Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

The Politics of the Sotomayor Vote



The vote on Sonia Sotomayor provided insight into the power of the Republican party base. Karen Bleier -- AFP/Getty Images

To the surprise of no one, Judge Sonia Sotomayor was confirmed to the U.S. Supreme Court this afternoon by a 68 to 31 Senate vote, a vote that revealed the lingering concerns that many Republican elected officials and aspiring GOP candidates carry about angering their party's base.

Just nine Republicans crossed party lines to back Sotomayor, a total that included four Senators -- Judd Gregg (N.H.), Mel Martinez (Fla.), George Voinovich (Ohio) and Kit Bond (Mo.) -- who are retiring in 2010 and, as a result, have little need to worry about the political implications of such a vote.

Of the high-profile Republicans running for the Senate in 2010, only one -- former Rep. Pat Toomey (Pa.) -- came out in support of Sotomayor's confirmation.

Why the reluctance on the part of some Republicans to back Sotomayor?

Undoubtedly, for many of the Senators who decided to oppose her the choice was based on a deeply-held belief about the proper approach for a judge to take to the law when sitting on the highest court in the land.

But, it's hard not to see politics in the positioning of some Senators toward Sotomayor.

Take Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R), for example, who, whether or not she ultimately believed Sotomayor to be qualified for the bench, had to vote against the nomination in order to preserve her conservative bona fides in advance of next year's primary fight against Gov. Rick Perry.

The primary calculation is also apparent in the decisions of Senate candidates like former Connecticut Rep. Rob Simmons, Florida Gov. Charlie Crist and New Hampshire businessman Ovide LaMontagne -- all three of whom opposed Sotomayor's confirmation.

Both Simmons and Crist are the frontrunners in their respective Senate bids but have to worry about other candidates running to their ideological right. Supporting Sotomayor would have left both open to attacks on their conservative credentials that would have been difficult to rebut.

For Lamontagne, who is weighing a run against former state Attorney General Kelly Ayotte (R), his opposition to Sotomayor served as an affirmation that he was the "true conservative" in the primary field.

Doubt that politics played a role in some of these decisions? Take a look at some of the Republican Senate candidates who chose not to offer a position on Sotomayor -- Reps. Mark Kirk (Ill.) and Roy Blunt (Mo.) as well as former Rep. Rob Portman (Ohio). What does that trio have in common? None of them face a serious primary fight -- yet.

Each still has months to go before the filing deadline and is likely being very cautious to avoid fanning conservative flames and drawing opposition from the right.

By Chris Cillizza  |  August 6, 2009; 4:36 PM ET
Categories:  Republican Party , Senate  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: The Most Important Number in Politics Today
Next: Morning Fix: Danger! Danger! Democrats!

Comments

actually it is the right wing that has disdain for the Constitution AND its Amendments that insist on activists judges(when it fits their dogma) whot want to shread the 9th Amendment and ignore stare decisis such as Griswold. Bork was quite comfortable with Richard Nixon's plumbers, bribery, and abuses of the IRS and the Justice Department. Bork ignored the concept that no man is above the law and was ready to rewrite the Commerce clause to fit his ideology.

Posted by: leichtman | August 10, 2009 2:57 PM | Report abuse

Anybody remember Robert Bork. A highly qualified constructionist. That's what supreme court justices should be. That's what we the crazy rabid Rush/wingnuts prefer. I have no idea why you libs have such disdain for the constitution that you need activist judges.

Posted by: Bjorn3 | August 10, 2009 10:59 AM | Report abuse

You don't need a voucher, dealers will apply a credit at purchase

Jimhenry
Blogger
www.cashforclunkersfacts.info
http://www.cashforclunkersfacts.info

Posted by: jimhenry0808 | August 8, 2009 4:06 AM | Report abuse

CONGRATULATION TO THE NEW ASSOCIATE JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT, SONIA SOTOMAYOR. IT'S ABOUT TIME.
MOST REPUBLICANS WERE ALL AGAINST THIS NOMINATION, SPECIALLY JOHN MCCAIN (R) ARIZONA. HOWEVER, NINE (9) REPUBLICANS VOTED FOR SOTOMAYOR OUT OF THE EXPECTED SIX (6) VOTES. IT IS A 68 VOTES AGAINST 31.
THIS MESSAGE IS SENT TO YOU BY ME, TO REMIND YOU TO REMEMBER SONIA SOTOMAYOR COME VOTING TIME WHEN ALL OPPOSED REPUBLICANS BOTH THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AND THE SENATE HOUSE VIE FOR YOUR VOTES.

Thanking you in advance, I remain

Sincerely yours,
Prudence Russell

Posted by: prudencerussell | August 7, 2009 10:19 PM | Report abuse

I personally think the Republicans should filibuster and put holds on every one of Obama's judicial nominees just like the Democrats did to Bush's nominees.

==

Another infantile GOP supporter.

Funny not really how so many of the nineteen-percenters are so very immature.

Obama's opposition to Roberts was for solid reasons, just was was Democratic oppostion to Robert Bork. In both cases the nominees were, yes, qualified, but also extreme and ideological. Bork had open contempt for antitrust law and Roberts and Alito have both come to the bench with hit-lists and have proven more "activist" than any Democratic nominees in recent history. Neither should have been confirmed.

Posted by: chrisfox8 | August 7, 2009 12:54 PM | Report abuse


RobT1: Too bad they don't have the votes for a filibuster. Elections have consequences.

Posted by: mikeinmidland | August 7, 2009 11:32 AM | Report abuse

The Republicans who voted against Sotomayor are just using the Obama/Democrat method of deciding whether to support a nominee for the Supreme court. Obama and a marjority of Democrats voted against both Roberts and Alito strictly for partisan reasons. Obama himself noted that Roberts was highly qualified for a seat on the Supreme court but wouldn't vote for him because he didn't agree with him politically. I personally think the Republicans should filibuster and put holds on every one of Obama's judicial nominees just like the Democrats did to Bush's nominees.

Posted by: RobT1 | August 7, 2009 10:42 AM | Report abuse

Not odd at all. The vote should have been 99-0, if the senators limited themselves to "advise and consent." The criteria:

1) Sonia Sotomayor is qualified to hold the position, and
2) She was nominated by the President.

Until the last 20 years, unanimous votes were not uncommon. And yes, Obama vote against Roberts was political--looking to the Democratic nomination. Hopefully the politicization of the Supreme Court is waning.

Posted by: mikeinmidland | August 7, 2009 10:38 AM | Report abuse

How odd that it was only the Republicans who voted on the nomination for political reasons.

Posted by: bartling | August 7, 2009 10:20 AM | Report abuse

I cannot understand why the GOP is so willing to keep the 10% of America that are rabid Limbaugh listeners and NRA nuts who believe democrats want the UN to take over America. By pandering to these nuts the republicans have decided they will remain in the minority and their only chance to gain the majority is through lies and riots and so they try. This is not politics, its fascism, and it needs to be pointed out repeatedly as the republican party continues to leave so many republicans behind.

Posted by: Fate1 | August 7, 2009 9:23 AM | Report abuse

@mibrooks: yeah those guys are wound too tight. The only time they even talk to each other on here is to high-five for some canned talking point.

I can get along with people I have some pretty stark disagreements with, and even get pretty heated on those disagreements, but still get along. But there are lines. There's something about what's left of the right that seems to be reflexively dishonest, not just another way of looking at things but lying through their teeth. And it's gotten down deep now, it's in their neurology, and they don't even seem to realize they're doing it. Creepy.

Like talking to some guy in the steam room a few days ago, telling me he has reservations about the global warming model and how much he respects science (never heard of Popper) and then starts trotting out the corn to ethanol story and then he goes on with the power of economics .. sorry, but I don't bother trying to agree to disagree with people like that. That's over the line.

When I was a kid the little girls had Barbie dolls with pull-rings coming out of their chests. Pull the ring, Barbie gushes a few words. Maybe a dozen recordings.

The goopers remaining remind me of those dolls.

Posted by: chrisfox8 | August 7, 2009 1:24 AM | Report abuse

Well however one parses the definitions, at the risk of committing the sin of generalization and sliding down the slippery slope of homogenizing individually unique human beings into condescendingly reductionist and colonialist classifications .....

