Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Does Sotomayor Matter Politically?

A prominent article in The Post this morning suggests that “The battle over President Obama’s first court nominee is also likely to have broad and long-lasting political implications for the president and both political parties.”

Or maybe not. Consider: In 1993 and 1994, Bill Clinton’s two Supreme Court nominees, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer, sailed through a Democratic Senate without a glove being laid on them. It didn’t seem to help Clinton or his party politically. Clinton and the Democrats got no credit for well-qualified and popular appointments in the 1994 congressional elections, and the Court as an issue wasn’t that prominent in Clinton’s re-election campaign in 1996 or, for that matter, in 2000 (until after the election!).

In 2005 and 2006, George Bush’s two nominees drew more opposition than Clinton’s had, but both made it through a GOP-controlled Senate pretty easily. They did well in the hearings, and, given that they’re conservatives, got respectful media treatment. But these impressive nominees didn’t slow down the free fall in Bush’s ratings in 2005-2006, didn’t help Republicans in the 2006 congressional elections, and the issue of the Court never took center stage in 2008.

Even the sturm und drang of the Bork hearings in 1987 and Thomas in 1991 had no clear effect on the politics of the day or the subsequent year’s elections. And there doesn’t look to be much prospect of much drama over Sotomayor. It’s possible, of course, that the Hispanic angle will be politically salient on behalf of Democrats -- though Republicans will be polite in their opposition, so I’m doubtful. It’s also possible, on the other hand, that the appearance of identity politics could hurt the Democrats -- though that seems to me to be unlikely too.

Obviously, the debate over Sotomayor is important in its own right. And obviously there could be surprises over the next week. But I think the political impact of what we’re seeing is likely to be minimal.

By William Kristol  | July 13, 2009; 1:21 PM ET
Categories:  Kristol  | Tags:  William Kristol  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: At Least One Senator Is Intellectually Honest
Next: Sonia Sotomayor Speaks -- and Feels

Comments

Given that Kristol is always wrong about everything, I'm glad he wrote this article. I happen to think it will make a difference, though my record is more uneven than William's. (That is, sometimes I'm right, sometimes, I'm wrong).

The first Hispanic Justice is a big deal. I expect that people will remember that, and her appointment adds to Obama's true commitment to diversity, showing Bush's 'diversity' to be little more than tokenism.

Posted by: GadiBen-Yehuda | July 13, 2009 1:58 PM | Report abuse

Does Kristol matter politically? Let me go ask my dog and I'll get back to you.

Posted by: LucyLou1 | July 13, 2009 2:06 PM | Report abuse

Kristol seems to think identity politics somehow won't somehow hurt the republicans, and would somehow be the exclusive province of Democrats.
I applaud the ignorance of Kristol and his GOP cronies. It means Sarah Palin could actually be seen as a viable republican candidate, it means that Dick Cheney, Rush Limbaugh, and Newt Gingrich are regarded by the conservative movement as statesmen, and it means that the GOP will anger the entire hispanic community in the process of defending rich old white people, thereby relegating themselves to the trash heap of history.
Good ridance.

Posted by: jeffc6578 | July 13, 2009 2:12 PM | Report abuse

Bill, can I call you Bill? Thanks. Bill, the difference this time, is that Sotomayor is a Latina and your side is going out of their way to demonize an intelligent and highly qualified Supreme Court nominee who will be approved.

If the republicans just made nice and let her be confirmed without making a big stink no damage would be done to the party. However, attacking someone of the sole basis of race cannot help but further alienate the Hispanic and female voting blocks that republican need to get back into the electoral game.

Big mistake.

Posted by: cfeher | July 13, 2009 2:15 PM | Report abuse

REPOSTING and excellent post from another Blogger

From the mouth of Mr. Sessions:

“The civil libertarians among us would rather defend the constitution than protect our nation’s security.”

Fei Hu

Posted by: Fei_Hu | July 13, 2009 2:17 PM | Report abuse

Sotomayor matters. She has shown us the Aemrican dream realized through intellect, hard work, diligence, perseverance and humility. Sotomayor is the opposite of Palin who flashed in the public sphere through her incoherence, razzmatazz religious pronouncements, sturm und drang signifying nothing. Kristol obviously prefers ideology over competence and intellect.

