Skip to main content

The Mother Jones article in the link below gives some interesting history of Sotomayor's confirmation to the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals in 1998. Jeff Sessions and others on the Senate Judicial Committee voted FOR her confirmation, with the committee vote going 16-2. But then things got really political:

"Senate Republican staff aides said Trent Lott of Mississippi, the majority leader, has agreed to hold up a vote on the nomination as part of an elaborate political calculus; if she were easily confirmed to the appeals court, they said, that would put her in a position to be named to the Supreme Court. And Senate Republicans think that they would then have a difficult time opposing a Hispanic woman who had just been confirmed by the full Senate."

Sessions and other Republicans who had voted for her in committee then changed their votes to avoid the "difficult time" envisioned by Trent Lott, noted racist. You will remember that Lott lost his majority leader position in large measure because of his inane racist comment at the time of Strom Thurmond's passing: "I want to say this about my state: When Strom Thurmond ran for president, we voted for him. We're proud of it. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn't have had all these problems over all these years, either." He was referring, or course, to the 1948 presidential election when Thurmond ran on the unabashedly segregationist "Dixiecrat" ticket.

Link
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

quote:
Originally posted by LMM:
This was in 1998. Who gives a rip?


Yes, it was in 1998, but you are as dense as depleted uranium if you can not see how it relates to the current confirmation hearings. Dis you not READ what I posted, and most particularly THIS:

"...if she were easily confirmed to the appeals court, they said, that would put her in a position to be named to the Supreme Court. And Senate Republicans think that they would then have a difficult time opposing a Hispanic woman who had just been confirmed by the full Senate."

In case you have not been keeping up with things, Ms. Sotomayor is now a nominee for the Supreme Court, just as the devious right-wing politicians anticipated in 1998 when they changed their votes! Is your mind really so small and compromised that you fail to see the linkage?
THIS confirmation is scary stuff. She believes she, because of her ethnicity and gender, will be able to render a "better" decision than someone who is not...that smells of racism. One of her "supporters" actually admitted as much on CNN this past week. "A Wise Latina Woman...." Were the shoe on the another foot, the media would be in an uproar. So much for objectivity...
I can't help but feel that there is a double standard going on here. Look at what Judge Alito said during his comfirmation hearing. If she were to say these things it would be like the second coming of baby jesus.



U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing on Judge Samuel Alito's Nomination to the Supreme Court

U.S. SENATOR TOM COBURN (R-OK): Can you comment just about Sam Alito, and what he cares about, and let us see a little bit of your heart and what's important to you in life?

ALITO: Senator, I tried to in my opening statement, I tried to provide a little picture of who I am as a human being and how my background and my experiences have shaped me and brought me to this point.

ALITO: I don't come from an affluent background or a privileged background. My parents were both quite poor when they were growing up.

And I know about their experiences and I didn't experience those things. I don't take credit for anything that they did or anything that they overcame.

But I think that children learn a lot from their parents and they learn from what the parents say. But I think they learn a lot more from what the parents do and from what they take from the stories of their parents lives.

And that's why I went into that in my opening statement. Because when a case comes before me involving, let's say, someone who is an immigrant -- and we get an awful lot of immigration cases and naturalization cases -- I can't help but think of my own ancestors, because it wasn't that long ago when they were in that position.

And so it's my job to apply the law. It's not my job to change the law or to bend the law to achieve any result.

But when I look at those cases, I have to say to myself, and I do say to myself, "You know, this could be your grandfather, this could be your grandmother. They were not citizens at one time, and they were people who came to this country."

When I have cases involving children, I can't help but think of my own children and think about my children being treated in the way that children may be treated in the case that's before me.

And that goes down the line. When I get a case about discrimination, I have to think about people in my own family who suffered discrimination because of their ethnic background or because of religion or because of gender. And I do take that into account. When I have a case involving someone who's been subjected to discrimination because of disability, I have to think of people who I've known and admire very greatly who've had disabilities, and I've watched them struggle to overcome the barriers that society puts up often just because it doesn't think of what it's doing -- the barriers that it puts up to them.

So those are some of the experiences that have shaped me as a person.


COBURN: Thank you.

Mr. Chairman, I think I'll yield back the balance of my time at this time, and if I have additional questions, get them in the next round.