I think the Latino-ization of the USA is a grand thing to watch. During my lifetime we're changing from a one-language melting pot to a two-plus language mosaic, and I think it's a lot prettier that way. I like seeing packages labelled in Spanish / English, I like the way fake Mexican food has given way to real Mexican food, I like the whole second culture with its own music and video stars, I think the change just rocks.

And I like seeing a wise Latina committing empathy on the Supreme Court

Posted by: chrisfox8 | August 7, 2009 1:14 AM | Report abuse

@bobbywc - That one cannot define a Latino is incorrect. It would be someone either from Latin America (Mexico, Central or South America, or Spanish speaking Caribbean) or of descent from said stock. It would exclude individuals from Spain (though Hispanic would include such, but exclude Brazillians).

There was a rather interesting article on this in the Sunday Post a few weeks back.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | August 7, 2009 12:34 AM | Report abuse

chrisfox8, When you read the comments on this site, we "lefties" are actually a lot friendlier with each other (and others) than I see from posters on the right. People like drindl, you, me, DDAWD, broadwayjoe, mark, etc., even CC, all get along much of the time. Sure, we toss insults around and fight passionately over issues we are passionate about, but I don't see this sort of diversity, honest disagreements and agreements, thoughtfulness, and just plain humanity on the right. If I could I would have a night out on the town with all of you... and it would be a blast!

Posted by: mibrooks27 | August 7, 2009 12:19 AM | Report abuse

Just where do they think their base is going to go? Is there a party that is even more white-racist-christianist-xenophobe-know-nothing than the GOP right now?

==

They could leave the GOP for the AIP, the fastest-growing party in Tizathy.

Why, in 2008 they had a staggering 40,000 votes! Move over, libertarians, there's a new roll of flypaper ready to snag the ko0ks

Posted by: chrisfox8 | August 6, 2009 11:44 PM | Report abuse

chrisfox8 - I already owe you dinner. How are things up there in the frozen North? We got rain here. Plus I did a "good deed". I ran into this nice Canadian couple with their young (6 year old) son. The husband was sooooo sick and *&#)@#Y tired of looking at scenery he was about to come unglued. So, I took out on a guided fly fishing trip for half a day yesterday afternoon and got him into some nice trout (14 - 18" native Rainbows).

==

"You're a Christian martyr!"
-- "The Glass Menagerie"

Seriously, nice job. Last time I was in VN we took some relatives on a two-day trip on Ha Long Bay, the Hebrides of Asia .. first time they'd even been to the North. Mine too .. different accent / dialect, much easier for me to understand.

No, you don't owe me dinner, if you're coming to my neck of the woods yer my guest and I pick up the tab. We'll go to Phở Hẩi Yến and you'll have the tastiest meal of your life. This I can promise.

Posted by: chrisfox8 | August 6, 2009 11:41 PM | Report abuse

Thanks, by the way. There's a lot of really neat stuff going on with cancer research now. I think we're going to see some big breakthroughs in the next five years.

Posted by: DDAWD | August 6, 2009 11:19 PM | Report abuse

Cool, cool. If posting the receipt isn't easy, then you don't have to worry about it. You were honest enough to bring it up, so I'll take your word for it.

Posted by: DDAWD | August 6, 2009 11:12 PM | Report abuse

DDAWD Done! Thank you. I'll mail a money order to them tomorrow and send a photocopy of the receipt to CC here at the Post.

Posted by: mibrooks27 | August 6, 2009 11:06 PM | Report abuse

"DDAWD - $100 to the charity of each other's choosing. If I won, I couldn't ask to to donate to a pro-gun charity and you can't have me donate to an anti-gun charity. Other than that, just about any group that isn't morally repugnant to the both of us. So.... since we're both pretty liberal, that yields a huge number of non-profits on the left plus here are lots of non-partisan charities. So, it's pretty much your choice. I wanted it to be dinner on the town by the loser. It was your choice to donate to charity and I accepted. So, choose away or ask for suggestions from our fellow forum members."

Ah, ok. I'm not really staunchly anti-gun. I think that different places should tailor gun laws to their different needs. New Orleans and DC shouldn't have the same gun laws as rural farm towns.

As for charity, let's see. Well, my state income tax form allows for the donation of your refund to a list of charities, so I give my refund to a charity for military families.

How about something that stokes my moral AND intellectual passions? Cancer research.

https://www.cancer.org/aspx/Donation/DON_1_Donate_Online_Now.aspx

Make the donation go towards cancer research.

This is acceptable, right?

Posted by: DDAWD | August 6, 2009 10:50 PM | Report abuse

Here's what I don't get:

Republicans voted against Sotomayor because they are afraid of alienating their base. Ok.

Just where do they think their base is going to go? Is there a party that is even more white-racist-christianist-xenophobe-know-nothing than the GOP right now?

What, are they afraid they'll lose votes to the American Nazi party? Do they fear LaRouche is cranking out better conspiracy theories?

The GOP ought to get a bit more confident in what it has to sell: the last shred of respectability possible for this nasty nexus of racist, superstitious ignorance parading as a voting block. The can sell Lincoln's reputation off in pieces for another 10 years or so before it is utterly reduced to worthless, tattered mockery. They should demand a high price for the last faint memories of integrity and respect they have. They have a corner on the market for right-wing respectability.

Posted by: nodebris | August 6, 2009 10:38 PM | Report abuse

When is the Republican Congress not ever concerned about anything. Anyone and everything concerns them when the person or issue is not linked to their right-wing conservative views.

~~ The Majority Democratic Senate concerns them.
~~ The Majority Democratic Congress concerns them.
~~ The Democratic White House concerns them.
~~ Barack Obama concerns them.
~~ The Economic Stimulus Package concerns them.
~~ The Cash for Clunkers Program concerns them.
~~ Health care Reform concerns them.
~~ A Black President concerns them.
~~ Global Warming concerns them.
~~ Liberal ideologies concerns them.
~~ The Liberal Media concerns them.
~~ Hillary Clinton concerns them.
~~ Joe Biden concerns them.
~~ Bill Clinton concerns them.

I am concerned about the extinction of the Republican Party.

Just kidding, no I am not.

Posted by: lcarter0311 | August 6, 2009 9:57 PM | Report abuse

When is the Republican Congress not ever concerned about anything. Anyone and everything concerns them when the person or issue is not linked to their right-wing conservative views.

~~ The Majority Democratic Senate concerns them.
~~ The Majority Democratic Congress concerns them.
~~ The Democratic White House concerns them.
~~ Barack Obama concerns them.
~~ The Economic Stimulus Package concerns them.
~~ The Cash for Clunkers Program concerns them.
~~ Health care Reform concerns them.
~~ A Black President concerns them.
~~ Global Warming concerns them.
~~ Liberal ideologies concerns them.
~~ The Liberal Media concerns them.
~~ Hillary Clinton concerns them.
~~ Joe Biden concerns them.
~~ Bill Clinton concerns them.

I am concerned about the extinction of the Republican Party.

Posted by: lcarter0311 | August 6, 2009 9:56 PM | Report abuse

chrisfox8 - I already owe you dinner. How are things up there in the frozen North? We got rain here. Plus I did a "good deed". I ran into this nice Canadian couple with their young (6 year old) son. The husband was sooooo sick and *&#)@#Y tired of looking at scenery he was about to come unglued. So, I took out on a guided fly fishing trip for half a day yesterday afternoon and got him into some nice trout (14 - 18" native Rainbows).

Posted by: mibrooks27 | August 6, 2009 9:53 PM | Report abuse

"Are they REALLY that demented?

==

The word I find myself using for them lately is "nihilistic"

I think they've reached the stage of some religious cult that kills its own children because God is going to show them a better way to reproduce."

AS I see it there are two factions - the Hannity/Limbaugh/Krauthammer faction and the Kathleen Parker/David Brooks faction, with the latter in the minority in the Republican party. The base of the party is now much more homogenous and much more to the right. Until such time that you have a pol who successfully breaks out of the pack, i.e. stands up to the base and wins an election, you'll see all the Congressmen genuflecting to the right. It'll come to a head likely in 2010, since Republicans are leaving the party in droves and becoming independents, they cannot sustain even their current membership in the Congress, unless Obama screws up to the same extent that Bush and the 2004 Congress did (which is hard to imagine). Even if the trillion dollar deficit is rsised as a major issue a la Perot, if the economy improves, that won't affect the outcome very much.

