Noonan, Cornyn, Steele, Krauthammer: Don’t go nuclear on Sotomayor

posted at 3:33 pm on May 29, 2009 by Allahpundit

Your meme du jour in four flavors. Krauthammer makes the case to the base that this isn’t worth a war; Noonan makes the case to Senate Republicans that it’s a golden opportunity for gravitas; Cornyn makes the case to Limbaugh and Gingrich that throwing grenades about racism isn’t helping; and Steele makes the case to, er, whoever Steele imagines his audience is. For all the sound and fury over a conservative split on how hard to hit Sotomayor, the differences between the two camps signify practically nothing. The Noonan camp isn’t saying she shouldn’t be pressed on her “wise Latina” and “courts make policy” comments, they’re merely asking the GOP to avoid unnecessarily inflammatory lines of attack. (See Andy McCarthy’s musings about Sotomayor as a potential juror for one clever, non-inflammatory possibility.) The real fault line between the two sides is whether the GOP should filibuster, but that’s not worth debating since it’ll never, ever happen. Even if Snowe and Collins shock the world by voting no, McCain will be wary of alienating Arizona’s Hispanic voters ahead of his reelection bid. She’s going to be confirmed. The only question is whether the GOP can use the confirmation process as a tutorial on the defects of liberal jurisprudence without getting bogged down in debating whether she’s a racist or not.

If you missed Noonan’s op-ed about this today, don’t treat the video clip as a fair substitute or else you’ll miss her all but declaring that right-wing blog readers are a conservative nutroots. Heart-ache. Click the images to watch.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

They’re all wrong. Big surprise.

progressoverpeace on May 29, 2009 at 3:34 PM

I have to say I am in agreement. Insist she answer the tough questions and don’t be a douchebag like Ted Kennedy was to Alito (or Bork).

D2Boston on May 29, 2009 at 3:35 PM

Why can’t you make a case on the merits and say I won’t vote for her. That is the american way…isn’t it.

tomas on May 29, 2009 at 3:35 PM

is it just me or does anyone else want all these ‘smarty smarty pants’ to shut the crap up. They are no more important than the rest of us and their opinions are no ‘better’ than anyone elses*.

* female latina judges excluded as they are of course demonstrably superior

gatorboy on May 29, 2009 at 3:36 PM

Hey Peggy, I guess the Democrats went with the “bull[bleep] narrative”, huh?

Pasalubong on May 29, 2009 at 3:37 PM

AP, you got Rush’s response to this? He kind of went nuclear on all of them, especially Cornyn. Apparently he held a fundraiser for him in the past.

youngO on May 29, 2009 at 3:37 PM

Has Kathleen Parker weighed in yet?

Kalifornia Kafir on May 29, 2009 at 3:37 PM

All we have is her racial insults. We patiently await a total deep and extended review process. If they have such urgency, they must be covering something. There are some experienced justices up there and so we are fine.

Her racist line would disqualify her for jury duty. HMMM.

seven on May 29, 2009 at 3:38 PM

We’re going to have to build a bigger porch for these people to hide under while the Democrats burn down the house.

FloatingRock on May 29, 2009 at 3:39 PM

RINOs pound sand.

Coronagold on May 29, 2009 at 3:39 PM

Has Kathleen Parker weighed in yet?

Kalifornia Kafir on May 29, 2009 at 3:37 PM

No but megan has.

I think she was around 250.

artist on May 29, 2009 at 3:39 PM

Kalifornia Kafir on May 29, 2009 at 3:37 PM

LOL!!!

tomas on May 29, 2009 at 3:35 PM

Agreed — I think that’s wholly appropriate.

D2Boston on May 29, 2009 at 3:40 PM

Her racist line would disqualify her for jury duty. HMMM.

+1

then again, Obama wouldn’t pass an FBI background check either… so much for that argument

gatorboy on May 29, 2009 at 3:40 PM

It’s important to expose the racism , don’t stop.

the_nile on May 29, 2009 at 3:41 PM

Has Kathleen Parker weighed in yet?

Kalifornia Kafir on May 29, 2009 at 3:37 PM

There will be a thread up with her reaction as soon as MegaMac issues her well-reasoned treatise on why Sotomayor is actually a Republican and should be rushed through to confirmation. AP is waiting to bundle the two geniuses and their sage advice.

progressoverpeace on May 29, 2009 at 3:41 PM

I agree with the RINO smarty-pantses in most respects, but would it be OK if every time the Republicans used the word “Latina” or any other Spanish-loan word they said it loudly, slowly, and emphatically like in the SNL skits?

