On May 26, 10:22�pm, Annika1980 wrote:
On May 26, 2:38�pm, wrote:

On 26-May-2009, wrote:
she is an
arrogant flaming liberal".

If you expect anything else from the one, you're not living in the real
world

--
bill-o

It's funny watching the wingnuts scramble trying to find something to
smear her with. What I have witnessed today are a bunch of right-
wingers scrambling to find something to oppose this pick on without
making it look like what it is .... politics as usual. I even heard
one wingnut mouthpiece claim that Sotomayor was only appointed to the
Federal bench by George Bush as some sort of political gesture of
goodwill to the Democrats, the obvious implication being that she
wasn't really qualified for the job. I mean, how can she be
qualified .... she's a WOMAN for Chrissakes ... and a Latino!

The irony is that had Obama appointed some old pasty white guy, as is
the norm, all the Repugs would be crying, "Where's the change you
promised? Same old politics as usual!"

It's early in the game, but I haven't yet heard one person give a
valid reason to oppose her. No doubt, the Repugs will try to dredge
(or is that Drudge) up some out-of-context remarks she made in some
decision years ago in an attempt to smear her, but I suspect her
confirmation will go fairly smoothly, assuming all her tax returns are
in order.

She graduated Summa Cum Laude from Princeton.
The wingers screaming above couldn't get into Princeton on the back of
a garbage truck.

On May 26, 10:20*pm, tomcervo wrote:
On May 26, 10:22 pm, Annika1980 wrote:



On May 26, 2:38 pm, wrote:

On 26-May-2009, wrote:
she is an
arrogant flaming liberal".

If you expect anything else from the one, you're not living in the real
world

--
bill-o

It's funny watching the wingnuts scramble trying to find something to
smear her with. What I have witnessed today are a bunch of right-
wingers scrambling to find something to oppose this pick on without
making it look like what it is .... politics as usual. I even heard
one wingnut mouthpiece claim that Sotomayor was only appointed to the
Federal bench by George Bush as some sort of political gesture of
goodwill to the Democrats, the obvious implication being that she
wasn't really qualified for the job. I mean, how can she be
qualified .... she's a WOMAN for Chrissakes ... and a Latino!

The irony is that had Obama appointed some old pasty white guy, as is
the norm, all the Repugs would be crying, "Where's the change you
promised? Same old politics as usual!"

It's early in the game, but I haven't yet heard one person give a
valid reason to oppose her. No doubt, the Repugs will try to dredge
(or is that Drudge) up some out-of-context remarks she made in some
decision years ago in an attempt to smear her, but I suspect her
confirmation will go fairly smoothly, assuming all her tax returns are
in order.

She graduated Summa Cum Laude from Princeton.
The wingers screaming above couldn't get into Princeton on the back of
a garbage truck.

Last week, they tried to make an issue of her intellect... she isn't
smart enough to be a SC Justice... they'll say anything... it's
shameful.

She has been a judge longer than any of the current justices were
before their appointments.

Tom

In article
,
Tom wrote:

Last week, they tried to make an issue of her intellect... she isn't
smart enough to be a SC Justice... they'll say anything... it's
shameful.

It cuts both ways.

Do you not remember the Clarence Thomas high-tech lynching?

In article , John Reddy wrote:

In article
,
Tom wrote:

Last week, they tried to make an issue of her intellect... she isn't
smart enough to be a SC Justice... they'll say anything... it's
shameful.

It cuts both ways.

Do you not remember the Clarence Thomas high-tech lynching?


No, since no lynching happened. Thomas himself called it a lynching,
which helped divert attention from the purpose of the hearings. It was
a deft playing of the race card.

Of course, the hearings did not call Thomas' intelligence into
question, so your point is doubly irrelevant.

Absent any real or manufactured scandal, Sotomayor is going to be
confirmed on the merits. The only question is how ridiculous her
opposition is willing to look in vainly opposing her. So far, the
answer has been "pretty damn ridiculous." Ex: The title of this
thread.

On May 27, 5:00*am, John Reddy wrote:
In article
,

*Tom wrote:
Last week, they tried to make an issue of her intellect... she isn't
smart enough to be a SC Justice... they'll say anything... it's
shameful.

It cuts both ways.

Do you not remember the Clarence Thomas high-tech lynching?

I was fairly tuned into the Clarence Thomas hearings as John Danforth
was shepherding through the proceedings. Danforth was my Senator from
MO, that's why I took interest in the hearings.

I don't recall any 'liberal' pundits questioning his intelligence, as
'conservative' pundits have with Judge Sotomayor. Today, Newt Gingrich
tweeted about her and called her a racist.

The criticisms about Justice Thomas were about ideology and politics,
not race or his I.Q.

Tom

tomcervo wrote:
On May 26, 10:22�pm, Annika1980 wrote:
On May 26, 2:38�pm, wrote:

On 26-May-2009, wrote:
she is an
arrogant flaming liberal".
If you expect anything else from the one, you're not living in the real
world
--
bill-o
It's funny watching the wingnuts scramble trying to find something to
smear her with. What I have witnessed today are a bunch of right-
wingers scrambling to find something to oppose this pick on without
making it look like what it is .... politics as usual. I even heard
one wingnut mouthpiece claim that Sotomayor was only appointed to the
Federal bench by George Bush as some sort of political gesture of
goodwill to the Democrats, the obvious implication being that she
wasn't really qualified for the job. I mean, how can she be
qualified .... she's a WOMAN for Chrissakes ... and a Latino!

The irony is that had Obama appointed some old pasty white guy, as is
the norm, all the Repugs would be crying, "Where's the change you
promised? Same old politics as usual!"

It's early in the game, but I haven't yet heard one person give a
valid reason to oppose her. No doubt, the Repugs will try to dredge
(or is that Drudge) up some out-of-context remarks she made in some
decision years ago in an attempt to smear her, but I suspect her
confirmation will go fairly smoothly, assuming all her tax returns are
in order.

She graduated Summa Cum Laude from Princeton.
The wingers screaming above couldn't get into Princeton on the back of
a garbage truck.



Or the turnip trucks they keep falling off of, as the case may be.