Posted by: Gaithersburg1 | August 6, 2009 9:44 PM | Report abuse

"The no vote on Sotomayor, a Puerto Rican, means nothing to Mexican Americans."

Correction: the note vote on Sotomayor...means nothing to stupid Mexican Americans.

It's true that many Mexican Americans are anti-Puerto Rican and anti-black racists and bigots; a leading Hispanic Republican in New Mexico said that Hispanic came to the US as conquistadores while blacks came as slaves as his reason for being against Obama.

But this ignorance on the part of Mexican-Americans will not keep the likes of John Cornyn, Kay Bailey Hutchinson, John McCain and Jon Kyl from kicking down Mexican-Americans.

Posted by: jjedif | August 6, 2009 9:44 PM | Report abuse

"Brand Building Stakeholder Relations for Procter & Gamble"

Oh, broadway joe, somebody knew exactly who was the right person to talk to. I am in this business. In future wars, keep this in mind... it will serve us well.

Posted by: drindl | August 6, 2009 9:39 PM | Report abuse

"ceflynline: I'm 90% certain that was supposed to be funny Posted by: chrisfox8"

Only slightly. The claim that Sotomayor isn't a citizen can't be accounted for by any other option. Think about that.

Posted by: ceflynline | August 6, 2009 9:32 PM | Report abuse

@mibrooks: send'im a gift certificate to Phở Hoa.

Posted by: chrisfox8 | August 6, 2009 9:31 PM | Report abuse

Are they REALLY that demented?

==

The word I find myself using for them lately is "nihilistic"

I think they've reached the stage of some religious cult that kills its own children because God is going to show them a better way to reproduce.

They've been surrounding themselves with the like-minded for so long that they just can't bring themselves to believe that we're not all Palinoids at heart (even when there's nobody else around)

Posted by: chrisfox8 | August 6, 2009 9:30 PM | Report abuse

DDAWD - $100 to the charity of each other's choosing. If I won, I couldn't ask to to donate to a pro-gun charity and you can't have me donate to an anti-gun charity. Other than that, just about any group that isn't morally repugnant to the both of us. So.... since we're both pretty liberal, that yields a huge number of non-profits on the left plus here are lots of non-partisan charities. So, it's pretty much your choice. I wanted it to be dinner on the town by the loser. It was your choice to donate to charity and I accepted. So, choose away or ask for suggestions from our fellow forum members.

Posted by: mibrooks27 | August 6, 2009 9:28 PM | Report abuse

"I think I need some real alalysis, because I really can't get my mind around this.

The Republicans who put up such a fight knew that it was all in vain. They CAN'T be so afraid of the part of thr republican to their right, since most of them have one foot off the political cliff on that side anyway. The NRA rating is something they could ignore, because the NRA would still have andorsed them, regardless, they would just have to give up thier 100% ratings.

They picked an ugly and unprofitable fight to oppose a particularly centrist candidate, wasted breath, strength, capital, and good will from the center to do it.

WHAT DID THEY GET THAT MERITS ACCEPTING THOSE NEGATIVES?"

It's simple - it would be very hard to defend their vote in a primary challenge - If they did vote "Yes", the challenger can easily appear to be to the right of the candidate by claiming that he/she would have voted "No". Given that the Republican base has shrunk and is much more conservative and to the right as say, compared to even 10 years ago, Senators cannot afford even to be seen leaning to the center, in matters that are considered vital to the right, such as Supreme Court nominees.

Posted by: Gaithersburg1 | August 6, 2009 9:27 PM | Report abuse

"Surprise, surprise," as Andy Griffith would say.

Most Republicans are ignorant, angry, old white men (and their ignorant, angry, old white woman companions) who long for the "good old days" of white dominance.

At worst, many Republicans are ignorant, white supremacist racists who support comes primarily from trailer parks full of angry, poor white people whose sense of racial superiority is all they have to brag about.

Posted by: jjedif | August 6, 2009 9:27 PM | Report abuse

The Bronx.

Yeah baby.

In the park homer.

Posted by: pressF1 | August 6, 2009 9:20 PM | Report abuse

I predict the Republican Senators up for reelection are going to pay dearly for this. Hard to imagine how they can, in a years time, justify their "No" vote, especially in states that have large Hispanic populations.

Posted by: Gaithersburg1 | August 6, 2009 9:18 PM | Report abuse

I think I need some real alalysis, because I really can't get my mind around this.

The Republicans who put up such a fight knew that it was all in vain. They CAN'T be so afraid of the part of thr republican to their right, since most of them have one foot off the political cliff on that side anyway. The NRA rating is something they could ignore, because the NRA would still have andorsed them, regardless, they would just have to give up thier 100% ratings.

They picked an ugly and unprofitable fight to oppose a particularly centrist candidate, wasted breath, strength, capital, and good will from the center to do it.

WHAT DID THEY GET THAT MERITS ACCEPTING THOSE NEGATIVES?

And tomorrow at least a few will rant and rave against the Cash for Clunkers bill.

Are they REALLY that demented?

Flatly, this bit of far right fireside theater is truly beyond understanding.

And yet the Record will still show 31 Republicans against her.

Posted by: ceflynline | August 6, 2009 9:13 PM | Report abuse

ceflynline: I'm 90% certain that was supposed to be funny

Posted by: chrisfox8 | August 6, 2009 9:09 PM | Report abuse

"Sotomayor is not a U.S. citizen. Its all a big F-ing conspiracy by the Democrats, illegal immigrants, gays, liberals, communists, and single moms. Posted by: hayden1"

Puerto Ricans ARE American citizens, and have been since 1917. The curious "Commonwealth Status" that Puerto Rico holds arises from the racism of the times, which wanted to make sure that those territories we acquired from Spain in 1898 didn't become full fledged states with "colored" majorities.

So what is it talking in you, hayden1, racism, or ignorance?

Posted by: ceflynline | August 6, 2009 9:04 PM | Report abuse

The first thing Reid needs to do is to get rid of the filibuster so everything is majority vote. Can you imagine what McConnell would do if he had 60 votes?

Posted by: broadwayjoe | August 6, 2009 9:00 PM | Report abuse

Glenn Beck could not have liked to hear this from Proctor and Gamble:

""No P&G ads should have appeared on this program in the first place," said Martha Depenbrock, Brand Building Stakeholder Relations for Procter & Gamble in an email. "To be clear, if any of our advertising appeared on the Glenn Beck show, it was in error and we appreciate you bringing this matter to our attention. We will do what we can to see that it doesn't happen again.""

Posted by: broadwayjoe | August 6, 2009 8:56 PM | Report abuse

I hope he picks women for the next 2 vacancies to bring the number to at least
4.

That would do more than anything to radically transform the debate on the Court for the better.

I would suggest Janet Napolitano and Jennifer Granholm. Both are lawyers but not Judges, so there is no long record of decisions for the GOP to flyspeck and use as an excuse to demand endless delays.

Either or both of those two nominations would be hard to obstruct.

Posted by: dcucich | August 6, 2009 8:55 PM | Report abuse

DDAW- it's o.k if sponsors pulled from Beck ... NOW WE WANT TO KNOW WHAT THEIR PRODUCTS ARE SO THAT WE CAN STOP BUYING THEN AND INVESTING .

Posted by: noHUCKABEEnoVOTE

==

This zit of a poster sounds about ready to pop

Posted by: chrisfox8 | August 6, 2009 8:52 PM | Report abuse

@drindl, and fellow patriots:

Here is the follow up information on the continued effort to pressure Beck's sponsors, from HuffPo:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-rucker/glenn-becks-advertisers-a_b_253281.html

Posted by: broadwayjoe | August 6, 2009 8:52 PM | Report abuse

What I really love about this is how this strategy totally failed when tried on Letterman for his Palin comments.

Posted by: DDAWD | August 6, 2009 8:36 PM
____
Totally co-sign

==

Thirded.

Wheels coming off the conservative "thing"

Posted by: chrisfox8 | August 6, 2009 8:51 PM | Report abuse

What I really love about this is how this strategy totally failed when tried on Letterman for his Palin comments.