CK MacLeod on May 29, 2009 at 3:41 PM

What a wilted country, full of sissies, we are. If it weren’t so tragic it would be hilariously funny.

Schadenfreude on May 29, 2009 at 3:41 PM

Tomorrow’s headline:
“Democrats Castrate Republican Leaders…AGAIN!”

sdd on May 29, 2009 at 3:41 PM

100% of the time they are wrong every time…

catmman on May 29, 2009 at 3:42 PM

There is absolutely nothing wrong with calling Sotomayor on the carpet for her racist and liberal approach to the judiciary. Any conservative that doesn’t attack her on her background that proves her unworthy to serve, is a coward and I’d rather not represent me. She is an intellectual nothing, and does not deserve the first Latino moniker. Let’s face it, Latino male judges were excoriated by liberals. Destroy her on her judgments and rake her her over the coals about her sexism and racism. To be honest, if a Hispanic would call me a racist because I choose to rip her apart…… I don’t care …. he/she wasn’t a Conservative to begin with.

MNDavenotPC on May 29, 2009 at 3:42 PM

Credibility Index:

1. Krauthammer
2. Cornyn
3. Steele (but improving)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
10. Noonan

Cicero43 on May 29, 2009 at 3:42 PM

The only question is whether the GOP can use the confirmation process as a tutorial on the defects of liberal jurisprudence without getting bogged down in debating whether she’s a racist or not.

Is everyone listening?

Why can’t you make a case on the merits and say I won’t vote for her. That is the american way…isn’t it.

tomas on May 29, 2009 at 3:35 PM

Exactly.

From something I put elsewhere:

Without resorting to the polarizing racist blather, let’s see how the dominoes are lining up.

1. Ricci: disgraceful judicial conduct condemned by her own liberal colleagues to the point that they red-flagged the case to ensure SCOTUS review–and the reversal is doing to get nailed to her forehead during her confirmation hearings.

2. She’s in favor of giving prisoners the right to vote:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/may/29/the-franchise-for-felons/

3. She seems to think that the Second Amendment doesn’t apply to states.

Three heinous positions with which too many Americans would disagree. No resort to shrill cries of racism. This is how you bludgeon a hard left nominee and a hard left president.

Feel free to scream racist at the very end, but stack up everything else first. Get the story going about her conduct not her biography.

Drip, drip, drip.

BuckeyeSam on May 29, 2009 at 3:42 PM

She needs to be asked why a latino woman is smarter than a white male.

Had a white male ever uttered that his experiences would make him a better justice than a latino woman, he would be called a racist. I believe in equality! Never take someone’s race into consideration in any way!

Anyone notice that Obama’s short list of prospects were all minority women? It just shows that Democrats don’t care about anything other than votes from groups, like hispanics, blacks, women. Obama could not find a single white male judge who was qualified to be on his short list from every judge in the nation?!?!?

jeffn21 on May 29, 2009 at 3:42 PM

There may not be much difference in opinions about the actual final course of action.

There is a big difference in how that course of action is actually implemented. I said in an earlier comment that I believe that several ‘moderate’ Republicans will make absolute mockery of GOP principles by slobbering all over her in the most condescending, pandering, ‘me too’, way imaginable…I have some suspects in mind.

Also, some of these ‘pundits’ are wrong on so many issues concerning the direction of the party, they automatically piss people off (like me)…Noonan and Cornyn are big offenders and practically sneer at the rank-and-file every time they have something to say.

AUINSC on May 29, 2009 at 3:43 PM

Please, conservatives, I am begging you, stop being mean. Don’t ask any questions, just vote yes and shut up. /sarc

Cindy Munford on May 29, 2009 at 3:44 PM

This country, her people, deserve a few more Sotomayors; they asked for them. Now they’re getting them. Rejoice.

Schadenfreude on May 29, 2009 at 3:44 PM

Regardless of the GOP’s actions, Sotomayor will get her hearings, and her vote…which is much more than Estrada got. Anyways, “Wise Latina” is only frosting to the Ricci-Didden-Doninger-Maloney cake. The Judge Who Saved Baseball already has four strikes against her, and the appointment isn’t a week old.

