It’s probably unlikely Obama will nominate anyone who doesn’t hate America and Americans and especially its Constitution, so I don’t know how big a deal to make over Obama’s choice of Sotomayor. It’s not like we could ever get him to do much better. I just wonder what’s the chance of getting him to nominate a reverse Souter. Like Sotomayor will come in saying, “I promise to rule based on whatever will please the New York Times” but soon after she gets in she says, “I’ve decided to make decision based on what’s actually in the Constitution.” And nothing actually in the Constitution should ever please liberals, because the Founding Fathers weren’t a bunch of fruits.
No way, this woman will be in catfights with Ruth Ginsberg competing to see who earns the right to claim to be the REAL communist radical on the court.
Actually, it’s a Good Thing that he has nominated a weak-minded leftist (but I repeat myself). He could have actually found a competent not-so-leftist off the Ninth Circuit. Or he could have appointed Hillary Clinton.
If he had appointed a competent leftist, he might have flipped Kennedy on some issues. As is, he appointed someone who won’t be able to convince anyone of anything they don’t already believe. She’s a true token.
This woman was inspired by Nancy Drew and Perry Mason! Perry F’n Mason! BWAAAAAA! Forget the great thinkers and constitutional minds of the past and present. Perry Mason!!!
I love it! She may struggle a bit, however waiting for the guilty party appearing before the SCOTUS to break down and start sobbing “alright, I did it!” “I did it!” “No More!” “You have me!” “I’m guilty!” “I confess!” “I confess!”
So, Sotomayor is Obama’s version of Harriet Meyers! The only difference is he has the votes to get her approved! No wonder the Democrats were so insistant on getting a filibuster proof majority!
What a country!
ussjc, you are a flipping genius. Will SNL have that as a skit this week? Don’t set your DVR just yet.
This is an improvemnet over the current situation in which Ginsberg and Souter fight over who is the real woman on the court.
From rags to rags: poor in the Bronx to wearing an activist liberal cape on the
parkSupreme bench. Plus, since she’s ‘Hispanic,’ if you oppose her, you’re racist !Please proceed popping rivets out of the USS Constitution while I choose between Montana and Texas.
William Ayers is too busy ghost running DOE.
Oh, and Jimmy, I’m thinking Montana. More mountains, less Brown Recluse spiders.
Marko, I’m still favoring Texas over Montana by virtue of it’s salt water access. But, Montana currently has the larger nads.
“This is the Supreme Court decision line. Press 1 for English, press 2 for Spanish.”
This is the Supreme Court decision line. “Certiorari denied! Employed middle aged white heterosexual male!”
uh I think we’re DOOMED!
You dudes can’t win. With this blatant discriminator on the bench, you can scrap the ideology and power down the thought processes; ready yourselves for a primal scream.
Apparently ” … a wise Latina woman… would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male… ”
Texa and Montana, not bad. I’m thinking Idaho.
This is the Supreme Court decision line. For Spanish, please hold. For English, please hang up now.
Considering how much GOP Senators have done to, er I mean for, us lately, I don’t think a 4-year filibuster is too much to ask
Isn’t there even ONE democrat female who isn’t a horror-show reject?
I saw her mug for the first time today and immediatly thought of Gilda Radner’s (maysherestinpeace) SNL character, Roseanne Roseannadanna.
“Well, Jane, it’sa always sumthin … “.
This is the Supreme Court decision line. Yea like we really took that Pro-Life debate seriously…hahahahahahaha! If you are a rube or a Christian or a white person who is not homosexual…stay on the hahahaha line bwaaaaaaa we will be right with you chortle as your call is teehee important to us (not)!!!