Sotomayor Refuses to Renounce 'Wise Latina' Word

CrackerJax said:

I'll go with Robert Bork who would run circles around Sotomayer in qualifications and actual record of competence.

It's not about the best qualified...one of the inherent problems with ONE MORE Obama nominee. It's more about stacking the bench, which is truly sad and a disservice to the country....thanks Obama.... gosh, he sure is in our corner huh....

Click to expand...

Define 'our'.

CrackerJax said:

I'll go with Robert Bork who would run circles around Sotomayer in qualifications and actual record of competence.

It's not about the best qualified...one of the inherent problems with ONE MORE Obama nominee. It's more about stacking the bench, which is truly sad and a disservice to the country....thanks Obama.... gosh, he sure is in our corner huh....

Click to expand...

its like a chess game. the govt vs. the people. and obama is just setting up hip playing field. soon enough he will have checkmate

Dolce Vita said:

its like a chess game. the govt vs. the people. and obama is just setting up hip playing field. soon enough he will have checkmate

Click to expand...

then we all lose

jrh72582 said:

Define 'our'.

Click to expand...

I don't think in party lines... our means "all of us". Obama will not be benefiting the country in the long run.

jrh72582 said:

Wrong! That's the thing about assumptions.

Click to expand...

That is the thing about laziness. I have no idea what you are objecting to.


You are an idiot.

For the record that was a personal insult directed at a user. Ill take the infraction.

Fucking morally bankrupt idiot.

its like a chess game. the govt vs. the people. and obama is just setting up hip playing field. soon enough he will have checkmate

Click to expand...

So someone that had worked herself up from poverty in a minority community is not one of the people your right we should pick this guy:



Robert Bork


Ted Kennedy:

"Robert Bork's America is a land in which women would be forced into back-alley abortions, blacks would sit at segregated lunch counters, rogue police could break down citizens' doors in midnight raids, schoolchildren could not be taught about evolution, writers and artists could be censored at the whim of the Government, and the doors of the Federal courts would be shut on the fingers of millions of citizens for whom the judiciary is -- and is often the only -- protector of the individual rights that are the heart of our democracy... President Reagan is still our president. But he should not be able to reach out from the muck of Irangate, reach into the muck of Watergate and impose his reactionary vision of the Constitution on the Supreme Court and the next generation of Americans. No justice would be better than this injustice."

Click to expand...

I have no clue if this crap is true, but it was said by a senator so if we use Obama's birth certificate as a measuring stick of truth, this must be too.

But that said he married a nun turned activist (I tried to find more about her but couldn't (Not that it matters at all)). If nothing else he pissed Jesus off by taking one of his ladies!

Kennedy is and has always been a person of the lowest standards. Read Bork's actual record and Kennedy seems to be trippin on acid. Kennedy knew full well no one would.....

Reagan nominated Bork for the seat on July 1, 1987.

Click to expand...

But since it was before the internet the scrutiny wasn't the same at that time. Now we can sift through massive amounts of information.

A million people sifting through decades of data that they manipulate against someone they don't like (or do like) to have it say what they want is a powerful thing.

The type of scrutiny our officials is under is insane.

So how about this one

Although an opponent of gun controlhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Bork#cite_note-20, Bork has denounced what he calls the "NRA view" of the Second Amendment, something he describes as the "belief that the constitution guarantees a right to Teflon-coated bullets." Instead, he has argued that the Second Amendment merely guarantees a right to participate in a government militia.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Bork#cite_note-21

Click to expand...

Sounds a lot like what everyone is saying to discredit Sotomayer.

I am not saying this guy wouldn't be a fine judge but you can tarnish anyone with information. I personally would be worried about his possible views of Abortion and forcing teachers in science class to teach non-science information, but he seems to love the letter of the law so if that held true it may be fine.

But I could say the same for Soto.

Borks qualifications are in outer space compared to Sotomayer. It's simply an exercise in futility to try and defend her as "qualified". It's quite simply a political choice.

There are at least hundreds of other judges who have a better record than her.

Legally, that lady is a train wreck. It's pretty simple.

Borks qualifications are in outer space compared to Sotomayer. It's simply an exercise in futility to try and defend her as "qualified". It's quite simply a political choice.

There are at least hundreds of other judges who have a better record than her.

Legally, that lady is a train wreck. It's pretty simple.

Click to expand...

I am trying not to get sarcastic,but your making it hard. "At least hundreds of other judges that have a better record", who and how do you define 'better' you mean more in line with your beliefs?

