Prediction: TOP TEN REASONS Sotomayor won't be confirmed (& how to stop her) --- UPDATED - **** RED ALERT ****
Submitted by nmlifestyles on Thu, 05/28/2009 - 19:00
TOP TEN REASONS SOTOMAYOR WON'T BE CONFIRMED (& how to stop her)
I generally support the idea of nominating a woman or a Hispanic to the U.S. Supreme Court, but not this one, not Judge Sonia Sotomayor. And she's so biased, that I'll go out on a limb to predict she won't be confirmed, for ten reasons:
10) SOTOMAYOR: ADMITS MAKING ACTIVIST POLICY FROM THE BENCH
In a 2005 panel discussion at Duke University, Sotomayor told students that the federal Court of Appeals is where "policy is made." She said the "Court of Appeals is where policy is made. And I know, and I know, that this is on tape, and I should never say that. Because we don't 'make law,' I know. [audience laughter] Okay, I know. I know. I'm not promoting it, and I'm not advocating it. I'm, you know. [audience laughter] Having said that, the Court of Appeals is where, before the Supreme Court makes the final decision, the law is percolating. Its interpretation, its application." As a judicial activist, she jokingly admits "making policy" from the bench, based on feelings or empathy or judicial precedent, not laws passed by Congress, and so she assumes the power of legislature, to make policy, legislating from the bench.
9) SOTOMAYOR: PRO-ABORTION-SUPPORTS ROE V. WADE
Although she ruled to uphold the longstanding "Mexico City Policy" which had limited funds for abortions performed overseas (until President Obama struck down that policy, now fully funding abortions overseas with our taxes), Sotomayor stands squarely in the camp of supporting and upholding the Roe v. Wade decision that legalized child killing across America and cost 50,000,000 children their lives.
Furthermore, Rev. Rob Schenck of The National Clergy Council now reports that Sotomayor was or is an active board member of a group called the "Childbirth Connection" that advocates for "reproductive rights of women," which is generally a code word for abortion on demand, including partial birth abortion, which Sotomayor has never publicly opposed. Since I was born to a single mom who courageously gave me up for adoption, and I was adopted at age three by a Christian family, I'm passionately pro-life.
8) SOTOMAYOR: ANTI-GUN, ANTI-WEAPON, ANTI- 2nd AMENDMENT
In her ruling to allow government to ban privately owned weapons belonging to New York citizens, Sonia Sotomayor wrote in Maloney v. Cuomo: "The Second Amendment applies only to limitations the federal government seeks to impose on this right . . . not upon that of the state." Since her crazy reading of the 2nd Amendment only forbids Congress from seizing your guns, the New York State Assembly was fully authorized to ban nunchuks, or seize ANY AND ALL of your weapons, according to Sotomayor's anti-liberty reasoning. But as a former military distinguished marksman and former captain of my rifle team at a New York State high school, I care about protecting our right to bear arms.
7) SOTOMAYOR: ANTI-TEN COMMANDMENTS, BUT PRO-MUSLIM?
ACLJ Attorney Jay Sekulow said of Sotomayor: "She is left in judicial philosophy, ranges much further left than Justice Ginsburg or Justice Souter . . . I just had a case where the Court was unanimous, it was involving the 10 commandments issue, and the court was unanimous 9 to 0, but I would not expect that if Judge Sotomayor was confirmed, that it would probably have been 8 to 1. She has a very, very strict view of church-state separation, and she was aggressive on this idea of a 'living constitution.'" Meanwhile she ruled one Muslim prisoner had a right to receive the Eid ul Fitr feast (a Muslim holiday meal) in his prison cell, and another Muslim prisoner had a right to access a Muslim chaplain, which is fine if she treats other faiths equally. But I personally suspect Sotomayor would rule to disallow public prayers offered "in Jesus name" but allow prayers to Allah, just like Obama's other judicial nominee David Hamilton.
PLEASE SELECT HERE TO SIGN, AND WE'LL AUTOMATICALLY FAX YOUR PERSONALIZED PETITION TO ALL 99 SENATORS, TO OPPOSE AND FILIBUSTER JUDGE SONIA SOTOMAYOR. (SAVING YOU HOURS OF LABOR!)
6) SOTOMAYOR: SAVIOR OF THE NATIONAL ORGANIZATION OF WOMEN
NOW President Kim Gandy quickly endorsed Sotomayor, saying: "This morning we will celebrate, and this afternoon NOW will launch our 'Confirm Her' campaign to ensure the swift confirmation of the next Supreme Court Justice." There's no way this liberal group would endorse Sotomayor unless she were pro-lesbian and pro-abortion, as Gandy openly advocates on the NOW web-site.
