-
Website
http://sayanythingblog.com/ -
Original page
http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/sonia_sotomayor_will_not_be_the_first_hispanic_on_the_supreme_court -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
You mean ethnic background? I don't think anyone made any mention of skin color, except you Rob.
"The 54-year-old judge, if confirmed, would become the first Hispanic to serve on the high court. She would also be the third female named to the Supreme Court, and the second on the current court."
From MSNBC.com:
"President Barack Obama chose federal appeals judge Sonia Sotomayor as the nation's first Hispanic Supreme Court justice on Tuesday, praising her as "an inspiring woman" with both the intellect and compassion to interpret the Constitution wisely."
From FOX News.com:
"Sotomayor, 54, would be the first Hispanic on the high court if confirmed. She would succeed Justice David Souter, who is retiring."
[quote][url=http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/05/26/sotomayor-confirmation-likely-assured/]Ultimately, it could be politically difficult for many Republicans, particularly those in Southwestern states, to lead a hard charge against a nominee who would become the first Hispanic Supreme Court justice.[/url][/quote]
But her confirmation is not assured. Democrats have 59 votes in the Senate, one short of the 60 needed to overcome a filibuster.
This gives Republicans just enough room to put up a fight against the nominee, should they choose to.
The outcome of the still-undecided Minnesota Senate race could give the Democrats a filibuster-proof 60 votes by the time the Senate moves to a final vote on Sotomayor, if Al Franken, who is leading in the contested election, is ruled the winner.
But Republican Norm Coleman would have the option to appeal a Franken victory, and Republicans have been pushing him to leave the option open. If Sotomayor's nomination fight intensifies, Coleman could be encouraged further to seek an appeal.
On top of that, Democratic Sens. Edward Kennedy and Robert Byrd are both ill and often are out of Washington. Their absences have been noted already on other votes.
Though Republicans reacted cautiously to Tuesday's announcement, 11 current Republican senators voted against Sotomayor when she was nominated to the appeals court by President Clinton in 1998. They included Kentucky Sen. Mitch McConnell, now the Senate Republican leader, and three senators on the current Judiciary Committee.
It's unclear how much resistance those Republicans will put up this time around. Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, who voted against Sotomayor in 1998 and now sits on the Judiciary Committee, said in a statement that her appointment requires a "thorough vetting."
"We need to ask tough questions to learn how this individual views the role of a Supreme Court justice," Grassley said.
McConnell offered a similar outlook. Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., though, said some of Sotomayor's "writings seem to raise serious questions about her approach to the Constitution and the role of the federal judiciary."
He added, "But I will withhold judgment."
...[/quote]
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/05/26/soto...
Boobalah
I think the 60 votes is just a filibuster-proof nomination. Anything less, then it is open for filibustering.
You lose them when you pander to the illegals ask any American of Hispanic descent that. The American Hispanics HATE illegals.
[quote]Ever heard of Seperate but Equal?[/quote]
Ever heard that was part of the Dixiecrat platform?
Rushbo almost got it right, He predicted a liberal, female, hispanic. How Liberal would be the major question.
Those who gave up their racist ways became Republicans, the Party of abolition of slavery; the rest, like Al Gore, Sr and Robert KKK Byrd, stayed in the Dem Party.
Not that I am complaining.
It might just be a perfect fit for your limited understanding of actual facts.
One day?
Two days?
Except for one guy they all folded right back into the Democrat party. What IIIIS your point Bob?
About the same amount of time it will take the Dems to say she is the most experienced judge evah! I bet they will say that the Republicans will be unable to fight her because they will lose Hispanic votes forever! You tell me Bob, would a conservative talk about the courts making policy?
[/quote]
???
[quote]Gore was one of only three Democratic senators from the eleven former Confederate states who did not sign the 1956 Southern Manifesto opposing integration,
South Carolina Senator J. Strom Thurmond tried to get Gore to sign the Southern Manifesto, but was told "Hell no" by Gore.
