speech, Judge Sotomayor questioned the famous notion - often invoked by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and her retired Supreme Court colleague, Sandra Day O'Connor - that a wise old man and a wise old woman would reach the same conclusion when deciding cases.
> "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," said Judge Sotomayor, who is now considered to be near the top of President Obama's list of potential Supreme Court nominees.
> Her remarks, at the annual Judge Mario G. Olmos Law and Cultural Diversity Lecture at the University of California, Berkeley, were not the only instance in which she has publicly described her view of judging in terms that could provoke sharp questioning in a confirmation hearing.
> This month, for example, a video surfaced of Judge Sotomayor asserting in 2005 that a "court of appeals is where policy is made." She then immediately adds: "And I know - I know this is on tape, and I should never say that because we don't make law. I know. O.K. I know. I'm not promoting it. I'm not advocating it. I'm - you know."
> The video was of a panel discussion for law students interested in becoming clerks, and she was explaining the different experiences gained when working at district courts and appeals courts. Her remarks caught the eye of conservative bloggers who accused her of being a "judicial activist," although Jonathan H. Adler, a professor at Case Western Reserve University law school, argued that critics were reading far too much into those remarks.
> Republicans have signaled that they intend to put the eventual nominee under a microscope, and they say they were put on guard by Mr. Obama's statement that judges should have "empathy," a word they suggest could be code for injecting liberal ideology into the law.
> Judge Sotomayor has given several speeches about the importance of diversity. But her 2001 remarks at Berkeley, which were published by the Berkeley La Raza Law Journal, went further, asserting that judges' identities will affect legal outcomes.
> "Whether born from experience or inherent physiological or cultural differences," she said, for jurists who are women and nonwhite, "our gender and national origins may and will make a difference in our judging."
> Her remarks came in the context of reflecting her own life experiences as a Hispanic female judge and on how the increasing diversity on the federal bench "will have an effect on the development of the law and on judging."
> In making her argument, Judge Sotomayor sounded many cautionary notes. She said there was no uniform perspective that all women or members of a minority group have, and emphasized that she was not talking about any individual case.
> She also noted that the Supreme Court was uniformly white and male when it delivered historic rulings against racial and sexual discrimination. And she said she tried to question her own "opinions, sympathies and prejudices," and aspired to impartiality.
> Still, Judge Sotomayor questioned whether achieving impartiality "is possible in all, or even, in most, cases." She added, "And I wonder whether by ignoring our differences as women or men of color we do a disservice both to the law and society."
> She also approvingly quoted several law professors who said that "to judge is an exercise of power" and that "there is no objective stance but only a series of perspectives."
> "Personal experiences affect the facts that judges choose to see," she said.
> Charles J. Ogletree Jr., a Harvard law professor and an adviser to Mr. Obama, said Judge Sotomayor's remarks were appropriate. Professor Ogletree said it was "obvious that people's life experiences will inform their judgments in life as lawyers and judges" because law is more than "a technical exercise," citing Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr.'s famous aphorism: "The life of the law has not been logic; it has been experience."
> In a forward to a 2007 book, "The International Judge" (U.P.N.E.), Judge Sotomayor seemed to put a greater emphasis on a need for judges to seek to transcend their identities, writing that "all judges have cases that touch our passions deeply, but we all struggle constantly with remaining impartial" and letting reason rule. Courts, she added, "are in large part the product of their membership and their judges' ability to think through and across their own intellectual and professional backgrounds" to find common ground.
> 
> http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/15/us/15judge.html


----------



## LongKnife56

Sotomayor will be a liberal activist justice:

Townhall.com Blog : Matt Lewis : Ken Blackwell on Guns-N-Sotomayor



> As Jilian noted, over at The Fox Forum, *Ken Blackwell* writes that "... _President Obama's nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor is a declaration of war against America's gun owners and the Second Amendment to our Constitution."_
> 
> This is not overblown rhetoric. As Blackwell notes,
> ... (Judge Sotomayor) is one of only three federal appellate judges in America to issue a court opinion saying that the Second Amendment does not apply to states. The case was Maloney v. Cuomo, and it came down this past January.That means if Chicago, or even the state of Illinois or New York, wants to ban you from owning any guns at all, even in your own house, that's okay with her. According to Judge Sotomayor, if your state or city bans all guns the way Washington, D.C. did, that's okay under the Constitution.​ The gun issue is a good one for those wishing to lobby Democratic politicians to look carefully at Sotomayor. In recent years, Democrats have essentially abandoned gun control for fear that it will cost them votes. If Sotomayor's position on guns becomes an issue, it could have political repercussions -- even if she is confirmed.
> As Blackwell writes:
> 
> There are a number of pro-Second Amendment Democratic senators from deeply red states, including Mark Begich from Alaska, Jon Tester and Max Baucus from Montana, Ben Nelson from Nebraska, Byron Dorgan and Kent Conrad from North Dakota, and Tim Johnson from South Dakota.
> These senators will jeopardize their seats if they vote to support an anti-gun radical for the Supreme Court. Second Amendment supporters will now be up in arms over this radical anti-Second Amendment nominee, and you should never underestimate the political power of American gun owners.​ The nomination has only been official for a few hours, and already we are learning more and more concerning things about this nominee. It will be interesting to see how this develops...