Posted by: mstratas | July 13, 2009 2:19 PM | Report abuse

You, Mr. Kristol, have to no right to an opinion on anything that affects our nation.
You still have the blood of Iraq on your lily-white little hands, if you lived in a saner, more ethical country you'd be in exile for your murderous fomenting for war against that country you played a huge role in the Bush Regime of destroying, speaking of genocide .......

If it weren't for the always pandering to the rightwing warmongers, The WaPo and CSPAN and FOX, no one would know who you are.

Posted by: headylilacs | July 13, 2009 2:30 PM | Report abuse

I think Bill Kristol matters editorially. He represents yet another capitulation by a once relevant proud newspaper to neoconservatism, snark, and smarminess.

Posted by: halmin | July 13, 2009 2:35 PM | Report abuse

It does seem that - maybe because once chosen, we don't think about them much any more? - the choice of a justice has very little impact on elections. Why is that? Maybe most of us don't know enough about our government to figure in/calibrate the judiciary correctly? We have short attention spans? We like to think in generalizations - doing otherwise gives us headaches?

Interesting article, but too short. Actually more interesting than the commentary by Mr. Kristol are the comments by so many others who apparently can't stand Mr. Kristol. Get a grip, people.

Posted by: jujones1 | July 13, 2009 2:52 PM | Report abuse

Does Sotomayor Matter Politically?
More than you do, Mr. Kristol.

Posted by: wardropper | July 13, 2009 2:57 PM | Report abuse

Does Kristol matter politically? Probably not- see the enjoyable article in today's LA Times with comments by GOP insiders, condemning his choice for McCain's VP pick, Palin. Wrong on Iraq, wrong on Palin, fired by his last employer, the list goes on. The only rational reaction is to boycott the Post until he and whoever hired him are shown the door.
Here by the way is a sampling of Kristol's mistakes-
"Saddam is past the finish line is developing nuclear weapons." 9/19/02
"We'll be vindicated when we discover the weapons of mass destruction." 3/5/03
"In [my] column I cite a report that Sen. Obama attended [church] services on 7/22/07 [when Rev. Wright gave a controversial sermon]. The Obama campaign has provided information showing that Sen. Obama did not attend church that day. I regret the error." 3/17/08
"Palin could be both an effective VP candidate and an effective President." 6/30/08
And so on, you get the idea.

Posted by: hairguy01 | July 13, 2009 2:59 PM | Report abuse

This who shabang only matters politically to the Republicans. It gives them a national stage to ply their political wears. They know they are getting center stage during this news cycle and will play it for all its worth. That's the meaning.

Posted by: maddymappo | July 13, 2009 3:06 PM | Report abuse

no, she doesn't matter politically...
first of all...
she is a puerto rican, a boricua...
the only people that she matters to are the puerto ricans in new york and florida...
other spanish people won't care, especially the mexicans...

Posted by: DwightCollins | July 13, 2009 3:06 PM | Report abuse

Okay, so what is the point of this post? May be, Kristol had to write something to get his pay.

Posted by: kevin1231 | July 13, 2009 3:10 PM | Report abuse

The salient point here is that Kristol couldn't tell a defining moment or a political shift if he was the sole voter in an election. This is the same guy who predicted: that Obama would never win so much as a primary, that the conflict between Sunni & Shia was overblown, that the Iraq war would last 3 months, and on and on ad nauseum. A fourth grader would have a better chance at political esp than this refugee from Quayle's inner sanctum. Please Bill, just go away....

Posted by: bklyndan22 | July 13, 2009 3:19 PM | Report abuse

Bill, you don't matter.

Posted by: bradhochhalter | July 13, 2009 3:22 PM | Report abuse

The only thing that matters, Kristol, is that you keep writing. Never have so many laughed so hard at so great a B.O.O.B. as you.

Kidding. You should just shut up. You make no difference at all. You never have. Not even to the people who love you.

Posted by: Karmicquickdraw | July 13, 2009 3:37 PM | Report abuse

"...given that they’re conservatives, got respectful media treatment...." Snarky, even for you, Mr. Kristol.

In retrospect, we rue Clinton's neglect in filling key judicial vacancies overall, leaving the door open for Bush to taint the judiciary with conservative absolutists (a few of whom, at least, were not graduates of Regent University -- thank heaven for small miracles).

Were that not damage enough to our legal system, the Right unleashed their squadrons of carney barkers to rail against "activist" judges -- "activist", I presume, meaning any legal mind who did not believe the Constitution was a work in progress from the pen of Dick Cheney.