Kid from Brooklyn on May 29, 2009 at 3:44 PM

Noonan, Cornyn, Steele, Krauthammer: Don’t go nuclear on Sotomayor

The problem is that ANY opposition to Sotomayor by Republicans will be portrayed as “going nuclear” on her, and especially tough opposition regarding her racial attitudes and her competence in her rulings (exemplified by her high rate of being overturned). You know and I know that the very instant a Republican senator asks her about either of these things, there will be bloodcurdling shrieks from the left of “anti-Hispanic racism”, etc. And Noonan, Steele, et al. are willingly playing into that meme with this whole “don’t go nuclear” schtick they are pushing.

The real fault line between the two sides is whether the GOP should filibuster

That’s never been the fault line when you consider some of the weak-kneed senators we already have in the GOP senate caucus, a filibuster would go nowhere anyway.

The fault line is whether or not to subject Sotomayor to tough questioning over her judicial and racial philosophy, which the left is trying to pre-empt – and which Noonan et al. are giving the left cover – with their “don’t go nuclear” meme.

thirteen28 on May 29, 2009 at 3:44 PM

Being moderate and bipartisan worked so well in 2006 and 2008, didn’t it….

Wethal on May 29, 2009 at 3:45 PM

Meanwhile, on another planet, Brooks is giddy over the inevitable confirmation of Justice Emphathy.

Zetterson on May 29, 2009 at 3:46 PM

It ain’t nutpickin’ when it’s said on national radio:

“Let’s hope that the key conferences aren’t when [Sotomayor]‘s menstruating or something, or just before she’s going to menstruate. That would really be bad. Lord knows what we would get then.” — G. Gordon Liddy, yesterday on the air

Yeah, that’ll work wonders. Wrong wonders of course, but wonders.

starfleet_dude on May 29, 2009 at 3:47 PM

Meanwhile, on another planet, Brooks is giddy over the inevitable confirmation of Justice Emphathy.

Zetterson on May 29, 2009 at 3:46 PM

No worries, she’ll fark him, royally.

Schadenfreude on May 29, 2009 at 3:47 PM

We’re on an unprecedented, non-stop pogrom of intimidation, harassment, discrimination and persecution of whites (especially males) and are told not to protest lest the persecutors will think we’re biased!!!!!!

MaiDee on May 29, 2009 at 3:47 PM

I think they might me onto something. I hate them all as they are phony, but I sense that by going easy on Sotomayor the dems are starting to wonder why we don’t mind her so much. The libs are already starting to question her abortion stance, and there might be blood in the water here. Let the libs destroy her. It will be fun to watch them torpedo her and Obama.

portlandon on May 29, 2009 at 3:48 PM

Even if Snowe and Collins shock the world by voting no, McCain will be wary of alienating Arizona’s Hispanic voters ahead of his reelection bid. She’s going to be confirmed.

Grahamnesty sits on the Judiciary Committee, so game over right there. The Maine Sisters voted Yay in ’98. I don’t know about Maverick though. He may want to suck up, but he’s still bitter about getting only 33% of the Latino vote.

Kid from Brooklyn on May 29, 2009 at 3:48 PM

Go nuclear? How’s about some life-signs from the GOP?

littleguy on May 29, 2009 at 3:48 PM

Tomorrow’s headline:
“Democrats Castrate Republican Leaders…AGAIN!”

sdd on May 29, 2009 at 3:41 PM

Yep. Once again, Republicans like Noonan, Krauthammer, Steele, and Cornyn are falling right into the trap of letting the left set the terms of the debate.

With “allies” like this, who needs enemies?

thirteen28 on May 29, 2009 at 3:48 PM

Keep in mind the rules of engagement over Sotomayor have been published.

Exceedingly careful“. Noonan, Cornyn, Steele, Krauthammer are just obeying the rules.

BobMbx on May 29, 2009 at 3:49 PM

Is this the way it’s going to be from now on? The Republicans are going to be told to exhibit lady-like behavior? I wish they would take a good long look at the other side and slap their wrists once in a while instead of admonishing the right.

sherry on May 29, 2009 at 3:50 PM

“This woman has written serious things in serious cases like the Ricci case in Connecticut.” –Peggy Noonan

Uuuuh. That woman wrote one paragraph as her ruling in the Ricci case. Come back to us, Peggy.