Sotomayor for the Court - Wendy Long - Bench Memos on National Review Online



> Sotomayor for the Court [Wendy Long]
> Judge Sotomayor is a liberal judicial activist of the first order who thinks her own personal political agenda is more important that the law as written. She thinks that judges should dictate policy, and that one's sex, race, and ethnicity ought to affect the decisions one renders from the bench.
> 
> She reads racial preferences and quotas into the Constitution, even to the point of dishonoring those who preserve our public safety. On September 11, America saw firsthand the vital role of America's firefighters in protecting our citizens. They put their lives on the line for her and the other citizens of New York and the nation. But Judge Sotomayor would sacrifice their claims to fair treatment in employment promotions to racial preferences and quotas. The Supreme Court is now reviewing that decision.
> 
> She has an extremely high rate of her decisions being reversed, indicating that she is far more of a liberal activist than even the current liberal activist Supreme Court.


Obama Supreme Court Candidate Sonia Sotomayor-Part 2 - Ed Whelan - Bench Memos on National Review Online



> Obama Supreme Court Candidate Sonia Sotomayor-Part 2 [Ed Whelan]
> I haven't had time to research and review Judge Sonia Sotomayor's body of opinions, so I'll limit myself to a couple additional comments (beyond my Part 1 post):
> 1. On those occasions on which the Supreme Court has reviewed Sotomayor's rulings, she hasn't fared well, drawing some pointed criticism and garnering at most 11 out of 44 possible votes for her reasoning across five cases.
> In _Malesko v. Correctional Services Corp. _(2000), Sotomayor ruled that the Court's 1971 ruling in _Bivens_, which implied a private action for damages against federal officers alleged to have violated a citizen's constititutional rights,should be extended to create an implied damages action against a private corporation operating a halfway house under contract with the Bureau of Prisons. On review (_Correctional Services Corp. v. Malesko _(2001)), the Court reversed Sotomayor by a 5-4 vote. Chief Justice Rehnquist's majority opinion labeled the plaintiff's claim "fundamentally different from anything recognized in _Bivens _or subsequent cases." In his concurring opinion, Justice Scalia acknowledged that "a broad interpretation of [_Bivens_'] rationale would doubtless produce [the] application" made by the dissenters (and Sotomayor). But, as he put it, "_Bivens_ is a relic of the heady days in which this Court assumed common-law powers to create causes of action-decreeing them to be 'implied' by the mere existence of a statutory or constitutional prohibition." The Court has abandoned that power in the statutory field, and "[t]here is even greater reason to abandon it in the constitutional field, since an 'implication' imagined in the Constitution can presumably not even be repudiated by Congress."
> Just last term, in _Knight v. Commissioner_, the Supreme Court, in a unanimous opinion by Chief Justice Roberts, reached the same end result as Sotomayor on a tax question, but faulted her for adopting a reading of the relevant statute that "flies in the face of the statutory language." In _Merrill Lynch v. Dabit_ (2006), the Court, in an opinion by Justice Stevens, unanimously (8-0) reversed Sotomayor's ruling that certain state-law securities claims were not preempted by federal law. Stevens pointed out that the Court had rejected Sotomayor's interpretation in cases from 1971 forward. In _New York Times v. Tasini_ (2001), the Court, by a 7-2 vote, rejected the reading of copyright law that Sotomayor had adopted (as the district judge in the case).
> In _Empire Healthchoice Assurance v. McVeigh_, the Court, by a vote of 5 to 4, affirmed a ruling by Sotomayor on a question of federal jurisdiction. (On a quick read, I can't readily discern whether the majority's grounds are the same as Sotomayor's, but will assume for purposes of my cumulative vote tally that they are.)
> I'll also note that the Court has granted review of Sotomayor's decision in _Riverkeeper v. EPA _ruling that certain provisions of the Clean Water Act do not authorize the EPA to engage in cost-benefit analysis in crafting its rules. The Supreme Court will decide that case-recaptioned _Entergy Corp. v. EPA_-this coming term.
> 
> (If any reader is aware of cases I've missed in which the Supreme Court has reviewed a ruling by Sotomayor, please let me know. )
> 2. Sotomayor is often painted as a moderate by virtue of the fact that President George H.W. Bush formally appointed her to a district-court seat. But, as I've explained before, when President Bush nominated Sotomayor to the district court in 1991, the New York senators, Moynihan and D'Amato, had forced on the White House a deal that enabled the senator not of the president's party to name one of every four district-court nominees in New York. Sotomayor was Moynihan's pick. I am reliably informed that Bush 41's White House nonetheless resisted nominating her because she was so liberal and did so in the end only as part of a package to move along other nominees whom Moynihan was holding up.
> 
> I'll also highlight that in 1998, on the roll-call vote on President Clinton's nomination of Sotomayor to the Second Circuit, 29 Republican senators (including John McCain) voted against her confirmation.


