Sotomayor "1" GOP "0"

[LurkerNoMore]

She admitted it. So, going by what she said, we all should know.

I'm not putting words in her mouth, I'm just going by what she said.

And?  You placed your opinion in her words there?

What about when she repeatedly denied she would allow her life experience to govern her judicial rulings, saying that "I do believe that judges must apply the law and not make the law,"

You seem to skip that part.  Selective judgement?

[GigantorX]

And?  You placed your opinion in her words there?

What about when she repeatedly denied she would allow her life experience to govern her judicial rulings, saying that "I do believe that judges must apply the law and not make the law,"

You seem to skip that part.  Selective judgement?

I'm not placing anything. She said that her being Latina and her life experiences would guide her her on the bench. Plain and simple.

So she gives a canned answer such as the one you typed, but her own words in an off the cuff engagement tell us that she will use her Latina/background heritage and experiences to guide her on the bench.

So she said her life experience and ethnicity would guide her rulings but then she quickly denies it once it ruffles a lot of feathers.

It seems that you seem to skip the part where she says, clear as day, that she will let her background and ethnicity guide her rulings.

Selective judgement?

[grab an umbrella]

Wasn't there also a video of her floating around where she said she legislates from the bench?

[GigantorX]

Here is an article from the New York Times.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/15/us/15judge.html?_r=1&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1243360988-F4qNaj3TJFXhvjbuifY9gQ

“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,”

"This month, for example, a video surfaced of Judge Sotomayor asserting in 2005 that a “court of appeals is where policy is made.” She then immediately adds: “And I know — I know this is on tape, and I should never say that because we don’t make law. I know. O.K. I know. I’m not promoting it. I’m not advocating it. I’m — you know.”

“Whether born from experience or inherent physiological or cultural differences,” she said, for jurists who are women and nonwhite, “our gender and national origins may and will make a difference in our judging.”

Food for thought.

[Dos Equis]

Wasn't there also a video of her floating around where she said she legislates from the bench?

I think you're referring to her comment that the appellate court is where policy is made.  When asked about that during the hearing she said the full context of her comment was the "policy" reflected in the text of the statute.

[GigantorX]

She is going to legislate from the bench. She seems to be a very poor choice for the Supreme Court, as well.

Her dealings with the firefighters and that whole ordeal links directly back with the quotes from my previous post. She has already shown her colors.

[Dos Equis]

She is going to legislate from the bench. She seems to be a very poor choice for the Supreme Court, as well.

Her dealings with the firefighters and that whole ordeal links directly back with the quotes from my previous post. She has already shown her colors.

I think she's going to be a liberal activist.  But she's replacing a liberal so it's not going to shake anything up.  This is one of the important "election consequences," but there was very little talk about it.  Wasn't discussed much at all during the debates.  Tried to raise the issue on the board several times.  http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=224219.0  Most of them crickets threads.    

But I will say after listening to her that Obama could have done a lot worse. 

[GigantorX]

I think she's going to be a liberal activist.  But she's replacing a liberal so it's not going to shake anything up.  This is one of the important "election consequences," but there was very little talk about it.  Wasn't discussed much at all during the debates.  Tried to raise the issue on the board several times.  http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=224219.0  Most of them crickets threads.    

But I will say after listening to her that Obama could have done a lot worse. 

That's scary to me, but I get your point. And yes, it is one of those "things" that the winner gets to do. 3 yards and a cloud of dust, so to speak.

And I didn't step foot on these boards until 3 months ago so it's not my fault for the tumble weeds.

[JOCKTHEGLIDE]

you guys are ntuz  i think lurkernomore is the only sane one here in representiving our latin, woman, friend here she came from poor,,raised to the top isnt that the american dream and she is living it  its what we all aspire to and she is a good role model with values, laws, education, among other things.

[GigantorX]

you guys are ntuz  i think lurkernomore is the only sane one here in representiving our latin, woman, friend here she came from poor,,raised to the top isnt that the american dream and she is living it  its what we all aspire to and she is a good role model with values, laws, education, among other things.

We are talking about the law and not letting your background, ethnicity and whatnot get in the way of handing down fair judgments.

[JOCKTHEGLIDE]

We are talking about the law and not letting your background, ethnicity and whatnot get in the way of handing down fair judgments.

sure,,but yet look at all the folks on the supereme court,,they all went through hardship in life

[grab an umbrella]

Honestly jock, she admitted she legislates from the bench.  I know a lot of judges do, but do we really need another one?