(Gore later claimed that the 1964 vote against civil rights was his biggest mistake.) He did support the Voting Rights Act of 1965.[/quote]
So what you are saying is that Hispanics are so racist that will throw away their conservative principles to rally behind a liberal, activist judge just because she is Hispanic?
[quote]Still, says Ken Hechler, 90, a liberal Democratic former U.S. House member from West Virginia who served with Byrd in Congress, "It's impossible for anyone to try to whitewash the KKK and its overall symbolism."
"But at the same time," he added, "we honor those people who publicly admit the error of their ways."
[b]Last week, Byrd said: "I know now I was wrong. Intolerance had no place in America. I apologized a thousand times . . . and I don't mind apologizing over and over again. I can't erase what happened."[/b][/quote]
Unless they're Republican or conservative; then you crucify them.
What does this have to do with Sotomayor not being the first Hispanic Justice, little parrot?
What does this have to do with you being andro's sock puppet?
[quote]Andro, ever hear about where the dixiecrats matriculated to?[/quote]
The ones that recanted their racist ways became Republicans. The rest stayed in the Democrat party.
Do you ever read history and understand it or just copy and paste incompetently?
Of course, I'm not anybody's sockpuppet.
[quote]Strom...Strom...say isn't that the avowed dem turned dixiecrat turned gop racist who raped and fathered a child with his 16 year old maid?[/quote]
Actually, this is what happened:
[quote]Daughter
Shortly after Thurmond's death on June 26, 2003, Essie Mae Washington-Williams publicly revealed that she was Strom Thurmond's daughter. She was born to a black maid, Carrie "Tunch" Butler (1909--1948), on October 12, 1925, when Butler was 16 and Thurmond was 22. At the time of Washington-Williams's conception, Carrie was only 15 years old, leading many to believe that she was a victim of statutory rape by Thurmond in the least; [b]however, this could not be true as the South Carolina State Constitution clearly stated that the legal age of Sexual Consent for an unmarried woman was 14 years of age. [/b]Thurmond only agreed to meet Washington-Williams when she was 16[citation needed]. He helped pay her way through college and later paid her sums of money in cash or, through a nephew, checks. Though Thurmond never publicly acknowledged Washington-Williams when he was alive, he continued to support her financially. These payments extended well into her adult life.[11] Washington-Williams has stated that she did not reveal she was Thurmond's daughter during his lifetime because it "wasn't to the advantage of either one of us"[11] and that she kept silent out of love and respect for her father.[12] She denies that there was an agreement between the two to keep her connection to Thurmond silent.[11]
[b]
After Washington-Williams came forward, the Thurmond family publicly acknowledged her parentage. Many close friends and staff members had long suspected this to have been the case, stating that Thurmond had always taken a great amount of interest in Washington-Williams and that she was granted a degree of access to the Senator more appropriate to a family member than to a member of the public.[/b][/quote]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strom_Thurmond
Wow, guess blew THAT one out of the water.
[quote]she is Puerto Rican and from NY...so that means all Mexican-Americans automatically vote for Obama because of this pick?[/quote]
Basically, these idiots think that all Hispanics are the same, thereby they should go all collude behind her. Typical racist thinking - kind of like how all Asians are the same. The problem is in their stupid group separations and warfare, you cannot have a house divided.
Look at the illegals, a lot of them are the same ethnicity as a lot of the Hispanics here. However, it is the resentment that the naturalized and natural born Americans because these people are parasites and sully their name.
[url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EgH7WgtIU2k]Strom talkin bout swimmin pools and such[/url]
The gop must be so proud to have had him around for so long.
robert108 on December 14, 2008 at 12:48 pm[/quote]
r180:
[quote]Still nothing on topic, little parrot...[/quote]
[quote]Apparently she will not be the first...
realitybasedbob on May 26, 2009 at 01:07 pm [/quote]
By your own definition r180, you are a liar.
On topic, Cordoza was pretty impressive.