----------



## LGriffin

This one, that Obie posted, really grinds my gears. "As an appellate judge, she sided with the city of New Haven, Conn., in a discrimination case brought by white firefighters after the city threw out results of a promotion exam because too few minorities scored high enough. Ironically, that case is now before the Supreme Court." 

She'll be pushing the affirmative action bullcrap even though "underprivileged" minorities have been entitled to free college for years! In this case eighteen white guys got screwed because only one Hispanic even passed...


----------



## BB-59

Were screwed.


----------



## Killjoy

Well, who did you think Obama was going to put there? A conservative?


----------



## uspresident1

Well on the bright side at least she's not replacing Scalia or Alito...were just swapping a liberal for a liberal.


----------



## OfficerObie59

*Re: Supreme Court Nominee Sotomayer*

Yeah, like I said, I think it could have been a lot worse considering whoever he nominated will get confirmed due to the virtually fillibuster majority the Dems have in the Senate. At least I holding out some hop e she won't be an off the charts bleeder.

If the GOP happens to take back enough seats in '10 to get more than 40 senate seats, Obama will have to go more mainstream if that's when his next pick becomes available.


----------



## 8MORE

Lets hope the next seat that opens on SCOTUS is after January 2013.


----------



## MetrowestPD

*Maybe she should adhere to this section of the Constitution before she states that the Appeals Court is where policy is made.*

*



* is the 



 and 



 is sometimes also known as *checks and balances*.


----------



## Guest

8MORE said:


> Lets hope the next seat that opens on SCOTUS is after January 2013.


I don't see much damage in this pick or the next one; Souter is a liberal when it comes down to it, and barring any unforeseen events, the next justice to go will be Ginsburg, who's also a liberal.

As I said before, everyone should say a prayer for the continued good health of Justices Roberts, Scalia, Thomas, and Alito.


----------



## JustSayNO

Does anyone know her stance on firearms in general? in regards to the ruling that the second ammendment apply to states until heller v DC, district courts had ruled that way. The ninth district court in april changed its stance on the second ammendment to apply it to states. Second Amendment now applies to the Ninth District | QandO

You can read the actual ruling here http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2009/04/20/0715763.pdf
It's quite intresting.


----------



## dcs2244

Too true, Wolfie, but there is nothing to be done about it. Everyone should remember that she was appointed to the bench by President Bush (41). He also appointed Justice Souter. Keep in mind, this is the type of politician, and ideology, supported by the RNC. RINO's are us. Barring some unforseen event, I think we are too far gone at this point to peacefully restore the republic.


----------



## LGriffin

JustSayNO said:


> Does anyone know her stance on firearms in general? in regards to the ruling that the second ammendment apply to states until heller v DC, district courts had ruled that way. The ninth district court in april changed its stance on the second ammendment to apply it to states. Second Amendment now applies to the Ninth District | QandO


_If she made some of the statements that she has as a white male, she wouldn't even be considered. Seems to her that firearms will be okay for minorities only... 
She put the screws to fireman, not a cops promotional exam. Everybody LOVES fireman, so the case has gotten a great deal of negative attn.
_ 


Wolfman said:


> Although it may be swapping lib for lib, remember you're swapping old lib for young lib. She will not let a pesky thing like the Constitution get in the way of her vision for a Brave New Ameriqa.


*"I simply do not know exactly what the difference will be in my judging," she said in a speech in 2001. "But I accept there will be some based on my gender and my Latina heritage."* _Yeah._

_Sure, young lib, but this chunky monkey looks like a good candidate for heart disease so maybe she won't stick around too long._

Seems Odrama is definitely looking to do eight years:

"Any Republican effort to block Sotomayor's confirmation could be risky for a party still reeling from last year's elections and struggling to gain back lost ground with Hispanics, the fastest-growing part of the population and one that is increasingly active politically."
Push to confirm first Hispanic to Supreme Court | Comcast.net


----------



## LongKnife56

> Everyone should remember that she was appointed to the bench by President Bush (41).


I am not a big defender of Bush (either one), but as for judges he did the best he could. The Libs blocked filling many vacancies for a long time. HE appointed Sotomayor as part of deal and he then he was said to be reluctant.

See my post # 34 above:



> Sotomayor is often painted as a moderate by virtue of the fact that President George H.W. Bush formally appointed her to a district-court seat. But, as I've explained before, when President Bush nominated Sotomayor to the district court in 1991, the New York senators, Moynihan and D'Amato, had forced on the White House a deal that enabled the senator not of the president's party to name one of every four district-court nominees in New York. Sotomayor was Moynihan's pick. I am reliably informed that Bush 41's White House nonetheless resisted nominating her because she was so liberal and did so in the end only as part of a package to move along other nominees whom Moynihan was holding up.