Sotomayor's nomination, in truth, may not be as significant as the Republican reaction to it and to the rule of law in general.

Posted by: ewhitfield1 | July 13, 2009 3:39 PM | Report abuse

He just thinks out loud and the checks seem to clear, so why stop, even if he's wrong most of the time.

Posted by: vigor | July 13, 2009 3:45 PM | Report abuse

The Latino population will remember that it was a Democrat who nominated the first Latino to the Supreme Court. Given this is a growing and coveted demographic... I would say yes, politically this nomination will matter.

Sadly however it will no change the balance of the court as it stands.

Posted by: pdxgeek | July 13, 2009 3:51 PM | Report abuse

DwightCollins

Ha! Last time I checked Florida was a key swing state.

Posted by: pdxgeek | July 13, 2009 3:56 PM | Report abuse

I think what Kristol is getting at, but his words are going around it, is .. Sotamayor is replacing Souter, which keeps the Court in its current status. However, if she were replacing Scalia or Thomas, or even Kennedy ... it would be a big deal.

Posted by: paris1969 | July 13, 2009 3:57 PM | Report abuse

the real question here is : "Does Kristol matter politically (or any other way?) Answer: NO! Get lost, smirking neocon fraud!

Posted by: mybandy | July 13, 2009 3:59 PM | Report abuse

Mr. Kristol,

You do not matter. Your thoughts are irrelevant.

After annointing Palin the saviour of your fringe party, you have ZERO credibility.

Besides, you've been wrong about everything - especially about the Iraq War.

Posted by: Heerman532 | July 13, 2009 4:12 PM | Report abuse

I wonder if Mr. Kristol and the 2012
GOP candidate for president will tell us
in every other speech just how critical
the choice for president will be as it
relates to the future of The Supreme Court?

Posted by: mv4man | July 13, 2009 4:16 PM | Report abuse

This is actually a really coherent, simple thought. It's not controversial, and it's correct.

What's wrong with you people?

Posted by: HookInMouth | July 13, 2009 4:18 PM | Report abuse

so what if she is the first latino, as long as we continue to define people by their race, then the politics of race will be in play. all that matters is that the senate reviews her record and determines by an open vote on the floor whether to accept her nomination or not.

Posted by: welangIII | July 13, 2009 4:31 PM | Report abuse

Hey Kristol, how is your buddy Dan Quayle?
To think, he was Quayle's Chief of Staff. No wonder he loves Palin. Birds of a feather ...

Posted by: lasker1895 | July 13, 2009 4:46 PM | Report abuse


Does Kristol forget

that both Ginsburg and Breyer are of the "chosen ones" persuasion?

And that AIPAC was screaming for such representation. Two out of n ine on the court from a less than 2% part of the population.

And Ginsburg has noted that she was an
affirmation action entrant in college.

Kristol tries frantically to matter again.
WaPo, of course, tries to help.
But he still remains one of the most detested of the detested neocons. As these posts show.

Posted by: whistling | July 13, 2009 4:47 PM | Report abuse

As far as policy making goes? Nah. In the giant, grand scheme of things however ..... Everything matters, "All creatures great and small".

Posted by: deepthroat21 | July 13, 2009 4:56 PM | Report abuse

Nice column. You are right, it won't make any political difference. Court groupies always go gaga over stuff like this, but the "battles" on the Hill about appointments sort of remind me of professional wrestling.

The only real question is, will Supreme Court decisions also be issued in Spanish ... you know, like everything else nowadays.

Posted by: oracle2world | July 13, 2009 5:00 PM | Report abuse

Does it not bother you that you are wrong about everything? You identity as king of Conservative nonsense is more important to you than truth itself and America's well being? There is a 5-letter word for that, beginning in W and ending in E. How to be polite to blockheads like you? i see you exiting stage right chased by a big bear.

Posted by: walden1 | July 13, 2009 5:30 PM | Report abuse

If ever a guy got it wrong all the time, it's you, Bill. Iraq, Palin, a pretty impressive list when you study it, and all from a guy who never wore the uniform but drapes himself in the flag every chance he gets. The political impact of what you write and argue is minimal. I'm surprised you still have a column.

