Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kan., isn’t reserving judgment on Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor. He’s a “no” vote now, just as he was in 1998 when she was confirmed to the federal appeals court. “I did not feel that she was appropriate on the appeals court,” Roberts told KCMO Radio in Kansas City. “Since that time she has made statements on the role of the appeals court that I think is improper and incorrect.”
He discounted Sotomayor’s ethnicity, gender and background as factors that should influence such a vote. Asked whether he risked being tagged as a “bigot” for opposing Sotomayor, who would be the first Hispanic justice and only the third woman to serve on the court, Roberts said: “I’m a Marine and nothin’ much scares me. That’s not going to be a consideration in my vote.”
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Regular on Open thread 11/23
- ProudMan on Too many exemptions
- ANTI on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/23
- SolDevVB on Open thread 11/23
- donndublin on Open thread 11/23
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/23
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/23
- CapnAmerica on Open thread 11/23
67 Comments
“Roberts” says –
“I’m a Marine and I love my garter belt.”
Monkeyhawk spent twenty LONG minutes in a private dressing room WATCHING a man get dressed. In his own words:
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2009/05/open-thread-525-2/#comment-580768
God Bless Senator Roberts.
The bigot is the fella in the white house who picked a judge based upon:
1. Sex
2. Race
(you don’t see “best qualified” in that list)
OK how about an actual definition:
Bigot: a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices ; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bigot
So neither Roberts nor Obama are bigots (at least concerning the Sotomayer nomination. I guess this will be a short thread if it stays on topic.
You are more correct Brian.
Obama isn’t being a bigot. Obama is being a racist. He is discriminating based upon race.
discriminatory – being biased or having a belief or attitude formed beforehand; “a prejudiced judge”
Monkeyhawk in the dressing room is being a pervert.
per·vert (pr-vûrt)
per·vert·ed, per·vert·ing, per·verts
1. To cause to turn away from what is right, proper, or good; corrupt.
2. To bring to a bad or worse condition; debase.
3. To put to a wrong or improper use; misuse. See Synonyms at corrupt.
4. To interpret incorrectly; misconstrue or distort: an analysis that perverts the meaning of the poem.
n. (pûrvûrt)
One who practices sexual perversion.
“American_Way
Posted May 28, 2009 at 1:06 pm | Permalink”
no reference… I guess you knew that one by heart, eh?
touché
In some ways, I guess we are all discriminatory aren’t we?
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/discriminatory
discriminatory: applying or favoring discrimination in treatment
discrimination:
1 a: the act of discriminating
b: the process by which two stimuli differing in some aspect are responded to differently
2: the quality or power of finely distinguishing
3 a: the act, practice, or an instance of discriminating categorically rather than individually
b: prejudiced or prejudicial outlook, action, or treatment
brian_nuevo
Posted May 28, 2009 at 1:20 pm | Permalink
In some ways, I guess we are all discriminatory aren’t we?
========================
Pipe down you damn Mexican!
;)
“Asked whether he risked being tagged as a “bigot” for opposing Sotomayor, who would be the first Hispanic justice …”
——
Interesting, isn’t it, that the author knows well the liberal “go to” word.
#
outlander
Posted May 28, 2009 at 1:26 pm | Permalink
“Asked whether he risked being tagged as a “bigot” for opposing Sotomayor, who would be the first Hispanic justice …”
——
Interesting, isn’t it, that the author knows well the liberal “go to” word.
====================
Perhaps the article author meets the definition of being a bigot?
A bigot is a person who is intolerant of or takes offense to the opinions, lifestyles or identities differing from his or her own.
“American_Way” obsesses –
“Monkeyhawk in the dressing room….”
This is beginning to be more about your fantasy than the reality I observed — over the course of 20 minutes or so — of the Marine primping in his cute little costume.
I came in off the racquetball court, took a shower, came out of the shower and the Marine was still at it. I sat in the sauna with a magazine and came out and the Marine was still fussing with those garters you claimed Marines don’t wear.
I took another cool-down shower and came out and got dressed as was leaving as your totally not-gay Marine was adjusting his “cover” by millimeters in the mirror.