Posted by: DDAWD | August 6, 2009 8:36 PM
____
Totally co-sign

Posted by: broadwayjoe | August 6, 2009 8:45 PM | Report abuse

Investing, noHuckabee? What will you invest? Your trailer?

Posted by: drindl | August 6, 2009 8:44 PM | Report abuse

Are you the same pigs that slamming Republicans that slammed them when BUSH appointed her ? huh ? Go change your diaper and get back to the Drag show ... It's over and Sharia law is on it's way in , you need to enjoy your pig pen while you still can.

Posted by: noHUCKABEEnoVOTE

==

So is your whole life flashing before your eyes?

Good.

"Sharia law is on it's way "

"its," by the way, illiterate.

Posted by: chrisfox8 | August 6, 2009 8:44 PM | Report abuse

"Are you the same pigs that slamming Republicans that slammed them when BUSH appointed her ? huh ? Go change your diaper and get back to the Drag show ... It's over and Sharia law is on it's way in , you need to enjoy your pig pen while you still can.

Posted by: noHUCKABEEnoVOTE | August 6, 2009 8:37 PM |"

Whoa, we have some serious geniuses on board tonight.

Sharia law, you mean what you Christianistas want to put into effect? So, you're into diapers, no Huckabee?

Too much information.

Posted by: drindl | August 6, 2009 8:43 PM | Report abuse

DDAW- it's o.k if sponsors pulled from Beck ... NOW WE WANT TO KNOW WHAT THEIR PRODUCTS ARE SO THAT WE CAN STOP BUYING THEN AND INVESTING .

Posted by: noHUCKABEEnoVOTE | August 6, 2009 8:41 PM | Report abuse

DDAW- it's o.k if sponsors pulled from Beck ... NOW WE WANT TO KNOW WHAT THEIR PRODUCTS ARE SO THAT WE CAN STOP BUYING THEN AND INVESTING .

Posted by: noHUCKABEEnoVOTE | August 6, 2009 8:41 PM | Report abuse

There is always the Independent Party of American citizens, please with the USA Constitution, to turn to.

Posted by: dottydo

==

That's a party of kooks, who last ran the hugely irrelevant nutbar Alan Keyes.

Flypaper for kooks. Like you.

Posted by: chrisfox8 | August 6, 2009 8:40 PM | Report abuse

Concerned about angering the base? Surly you jest. The base is beyond anger. Town hall meetings show them wild eyed and foaming at the mouth, carpet chewing, kid kicking, smoking mad. My suspicion is a lot of it can be traced back to a Black guy living in a White House.

Posted by: slim2 | August 6, 2009 8:39 PM | Report abuse

Are you the same pigs slamming Republicans that slammed them when BUSH appointed her ? huh ? Go change your diaper and get back to the Drag show ... It's over and Sharia law is on it's way in , you need to enjoy your pig pen while you still can.

Posted by: noHUCKABEEnoVOTE | August 6, 2009 8:38 PM | Report abuse

You leftists in the media are a joke. Why did Obama vote against Roberts even while admitting he was superbly qualified?

==

You need to ask that after Roberts has turned out to be the most activist jurist in decades?

Posted by: chrisfox8 | August 6, 2009 8:38 PM | Report abuse

Are you the same pigs that slamming Republicans that slammed them when BUSH appointed her ? huh ? Go change your diaper and get back to the Drag show ... It's over and Sharia law is on it's way in , you need to enjoy your pig pen while you still can.

Posted by: noHUCKABEEnoVOTE | August 6, 2009 8:37 PM | Report abuse

"BTW, the grass roots effort to have people contact Glenn Beck's sponsors to protest his racist slam of BHO worked. Sponsors have left him in droves, according to HuffPo today. Thanks to the patriots who called, wrote, and emailed Beck's sponsors. People power works.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/07/28/fox-host-glenn-beck-obama_n_246310.html

Posted by: broadwayjoe"

What I really love about this is how this strategy totally failed when tried on Letterman for his Palin comments.

Posted by: DDAWD | August 6, 2009 8:36 PM | Report abuse

bobbywc: Do you happen to know Michelle Maglagang or Juan Williams or Dinesh DeSouza?

Posted by: broadwayjoe | August 6, 2009 8:34 PM | Report abuse

@leichtman: I think voter registration is the key. And encouraging folks to do early voting, if TX allows it. It clearly helped get BHO over the top in the South (VA and NC).

Posted by: broadwayjoe | August 6, 2009 8:30 PM | Report abuse

"Well, she was confirmed and I didn't think she would be or deserved to be. What makes this even harder for me to bear is, now, I have to contribute to (I think it was...) DDAWD's favorite charity that doesn't involve gun control. Was it you DDAWD or was it someone else here? Do I send the receipt (proof) to Chris C? Come on, rub it in just a little."

Man, I totally forgot about this. What were the conditions of the bet?

Posted by: DDAWD | August 6, 2009 8:27 PM | Report abuse

Senator Lindsey Graham started the ball rolling for these Republican senators who bucked the right wing talk show party leaders and made the constitutionally right decision instead of the politically right decision. He deserves some respect for his stance.

Posted by: jrosco3 | August 6, 2009 8:27 PM | Report abuse

Implicit in the claim by conservatives that Sotomayor's comment about a "wise Latina" is somehow racist is the belief that a white male harbors no such bias - which, of course, is pure b.s.

The only difference is that a white male's bias is to protect the power structure, whereas Sotomayor might, because of her background, be more likely to see the merits of a plaintiff's suit.

Posted by: EnemyOfTheState | August 6, 2009 8:25 PM | Report abuse

Thanks for the info, broadway joe. I'll contact Beck's sponsors too. Great idea. He's an unhinged, racist nut case.

Posted by: drindl | August 6, 2009 8:10 PM
____________
I'm just tickled it worked. Donny Deutsch was great. I sent a bunch of emails but didn't think anything would happen. It's funny when you read the bios of these broadcast bigots--they were all losers in life but just lucked into careers in hate broadcasting. To your point, they have rotated in other sponsors for Beck's show to replace the ones who left. Hopefully they will get posted as well somewhere with contact info. Cheers.

Posted by: broadwayjoe | August 6, 2009 8:25 PM | Report abuse

Chrisfox8, okay maybe I am wrong - so just tell us what you meant by the following. "You can bet that Spanish language news are telling their listeners who voted no."

As if the Anglo stations are not doing the same. The presumption is you are saying there is something special about it on the Spanish language stations. You are implying Spanish speaking people are going to be angry.

The Mexican American vote of South Texas cntrols Texas - they will not vote because the Dems have poopooed on them since before the Civil War. This is why the Dems are out of power in Texas

Obama just cut a deal with the corrupt Dems of South Texas to force the people of Brownsville to pay for the building of the wall we do not want. Yes you heard me right.

Obama pushed for the building of the wall in a place which interfered with a new needed Loop and downtown development.

Here is the deal - when Brownsville is ready to go forward with the development - at our expense we can take down Obama's wall and pay to build a new one. had Bush done this people like you would be yelling from the roof tops

The Mexican American community of South Texas cares more about how Obama did us over than about a Puerto Rican Supreme Court justice.

I was responding to your statement - and it was simply reflective of someone who does not understand the dynamics of the Spanish speaking population of the US.

In Texas you cannot even get new arrival Mexican immigrants to agree with those here since before the Republic of Texas.

Bobby Wightman-Cervantes

Posted by: bobbywc | August 6, 2009 8:20 PM | Report abuse

You too, can have your own Kenyan birth certificate!

Just go here! it really works!

http://kenyanbirthcertificategenerator.com/

Posted by: drindl | August 6, 2009 8:16 PM | Report abuse

"Undoubtedly, for many of the Senators who decided to oppose her the choice was based on a deeply-held belief about the proper approach for a judge to take to the law when sitting on the highest court in the land."
___________
I missed this gem at first. Outside DrudgeWorld, no one is buying into that. How do you even type that into the computer with a straight face?