SPECTER: Thank you very much, Senator Coburn.

Link
Did you catch Boxer's racist rant? boy oh boy, isn't she a democrit, notice he calls her mam. Big Grin

Link


The President and CEO of the National Black Chamber of Commerce (NBCC) tore into Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) Thursday for what he said were "condescending" and "God awful" racial statements at a hearing.

NBCC head Harry C. Alford took strong exception to Boxer having referenced an NAACP report favoring climate change legislation during a hearing of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, of which Boxer is the chairwoman.

"Madam chair, that is condescending to me," Alford said. "I'm the National Black Chamber of Commerce, and you're trying to put up some other black group to pit against me."

Boxer defended including the report, however, saying the report reflects a "diversity" of support behind climate change legislation facing the Senate.

"If this gentleman were here, he would be proud he's being quoted," Boxer said in defense of the NAACP support.

Alford, however, struck back against Boxer, accusing her of "getting racial" in the climate change debate.

"All that's condescending, and I don't like it. It's racial. I take offense to it. As an African-American and a veteran of this country, I take offense to that," he said. "You're quoting some other black man — why don't you quote some other Asian or some other… You're getting racial here."

"You're speaking on behalf of the black community?" Alford asked. "Why are you doing the colored people association's study with the black Chamber of Commerce?"

He finally concluded:

"We've been looking at energy policy since 1996. And we are referring to the experts, regardless of their color. And for someone to tell me, an African-American, college-education veteran of the United States Army, that I must contend with some other "black group" and put aside everything else in here — This has NOTHING to do with the NAACP, and really has nothing to do with the National Black Chamber of Commerce. We're talking about energy. And that — that road the chair went down, I think is God awful."

You can view the exchange — starting at about 18:00 minutes into the video — here.
quote:
Originally posted by Chow:
Did you catch Boxer's racist rant? boy oh boy, isn't she a democrit, notice he calls her mam. Big Grin

Link


The President and CEO of the National Black Chamber of Commerce (NBCC) tore into Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) Thursday for what he said were "condescending" and "God awful" racial statements at a hearing.

NBCC head Harry C. Alford took strong exception to Boxer having referenced an NAACP report favoring climate change legislation during a hearing of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, of which Boxer is the chairwoman.

"Madam chair, that is condescending to me," Alford said. "I'm the National Black Chamber of Commerce, and you're trying to put up some other black group to pit against me."

Boxer defended including the report, however, saying the report reflects a "diversity" of support behind climate change legislation facing the Senate.

"If this gentleman were here, he would be proud he's being quoted," Boxer said in defense of the NAACP support.

Alford, however, struck back against Boxer, accusing her of "getting racial" in the climate change debate.

"All that's condescending, and I don't like it. It's racial. I take offense to it. As an African-American and a veteran of this country, I take offense to that," he said. "You're quoting some other black man — why don't you quote some other Asian or some other… You're getting racial here."

"You're speaking on behalf of the black community?" Alford asked. "Why are you doing the colored people association's study with the black Chamber of Commerce?"

He finally concluded:

"We've been looking at energy policy since 1996. And we are referring to the experts, regardless of their color. And for someone to tell me, an African-American, college-education veteran of the United States Army, that I must contend with some other "black group" and put aside everything else in here — This has NOTHING to do with the NAACP, and really has nothing to do with the National Black Chamber of Commerce. We're talking about energy. And that — that road the chair went down, I think is God awful."

You can view the exchange — starting at about 18:00 minutes into the video — here.


I think you accidentally posted on the wrong thread this wasn't a Boxer topic,Thanks

Attachments

Images (1)
  • MJ1
quote:
Originally posted by Am I Barry Gibb?:
quote:
Originally posted by Chow:
Did you catch Boxer's racist rant? boy oh boy, isn't she a democrit, notice he calls her mam. Big Grin

Link


The President and CEO of the National Black Chamber of Commerce (NBCC) tore into Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) Thursday for what he said were "condescending" and "God awful" racial statements at a hearing.

NBCC head Harry C. Alford took strong exception to Boxer having referenced an NAACP report favoring climate change legislation during a hearing of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, of which Boxer is the chairwoman.

"Madam chair, that is condescending to me," Alford said. "I'm the National Black Chamber of Commerce, and you're trying to put up some other black group to pit against me."