Posted by: robertsmith6666 | July 13, 2009 5:33 PM | Report abuse

Pity -- all I see here is the negative, irrelevant, opinions of someone akin to a thrice convicted snake oil salesman.

Relegated to 500-words-or-less and all back of the bus, it still makes me nauseous -- perhaps even a bit angry -- that this man is allowed to rant and blather on after his destructive, fanatical ideologue behavior in the past 25 years and his current anti-Obama, all-the-time garbage -- as if now he might have something, anything, remotely constructive to say in helping our country -- as if he might muster a modicum of something that displays a small piece of humanity and true American patriotism.

We know you are too smart to actually believe that Sarah Palin is anything more than a parroting wing-nut bobblehead, so your incessant promotion and praise for her is suspicious to say the least -- something sinister perhaps? Must be, 'cause you're way too old and ugly to bed that babe in this lifetime.

WAKE UP WILLY!

.

Posted by: Frank57 | July 13, 2009 5:47 PM | Report abuse

Does Kristol matter politically?

Do his columns have broad and long-lasting political implications?

Posted by: AlanGoldberg54 | July 13, 2009 5:53 PM | Report abuse

Sotomayor's confirmation will have tremendous political implications, particularly on the role that judicial philosophy has in the Supreme Court decision making process. Excellent article below which elaborate on this issue and the controversy surrounding Sotomayor's nomination.

"The the Sonia Sotomayor Looking Glass"

By Matt Semino, Esq.

http://elitestv.com/pub/2009/06/through-the-sonia-sotomayor-looking-glass

Posted by: supreme22 | July 13, 2009 5:57 PM | Report abuse

she matters muh more than kristol.some on the post must be a relative of his for him to have a job here. i thought the only to employ him was murdoch.

Posted by: donaldtucker | July 13, 2009 6:05 PM | Report abuse

Interesting article - Republican Conservatives have crowed and complained for years about "Liberal activist Judges" subverting the law of the people. Now that the first supreme court justice nominee with an hispanic heritage is on the cusp of nomination, suddenly the potential impact of such a justice doesn't matter politically.

Are Republicans afraid of further alienating a voting block (Hispanic Americans), that they once courted, but lost in the congressional fight over immigration and in the 2008 presidential election?

Mr. Kristol is correct to say that individual Justices don't necessarily affect the political climate. Nor can they be counted on to fulfill the political ideology of the Presidents who have submitted their nominations.

What matters is the overall composition of the court. A five to four majority is HIGHLY significant politically. Of course, such a majority does not now exist for "Liberal" interpretations of the Constitution. Perhaps that is why Mr. Kristol can be so blase about Judicial political ramifications.

Over time, should the ideological composition shift away from a conservative majority, I would expect his seeming indifference to effect a 180 degree shift.

I am further amazed by another statement in his column: That Bush's two nominees in 2005 and 2006, being conservatives, got respectful media treatment. Does that mean that another Republican whipping boy, Media "Liberal Bias", is in his mind, either dead or non-existent?

Posted by: MillPond2 | July 13, 2009 6:21 PM | Report abuse

The appointment of Sonia Sotomayor is very unlikely to be a major factor in any near term election. But President Obama does seem to be succeeding in cementing relations between the Democrats and the Hispanic community. There is a real prospect that Sotomayor's appointment could be one step in a process that condemns the Republicans to long term minority status. In that case, maybe the Republicans could rely on her empathy to help them out in some future legal conflict.

Posted by: dnjake | July 13, 2009 6:32 PM | Report abuse

Here is what they mean about long-term implications, lunkhead. Sotomayor, like her or not, is an accomplished intelligent qualified judge. When the GOP dances around the flame by saying she is not smart or too feely and liberal and not able and dangerous, millions of people will watch and remember what they said about someone as good as Sotomayor. Those people, minorities, women, latinos will realize that the GOP talks down to one of the best of the best minorities like that. They will then have to think what does the GOP think about normal regular minorities if they are so opposed to her.

Posted by: steveboyington | July 13, 2009 6:38 PM | Report abuse

Of course it matters because it's an ironically visual picture of what's mostly wrong with Government and most of the Right....a group of mostly white men, and I might add OLD white men, lecturing a Latina woman on issues of race and gender in America.

Posted by: megsplace2 | July 13, 2009 6:44 PM | Report abuse

The real question is: Does Kristol matter politically? Answer: Hell no.