Tuning Spork on May 29, 2009 at 3:51 PM

Sorry, but if I were a senator I’d treat Sotomayor with all the deference and respect that the donks afforded to Bork, Thomas, Estrada and Alito (i.e., none).

If there’s one thing we should’ve learned from watching the hapless George W. Bush for the last 8 years turning the other cheek again and again and again, it’s the need to occasionally slap the other guy back harder than he slapped you — that’s the only way to get him to back off.

There’s an old story about a flock of sheep that got together and decided to try to persuade the local wolves to leave them alone. They wrote up a manifesto extolling the virtues of vegetarianism and non-violence, and sent it to the wolves asking them to sign onto it as well.

After a considerable period of time, the wolves sent back a one-page reply:

“We eat you because you taste good.”

Well, that’s the difference between squish “Republican insiders” and the donks: the latter slap the former around with impunity, not because of anything that the Republicans have or haven’t done but simply because they enjoy slapping them around.

The only way to stop it is to take the enjoyment out of the activity. And the only way to do that is to start slapping back.

Spurius Ligustinus on May 29, 2009 at 3:51 PM

Before this is all over, the GOP will be stuffing the Senate ballot box in favor of the Great Latina Decider. She’ll pass the Senate 273-7.

progressoverpeace on May 29, 2009 at 3:51 PM

“Kumbaya my Lord…Kumbaya. Kumbaya my Lord…Kumbaya. Kumbaya my Lord…Kumbaya. Oh Lord…Kumbaya.” Our thanks to the RINO Combined Chorus for that beautiful rendition. Our next selection will be “Can’t We All Just Get Along?”

sdd on May 29, 2009 at 3:51 PM

Given how the likes of Limbaugh, Gingrich, Liddy, et. al. have messily chumned the rhetorical waters on Sotomayor’s nomination, there’s no freakin’ way questions about race, empathy, etc. can now be legitimately asked during her nomination hearings in the Senate without all that sorry crazy base rhetoric being gleefully repeated by the Democrats.

Game over.

starfleet_dude on May 29, 2009 at 3:51 PM

Tomorrow’s headline:
“Democrats Castrate Republican Leaders…AGAIN!”

sdd on May 29, 2009 at 3:41 PM

And the Republican leaders supplied the knife.

Apparently we are to accept the Dem meme that “any challenging, any questioning of someone who will be a SC justice for life is unacceptable & racist – IF it’s a woman or minoruty.”

katiejane on May 29, 2009 at 3:52 PM

This is all stategic. Sotomayor is going to be confirmed like or not. There’s no use going nuts about it.

Republicans can look like theyre being “bipartisan” while also avoiding offending hispanics.

It’s a no brainer. May not like it, but if Republicans want to make a play in 2010, moves like this are necessary.

therightwinger on May 29, 2009 at 3:52 PM

The NYT says “Judge Sonia Sotomayor, President Obama’s Supreme Court choice, has a blunt and even testy side” but it would be totally and absolutely bad for the Republicans to be tough on her. Yep, the only possible outcome is for her to look good and all victim-y.

Wanna buy some swampland?

MamaAJ on May 29, 2009 at 3:53 PM

Keep in mind the rules of engagement over Sotomayor have been published.

Doesn’t matter. Who do you think is defining the Republican Party these days? Limbaugh and his spite-mongering ilk, that’s who. Cornyn may be hoping to keep some of the spittle off him by “leaking” said rules, but it’s not going work.

starfleet_dude on May 29, 2009 at 3:55 PM

This is all stategic.

A strategic advantage for the lunatic left, that is.

Sotomayor is going to be confirmed like or not. There’s no use going nuts about it.

Says who? She can’t get out of committee without a GOP vote. But let’s surrender before anyone fires a shot. It works for France.

Republicans can look like theyre being “bipartisan” while also avoiding offending hispanics.

What sort of motivation is looking “bipartisan”? That’s just silly. ANd hispanics don’t give a damn about how “bipartisan” the GOP might be. Haven’t you been watching the goings on in politics?