----------



## justanotherparatrooper

Note who she quotes and google the name...


----------



## LGriffin

justanotherparatrooper said:


> Note who she quotes and google the name...


*Norman* Mattoon *Thomas* (1884-1968) was a leading American socialist, pacifist, and six-time presidential candidate for the Socialist Party of America. *...:fu2:*


----------



## LongKnife56

Obama is a socialist (or worse) himself, so this is what we should have expected.


----------



## uspresident1

justanotherparatrooper said:


> Note who she quotes and google the name...


I would love to see this yearbook quote on Hannity or Bill O'Reilly tonight. That is some damn fine research on your part Para.


----------



## justanotherparatrooper

uspresident1 said:


> I would love to see this yearbook quote on Hannity or Bill O'Reilly tonight. That is some damn fine research on your part Para.


 I cant take the credit bro, I heard it on Glen Beck this morning.


----------



## uspresident1

justanotherparatrooper said:


> I cant take the credit bro, I heard it on Glen Beck this morning.


Well nevertheless it's an excellent post. I just e-mailed O'Reilly about it. I am sure he is already well aware but hopefully he can mention it on his show tonight.


----------



## cj3441

Killjoy said:


> Is she actually a strict constructionist as she claims to be or is she a liberal court activist? I don't care about her gender, race or views as long as she remains faithful to the constitution and doesn't let any bias leak in.


She is a left wing liberal activist who has; and will continue to try to "legislate from the bench".


----------



## OfficerObie59

JustSayNO said:


> Does anyone know her stance on firearms in general? in regards to the ruling that the second ammendment apply to states until heller v DC, district courts had ruled that way. The ninth district court in april changed its stance on the second ammendment to apply it to states.


Quite surprising, since the 9th Circuit wear red robes.


justanotherparatrooper said:


> Note who she quotes and google the name...





LGriffin said:


> *Norman* Mattoon *Thomas* (1884-1968) was a leading American socialist, pacifist, and six-time presidential candidate for the Socialist Party of America. *...:fu2:*


I have a notepad document I keep on my computer that I use to compile the quotes I come across here and there that rotate on in my signature block.

This one was like number two on the list:


> "The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism, but under the name of liberalism they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program until one day America will be a socialist nation without ever knowing how it happened." -Norman Thomas, U.S. Socialist Party Presidential nominee, 1928, 1932, 1936, 1940, 1944, & 1948.


Scary.


----------



## Kilvinsky

Damn scary stuff.


----------



## justanotherparatrooper

Im trying to find the link. I heard rush quote a ruling from her stating that the RTKBA is not Constitutional and that that particular ruling is up for appeal at the USSC.


----------



## OfficerObie59

One of the panelists on the "This Week" roundtable on Sunday (I think it was David Brooks) made the comment that she'll be going through confirmation right around the time her case dealing with the New Haven firefighters promotional exam is expected to be overturned by the current court. Should make for some good fireworks in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

As always, George Will made some great comments to when he took Donna Brazille to task. Anyone interested: ABC News


----------



## 7costanza

sean --

President Obama hit a home run with his nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court -- and not just because she's the "woman who saved baseball" by ending the strike in 1995, nor simply because she would be the first Latina ever to serve on the high court.

It was a home run because in her three-decade career as a prosecutor, judge, private litigator and law professor, she has time and again earned bipartisan praise as one of America's finest legal minds. And it was the right choice because Judge Sotomayor -- herself born and raised in a South Bronx housing project -- has summed up the American dream in her own incredible story and never once forgotten how the law affects our daily lives.

Now her historic nomination goes to the Senate. I know that process well, and I can tell you that the debate of the coming weeks and months will be shaped by the public response in the next few hours and days. It's critical that the Senate and the public clearly see where the American people stand.

*Will you add your name to the growing list of Americans who are pledging to "Stand with Sotomayor" today? Your name and comments will become part of a public display of support at this crucial time.*

​
I've followed Judge Sotomayor's remarkable journey for years. I voted for her when President George H.W. Bush nominated her for the District Court in 1992, and I was proud to vote for her again when President Bill Clinton nominated her for the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in 1998.

Born to a Puerto Rican family, Sotomayor grew up in a public housing project in the South Bronx. She was an avid reader from an early age, and was first inspired to pursue a legal career by the Nancy Drew mystery novels. Driven by her mother's belief in the power of education and her own relentless work ethic, she excelled in school. She won a scholarship to Princeton University, graduated _summa cum laude,_ and then went on to attend Yale Law School where she served as an editor of the prestigious _Yale Law Journal._

Like President Obama, Sotomayor passed up many more lucrative opportunities after law school to put her degree to work for the public good. She served as an Assistant District Attorney in New York, tackling some of the hardest cases facing the city, including robberies, assaults, murders, police brutality, and child pornography. Her growing reputation for fearlessness and legal brilliance prompted her first nomination to the federal bench, and she's only continued to soar.