Pat Buchanan who led the charge against Judge Sonia clearly explained why the Sonia haters, well, hate Sonia. From HuffPo's Jason Linkins:

"Anyway, my favorite part of this wondrous dialogue came after Maddow asked Buchanan why he thought that 108 of the 110 Supreme Court Justices had been white. He [Buchanan] replied:

"White men were 100% of the people that wrote the Constitution, 100% of the people that signed the Declaration of Independence, 100% of the people who died at Gettysburg and Vicksburg, probably close to 100% of the people who died at Normandy. This has been a country built basically by white folks, who were 90% of the nation in 1960 when I was growing up and the other 10% were African-Americans who had been discriminated against. That's why."
___________

...deeply held belief about the..." Pleaaaase.

Posted by: broadwayjoe | August 6, 2009 8:15 PM | Report abuse

There is always the Independent Party of American citizens, please with the USA Constitution, to turn to.

Posted by: dottydo | August 6, 2009 8:11 PM | Report abuse

Thanks for the info, broadway joe. I'll contact Beck's sponsors too. Great idea. He's an unhinged, racist nut case.

Posted by: drindl | August 6, 2009 8:10 PM | Report abuse

broadwayjoe:

How do we turn your observations into a strong Hispanic turnout in the Texas Valley come 2010? Being p.o. needs to be turned into electoral empowerment, especially if we are to ever turn out the right wing loonies running my beloved state government(into the ground). We need help here in Texas before Perry or KBH has Texas secede which for some might actually bring joy to those outside my home state. Remember we are also the state that produced Ann Richards and Molly Ivens.

Posted by: leichtman | August 6, 2009 8:06 PM | Report abuse

BTW, the grass roots effort to have people contact Glenn Beck's sponsors to protest his racist slam of BHO worked. Sponsors have left him in droves, according to HuffPo today. Thanks to the patriots who called, wrote, and emailed Beck's sponsors. People power works.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/07/28/fox-host-glenn-beck-obama_n_246310.html

Posted by: broadwayjoe | August 6, 2009 8:02 PM | Report abuse

The republicans eager to please the bigots who dominate their base, just lost the growing Latino vote for the next 40-50 years. Nice going.

Posted by: artbee2000 | August 6, 2009 7:56 PM | Report abuse

Well, she was confirmed and I didn't think she would be or deserved to be. What makes this even harder for me to bear is, now, I have to contribute to (I think it was...) DDAWD's favorite charity that doesn't involve gun control. Was it you DDAWD or was it someone else here? Do I send the receipt (proof) to Chris C? Come on, rub it in just a little.

Posted by: mibrooks27 | August 6, 2009 7:54 PM | Report abuse

alysheba_3:

There's no Constitutional requirement that a Supreme Court Justice be a natural-born citizen (or, even a lawyer, for that matter) -- so, it would be irrelevant to ask for her birth certificate -- nice try though.

Posted by: JakeD | August 6, 2009 7:51 PM | Report abuse

You leftists in the media are a joke. Why did Obama vote against Roberts even while admitting he was superbly qualified? Well, considering the fact that his spiritual adviser for 20 years is a racist to the core, now we understand one reason why. He also had plans to run for the Presidency, meaning he had to make sure he didn't anger the base with a vote for a Bush nominee.

And what about the Democrats that lynched Justice Thomas? Or the Democrats that filibustered Estrada? Racism? Or appeasing the base?

Stop with the hypocrisy Obamabots.

Posted by: conservativemaverick | August 6, 2009 7:50 PM | Report abuse

hopefully Senator KBH will pay a heavy political price for her vote today. I will never stop reminding my fellow Texans of her vote, despite her expected whining and doing the Texas 2 Step of denial, come Nov 2010.

Posted by: leichtman | August 6, 2009 5:28 PM
____________

KBH is every bit as extreme as Palin, Michelle Bachman, and Audra Shay (the 38 year old President of the "Young" Republicans). Wasn't KBH one of the Senators who refused to allow Justice Sonia to even set foot in her office? Que lastima.

What's funny is the MSM is so self-absorbed, they have no clue how badly this Sotomayor bashing played in the Spanish language media, Univision, etc. One politician, it may have been Bob Menendez, said Latinos are not monolithic...EXCEPT when it comes to support for Judge Sonia.

Posted by: broadwayjoe | August 6, 2009 7:47 PM | Report abuse

Sam Alito, distinguished "former" member of Concerned Alumni of Princeton (its mission-allegedly: to keep black and women out of Princeton, Sonia's alma mater) got only 58 votes when confirmed. Think Sam may have some "issues" when Sonia takes her seat?

Posted by: broadwayjoe | August 6, 2009 7:37 PM | Report abuse

"So are right-wing nuts now going to demand to see Justice Sotomayor's birth certificate? Maybe they can tell us about the conspiracy of placing birth announcements in Hawaiian newspapers in 1961, to have Barack Obama elected as POTUS, just to place a Latino on the SCOTUS bench."

Well, the ultimate goal is for Obama to combine his two extreme passions - abortions and hatred of white people. This is basically leading up to forced abortions of white babies.

Posted by: DDAWD | August 6, 2009 7:27 PM | Report abuse

"Why the reluctance on the part of some Republicans to back Sotomayor?"
____________
Hardly a mystery. Come on. This has been written about ad nauseam by political analysts.
Answer: Irrational unhinged racism

One recent poll showed Texas going blue by a few percentage points. Texas! Wait till the innocent kids derided by the bigots as "anchor babies" start voting down the road.

Next subject...

Posted by: broadwayjoe | August 6, 2009 7:25 PM | Report abuse

The poor GOP. They have to pander to the birthers and the yellers. There is no room for moderates or minorities in the GOP.

Posted by: tinyjab40 | August 6, 2009 7:22 PM | Report abuse

"When Bill O'Reilly, who I dislike intensely makes an ignorant comment about blacks the liberal press goes nuts, but when a liberal makes the same mistake - dead silence."

Well, the press response over Obama's "stupidly" comment begs to differ, but he's the President, so maybe that doesn't count. Other examples are Sotomayor's wise Latina comment and Biden's comment on 7-11s. Press made hay about both of those as well.

But got any examples of liberals of O' Reilly's stature making some comment that was largely ignored?

Posted by: DDAWD | August 6, 2009 7:20 PM | Report abuse

Hey Bobby W-C that made no sense whatsoever. I have no idea why you're going off on the homogeneity tangent, that's not connected to a single bloody word I wrote. Were it not for the quotes I would assume you were answering another post.

This is, what, the third time you've wrung that homogeneity handkerchief? If nobody's stereotyping, and nobody is, you're just throwing out tangents, which is to say, trolling.

Posted by: chrisfox8 | August 6, 2009 7:18 PM | Report abuse

Sotomayor is not a U.S. citizen. Its all a big F-ing conspiracy by the Democrats, illegal immigrants, gays, liberals, communists, and single moms.

Posted by: hayden1 | August 6, 2009 6:24 PM
********************************************

So are right-wing nuts now going to demand to see Justice Sotomayor's birth certificate? Maybe they can tell us about the conspiracy of placing birth announcements in Hawaiian newspapers in 1961, to have Barack Obama elected as POTUS, just to place a Latino on the SCOTUS bench.

Posted by: alysheba_3 | August 6, 2009 7:17 PM | Report abuse

Oh yeah, I also correctly predicted all the Final Four teams as well as the subsequent games.

I didn't choose to have this gift. It chose me.

Posted by: DDAWD | August 6, 2009 7:16 PM | Report abuse

"DDAWD:

Well, I did make my prediction based on the individual Senators I thought would vote for Sotomayor, but I was wrong on 4 of them (Grassley, Hatch, KBH, Cornyn vs. Voinovich, Bond, Alexander, Gregg).

If you only missed NE-2, that was one heck of an electoral map prediction."

Thanks. The only ones I was real unsure about were North Carolina and Missouri. Those came down to basically coin flips, I just happened to make the right guess for both. (and both were extremely close in the real election. I don't think Missouri was decided for a couple of weeks.)

Posted by: DDAWD | August 6, 2009 7:12 PM | Report abuse

I'm going to assume Savedgirl and Hayden are both just having a little fun. Whatever, they don't constantly troll the board.

Lamar Alexander, Kit Bond, Susan Collins, Lindsey Graham, Judd Gregg, Richard Lugar, Mel Martinez, Olympia Snowe, George Voinovich.

Those are the guys that crossed over.

Also, Leos and Libras were unanimous in favor. She did worst among Taurses and Virgos (does anyone know why in the world the WaPo website has an option to sort by astrological sign??)