Your version, “American_Way,” has some delusion I was sitting there staring at your Marine’s package for 20 minutes non-stop. Then again, your version of reality is oft times perverted. We’ve come to expect that from you.
So, no. I didn’t react to the Marine in garters quite the way you would have. But enjoy your fantasies. I suspect that’s all you’ve got.
“God Bless Senator Roberts.
“The bigot is the fella in the white house who picked a judge based upon:
1. Sex
2. Race
“(you don’t see “best qualified” in that list)”
Shallow bullsh*t from AmWay. Again. Like I said in an earlier thread:
Name the single most qualified individual to serve on the Supreme Court of the United States, and base it on objective criteria. Sotomayor is fully qualified, and is demonstrably at least as well qualified as every other candidate who currently serves on the Court, and based on her length of time in the federal judiciary as well as the fact that she already IS a sitting federal justice, she is arguably better qualified than most.
http://hpronline.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=168&catid=87&Itemid=378
Pretty much every SCOTUS justice has been picked based on a president’s anticipation of their judicial philosophy, and since there are many qualified individuals for one position, the selection is going to come down to subjective criteria.
Unless you think that the BA disciminated against non-white and older, arguably more experienced candidates in selecting Roberts and Alito.
“Monkeyhawk” giggles-
“I was sitting there staring at your Marine’s package for 20 minutes non-stop”
“Your version, ‘American_Way,’ has some delusion I was sitting there staring at your Marine’s package for 20 minutes non-stop.”
Is Anti-ized to read: “I was sitting there staring at your Marine’s package for 20 minutes non-stop”
Re: Anti
DNFTT
But Agnatha, Monkeyhawk does that kinda crap everyday.
Re: Agnatha
DNFTT
Is this racist?
““I would hope that a wise White Man with the richness of his experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a hispanic woman who hasn’t lived that life,” said.
Or is this racist?
““I would hope that a wise white fella with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a black male who hasn’t lived that life,” said.”
But this is cool:
““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,” Sotomayor said.”
white fella with the richness of her….
====================================
I’m confused.
Is this racist?
““I would hope that a wild weasling Man with the thickness of his experiences would more often than not reach a better confusion than a titanic woman who hasn’t knifed the life ,”
“ANTI” whines –
“…Monkeyhawk does that kinda crap everyday.”
So examples should be easy for you to post.
Carry on.
So examples should be easy for you to post.
======================================
Yes.
Monkeyhawk
Posted May 28, 2009 at 1:35 pm | Permalink
“I was sitting there staring at your Marine’s package for 20 minutes non-stop.”
That’s pretty much what you posted before. You don’t need to try tap dancing around it. It’s clear as day. And again, I do not care about your sexual orientation. It matters not to me.
I should warn Hank to tell Nathan to be careful next time he is in gym..Get one of those big jumbo towels.
ANTI
Posted May 28, 2009 at 1:57 pm | Permalink
white fella with the richness of her….
====================================
I’m confused.
=========================
I meant “richness of his”.
Now stop that. YOu are going to get Monkeyhawk aroused.
“American_Way
Posted May 28, 2009 at 2:05 pm | Permalink
…I should warn Hank to tell Nathan to be careful next time he is in gym..Get one of those big jumbo towels.”
or lubricants.
From the WSJ. A very good column.
The danger inherent in this judicial view is that the law isn’t what the Constitution says but whatever the judge in the “richness” of her experience comes to believe it should be.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124338457658756731.html
Lib judges= Cafeteria Constitutionalists.
Again, who cares! Why is this suddenly so different when it’s done now? They made it clear they wanted an African American to replace Obama in the Senate…they got one, and boy he’s a winner! They wanted a woman to replace Hillary in the Senate, and they got one. Teddy proposed that it should be his wife replacing him, before his cancer went into remission. Biden got one of his staffers to keep the seat warm for his son. None of these have anything to do with logical reasons based on the best candidates, it’s all about political spin to fit personal/political agendas. Sotomayor’s just the latest opportunity for a politician to be a political.
DFB,
Actually, Teddy proposed that his niece fill Hillary’s vacated Senate seat. Other than that, your post is pretty much spot on.
DFB says “Sotomayor’s just the latest opportunity for a politician to be a political”
Except in the case of a supreme court justice they have the capacity to do real harm to our way of life. Few politicians have that capacity.