If confirmed, she would start with more federal judicial experience than any Justice in a century, more overall judicial experience than any Justice in 70 years, and replace David Souter as the only Justice with firsthand experience as a trial judge. She has participated in over 3,000 panel decisions and authored roughly 400 opinions, expertly handling difficult issues of constitutional law, complicated procedural matters, and lawsuits involving complex business organizations.

In her years on the bench, Judge Sotomayor has earned acclaim from legal scholars and experts from both sides of the aisle for her intellectual toughness, her probing oral questioning, and her ability to issue decisions that hold both factual details and legal doctrines in equal measure. And she's never failed to apply a steady, common-sense analysis of how the law touches our daily lives.

*Her story is incredible. Her qualifications are undeniable. And her judgment will serve us all well on the highest court in the land.*

Please join me in becoming a part of this historic moment for the Court and our country. Add your name now to publicly show that you, too, "Stand with Sotomayor." In these crucial early hours, let us leave no doubt about the people's support for this extraordinary nominee.

*http://my.barackobama.com/sotomayorstand*

Thank you,

Vice President Joe Biden

​


----------



## CJIS

*Sessions says Sotomayor comment is "troubling"*

USA Today - ‎4 hours ago‎
The Senate Republican who is charged with grilling Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor during her confirmation hearings told USA TODAY's Matt Kelley this morning that she needs to explain a 2001 speech in which she said a *"wise Latina woman" might make better judicial decisions than a white man...*
Conservatives, liberals take sides on Sotomayor The Associated Press 
Hatch says high court pick Sotomayor not racist, but may be *...* Salt Lake Tribune

Oh baby they picked up on the in-partiality too!

To 7Coz.

I wish there was a site were I could voice my non support. If you find one let me know.


----------



## kwflatbed

LOL Seven I got the same e-mail thanks to masscopguy putting
my name on their mailing list.
They will not remove it either no matter how many nasty replies
I send back.


----------



## Kilvinsky

I watched the Round Table that Obie posted. George Will, you're OK in my book as always. David..something (I forget already) did a nice job as well. Donna Brazile, sigh, not impressed. The other guy? Yeah, he was there.


----------



## 7costanza

> LOL Seven I got the same e-mail thanks to masscopguy putting
> my name on their mailing list.
> They will not remove it either no matter how many nasty replies
> I send back.


Harry, I actually joined the site during the election...that old keep your friends close and your enemies closer thing. Now I cant get them to stop sending me emails, no matter how many times I tell them to #%CK OFF....


----------



## LongKnife56

I got on their emailing list because I wrote to give Barry a piece of my mind and they didn't bother to read (or were too stupid to understand) what I was saying sop they put me on their list, but I must be on a different list because the email is different. That's OK as it was junk email address anyway and it now saved me from buying the Glob.

But the post above includes a live link to donate. Why was that included?


----------



## 7costanza

> But the post above includes a live link to donate. Why was that included?


Two reasons...(1) I wanted to show how much of a @%nt he is STILL asking for donations...he raised more money than anyone has ever done, but now has put the Country ten trillion in debt. and (2) Iam pretty sure that no one HERE was going to break out their Visa and make a donation .


----------



## OfficerObie59

*Re: Supreme Court Nominee Sotomayor*



7costanza said:


> Two reasons...(1) I wanted to show how much of a @%nt he is STILL asking for donations...he raised more money than anyone has ever done, but now has put the Country ten trillion in debt. and (2) Iam pretty sure that no one HERE was going to break out their Visa and make a donation .


Laura Ingraham was on Imus yesterday morning (Thursday 5/28) and she had a good take 7's comment, on Sotomayor, and on how Obama sucks in general.

http://www.wabcradio.com/getpodcast...abc.fimc.net/ImusMP3/5-28-09LAURAINGRAHAM.mp3


----------



## LongKnife56

I don't listen to Imus anymore, but this clip is definitely worth listening to. (It does start off a little slow although it does reinforce the point that 7costanza made above that the libs are going all out to raise the funds to push this nomination.)

Laura is great! She also said elections have consequences. Sotomayor is one and one that most people who did not vote for Barry knew was coming. As for people who voted for him, they either knew and wanted a liberal activist justice or they don't even understand the difference or the danger. Hopefully he only gets to appoint a replacement for Ginsberg which will not distrub the balance before the mid-term elections and enough people wake up.


----------



## 7costanza

msnbc.com Video Player


----------



## Kilvinsky

7costanza said:


> Two reasons...(1) I wanted to show how much of a @%nt he is STILL asking for donations...he raised more money than anyone has ever done, but now has put the Country ten trillion in debt. and (2) Iam pretty sure that no one HERE was going to break out their Visa and make a donation .


We WEREN'T supposed to donate? Shit. THANKS 7. There's .35 I'll never get back.

I feel so violated.


----------



## 7costanza

*Obama's court pick keeps gun stocks soaring*

President Obama's nomination of federal appeals court Judge Sonia Sotomayor to replace retiring Supreme Court Justice David Souter heralds yet another victory for gun-makers. Yes, you read that right.