Posted by: DDAWD | August 6, 2009 7:04 PM | Report abuse

For Miss Dotty to read:

By submitting content, you are consenting to these rules:

1. You agree not to submit inappropriate content. Inappropriate content includes any content that:
* infringes upon or violates the copyrights, trademarks or other intellectual property rights of any person
* is libelous or defamatory
* is obscene, pornographic, or sexually explicit
* violates a person's right to privacy
* violates any local, state, national, or international law
* contains or advocates illegal or violent acts
* degrades others on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual preference, disability, or other classification
* is predatory, hateful, or intended to intimidate or harass
* contains advertising or solicitation of any kind
* misrepresents your identity or affiliation
* impersonates others

Posted by: dotto | August 6, 2009 7:01 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: hclark1 "Sonia Sotomayor is a racist"

DC Sage Wrote:
Judge Sonya Sotomayor stood toe to toe with southern bigotry and never blinked. Judge Sotomayor is to be congratulated for passing the test presented by the bigoted white guys in the United States Senate who were never going to vote for someone who was not a white guy anyway.

This is a great achievement for a hard working American. We know who the real racists are and Judge Sotomayor is not one you.

Posted by: DCSage | August 6, 2009 7:01 PM | Report abuse

Wait a minute--Republicans voted against Sotomayor in retaliation for the Miguel Estrada nomination withdrawal in 2003? Aren't Republicans the ones who keep saying the past doesn't matter? Torture doesn't matter because it happened in the past? George Bush's past didn't matter? Nothing Republicans did yesterday matters? Looks to me like the party selectively ignores the past. And they may prove to have no future.

Posted by: Rafaelo | August 6, 2009 7:01 PM | Report abuse

DDAWD:

Well, I did make my prediction based on the individual Senators I thought would vote for Sotomayor, but I was wrong on 4 of them (Grassley, Hatch, KBH, Cornyn vs. Voinovich, Bond, Alexander, Gregg).

If you only missed NE-2, that was one heck of an electoral map prediction.

Posted by: mnteng | August 6, 2009 6:59 PM | Report abuse

In the end I am glad the Court has another woman, and someone with a Latino background. Diversity is what makes the US prosper in ideas. It is a good day for the US, but Chrisfox8 has it wrong and I find these kind of comments disturbing.

"Good luck selling those no votes as principled. Sotomayor is amply qualified and emphatically centrist, she should have gotten a full sweep of yes votes. You can bet that Spanish language news are telling their listeners who voted no.

I hope Texas goes blue."

When Bill O'Reilly, who I dislike intensely makes an ignorant comment about blacks the liberal press goes nuts, but when a liberal makes the same mistake - dead silence.

Texas may go blue for other reasons - but I can tell you with 100% certainty that you threatend the right of Mexican Americans in South Texas with more gun laws, Mexican Americans who have been here since it was Mexico, and they will vote against you.

It is racist to presume any cultural relationship between Mexican Americans and Puerto Ricans. Their foods are not even the same. the speak completely different dialects of Spanish.

It is interesting the Latino Community is to retaliate eventhough no one can define the word Latino.

Mr. Chris, such as snowfalkes we are as diverse a people as the rest of the planet. You insult us when you imply otherwise. We such as Dr. King taught us, want to be judged on the content of our character, adn not on your preconceived notions on what it means to be a Latino.

But in the end, Associate Justice Sotomayor is a good thing for the US. People should see the bigger victory for the US and not something as racists as Latinos should retaliate. She will be no more of a judicial activist policy making god than any of the other 8 -

Bobby Wightman-Cervantes


Posted by: bobbywc | August 6, 2009 6:57 PM | Report abuse

Why would anyone in the TEA PARTY revolt care if you further destroy jobs

==

It's your side that wants to offshore as many jobs as possible

Posted by: chrisfox8 | August 6, 2009 6:57 PM | Report abuse

...There is an excellent chance that she will have opportunities to rule against corporate interests and against religious intolerance.

Are you seeing your lives flash before your eyes?

Good.

Posted by: chrisfox8
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Why would anyone in the TEA PARTY revolt care if you further destroy jobs and your taxbase?

You are already without funds according the the IRS.
Knock yourself out ending the regime unfunded.
Kooks are fun to watch.

Posted by: dottydo | August 6, 2009 6:55 PM | Report abuse

Sonia Sotomayor is a racist

Posted by: hclark1 | August 6, 2009 6:54 PM | Report abuse

The last well known and open racist before Sotomayor, signed into power in the USA was Senator Byrd the head of the KKK, is also a Democrat.

Posted by: dottydo | August 6, 2009 6:51 PM | Report abuse

"

This is unaccepable...we white people WANT OUR COUNTRY BACK!!!!!

Posted by: SavedGirl |"

First learn to spell, honkey! [Three times you got it wrong.]

Posted by: thrh | August 6, 2009 6:51 PM | Report abuse

The last well known and open racist signed into power in the USA was Senator Byrd the head of the KKK, who is also a Democrat.

Posted by: dottydo | August 6, 2009 6:49 PM | Report abuse

Hey, goopers.

A Hispanic woman will be sworn in as the next Supreme Court Justice.

There is an excellent chance that she will have opportunities to rule against corporate interests and against religious intolerance.

Are you seeing your lives flash before your eyes?

Good.

Posted by: chrisfox8 | August 6, 2009 6:39 PM | Report abuse

"Thanks. The vote that I missed was Byrd coming back to work. Who knew he'd do that?"

Did you really have predictions down to a Senator level? If so, that's amazing.

Reminds me of my electoral map predictions. Almost perfect down to the state level. I was off by one when NE-2 went blue.

Posted by: DDAWD | August 6, 2009 6:39 PM | Report abuse

could have added Murkowski in the political lineup. She has to worry about Palin.... darling of the nutter wing. She thought she could be her own woman but she is in the game now and the bigger picture is 3 moves down the line. Plus she recently joined the repug leadership group and... there really was no chance Sotomayer would not be confirmed.

Posted by: angriestdogintheworld | August 6, 2009 6:33 PM | Report abuse

Lets all mob the town hall meetings and demand Obama show his birth certificate and call him a nazi, communist, fascist, racist, naturist, dentist, podiatrist

Posted by: hayden1 | August 6, 2009 6:29 PM | Report abuse

Obama was born in Iceland.

Posted by: hayden1 | August 6, 2009 6:26 PM | Report abuse

It's baffling to watch the Republican party commit suicide by pandering to the right wing. Those zealots do not reflect the values of the majority of americans.

Posted by: Reed1 | August 6, 2009 6:25 PM | Report abuse

Sotomayor is not a U.S. citizen. Its all a big F-ing conspiracy by the Democrats, illegal immigrants, gays, liberals, communists, and single moms.

Posted by: hayden1 | August 6, 2009 6:24 PM | Report abuse

One more time, justdiogo.

Posted by: JakeD | August 6, 2009 6:17 PM | Report abuse

"Nobody is perfect"Remenber the ending of the Film? But considering Sonia Sotomayor background as a whole, she will be the "perfect" Señora for the highest function any person can get in any country.He has LIVING EXPERIENCE, a experience that can´t be taught at any university.(Remember the rustic Sancho Panza administering law in his insula Barataria)
The United States is a country of immigrants and the ruling class must admit, sooner than later, that a "puertorrican" got brains and heart to represent any American in the difficult task of imparting the LAW.Congratulations and good luck on the new job.Mark twenty + Mark Twain

Posted by: justdiogo | August 6, 2009 6:13 PM | Report abuse

Worth posting again:

Colin Laney: "You haven't told me what I'm looking for."