5) SOTOMAYOR: OVERRULED 33 OF 44 VOTES BY SUPREME COURT
Sotomayor has had 5 decisions reviewed by the U.S. Supreme Court, 3 of which have been reversed. One of these was her aggressive pro-environmental anti-energy decision, another was her aggressive pro-litigation anti-business decision, which was overturned unanimously. She has carried only 11 of 44 possible votes during those cases. Chief Justice Roberts once stated that her method of reading the statute in question "flies in the face of the statutory language." Dean Mat Staver of Liberty Law School cites these reasons to oppose Sotomayor, saying, "No one ever expected President Barack Obama to nominate someone who respects the original intent of the Constitution."
read the rest here >>>
http://ronpaul.meetup.com/281/messages/boards/thread/6978731
No comment yes ???
No comment
yes ???
see to your liberty
She is Ruth Bader Ginsburg on steroids.
There would be no credibility left on the SCOTUS.
Al Franken would probably be the next nominee!
10 questions for Sotomayor that probably won't be asked ... WHY
10 questions for Sotomayor that probably won't be asked ... WHY NOT?
Today marks the beginning of confirmation hearings in the U.S. Senate for Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor.
Most Senate observers say that Sotomayor will have fairly smooth sailing to confirmation and that she may pick up as many as TEN (10) Republican votes in her favor, Remember that, and keep note of their names.
Perhaps never before in the history of U.S. Supreme Court nominations has a nominee been so thoroughly vetted, so thoroughly discredited, and yet so thoroughly hailed as 'the most qualified judge in the nation for the job.'
Obviously these are the same people who would claim that Joe Biden never puts his foot in his mouth.
The following 10 questions will never be asked of Judge Sotomayor. As with everything else Obama has done, the Democrat-controlled Congress heaps lavish praise on the Obama choice, deftly covering up the glaring problems associated with the nominee, merrily prancing along the way, happy to do the Great One's bidding.
However, these questions need to be considered whether the Senate asks them or not.
1. At Yale Law School you adhered to a common school of thought among Yale professors and graduates that maintains that the ultimate factor that influences judicial decisions is the individual Judge--their heritage, background, unique outlook, and the ultimate power that rests solely with their rulings. How does this point of view square with the view of the Founders who believed that an objective consideration of original intent is the single most important criterion?
2. Another common school of thought among law schools and Constitutional scholars is the notion that the Judge's chief responsibility in deciding a case is to adhere to court precedent. In your ruling effecting the white firefighters in New Haven, you claimed that you were 'only following court precedent.' But what about those instances where court precedent clearly flies in the face of clear original intent with regard to the Constitution? The fact that SCOTUS has overturned your rulings more often than any other federal judge speaks volumes.
3. Do you believe that the U.S. Constitution is the ultimate and final rule of law in the United States?
4. What is your view on the authority, if any, of international courts, or 'international law,' when those laws contradict the principles of the U.S. Constitution? And what about international treaties signed by Presidents that violate Constitutional principles? How can these laws and treaties be considered 'legal' in this country?
5. Do you believe that it is possible for a Supreme Court Judge to act in a manner that is above the law, outside the bounds of our commonly-accepted rule of law? And what is the remedy for such an act, if indeed you believe it is possible?
6. And what, in your opinion, is the remedy for acts that are above the law by the Executive Branch, including programs, policies, and personnel (such as 'Czars')? And please describe how this can be remedied if the other 2 branches of government fail to do their Constitutional duty in providing appropriate oversight and, ultimately, investigation and prosecution?
7. What was the context of your statement when you declared that white men should be castrated? That statement, along with your assertion that a 'Latina woman' would arrive at a wiser decision than a white man appear to be blatantly racist. Do you see how the casual observer could come to that conclusion? And explain exactly how those statements are not racist in nature.
8. You have stated that you are a 'child of affirmative action' due to the fact that you got into Yale although you lacked the scores to do so. In the years since, affirmative action has been largely discredited as an effective means of addressing past discrimination. How can you condemn discrimination based upon race when you admit that you are a beneficiary of such discrimination and indeed support such discrimination through affirmative action?
9. Do you believe that the Second Amendment in the Bill of Rights to the U.S. Constitution affirms the individual citizen's right to own and keep firearms? Do local laws that hamper the ability of citizens to utilize all the tools of effective self-defense violate the concept delineated in the Second Amendment?