Let me explain.

While most investors have been rightly focused on the crisis in the markets and economy lately, some Americans have been focusing on other political issues, namely the Second Amendment.

They wonder, will the Obama Administration and new Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor put the right to bear arms in jeopardy? Clearly, many think so, as evidenced by an increase in gun sales and an associated rally in gun stocks.

Indeed, two of my favorite gun stocks, Sturm Ruger & Co. (RGR) and Smith & Wesson (SWHC), rallied Thursday on the news of Sotomayor's nomination. But it's not just Sotomayor's nomination that has been lifting the gun-makers. The recession has helped, too.

*Buying protection*

You wouldn't think a recession as deep as the one we've been experiencing would be a boon to gun sales, but many citizens are arming themselves expressly because of the recession. You see, the recession has brought massive budget cuts to many municipalities. That means less fire and police protection. In response, gun sales are on the rise.

My response to this undercurrent is to recommend stocks that take advantage of the increase in gun sales. Two of my f*avorite stocks to buy now* make guns.

Sturm Ruger & Co. (RGR) is one of the leaders in the space, producing products across the firearm spectrum. The company is enjoying growing sales at a time of recession due to the political undercurrent. I rate the stock an A or Strong Buy.

Smith & Wesson (SWHC) was made famous by Clint Eastwood's, "Dirty Harry" character. Some poor management decisions helped push SWHC to under $2 per share prior to the election last November.

But post-election, the stock has doubled in value. I expect more of the same until the administration can definitively ease concern regarding the Second Amendment.
I rate SWHC a B or Buy.

Another benefactor of the boom in gun sales is the sporting goods retail space. I have a good friend that owns a very small independent sporting goods shop. He can't keep enough gun products on the shelves.

That bodes well for sporting goods superstore, Cabela's (CAB). Retail sales have struggled during this recession, but gun sales are easing the pain for CAB. That, combined with expectations of economic recovery, have pushed CAB to pre-financial crisis levels.

I rate CAB a B or Buy.

The market is treading water due to the tug and pull of the inflation and deflation camps. The gun story though seems to be on a straight shot higher. Investors can benefit by following that trend.


----------



## justanotherparatrooper

I love how the libs are calling for a civil atmosphere during the confirmation hearings....You mean like they did for Robert Bork, Anthony Scalia and Justice Thomas?


----------



## Kilvinsky

Anita Hill, do you have anything to add?


----------



## CJIS

*Sotomayor impresses in interviews, senators say*

The Associated Press - ‎1 hour ago‎
WASHINGTON (AP) - Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor has bonded with female senators about her childhood love of Nancy Drew mysteries and shared war stories with the Senate's former prosecutors about her days in the gritty Manhattan district *...*

Video: NY Man Has Bad Memories of Sotomayor The Associated Press

Sotomayor impresses in interviews, senators say Fresno Bee


----------



## 263FPD

Now that Patrick was jilted by his buddy the Pres. in favor of Sonia Sotomayor, what is he going to do? When he throws his temper tentrum what else will try to take away from the police? Vacation weeks? Health benefits? Sick days?


----------



## kwflatbed

The thread on Kagan nomination was on MC 2.

Updates to that thread:










*DOCS: BIG LIB KAGAN*

*EXCLUSIVE: Documents Show Kagan's Liberal Opinion on Social Issues*

*Posted by Jan Crawford 261 comments *

*Elena Kagan has kept her cards so close to the vest that in the days after President Obama nominated her to the Supreme Court, some on the left worried she was too moderate to replace liberal Justice John Paul Stevens.*

*But in documents obtained by CBS News, Kagan--while working as a law clerk to the late Justice Thurgood Marshall - made her positions clear on some of the nation's most contentious social issues.*

*The documents, buried in Marshall's papers in the Library of Congress, show Kagan standing shoulder-to-shoulder with the liberal left, at a time when the Rehnquist Supreme Court was moving to the conservative right. *

*OBAMA MAY USE EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE TO WITHHOLD KAGAN PAPERS...*

*GALLUP: Support for Kagan below recent nominees, similar to Miers...*


----------



## OfficerObie59

Her positions on liberal issues should be a surprise to no one. Her bona fides, how ever limited, are very clear.


----------



## Killjoy

Like Obama was going to appoint someone other than a dyed-in-the-wool liberal to replace Stevens. I only hope the Republicans give her some tough questions unlike the soft-ball they tossed at Sotomeyer.