Boxer defended including the report, however, saying the report reflects a "diversity" of support behind climate change legislation facing the Senate.

"If this gentleman were here, he would be proud he's being quoted," Boxer said in defense of the NAACP support.

Alford, however, struck back against Boxer, accusing her of "getting racial" in the climate change debate.

"All that's condescending, and I don't like it. It's racial. I take offense to it. As an African-American and a veteran of this country, I take offense to that," he said. "You're quoting some other black man — why don't you quote some other Asian or some other… You're getting racial here."

"You're speaking on behalf of the black community?" Alford asked. "Why are you doing the colored people association's study with the black Chamber of Commerce?"

He finally concluded:

"We've been looking at energy policy since 1996. And we are referring to the experts, regardless of their color. And for someone to tell me, an African-American, college-education veteran of the United States Army, that I must contend with some other "black group" and put aside everything else in here — This has NOTHING to do with the NAACP, and really has nothing to do with the National Black Chamber of Commerce. We're talking about energy. And that — that road the chair went down, I think is God awful."

You can view the exchange — starting at about 18:00 minutes into the video — here.


I think you accidentally posted on the wrong thread this wasn't a Boxer topic,Thanks


nope, it turned to racism so i posted about Boxers racist antics Wink
Chow has trouble focusing on the topic at hand. I have noticed that Chow seems to take sharp lefts whenever he/she is confronted with something he/she either doesn't understand or can't debate with intelligence.

What a story on Boxer and Alford has to do with the double standard that Congress seem to be dealing Sotomayor in her confirmation hearing is beyond me.

Chow do you have an opinion on how Sotomayor is being held to a different standard than Alito? If so I would really like to hear it.
quote:
Originally posted by Jankinonya:
Chow has trouble focusing on the topic at hand. I have noticed that Chow seems to take sharp lefts whenever he/she is confronted with something he/she either doesn't understand or can't debate with intelligence.

What a story on Boxer and Alford has to do with the double standard that Congress seem to be dealing Sotomayor in her confirmation hearing is beyond me.

Chow do you have an opinion on how Sotomayor is being held to a different standard than Alito? If so I would really like to hear it.



I have yet to see where a nominee has been treated nicely from the opposing party, I still haven't able to get past the coke can/hair incident. Wink

I be hanging with ya janking on ebonics Cool
quote:
Originally posted by Chow:
quote:
Originally posted by Jankinonya:
Chow has trouble focusing on the topic at hand. I have noticed that Chow seems to take sharp lefts whenever he/she is confronted with something he/she either doesn't understand or can't debate with intelligence.

What a story on Boxer and Alford has to do with the double standard that Congress seem to be dealing Sotomayor in her confirmation hearing is beyond me.

Chow do you have an opinion on how Sotomayor is being held to a different standard than Alito? If so I would really like to hear it.



I have yet to see where a nominee has been treated nicely from the opposing party, I still haven't able to get past the coke can/hair incident. Wink

I be hanging with ya janking on ebonics Cool


This is your answer? Ok, so by your reasoning it makes sense to have this kind of double standard due to a history of party-line hypocrisy? I think that is what is wrong in this country today. I am neither left nor right. Truly. I have agreed with both sides depending on the issue. I don't jump on the current band wagon based solely on Democrat or Republican. I would like to think that our congress could make a decision about an appointee to the highest court in our land based on experience, conduct, education, record. Not "well she was appointed by a democrat president so I am going to be unreasonable and pick at issues that hold no bearing to the job at hand."

I dream of a day without this silly "my teams better than yours" and we get on with true democracy.
quote:
Not "well she was appointed by a democrat president so I am going to be unreasonable and pick at issues that hold no bearing to the job at hand."


The biggest problem with this is that SHE will decide which issues hold bearing to her job. The supreme court's constitutional role is to interpret the constitution, not create law by fiat. An activist judge, which Sotomayor has shown herself to be, stretches the constitution to an almost unrecognizable shape. And she's there for the rest of her life, with no possibility of changing after she's seated.

I agree that political squabbling reminds one of a -what?- flock(?) of chickens running in all different directions and trying to make themselves heard, but the process of an in-depth appraisal of her past qualifications as well as her potential for far-reaching societal mandates has to be carefully evaluated.

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×