Kathy Torrance: "Anything that might be of interest to Slitscan. Which is to say, anything that might be of interest to Slitscan's audience. Which is best visualized as a vicious, lazy, profoundly ignorant, perpetually hungry organism craving the warm god-flesh of the anointed. Personally I like to imagine something the size of a baby hippo, the color of a week-old boiled potato, that lives by itself, in the dark, in a double-wide on the outskirts of Topeka. It's covered with eyes and it sweats constantly. The sweat runs into those eyes and makes them sting. It has no mouth, Laney, no genitals, and can only express its mute extremes of murderous rage and infantile desire by changing the channels on a universal remote. Or by voting in presidential elections."
-- "Idoru" (William Gibson)

Posted by: chrisfox8 | August 6, 2009 6:12 PM | Report abuse

"Nobody is perfect"Remenber the ending of the Film? But considering Sonia Sotomayor background as a whole, she will be the "perfect" Señora for the highest function any person can get in any country.He has LIVING EXPERIENCE, a experience that can´t be taught at any university.(Remember the rustic Sancho Panza administering law in his insula Barataria)
The United States is a country of immigrants and the ruling class must admit, sooner than letter, that a "puertorrican" got brains and heart to represent any American in the difficult task of imparting the LAW.Congratulations and good luck on the new job.Mark twenty + Mark Twain

Posted by: justdiogo | August 6, 2009 6:09 PM | Report abuse

Wow...the Republicans are worried about upsetting their BASE as it pertains to the Sotomayor vote...all 2,000 of them.

Meanwhile, they 'kiss-off' Latinos in gargantuan numbers.

Posted by: tbenn1021 | August 6, 2009 6:08 PM | Report abuse

I had 67-31 in the pool at work. Byrd messed me up. I thought he and Kennedy would be no-shows.

Congrats to the new Supreme Court Justice. Maybe Roberts will get the oath right this time (on Saturday).

Posted by: chi-town | August 6, 2009 6:07 PM | Report abuse

"Nobody is perfect"Remenber the ending of the Film? But considering Sonia Sotomayor background as a whole, she will be the "perfect" Señora for the highest function any person can get in any country.He has LIVING EXPERIENCE, a experience that can´t be taught at any university.(Remember the rustic Sancho Panza administering law in his insula Barataria)
The United States is a country of immigrants and the ruling class must admit, sooner than letter, that a "puertorrican" got brains and heart to represent any American in the difficult task of imparting the LAW.Congratulations and good luck on the new job.Mark twenty + Mark Twain

Posted by: justdiogo | August 6, 2009 6:07 PM | Report abuse

Yup. Obama opened a manhole, and 31 Republican Senators leapt right down.

Posted by: chrisfox8 | August 6, 2009 6:01 PM | Report abuse

Who cares about the 31 Republicans who did not vote for the "Wise Latina"?
It is beginning to show how irrelevent the Repulicans have become.
The Party of NO the GOP Grand Opposition Party all bark but No Bite. Obama put them in a straight jacket by nominating Judge Sonia. How do you hit a wicked ball?

Posted by: Carprin | August 6, 2009 5:59 PM | Report abuse

"This isn't to say that none of the Republicans who voted against Sonia Sotomayor's confirmation did so for political reasons."

Whoops. That should be "This isn't to say that ALL of the Republicans who voted against Sonia Sotomayor's confirmation..."

Posted by: GJonahJameson | August 6, 2009 5:56 PM | Report abuse

I'm skeptical of the observations of some that so many Republicans' votes were swayed by the desire to get NRA endorsements. No politician who might seek re-election would want to do something to jeopardize those chances, and I'm sure an NRA endorsement generally adds more votes than it takes away, but how much of a difference does it really make? Voters who only pick the candidates the NRA endorses aren't going to vote Democratic very often anyway.

The larger political motivator, I'd say, is the opportunity for them to pad their "Hey, look how many times I voted against something President Obama wanted!" records. If Obama's ambitious agenda turns out badly for him, that's a plus for Republicans' (re-)election chances, and they're well aware of it. Getting those "no" votes in early is key for Republicans who want to offer their party as an alternative come 2010 and 2012. Sure, if the things they vote against don't hurt Obama and the Democrats in the long run, they might end up looking stupid. But then, if the current Obama- and Democrat-driven plans are largely successful, Republicans are going to have a tough time getting (re-)elected no matter how they voted this year.

This isn't to say that none of the Republicans who voted against Sonia Sotomayor's confirmation did so for political reasons. But just as I can't imagine all of them doing it for political reasons, I also can't imagine none of them doing it for political reasons. We are talking about politicians here, after all.

Side note: Anyone who interprets the comments of "SavedGirl" as 100 percent serious and not as a satirical jab at angry conservatives needs to shake out the cobwebs.

Posted by: GJonahJameson | August 6, 2009 5:52 PM | Report abuse

What a catastrophe! Republicans have lost the Puerto Rican bloc vote.

==

And the northeast vote, and the midwest vote, and the urban southern vote, and the college-educated vote, and a majority of the independent vote ....

Posted by: chrisfox8 | August 6, 2009 5:48 PM | Report abuse

The white people in Iceland are nice Socialists; please don't try to inflict members of the Ku Klux Klan on them -- we need them here to remind us of the dangers of inbreeding.

Posted by: matthewjblack | August 6, 2009 5:48 PM | Report abuse

They chucked honor and integrity to avoid crossing the Republican "base"? You mean that loud, ignorant and -- thankfully -- shrinking little band of cranks? Except in the darkest confines of the Deep South, it seems to me a poor trade-off.

Posted by: CopyKinetics | August 6, 2009 5:44 PM | Report abuse

NO, I don't think she's a troll. The name is too real. Nah, I heard a lot of interviews on NPR during the election where people where just this upfront. Southerners, mostly. It just seems to come naturally to them.

Posted by: drindl | August 6, 2009 5:43 PM | Report abuse

theonefisher1, what's truly odd is how many credulous patsies there are who will buy whatever improbable factoids their idols sell them without even a whit of independent reflection or investigation. Someone with a partially functioning intellect might have run into counter-facts like "hey, maybe the person who has vastly far more court experience than any other justice might have gotten overturned more often -- and confirmed more often as well, having had more cases. Hmmm." But maybe you do have such a minimum of intellect and did run into that counter-fact, only to discover that you had insufficient integrity to credit it.

Posted by: nodebris | August 6, 2009 5:42 PM | Report abuse

The peculiar thing about the Republican furor over the wise Latina woman is that she is no liberal; she is a very conservative Catholic woman who will move the center of the Court even more to the right.

We are still waiting for Republicans to offer evidence for of presumed liberal leanings.

Carl Sagan said, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."

At least the alien abductees claim to have been present at their probings and, in that case, at least are witnesses, which makes them marginally more credible than most Republicans.

Posted by: matthewjblack | August 6, 2009 5:41 PM | Report abuse

What a catastrophe! Republicans have lost the Puerto Rican bloc vote. But we'll welcome any individuals of independent mind of whatever race and ethnicity. General Patton said it, "If everyone thinks the same way, someone's not thinking."

Posted by: mhr614 | August 6, 2009 5:41 PM | Report abuse

It's just a real pleasure to see a defeat for the NRA.

God bless the Democrats and may the republicans who voted against her enjoy their time in hell along with their fellow NRA members, with the blood on their hands of thousands upon thousands of innocent citizens.

Posted by: drindl | August 6, 2009 5:41 PM | Report abuse

Oh come on guys "SavedGirl" has to be a troll.

Real goopers know better than to express racism right out loud, that's why they mask it behind dog-whistle about birth certificates and "real Americans"

Posted by: chrisfox8 | August 6, 2009 5:40 PM | Report abuse

Conservatives, if you can call them that, lost a big one today. Yesterday they lost a big one too, when the president they hate only slightly less than Obama got two jailed journalists released from North Korea.

One hopes that since they can't handle not getting their way any better than small children can, some of them will torque themselves into coronaries.

Posted by: chrisfox8 | August 6, 2009 5:38 PM | Report abuse


Sorry, I guess "Whitegirl" was a Freudian slip, because I don't believe she's "saved" either.

Ever notice how Fundamentalist Christians seldom quote from the Gospel, but are more concerned about the Five Books of Moses? (aka the Torah?)

Posted by: mikeinmidland | August 6, 2009 5:38 PM | Report abuse

'Savedgirl' would hve been a really enthusiastic Nazi, as would a number of posters today. Sick fascists.

Posted by: drindl | August 6, 2009 5:36 PM | Report abuse

This is unaccepable...we white people WANT OUR COUNTRY BACK!!!!!

Posted by: SavedGirl | August 6, 2009 5:27 PM | Report abuse


Here you have the creepiness of the Republican Party on full display. The little racist creep obviously considers herself a christian, too.

Sorry, baby, you aren't saved from anything. Jesus hates racists and you are going striaght to hell.