----------



## kwflatbed

Republicans Seize on Newly Released Documents to Oppose Kagan Nomination

With her confirmation hearing less than a week away, Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan is facing attacks from Republican critics over newly released documents that show she briefly suspended on-campus military recruitment when she was dean of Harvard Law School in 2005.
Democrats say the documents, released over the weekend by the Department of Defense, strengthen support for Kagan by showing that she permitted military recruitment through the Harvard Law School Veterans Association, despite her opposition to the military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy regarding gay servicemen and women.
But Republicans are using the documents to blast Kagan's "discriminatory treatment of the military" while she was at Harvard. 
Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions, ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, suggested that the White House has perpetuated "misleading and even untrue statements" regarding Kagan's treatment of military recruiters at Harvard.
"The White House had the temerity to declare that these records show that Ms. Kagan worked to 'accommodate military recruiters,' to 'assiduously follow the law,' and 'ensure that Harvard law students could choose a career in military service,' Sessions said in a statement Monday.

FOXNews.com - Republicans Seize on Newly Released Documents to Oppose Kagan Nomination


----------



## kwflatbed

Kagan set to break silence as hearings commence

By JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS, Associated Press Writer Julie Hirschfeld Davis, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - Elena Kagan, a trailblazer for women and the law, is hitting a new path that could be strewn with a few rough patches:  Senate Judiciary Committee hearings on her Supreme Court nomination.
Kagan's chances are bright as she heads into a marathon week of high-pressure vetting before the Judiciary panel, pressing to portray herself as a mainstream, impartial addition to the court. She's set to break weeks of public silence in sworn testimony before the panel reviewing her nomination.
Democrats have more than enough votes to confirm her. Republicans have shown no inclination to try to block such a vote, although some conservative interest groups are urging them in increasingly vocal ways to do so.
Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., the Senate Judiciary Committee chairman, predicted Monday that Kagan will be cleared with votes to spare. He brushed off GOP questions about her lack of judicial experience, saying there have been many successful justices who had no previous bench time. He cited Earl Warren, Hugo Black and Robert Jackson.
Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama, the ranking Republican on the panel, said he hopes there won't be a filibuster, but said he's concerned that Kagan may be "outside the mainstream" of legal thinking.

Kagan set to break silence as hearings commence - Yahoo! News


----------



## kwflatbed

*GOP Raises Concern Over Kagan's 'Liberal Activism'*



AP
Obama's Supreme Court nominee pledges during confirmation hearing to uphold the law as some Republicans worry she will bring liberal politics and anti-military bias to the job.
Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan pledged on Monday to do her best to consider "every case impartially, modestly, with commitment to principle and in accordance with law" if appointed to the nation's highest court.
Speaking on the first day of her confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Kagan said the court must ensure that "our government never oversteps its proper bounds or violates the rights of individuals."
"But the court must also recognize the limits on itself and respect the choices made by the American people," she said, adding that her past work in government public service has shown her that, in her words, "no one has a monopoly on truth and wisdom."
"I will make no pledges this week other than this one -- that if confirmed, I will remember and abide by all these lessons," she said. "I will listen hard, to every party before the court and to each of my colleagues."


*Kagan's Opening Statement*








*Behind the Scenes With Carl Cameron*
*RAW DATA: Confirmation Hearing Witnesses*


----------



## topcop14

Has anyone heard any of her non answers to the questions she is giving at the hearings? When asked if she wrote a certain paper in favor of partial birth abortions, she said I have seen the paper and when pressed said "well it's in my hand writing". What kind of answer is that? This liberal bitch can't give a straight answer to the simplest of questions. Oh and she believes that the .GOV has the right to tell us what we can and cannot eat! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! She also sees no problem with looking to foreign law when making judicial decisions. WTF The only thing a Supreme Court justice should look at when making a decision is that little thing known as the Constitution. Oh let me clarify that, the Fucking U.S. Constitution. :stomp: And no, it is not a living, breathing document that means different things at different times. It says what it means and means what it says.:stomp:

AHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! DEEEP BREATH, DEEP BREATH, CALM DOWN TOPCOP, REMEMBER YOUR BLOOD PRESSURE. (Just one of the little voices in my head that tells me to do things from time to time)


----------



## kwflatbed

None of it mans shit she had the job the day she was nominated.


----------



## Kilvinsky

That's for damn sure. RUBBER STAMP IT DEMS! Sheesh.


----------



## topcop14

kwflatbed said:


> None of it mans shit she had the job the day she was nominated.


I know, the republican's don't have the balls to do what needs to be done! ! !


----------



## dcs2244

Release The Kagan!


----------



## kwflatbed

*Conservatives Ponder NRA Priorities, Motives Questioned on Kagan, Reid*

By Judson Berger

Sen. Orrin Hatch's decision to oppose Elena Kagan for a seat on the Supreme Court probably wasn't made in fear of the National Rifle Association's threat to senators that the group will take their votes on the nominee into consideration during endorsement time this election season.
Hatch already has an A+ rating from the gun group. But the moves by both parties -- Hatch's Friday announcement that he will vote "no" on Kagan and the NRA's Thursday announcement that it opposes Kagan and senators who vote for her risk their wrath -- are aimed at least in part at shoring up their conservative credentials with supporters.
For Hatch, he's already been warned that he could face the fate of fellow Utah Republican Sen. Bob Bennett, who was ousted during the state GOP's convention this spring. Hatch voted for Kagan as President Obama's solicitor general, a no-no for conservatives, but said now that the Supreme Court seat is a very different role than being the administration's top litigation attorney.
"All the evidence Senator Hatch has is that (Kagan) would allow her personal or political views drive her legal views. That is the definition of judicial activism something he has long opposed," Hatch spokeswoman Antonia Ferrier told Fox News.
Hatch may gain some credit for getting out in front on Kagan -- he's the first Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee to announce his no vote.