10. Do you think that Roe v. Wade is a good decision and that the consequences of this ruling by the Supreme Court have been good for the country?
Perhaps one or two brave Senators may dare ask a couple of these questions, but I doubt the others will ever see the light of day in the Sotomayor hearings. Our nation is much the poorer for it.
http://www.examiner.com/x-3704-Columbia-Conservative-Examine...
Very
Very Important...!!!!!
Please take Action
On intrade.com, she is
On intrade.com, she is currently odds-on to get 75 or more votes in the Senate.
Action Needed@ Sotomayor
Action Needed@
Sotomayor nomination — her confirmation hearing begins Monday. Senators will be voting soon?. So if you want them to vote no than tell them A.S.A.P.
* Update*
Senate Judiciary Committee will be the ones voting [call-email-fax]
I heard it will require at least one republican vote
Here is a list of them all:
[call-email-fax]
Patrick J. Leahy
Chairman, D-Vermont
Herb Kohl
D-Wisconsin
Jeff Sessions
Ranking Member, R-Alabama
Dianne Feinstein
D-California
Orrin G. Hatch
R-Utah
Russell D. Feingold
D-Wisconsin
Charles E. Grassley
R-Iowa
Charles E. Schumer
D-New York
Jon Kyl
R-Arizona
Richard J. Durbin
D-Illinois
Lindsey Graham
R-South Carolina
Benjamin L. Cardin
D-Maryland
John Cornyn
R-Texas
Sheldon Whitehouse
D-Rhode Island
Tom Coburn
R-Oklahoma
Amy Klobuchar
D-Minnesota
Edward E. Kaufman
D-Delaware
Arlen Specter
D-Pennsylvania
Al Franken
D-Minnesota
~ what I see is a glorious future. I've said to people for years that America is at the dawn of its Republic now, because we never had a Republic. We've been under control of the bankers the whole time. We'll get our own government and America will begin
Excellent!
anyone have all these emails together in a quick easy copy & paste?
with a little tweeking she
with a little tweeking she will be confirmed
La Raza?
Why would you support nominating a woman or a hispanic to the court? Shouldn't the criteria include a familiarity and loyalty to the Constitution? When we start thinking like those who are working to destroy our freedom, we just make their job easier.
Sotomayor's affiliation with La Raza, (the Race) should be sufficient to disqualify her. No one who identifies with a particular group is likely to adjudicate fairly when the case involves people of her affiliation and the Great Unwashed. I would think that anyone associated with a group who's name means "The Race" could fairly be identified as a racist.
Clearly this woman is NOT qualified to be a Supreme Court Justice.
She'll be confirmed and it
She'll be confirmed and it won't be close. As usual when I make a prediction I'm willing to back it up with a wager. Any takers?
I will be likely to call,
can't afford to fax right now ; (
------
Libera me, let the truth break, what my fears make..
Libera me......from this dark dream, to the life-stream! --Leslie Phillips
What's next after End the Fed? Repeal the XVI and XVII Amendments!
We do not need to get good laws to restrain bad people,
we need to get good people to restrain bad laws. --
--G.K. Chesterton
Tell your Senators now! if you care.
~ what I see is a glorious future. I've said to people for years that America is at the dawn of its Republic now, because we never had a Republic. We've been under control of the bankers the whole time. We'll get our own government and America will begin to have a history. ~ Eustace Mullin~
They'll put her in
She's another clown puppet from the Princeton Toybox.
The rich are rolling the ball while most of you are spinning your wheels or preparing for a doomsday scenario.
============================
Glen Beck -- An Exposed Enemy:
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/90198
Glenn Beck Supports NAFTA and taking your job:
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/86643
============================
Glen Beck -- An Exposed Enemy:
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/90198
Glenn Beck Supports NAFTA and taking your job:
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/86643
I think you're wrong
I think she will be confirmed, and I think your reasons she won't support my prediction.
I think they'll let her be a firestorm for a little while, then
she'll "back-out" at the last minute and a complete psycho no-name will emerge and get confirmed easy because everyone's tired of fighting. The gesture has been made.
She's
exactly the kind of justice the people who run this country want because she's made it clear she's willing to shred the constitution. Why would they prefer a psycho no-name?
I'm only building this notion on knowing how they like to play
She's bad no doubt, but there's plenty of bad ones. Why announce a pick in May that won't be questioned until September? They know what they're doing. If I'm wrong, I'll bump this thread. If I'm right, you bump it. ;)
At this point, it's all just a game anyway.
You're right
in that they know what they're doing and it's all just a game anyway. My angle is Obama would prefer not to be compared to Bush by pulling another Harriet Miers, but only time will tell...