Heckler,
Elections have consequences. Bush had the chance to fill two slots with young conservative judges and he did. Who would realistically expect him to do anything else?
Now, it’s Obama’s turn.
Now, it’s Obama’s turn.
======================
I think he should be gracious and skip his turn.
I don’t like quotas, whether it be by gender, race, or whatever. That said, there is one VERY interesting aspect to this lady’s qualifications:
The right wing opposes her because she may be anti-gun, and an “activist.”
BUT
There are elements in the left wing who have their doubts because she is Catholic, and seems to disfavor abortion.
Maybe we could do worse.
#
ANTI
Posted May 28, 2009 at 3:03 pm | Permalink
Now, it’s Obama’s turn.
======================
I think he should be gracious and skip his turn.
===========================================
Don’t hold your breath waiting for that to happen.
The only way Obama really has a chance to change the court significantly is if he has the opportunity to replace Justice Kennedy.
He’ll likely replace Ginsburg and Stevens but he’ll just be replacing liberals with liberals when that happens.
Roberts, the bald-headed POS.
Strangely, he didn’t vote against her when George H. W. Bush nominated her to the Federal Bench.
Hmmm . . .
The kind of hypocritical two-faced schizen one would expect from the Head of Senate Intelligence Committee who stonewalled the Iraq Failure Report.
What ever happens, I’m sure the CONs will give her an “up or down vote” after they went onandonandonandon about that during W’s tenure.
Heh. Yeah, right.
Judge Sonia Sotomayor could walk into a firestorm on Capitol Hill over her stance on gun rights, with conservatives beginning to question some controversial positions she’s taken over the past several years on the Second Amendment.
Earlier this year, President Obama’s Supreme Court nominee joined an opinion with the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that Second Amendment rights do not apply to the states.
A 2004 opinion she joined also cited as precedent that “the right to possess a gun is clearly not a fundamental right.” -Fox
Well, all I ask is that she gets an up or down vote, Anti.
Who wants to bet on a CON filibuster?
CapnAmerica
Posted May 28, 2009 at 4:07 pm | Permalink
Well, all I ask is that she gets an up or down vote, Anti.
==============================
I think she’s a Kook, but she will probably get in.
Common Sense and Politicians just don’t go together.
Sadly.
3. To put to a wrong or improper use; misuse. See Synonyms at corrupt.
4. To interpret incorrectly; misconstrue or distort: an analysis that perverts the meaning of the poem. [AmWay]
Like I keep telling you:
Our President is Obama.
You pervert the name intentionally, and wrongly to: O’bama
Proves Amway to be a pervert!!
(But to be truthful, AmWay is not the only one on the Blog who is Perverting the name of our Preident Obama.)
Preident s/b President
Preident Obama -Chas
==================
Pervert.
Preident s/b President
=====================
Nevermind, I retract my previous slam.
Obamanation’s leftist extremist judicial nominee Sotomayor is a member of racist La Raza, a group that has promoted driver’s licenses for illegal aliens, amnesty programs, and no immigration law enforcement by local and state police, with connections to groups that advocate the separation of several southwestern states from the rest of the USofA.
Chas your above post at 4:29 constitutes a troll post.
If you are not careful, I will have a poster I know flood the weblog with cut-and-paste from a website which discusses trolls (he is a very, very good paster and always stays within the lines).
parkay hates Hispanic fetuses.
La Raza and hispanics are celebrating. Just like blacks did after BHO won the election. I believe they will be disappointed in how their lot in life doesn’t change due to this political appointment.
#
grownup
Posted May 28, 2009 at 5:27 pm | Permalink
La Raza and hispanics are celebrating. Just like blacks did after BHO won the election. I believe they will be disappointed in how their lot in life doesn’t change due to this political appointment.
=============================================
BHO is an Irishman. If you don’t believe me, ask ANTI.
BHO is an Irishman. If you don’t believe me, ask ANTI.
===============================
Damn straight, Ginger mother humper!
This video proves that it is spelled O’Bama. :)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HplZ_taHXLM
Daniel – I agree Teddy tried to get Caroline (sp?) in his seat, but other Dems had suggested putting his wife in as a placeholder “out of respect for the Kennedy legacy” at the same time. It didn’t get as much press, once Caroline’s name was in the mix for Hillary’s seat.