Full Story:
FOXNews.com - Conservatives Ponder NRA Priorities, Motives Questioned on Kagan, Reid


----------



## OfficerObie59

topcop14 said:


> Has anyone heard any of her non answers to the questions she is giving at the hearings? When asked if she wrote a certain paper in favor of partial birth abortions, she said I have seen the paper and when pressed said "well it's in my hand writing". What kind of answer is that? This liberal bitch can't give a straight answer to the simplest of questions. Oh and she believes that the .GOV has the right to tell us what we can and cannot eat! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! She also sees no problem with looking to foreign law when making judicial decisions. WTF The only thing a Supreme Court justice should look at when making a decision is that little thing known as the Constitution. Oh let me clarify that, the Fucking U.S. Constitution. And no, it is not a living, breathing document that means different things at different times. It says what it means and means what it says. (Just one of the little voices in my head that tells me to do things from time to time)


Listen, I'm not saying her answer was a good one, but if anyone thinks these hearings are anything else other than a way for Senators to get on TV and grandstand for the camera, they have anothing thing coming.

They ask political questions, she gives political answers. I'm merely sying her broken answers are the result of answering to a broken system. Granted, I think that it's broken for the very reason that we no longer pick judges based upon professional competence in law, but rather based upon which prosepctive judge will rewrite the Constitution in a manner to one's own liking. Still, the confirmation system is no more than a game, and whether a living constitutionalist or originalist you have to play that game if you want a shot at being confirmed.


----------



## kwflatbed

*Senate Committee Approves Kagan for Supreme Court*

Published July 20, 2010
| Associated Press










Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan gestures as she testifies at the Senate Judiciary Committee on Capitol Hill June 29. (Reuters Photo)

WASHINGTON -- The Senate Judiciary Committee has voted to approve Elena Kagan's nomination to the Supreme Court.
The 13-6 vote sends Kagan's nomination to the full Senate, where she's expected to be confirmed as early as next week to succeed retiring Justice John Paul Stevens.
Just one Republican, Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, joined panel Democrats in supporting President Obama's second Supreme Court nominee. A few more Republicans are likely to back her in the full Senate, where Democrats have more than enough votes to confirm her.
Most GOP senators argue that Kagan would put her political views ahead of the law. They also point to what they call her liberal agenda on such issues as abortion and gun rights.

FOXNews.com - Senate Committee Approves Kagan for Supreme Court


----------



## kwflatbed

*NRA-ILA GRASSROOTS ALERT*
*Vol. 17, No. 30 07/30/10*

*Last Chance To OPPOSE*
*Elena Kagan's Confirmation to U.S. Supreme Court*​
*On Tuesday, July 20, the Senate Judiciary Committee voted 13-6 to send Elena Kagan's Supreme Court nomination on to the full Senate for a vote. The full Senate vote on the confirmation will occur the week of August 2nd. NOW is the time to contact your U.S. Senators and strongly urge them to OPPOSE and filibuster the Kagan nomination! *​*As we've been reporting in these pages, on July 1, in a letter to the U.S. Senate, NRA announced its strong opposition to her confirmation. Prior to the Senate Judiciary Committee vote, we ran print ads in Politico, Roll Call, and The Hill newspapers, and ran a nationwide commercial on Fox News and on the Internet opposing Kagan's confirmation.*

*Both her political career in the Clinton Administration and her testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee make it clear that Kagan is a serious opponent of our Second Amendment Rights. *


----------



## kwflatbed

Senate to confirm Kagan as court's 4th-ever woman



AP - FILE - In this June 30, 2010 file photo, Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan testifies on Capitol Hill &#8230;

By JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS, Associated Press Writer Julie Hirschfeld Davis, Associated Press Writer - 1 hr 39 mins ago

WASHINGTON - Her confirmation assured, Elena Kagan is on the brink of becoming the fourth woman ever to serve as a Supreme Court justice.
The Senate is set Thursday to confirm President Barack Obama's nominee, whose addition to the court will mark the first time three female justices have served concurrently. Nearly all Democrats, the Senate's two independents and a handful of Republicans are backing her.
The vote is to be one of the Senate's last actions before its members depart for a monthlong vacation.
Republicans have harshly criticized Kagan, 50, as a political activist who would be unable to put aside her liberal views and render impartial decisions. Democrats defend the former Harvard Law School dean as a highly qualified legal scholar who could help bring consensus to the polarized court.

Full Story:
Senate to confirm Kagan as court's 4th-ever woman - Yahoo! News


----------