" It's simply an exercise in futility to try and defend her as "qualified"." Really? So ok, schools she attended and the awards she received don't qualify I get that, but..

Sonia Sotomayor has served as a judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit since October 1998. She has been hailed as "one of the ablest federal judges currently sitting" for her thoughtful opinions,i and as "a role model of aspiration, discipline, commitment, intellectual prowess and integrity"ii for her ascent to the federal bench from an upbringing in a South Bronx housing project.
Her American story and three decade career in nearly every aspect of the law provide Judge Sotomayor with unique qualifications to be the next Supreme Court Justice. She is a distinguished graduate of two of America`s leading universities. She has been a big-city prosecutor and a corporate litigator. Before she was promoted to the Second Circuit by President Clinton, she was appointed to the [COLOR=blue ! important][COLOR=blue ! important]District [COLOR=blue ! important]Court[/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR] for the Southern District of New York by President George H.W. Bush. She replaces Justice Souter as the only Justice with experience as a trial judge.
Judge Sotomayor served 11 years on the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, one of the most demanding circuits in the country, and has handed down decisions on a range of complex legal and constitutional issues. If confirmed, Sotomayor would bring more federal judicial experience to the Supreme Court than any justice in 100 years, and more overall judicial experience than anyone confirmed for the Court in the past 70 years. Judge Richard C. Wesley, a George W. Bush appointee to the Second Circuit, said "Sonia is an outstanding colleague with a keen legal mind. She brings a wealth of knowledge and hard work to all her endeavors on our court. It is both a pleasure and an honor to serve with her."
In addition to her distinguished judicial service, Judge Sotomayor is a Lecturer at Columbia University Law School and was also an adjunct professor at New York University Law School until 2007.

Click to expand...

She has been in the legal system for over 30 years.

I think that your just biased and won't see or try to see logic.

You can pick anything apart if you dismiss information that you would like and only focus on what you want to dislike.

I mean more in line with not being overturned in superior courts above.... Soto has a 60% overturn rate.... that is NOT an indication she needs to be bumped up beyond judicial reproach..... does it (be honest)??

Here is some snippits that explain better why I think that the overturn rate is not important:

The Supreme Court historically reverses the majority of all cases it reviews - 76 percent so far this term (2009), with three decisions pending <insert by me, one of which is Soto's>. Legal analysts say that's because it seeks to correct what it sees as erroneous interpretations by lower courts or to settle conflicting views among the circuits about a law's meaning.
"Pretty much all courts have a generally high reversal rate before the Supreme Court," said Adam Samaha, a constitutional law professor at the University of Chicago. "The justices have a practice of taking a case for purposes of changing what happened below."

Click to expand...

constitutional case &#8212; 1,194 in total &#8212;

Click to expand...

She has many others, but these were the ones that dealt with the constitution.

And since almost every case (at this level) that one side loses gets sent to the Supreme court and they pick the ones that may be able to be overturned due to being unconstitutional. When they choose not to review a case, they agree with the decision.

So really she had 4 of over 1000 cases overturned. so about a 99.6% agreement rate with the high court.

If you look at just the hardest to judge cases that had been sent (6), they over-turned her 4 times.

And since the supreme court overturns about 75% of the cases it sees the average 'success' rate of judges who have their cases seen in the supreme court is 25%. So she is still above average.

You have to love numbers.

That's a nice bit of twisty truth. While the courts may (quite obviously) overturn cases, the numbers pertain to all lower judges. Soptomayer has a very high Overturn rate PER Judge. There's a big difference in that little twist.

The fact that cases are overturned is not supposed to be a goal.

I was trying to find a historical judge by judge overturn rate, but couldn't. I wish I worked for Gallup or something where i could just have people pull the numbers. I think that would be most telling. I would bet that most judges would only have 1 case seen, but that is purely guessing. So it would have to be people with cases seen by supreme court over 5 times to get a decent statistical analysis.

The world may never know......

I expect nothing less from you med Man. Our entire judicial system should use bias in all of its reviews. Why not?

lead with racism and bigotry

Martin Luther King is spinning in his grave

i am better than you because of the color of my skin ,oh yes were making some progress now...........sotomayor for pres. 2012

CrackerJax said:

Martin Luther King is spinning in his grave

Click to expand...

wow what melodramatic grandstanding.

if someone white would have highlighted their heritage it would be no big deal.
if some irish dude was being nominated and made a crack about being a 'fighting irishman'
i doubt there would be pissing and moaning. seriously leave mlk out of this please its so asinine and really silly.