But here’s just a random thought. If politicians want to play Affirmative Action politics, let them do it! Catch is, they have to play it all the time, and not just when it’s ideologically convenient. The solution is simple. Add “political affiliation” to the list of protected classes under the Equal Employment Opportunity Act (age, race, gender, handicap or sexual orientation). It’s bi-partisan, as both parties would be held to non-discriminatory standards on ALL appointments going forward. If it’s good for the “people” (ie, business must live up to it), it’s good for govt too.
#
Regular
Posted May 28, 2009 at 5:48 pm | Permalink
This video proves that it is spelled O’Bama. :)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HplZ_taHXLM
=====================================
Regular smells what I’m steppin’ in!
Wake up Chas!
#
Regular
Posted May 28, 2009 at 5:48 pm | Permalink
This video proves that it is spelled O’Bama. :)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HplZ_taHXLM
==========================================
Well, I’m convinced.
I think O’Bama’s teleprompter is Mexican.
It does all the work and gets no credit.
This video proves that it is spelled O’Bama. :)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HplZ_taHXLM
==========================================
There can be shadow of doubt about it now.
There’s no one as Irish as Barack O’Bama.
There can be no shadow of doubt about it now.
There’s no one as Irish as Barack O’Bama.
Just give her an up or down vote, don’t make us use the ‘nuclear’ solution.
don’t make us use the ‘nuclear’ solution.
==============================================
WTF?
Where is the evidence that she is from the La Raza group?
Also, is this discriminatory?
“And that’s why I went into that in my opening statement. Because when a case comes before me involving, let’s say, someone who is an immigrant — and we get an awful lot of immigration cases and naturalization cases — I can’t help but think of my own ancestors, because it wasn’t that long ago when they were in that position…
When I get a case about discrimination, I have to think about people in my own family who suffered discrimination because of their ethnic background or because of religion or because of gender. And I do take that into account.”
Political_mama,
Have you decided to swing back, or are you still a victim?
Wow, why don’t you get the vibrator out of your azz.
Just one word Roach… Rabbit. ;>
Going to answer my question about the discrimination written in the quote above? No? Why not?
From the Desk of Newt Gingrich
“I have a dream: that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.”
- Dr. Martin Luther King
“Can you imagine if the President of the United States nominated a judge to the U.S. Supreme Court who said this:
“My experience as a white man will make me a better judge than a Latina woman would be.”
Or could you imagine if that same judge ruled from the bench to deny 18 African-American firefighters a promotion just because of their skin color?
That judge would be called a bigot – and in my judgment, rightly so! Would there be any doubt that he would be FORCED to WITHDRAW his nomination for the Supreme Court?
None.
There are only two options for how we govern ourselves – by laws, or by the will of those in power. The rule of law represents objective, dispassionate knowable standards that are applied and enforced equally to all citizens regardless of their background.
The will of those in power represents subjective, fleeting standards that are never fully known by any and are applied purely to satisfy the wishes of a small, concentrated group in power.
True justice is blind. It does not consider one’s religion, wealth, race or in this case sex, family origin and ethnicity. To do so would be unjust.
To put someone on our nation’s highest court who believes these traits should be considered in cases before the court, would be wrong.
Judge Sonia Sotomayor has proven, by her own admission, that she is such a judge. Knowing this, President Obama should withdraw her nomination to the Supreme Court.
Consider what Judge Sotomayor said about how her being a Latina woman will affect her decisions as a judge:
“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.”
You read that right – Judge Sotomayor said that her experience as a person of a particular sex and ethnic background will make her a better judge than a person of another sex and a different ethnic background!
When did that view become acceptable?
If Civil War, suffrage, and Civil Rights are to mean anything, we cannot accept that conclusion. It is simply un-American. There is no room on the bench of the United States Supreme Court for this worldview.
The checks and balances between the three branches of government are designed to prevent any small faction of society from exerting undue influence over the rest of us. If President Obama will not withdraw his nomination, then the Senate has a duty to ensure that judges with who hold these beliefs are not confirmed to serve on the Supreme Court.”