[quote]Early years
Rebecca Cardozo died in 1879 when Benjamin was quite young. He was raised during much of his childhood by his sister Nell, who was 11 years older. One of his tutors was Horatio Alger.[2] At age 15, Cardozo entered Columbia University[2] and then went on to Columbia Law School in 1889. [b]Cardozo wanted to enter a profession that could materially aid himself and his siblings, but he also hoped to restore the family name, sullied by his father's actions as a judge.[/b] When Cardozo entered Columbia Law School, the program was only two years long; in the midst of his studies, however, the faculty voted to extend the program to three years. Cardozo declined to stay for an extra year, and thus left law school without a law degree.[3] He passed the bar in 1891 and began practicing appellate law alongside his older brother.[2] Benjamin Cardozo practiced law in New York City until 1914.[2] In November 1913, Cardozo was narrowly elected to a 14-year term on the New York Supreme Court (which is actually a network of trial courts, not the state's highest appeals court), beginning on January 1, 1914.[/quote]
I guess he wanted to be better and drag his family out of crap of which I can laud him for.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Cardozo#E...
He was pretty humble too:
[quote]In truth, I am nothing but a plodding mediocrity--please observe, a plodding mediocrity--for a mere mediocrity does not go very far, but a plodding one gets quite a distance. There is joy in that success, and a distinction can come from courage, fidelity and industry.[/quote]
Stupid Nordok.
Just about as proud as you Dems are of Byrd. We all have our albatross to bear Bob.
Why not write to him and ask for a personal apology.
Couldja just link me to somewhere Good Ole Boy Strom apologized, couldja?
Yet he still calls people white niggers on TV decades after, and long after "dropping his membership", he wrote to the Klan, affirming their necessity.
Even by his admission he was a racist to the mid 80s when he son died, and he miraculously realized that black people loved their children too. Even that explaination, as stupid as it sounds, reeks of racism.
[quote]Couldja just link me to somewhere Good Ole Boy Strom apologized, couldja?[/quote]
Moving the goalposts. First it was that all of the Dixiecrats became Republicans. And now that it's clear that only one did...now we have to apologize for his past views? Pass.
robert108 on May 26, 2009 at 02:54 pm [/quote]
Well Mr Big Parrot, judge Benjamin Nathan Cardozo was [b]not Hispanic[/b].
He was of Portuguese extraction.[b] Portuguese [/b][u]are not [/u][b]Hispanics[/b].
Clearly the title of the post is either misleading and/or erroneous.
Nationalities are not ethnicities, most of the time.
Who ever claims they are Australian if they were born in the USA, and their parents are from Australia?
Hispanic (Spanish: hispano, hispánico) is a term that historically denoted a relationship to the ancient Hispania (geographically coinciding with the Iberian Peninsula). During the modern era, it took on a more limited meaning, relating to the contemporary nation of Spain.
Still more recently, the term is used to describe the culture and people of countries formerly ruled by Spain, usually with a majority of the population having Spanish ancestry and speaking the Spanish language. These include Mexico, the majority of the Central and South American countries, and most of the Greater Antilles. There are also Spanish influences in the African nation of Equatorial Guinea,[1] and the cultures of the Spanish East Indies' nations and territories, the Philippines, Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands.[2]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hispanic
Note: The Greater Antilles includes Puerto Rico.
Do you throw out uninformed stuff just to get people fired up, or are you really that ignorant?
Hank Reardon,
This does not need to be an "either-or" question!
Sotomayor would NOT be the first hispanic Supreme Court Justice. Justice Benjamin Cardozo was, in fact, of Portuguese descent, making him the first Hispanic Supreme Court Justice. He served 70 years ago and was nominated for that position by a Republican President, Herbert Hoover.
Thus, this is NOT another fake 'historic first' by PresBO. In fact, there is nothing historic about this nomination. It is nothing more than a semi-liberal judge being nominated by a heavily liberal President to replace another semi-liberal judge. Big. Deal.
Is she an activist? No more than Souter. Will the Republican's fight the nomination? Probably not. They should, however, question her just as rigorously as the Democrats questioned Chief Justice Roberts. If they are smart, they will get her to expose herself in a less than positive light. If they can't do that, she'll be a justice.