[JOCKTHEGLIDE]

Honestly jock, she admitted she legislates from the bench.  I know a lot of judges do, but do we really need another one?

what she saids and does are two different things,,,obama who I voted does the same thing yet no one is crying foul,,,

[grab an umbrella]

See jock the difference is when they are in the spotlight they say one thing, but behind closed doors they say another.  I personally trust what they say behind closed doors.

[Soul Crusher]

See jock the difference is when they are in the spotlight they say one thing, but behind closed doors they say another.  I personally trust what they say behind closed doors.

She also said we dont have a right to self defense. 

[LurkerNoMore]

We are talking about the law and not letting your background, ethnicity and whatnot get in the way of handing down fair judgments.

Then 90% of all judges - especially civil court and child court judges - would need to step down.

[Soul Crusher]

Then 90% of all judges - especially civil court and child court judges - would need to step down.

Lurker, do you agree with her that we dont have a right to self defense. 

[LurkerNoMore]

Lurker, do you agree with her that we dont have a right to self defense. 

You have to link me to her exact quote on that and I will judge it then.

[Soul Crusher]

You have to link me to her exact quote on that and I will judge it then.

[shootfighter1]

We need justices that will closely follow the letter of the law and our constitution.  It seems Sotomayor is not that person. Her repeated words in speeches about her race & gender giving her a better perspective is very concerning for a supreme court judge.  I'd like to see far left and far right candidates thrown out, we don't want extremists as supreme court justices. 
I'm not sure how leftist Sotomayor is, but she is in favor of affirmative action and her actions and speeches follow suit. If you look at her history, she has brought issue with Princeton University for not having enough Hispanic teachers.  I do not understand any justice that voted against the firefighters...the tests were verified as fair, those guys should have received the promised promotions from day 1.  Anyone who does not support equal rights & fairness for all can remove themselves from the judicial branch as far as I'm concerned.  We need a movement to end Affirmative action now.

All that said, however, she will be nominated because we have 1 party dominance right now.

[GigantorX]

We need justices that will closely follow the letter of the law and our constitution.  It seems Sotomayor is not that person. Her repeated words in speeches about her race & gender giving her a better perspective is very concerning for a supreme court judge.  I'd like to see far left and far right candidates thrown out, we don't want extremists as supreme court justices. 
I'm not sure how leftist Sotomayor is, but she is in favor of affirmative action and her actions and speeches follow suit. If you look at her history, she has brought issue with Princeton University for not having enough Hispanic teachers.  I do not understand any justice that voted against the firefighters...the tests were verified as fair, those guys should have received the promised promotions from day 1.  Anyone who does not support equal rights & fairness for all can remove themselves from the judicial branch as far as I'm concerned.  We need a movement to end Affirmative action now.

All that said, however, she will be nominated because we have 1 party dominance right now.

He heart is in the right place...........right?

[JOCKTHEGLIDE]

ITS NOT A ONE PARTY DOMINATION  ,,its about what american people want and need right now someone who can provide HOPE to the american people by the american people.  someone who can stand up up in a lonely forest and speak for all among us for the great good sotomayor can do that for the minority and can make history as the first hispanic/latin woman to do it,,  She is a voice of resasoning among a crowd of nothingness,,,

We need justices that will closely follow the letter of the law and our constitution.  It seems Sotomayor is not that person. Her repeated words in speeches about her race & gender giving her a better perspective is very concerning for a supreme court judge.  I'd like to see far left and far right candidates thrown out, we don't want extremists as supreme court justices. 
I'm not sure how leftist Sotomayor is, but she is in favor of affirmative action and her actions and speeches follow suit. If you look at her history, she has brought issue with Princeton University for not having enough Hispanic teachers.  I do not understand any justice that voted against the firefighters...the tests were verified as fair, those guys should have received the promised promotions from day 1.  Anyone who does not support equal rights & fairness for all can remove themselves from the judicial branch as far as I'm concerned.  We need a movement to end Affirmative action now.

All that said, however, she will be nominated because we have 1 party dominance right now.

[Soul Crusher]

ITS NOT A ONE PARTY DOMINATION  ,,its about what american people want and need right now someone who can provide HOPE to the american people by the american people.  someone who can stand up up in a lonely forest and speak for all among us for the great good sotomayor can do that for the minority and can make history as the first hispanic/latin woman to do it,,  She is a voice of resasoning among a crowd of nothingness,,,

Hysterical!  I hope that was joke. 

[JOCKTHEGLIDE]

nope

Hysterical!  I hope that was joke. 

[grab an umbrella]

Like 333386 said, jock I really hope you aren't serious.  This country needs justices who rule on law and not precedent, and who don't let their personal bias' get in the way.