Posted by: drindl | August 6, 2009 5:35 PM | Report abuse

Whitegirl: This country is made up of immigrants from all over the world. Perhaps you'd be more comfortable in Iceland. Or the Third Reich.

Posted by: mikeinmidland | August 6, 2009 5:34 PM | Report abuse

The 31 voted in sympathy for the whacko who exercised his "GUN RIGHTS" up there in that gym.
The guy who exercised his NRA-GIVEN rights and murdered those three women.
The NRA will change when someone walks into a gun show or an NRA convention and opens with both barrels blazing.

Posted by: Tomcat3 | August 6, 2009 5:33 PM | Report abuse

"I find it odd that no one has considered the fact that she had more decisions overturned than any other judge on the Supreme Court."


*LIE*

Posted by: drindl | August 6, 2009 5:32 PM | Report abuse

Good luck selling those no votes as principled. Sotomayor is amply qualified and emphatically centrist, she should have gotten a full sweep of yes votes. You can bet that Spanish language news are telling their listeners who voted no.

I hope Texas goes blue.

Posted by: chrisfox8 | August 6, 2009 5:28 PM | Report abuse

hopefully Senator KBH will pay a heavy political price for her vote today. I will never stop reminding my fellow Texans of her vote, despite her expected whining and doing the Texas 2 Step of denial, come Nov 2010.

Posted by: leichtman | August 6, 2009 5:28 PM | Report abuse

I find it odd that no one has considered the fact that she had more decisions overturned than any other judge on the Supreme Court. I guess conservatives are racist...not her obviously racist comments. This does not even address her comments about her feelings about legislating from the bench. The true partisan players are the democrats...not one had the guts to vote against her. I rest my case!

Posted by: theonefisher1 | August 6, 2009 5:28 PM | Report abuse

This was a gun vote. The NRA owns the Republican party. It told them how to vote.

Posted by: esch | August 6, 2009 5:27 PM | Report abuse

This is unaccepable...we white people WANT OUR COUNTRY BACK!!!!!

Posted by: SavedGirl | August 6, 2009 5:27 PM | Report abuse

This is unaccepable...we white people WANT OUR COUNTRY BACK!!!!!

Posted by: SavedGirl | August 6, 2009 5:27 PM | Report abuse

This is unaccepable...we white people WANT OUR COUNTRY BACK!!!!!

Posted by: SavedGirl | August 6, 2009 5:27 PM | Report abuse

What base? The "tea party", "the birthers" and the "racists". Add also the "Palins", "Bachmanns" and forgive me that nut case in the house.

Posted by: jrubin1 | August 6, 2009 5:27 PM | Report abuse


In defense of CC, "many" doesn't mean "most." 31 Senators voted no. Of those, could 4 or 5 have done it on principle?

Nevermind. I think CC was just being polite.

Posted by: mikeinmidland | August 6, 2009 5:26 PM | Report abuse

So Republicans are not racists but merely gutless. How attractive!

Posted by: rlambert12 | August 6, 2009 5:25 PM | Report abuse

"Undoubtedly, for many of the Senators who decided to oppose her the choice was based on a deeply-held belief about the proper approach for a judge to take to the law when sitting on the highest court in the land."

==

What a boatload of bilgewater.

If they had "deeply held beliefs" they could have expressed them, instead they trotted out a pile of dog-whistle and some shibboleths about "activist judges."

People who have genuine principles don't need to dodge and weave with lies.

Posted by: chrisfox8 | August 6, 2009 5:18 PM | Report abuse

chrisfox8:

I thought that all conservatives were "racist" though. That never changes, right?

Posted by: JakeD | August 6, 2009 5:13 PM | Report abuse

mnteng:

No one could have anticipated terrorists hijacking airplanes and flying them into buildings either ; )

Posted by: JakeD | August 6, 2009 5:12 PM | Report abuse

Conservatives have no "principles"

Whatever they claim to believe changes every time Rush Limbaugh goes on the radio, or the NRA issues a pronouncement.

Conservatives may talk about small government and privacy, then they authorize wars, approve wiretapping, approve totalitarian approaches to justice.

No wonder they keep losing, and will continue to keep losing.

Posted by: chrisfox8 | August 6, 2009 5:10 PM | Report abuse

"deeply-held belief about the proper approach for a judge"

That means deeply-held belief that judges should rule in favor of corporate interests and religious conservatives.

Posted by: mikeinmidland | August 6, 2009 5:10 PM | Report abuse

It's actually quite satisfying watching the repubitards self-immolate in full public view. Can't wait to see the next "NO" vote.

Posted by: swatkins1 | August 6, 2009 5:10 PM | Report abuse


Please Republican senators, continue to vote for whatever your "base" wants.

You will be rewarded!

In the next world--

Posted by: lichtme | August 6, 2009 5:09 PM | Report abuse

"Undoubtedly, for many of the Senators who decided to oppose her the choice was based on a deeply-held belief about the proper approach for a judge to take to the law when sitting on the highest court in the land.

"

righto,, judges should support white males with money

Posted by: newagent99 | August 6, 2009 5:08 PM | Report abuse

can we use cash for clunkers to get rid of these OLDSENATORS?their time has passed,i have no idea why their states still vote them in.

Posted by: donaldtucker | August 6, 2009 5:08 PM | Report abuse

"Undoubtedly, for many of the Senators who decided to oppose her the choice was based on a deeply-held belief about the proper approach for a judge to take to the law when sitting on the highest court in the land."

Oh, undoubtedly.

So, how's the sailing on the Good Ship Lollipop, Chris?

Posted by: nodebris | August 6, 2009 5:06 PM | Report abuse

JakeD:

Thanks. The vote that I missed was Byrd coming back to work. Who knew he'd do that?

Posted by: mnteng | August 6, 2009 5:04 PM | Report abuse

"Undoubtedly, for many of the Senators who decided to oppose her the choice was based on a deeply-held belief about the proper approach for a judge to take to the law when sitting on the highest court in the land."

I hold immense doubt that many of those senators voted 'no' based on any deep held belief other than that they should be reelected & a 'yes' would get in the way of an NRA endorsement. For instance, Senator McCain's vote was surely intended to fend off the 'minuteman' coming at him from the right.

Posted by: bsimon1 | August 6, 2009 5:04 PM | Report abuse

SarahBB:

Which Republicans are you referring to?

Posted by: JakeD | August 6, 2009 5:03 PM | Report abuse

Sometimes, even CONSERVATIVE politicians need to be reminded of their principles -- I'm actually glad my prediction was wrong -- I just thought, with her confirmation being fait accompli, they would give more lip service to Hispanic voters.

Posted by: JakeD | August 6, 2009 5:02 PM | Report abuse

Whatever, she's confirmed. And, how cool was it to see Sen. Al Franken announcing the vote! You Republicans who have stirred up the rabid, hate-filled mob ought to be afraid of the monster you've created.

Posted by: SarahBB | August 6, 2009 5:00 PM | Report abuse

We have, what? Several retiring senators and a couple from Democratic Maine.

So we see that the NRA is stronger than the will of reasonable conservative Senators. Principles, schminciples.

Posted by: mikeinmidland | August 6, 2009 4:58 PM | Report abuse

Congrats to "mnteng" for guessing closest: 67-31. I missed it by 10 GOP votes (I honestly did not anticipate that the NRA would weigh in on this vote so heavy ; )

Posted by: JakeD | August 6, 2009 4:49 PM | Report abuse

The 4 Senators from Arizona and Texas who voted no in effect pointed out by their vote the concept of being Latino is a myth - heck people cannot even define what it means.

The no vote on Sotomayor, a Puerto Rican, means nothing to Mexican Americans. Further these Mexican Americans have a lot more in common with their fellow Texans and Arizonians than with Sotomayor - they like to hunt and they like guns. (Just like the Anglos) They are about issues, not politically motivated mythical labels.

Bobby Wightman-Cervantes

Posted by: bobbywc | August 6, 2009 4:48 PM | Report abuse

So sad that 31 Republican Senators could not find the will to adhere to their "strict constructionist" limited view of the "advise and consent" clause to overcome their rabid fear of the right-wing zealots.

Posted by: mikeinmidland | August 6, 2009 4:46 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company