CNN asks for comment from: LIBERTARIAN Cato Institute!
Commentary: Sotomayor pick not based on merit
* Story Highlights
* Ilya Shapiro: Choice of Sotomayor is based on identity politics, not merit
* He says her life story is compelling but she should be thoroughly vetted
* Shapiro: Sotomayor may suffer from failure to deal with issues in New Haven case
* He says Republicans should educate public about differences over the law
updated 9:18 a.m. EDT, Wed May 27, 2009
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/05/27/shapiro.scotus.identi...
NoSo..:Supreme Court Action Center
TAKE ACTION!
Use the information on this page to help get the word out about Obama's liberal activist nominee to the Supreme Court, Sonia Sotomayor.
Pass it on to your friends. Use it as you communicate with your Senators!
Click here to sign the "No Liberal Judges" petition... Click here to send a personalized fax message to your Senators!
Supreme Court Action Center
Posted by : Drew McKissick May 26, 2009 - 3:38pm
Since there will be a lot of information coming out on Sotomayor, I thought it made sense to create a handy-dandy place to park copies and links on as much information as possible.
Feel free to use as you communicate with your members of the Senate!
Just the facts...
http://www.conservativeoutpost.com/supreme_court_action_center
Wash. Times: "Sotomayor would let prisoners vote"!
EDITORIAL: The franchise for felons
Sotomayor would let prisoners vote
By | Friday, May 29, 2009
Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor wants to give jailbirds the right to vote. It's her opinion that the federal Voting Rights Act can be used to force states to allow voting by currently imprisoned felons. Ms. Sotomayor's dissenting opinion in a 2006 felon-voting case should make senators extremely wary of confirming her for the high court.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/may/29/the-franchis...
She is a member of La Raza.
Supreme Court Nominee Sotomayor Belongs To A Subversive Group And Should Be Rejectedl
May 28, 2009
By Vincent Gioia
With the disclosure that Obama's U.S. Supreme Court nominee, Sonia Sotomayor, is a member of La Raza, it's appropriate to look at what La Raza stands for to understand Sotomayor's mindset as she decides critical cases on the court.
According to the American Bar Association, Sotomayor is a member of the NCLR (National Council of La Raza), which bills itself as the largest national Hispanic civil rights and advocacy organization in the United States but take a look at what the organization really advocates.
To reinforce the importance of this association note that Sotomayor has said "I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experience would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life." The remark was made in a 2001 speech at the University of California's Berkeley School of Law. The lecture was published the following year in the Berkeley La Raza Law Journal.
It is not an overstatement to say Sotomayor's approach to decisions of the Court would be influenced significantly by her roots which is not the asset Obama would like us to believe.
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich wrote: "Imagine a judicial nominee said 'my experience as a white man makes me better than a Latina woman.
http://www.rightsidenews....
Judge SoSo...
...would be the most racist Justice since John Taney.
Sic Semper Tyrannis
Prof: I like your name change.
or how about "NoSo"
Thank you
I don't know about "NoSo". I derived "SoSo" from her name, a' la "J Lo" or "e_go".
Oh, wait! I see what you mean! While "SoSo" was my evaluation of her qualifications, "NoSo" is your wish for her dismissal. Sorry. I can be a little slow sometimes (as many can surely attest!)
Sic Semper Tyrannis
SOTOMAYOR: ANTI-GUN, ANTI-WEAPON, ANTI- 2nd AMENDMENT
This is the only issue likely to stop her...Pelosi and Company secretly fear the power of gun rights groups.
SUPPORT OUR FOUNDERS' AMERICA
Support the Constitution of the United States
SUPPORT OUR FOUNDERS' AMERICA
Support the Constitution of the United States
You don't sound like a RP supporter to me
Actually, there's no way in hell.
it's goin' down
Of course she won't be
Of course she won't be confirmed ...
Here's the communist tactic:
1. First nominee must be a poor choice
2. Make a circus out of the nominee's circumstances
3. When rejected, do it again with a second bad nominee
4. It's the 2nd or 3rd nominee that'll be confirmed once everyone is tired of the circus.
See, Sotomayor (the latina racist) is relatively harmless as she won't be confirmed. Be weary of the 2nd or 3rd nominee. It's the communist way.
---
"Live free or die: Death is not the worst of evils." -- General John Stark.
---
"Live free or die: Death is not the worst of evils." -- General John Stark.
Agreed , that`s the way they work us.
Just a big game---
"You`re the Indians of the 21st Century, and that`s very sad."
Russel Means