Posted by: Jerryvov | July 13, 2009 6:46 PM | Report abuse

I agree with some of the earlier posts. When Boris Yeltsin was accosted by the American Press about the disaster in Russia during a visit with Bill Clinton, Yeltsin responded "Now, it can be told for the first time. It is you who are the disaster."
And so to Bill Kristol the question must be posed: Is Bill Kristol important politically?
Now, it can be said for the first time, that not only is Bill Kristol not important politically, he is not important COSMICALLY.
Bill Kristol is unimportant on a COSMIC SCALE! AHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA!

Posted by: DaktariImpossible | July 13, 2009 6:48 PM | Report abuse

It is an irony that the hispanic community should find a natural ideological home in your party, after all, the tend to be both domestic and foreign policy conservatives. Why don't they?-since Nixon, your party has embraced nativism and racism, and this offends hispanics. If you guys could extirpate the nativism, and the corporate cronyism, you could build a real winner.

Posted by: george22_1999 | July 13, 2009 7:26 PM | Report abuse

The fact that "Billie Jean" Kristol believes it means it's either a lie, or just right-winged prattle meant to convince others that what's wrong with Republicans is actually their strength...

So, "Billie Jean" Kristol, your strength is your journalism... and anyone who believes that lie is just a low-down NEOCON like you!

Posted by: gmoore40 | July 13, 2009 7:33 PM | Report abuse

hey billy, if that is true why are you repug neocons sweating bullets? to americans other than old white men the jurist does matter in lots of ways you and your ilk will never be able to comprehend.she like our president has made history, we don't expect you to move easily into the 21st century.keep touting the Alaskan ex-gov grandmother, your predictions makes me feel a lot better as 2012 approaches.

Posted by: ninnafaye | July 13, 2009 8:14 PM | Report abuse

More drivel from Kristol. Froomkin was so much better.

Posted by: frodot | July 13, 2009 8:43 PM | Report abuse

Wow, the Kristol derangement syndrome is on full display. You liberals really need to get a life.

Posted by: redskinsrex | July 13, 2009 8:58 PM | Report abuse

What sort of affirmative action guaranteed that the man who gave us Sarah Palin, and the author of dubious opinions too numerous to mention, would get yet another column at yet another newspaper? It is frustrating that after getting rid of him at the New York Times, we now have to put up with him here. I don't care how important his mother and father used to be, his column inches remain a waste of time.

Posted by: alsacecypr | July 13, 2009 9:06 PM | Report abuse

These responses use so much of the same language a lot of them must have been written by the same person. Frank Rich, Bill Ayers, the reverend Farrakhan. Reverend Wright. and in all the time Obama attended that church, there was only one of those sermons where Wright flounced around in what looks like a mumu, spewing hatred of the US and Israel, and that was the previously mentioned date when Obama was not there. I hope this helps.

Posted by: truck1 | July 13, 2009 9:22 PM | Report abuse

If you ever wonder what is wrong in this country, just look at William Kristol:

A propaganda artist with no integrity, no humanity and no intelligence,( just an allegiance to the Military-Industrial-Complex) gets to spew his drivel on unsuspecting Americans. This is not journalism. It is propaganda and it is sickening.

Posted by: peaceful2008 | July 13, 2009 9:42 PM | Report abuse

The first Hispanic Justice is a big deal. I expect that people will remember that, and her appointment adds to Obama's true commitment to diversity, showing Bush's 'diversity' to be little more than tokenism.
**************

nice job crafting a big, bright, blinking non-sequitur. two, infact.

Obama's commitment diversity is "true" because...he appointed a minority.

and by this clear signal that his commitment is true obama exposed bush was engaging in tokenism when...he appointed minorities.

hmmm. non-sequitur are best when at least minimally disguised. you must not have read the directions on that package of talking points you bought.

the funniest thing is that sotomayor was originally appointed by...george H.W. bush.

so did that show a true commitment to diversity, or is it tokenism unless it's the supreme court?

ah but then there clearance thomas, so H.W. Bush is definately in the clear.

yeah, you make no sense.

Posted by: dummypants | July 13, 2009 9:47 PM | Report abuse

If you ever wonder what is wrong in this country, just look at William Kristol:

A propaganda artist with no integrity, no humanity and no intelligence,( just an allegiance to the Military-Industrial-Complex) gets to spew his drivel on unsuspecting Americans. This is not journalism. It is propaganda and it is sickening.
************

speaking of what is wrong with the country, just look at your mindless post.