She isn't that controversial and as a conservative, I don't really see any major danger in her becoming a justice.
This won't be a huge battle.
What IS upsetting is that the Democrats put up and ENORMOUS fight over a truly historic nomination - that of Justice Clarence Thomas, the first black justice on the court. They vehemently opposed his nomination and suffered little consequence - black voters quickly forgot that Thomas was dragged through the mud and continued to vote primarily Democratic.
The fact that so many liberals seek to ignore Cardozo's accomplishment is either evidence of brainless Obama worship or a complete lack of respect for the accomplishments of Hispanics. Ignoring Cardozo's Hispanic roots so you can pretend Obama is making history is disrespectful to every Hispanic.
From merriam-webster online:
Hispanic:
1)of or relating to the people, speech or culture of Spain or of Spain and [b]Portugal/b]
From Wiki (regarding Cardozo, the first Hispanic Supreme Court Justice):
"Cardozo was the [b]first Hispanic[/b] (Latino, Ibero-American)and second person of Jewish descent, after Louis Brandeis, to be appointed to the Supreme Court."
Face it, this is another example of the Obama administration trying to pull a fast one. Claiming Sotomayor is the first hispanic nominee SOUNDS like a big deal. Remove the lie that she would be the first, and it becomes just another nomination.
My question is: Did she fail to pay her taxes? Seems to be a requirement in the Obama administration.
Maybe this will fix the bold crisis.
The closes you could say is that Sotomayor is the first Latino Christian. She's NOT the first Latino period. That honor went to a Jew thanks to a Republican.
Eat it libtards.
[b]Eat it libtards.[/b][/quote]
Gawd what a troll.
Label "hispanic"
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily...
[quote]The Census Bureau added the "Hispanic" query at the last minute at the insistence of President Nixon, who astutely saw the large number of Mexican-Americans in his native California as an indicator that Hispanics were becoming an important voting bloc.[/quote]
[quote]Today, except at the Library of Congress and the Small Business Administration, the consensus tends to be that Portuguese-Americans are not Hispanic. "I personally do not classify Portuguese under the `Hispanic' or `Latino' label, and I would say the majority [of Portuguese-Americans] do not as well," says Jason Moreira, executive assistant of the Portuguese American Leadership Council of the United States.[/quote]
Stop with the label nonesense and get back to the issues.All supreme court judges should be voted in by the people!!
Sonia Sotomayor
2001 lecture at the University of California-Berkeley. Referring to former Justice Sandra Day O'Connor's saying that "a wise old man and wise old woman will reach the same conclusion in deciding cases," Sotomayor said[b],[quote] "I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life."[/quote][/b]
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/SCOTUS/story?id=...
Do you not see that quote by her is the real problem?and blog worthy than her being "first hispanic"
And because of this my feeling is Republicans and Democrats have failed this country!instead of talking about real issues that effect all LEGAL americans the rats scramble for nonsense topics.
www.ronpaul.com (one of the last real Americans )limited constitutional government, low taxes, free markets, and a return to sound monetary policies!!!!!
Try again.
The word Hispanic is a political contrivance created in the United States. That word only exists here. Latin Americans and Spaniards don't use the word in their native countries.
So, Sotomayor would technically be the first Hispanic. You are wrong! I know this 'cause I'm bangin' a hot little Latina right now. Smoking hot and very sexy!
So if you are white, you are racist. If you are black, you are an Uncle Tom.
I guess if you are Hispanic and Republican you are invisible.
-- and don't even get them going with Jewish Republicans!
Jews are not Hispanic? Really? Someone send Rob a memo.
arguing about whether or not something is the first is...
f**king lame, IMHO.
Rob
Tell me -- if she isn't the first... then what? Who gives a shit? Are you bent because the recent 'firsts' your party has achieved are all massive fuckups?
Obama has a better record than Bush when it comes to having massive-scale terrorist attacks occur in US cities. That's a big improvement you have neglected, given your preoccupation with all things security- and terrorist-related.