1. reckless, polarizing labeling ("propoganda artist")


2. personal attacks ("integrity", "humanity" OR "intelligence"!)

3. aggresive language ("spew", "sickening")

4. and throw in the obligatory boogieman ("military-industrial complex")


all in response to a column where bill krisol said nothing very controversial, even if you dont happen to agree with all of it.

you would've thought he said sotomayor would be a bad judge because she wasnt a wise white male.

Posted by: dummypants | July 13, 2009 9:55 PM | Report abuse


"If you ever wonder what is wrong in this country, just look at William Kristol:

A propaganda artist with no integrity, no humanity and no intelligence,( just an allegiance to the Military-Industrial-Complex) gets to spew his drivel on unsuspecting Americans. This is not journalism. It is propaganda and it is sickening."

Blah blah, woof woof.

All of which goes to prove the old adage of "never over-estimate the intelligence of a "progressive".


Posted by: grenier441 | July 13, 2009 10:16 PM | Report abuse

more pointless drool from one of the last self-appointed spokespeople of the angry old white guys club. It's not even worth our time to bother with you anymore. FIN.

Posted by: pookiecat | July 14, 2009 12:09 AM | Report abuse

Does Kristol matter? I guess someone at the Post does believe so. Just more affirmative action for Chickenhawk warmongering pr*cks.

What is Bill Kristol?
"propaganda artist with no integrity, no humanity and no intelligence,( just an allegiance to the Military-Industrial-Complex)"

"It is frustrating that after getting rid of him at the New York Times, we now have to put up with him here."

Posted by: Marcaurelius | July 14, 2009 7:12 AM | Report abuse

Bill, can I call you Bill? Thanks. Bill, the difference this time, is that Sotomayor is a Latina and your side is going out of their way to demonize an intelligent and highly qualified Supreme Court nominee who will be approved.

If the republicans just made nice and let her be confirmed without making a big stink no damage would be done to the party. However, attacking someone of the sole basis of race cannot help but further alienate the Hispanic and female voting blocks that republican need to get back into the electoral game.

Big mistake.

===========================================

Earth to WaPo bottom feeder....they are being very deferential to the nominee. She will be confirmed by a large majority. It will have ZERO impact politically going forward.

Also, a cursory spell check would improve your "credibility" as an esteemed dignitary, ahem, of the learned left.

Posted by: crosbyjo | July 14, 2009 8:55 AM | Report abuse

Does Judge Sotomayor matter politically? I might have said no, not really, and agreed with you sir, until I heard something yesterday that made me sit up a little.

You, in your column state "....though Republicans will be polite in their opposition,..". Perhaps you should re-listen to Sessions opening remarks. I believe those remarks made Judge Sotomayor politically relevant for Latinos throughout America.

Posted by: alysheba_3 | July 14, 2009 11:29 AM | Report abuse

Well, coming from a guy who still thinks that Sarah Palin should be sitting in the Oval Office in a few years, this is very comforting.

Posted by: thurmansledge | July 14, 2009 11:57 AM | Report abuse

Alas poor Yorick ..I knew Him well.......Excuse Me , you mean this isn't the NY Times Theatre Guild webpage??? .....hmmmm.. thats a surprise,, especially after reading the majority of today's Court Jester like comments ... OK Horatio, you can relax now,,,I do intend on offering up a real response to Mr Kristol's Op-ed..

All Presidential elections have consequences ; unfortunately , when casting their vote, the the majority of the electorate is blind to that reality ...Its false to say or think the line of questioning of Judge Sotomayor during the confirmation hearings prior to her accession to the Supreme Court has no political implications ...Im not expecting the residents of East LA to rush in to the streets if a Republican Senator asks a probative question .... However, I do believe if the Right doesn't offer a tough stance to Obama and His agenda , judicial and otherwise, the political ramifications will be felt for years to come ... The Republicans lost the election and are at a temporary political disadvantage ...I hope they have not lost their back bone as well.. All the actors know this dog and pony show over the balance of power must be played out ...Sotomayor is merely the vehicle the Right and Left will joust over while expressing their view points ...

Mr Kristol ,in closing lemme say , I want to solve hunger every where and of course World Peace is high on My list of priorities too...

Posted by: Spartann | July 14, 2009 12:15 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company