It’s a no brainer. May not like it, but if Republicans want to make a play in 2010, moves like this are necessary.

therightwinger on May 29, 2009 at 3:52 PM

Surrender. Great move. Just affirm that Affirmative Action is perfectly reasonable and good enough to use in order to fill our SCOTUS. That’s great. Really great.

progressoverpeace on May 29, 2009 at 3:56 PM

Grahamnesty sits on the Judiciary Committee, so game over right there.

***

Kid from Brooklyn on May 29, 2009 at 3:48 PM

How does the GOP allow idiots auch as Graham to get on important committees? I’d assign Graham to those committees investigating steroid use in baseball and other nonsense.

Besides Graham, Sessions and Hatch are GOP members of this committee. What other GOP?

As far as Sessions and Hatch are concerned, I saw them a couple of times this week, and I thought they took a great approach. Sessions, with that damn Southern accent is in a difficult position, because every time he talks, half the country is playing Mississippi Burning in the back of their minds. That said, he’s been firm but low-key, which is great for now. Hatch, who has more latitude, I think, was much more assertive in one interview I saw. I talked about some “very troubling” things that need to be explored.

The idea is not to go nuclear at the outset. Start doing the digging, plant seeds of doubt, dribble out questions in advance of the hearings to show that Obama has failed to vet yet another nominee–that’s a point that is entirely consistent with his White House operation. They campaign well, but they govern poorly, and vet even worse than that.

BuckeyeSam on May 29, 2009 at 3:58 PM

Cowards the lot of them… I’m tired of the GOP trying not to “offend” anyone…

Doogiesd on May 29, 2009 at 3:58 PM

George Lopez called in to the morning radio progam today to promote a show he’s having in town over the weekend. The very liberal (Kucinich backer) host asked him about Sotomayor and he was pretty funny. Said all latinas think they are Supreme Court Justices, so this isn’t a shock.

Then laid into her looking like Babe Ruth????

Also made fun of Obama’s administration: Paraphrased, “He’s been kind to people of color, putting them in positions like head of NASA. He’s put so many in, that at least of few have got to be thinking to themselves, ‘Damn – I have no idea how I got this job.’”.

Nice to see some jabs at the admin. from the other side.

The host didn’t laugh at all.

Editor on May 29, 2009 at 3:58 PM

See Andy McCarthy’s musings about Sotomayor as a potential juror for one clever, non-inflammatory possibility.

Impartiality is the proper line of attack. Once she is on the SCOTUS she admittedly will not be capable of being impartial in cases involving Latina women, especially in cases vis a vis white men. Yet it would be her decision whether or not to recuse herself in such situations. ((Remember the liberals aghast at Scalia deciding for himself that he was not impartial in a case involving Chaney’s office after sharing a duck blind with the VP?)) Anyway, the Senators should ask her if she is prepared to recuse herself from cases where her admitted bias is sure to impact her decision making.

tommylotto on May 29, 2009 at 3:59 PM

starfleet_dude on May 29, 2009 at 3:55 PM

moderates are useless. I sure as hell don’t want these fools defining a party I’m part of.

youngO on May 29, 2009 at 4:00 PM

starfleet_dude on May 29, 2009 at 3:51 PM

Bork, Thomas, Estrada

Keep throwing rocks in your glass house…it needs the ventilation.

AUINSC on May 29, 2009 at 4:00 PM

If the situation were reversed, and it was a Republican nomination………..

…………. the Democrats would be in full attack.

So why should the Republicans not stand up on principle and bring to the light of day her racist beliefs……?

…….. This is for a seat on the Supreme Court of the United States where she will have influence over the lives of the American people for decades to come, this is not American Idol!

The more the RINOs, MSM, and Democrats say “don’t do it”, the more I am convinced it is the exact right thing to do……..

Seven Percent Solution on May 29, 2009 at 4:01 PM

Gibbs spoke for her today – hestated that she would say her word source was “poor”…

ladyingray on May 29, 2009 at 4:01 PM

Roll over and play dead, like good little RINOs.

It’s a no brainer. May not like it, but if Republicans want to make a play in 2010, moves like this are necessary.

BS. Utter BS. Complete nonsense.

Whether they oppose her or not will not make one bit of difference at the polls.

Sick of hearing it, sick of reading it.

Screw it, she’s a liberal woman and a liberal Latino, why bother confirming her at all? Should be a free freaking pass.

reaganaut on May 29, 2009 at 4:01 PM

hestated = he stated

ladyingray on May 29, 2009 at 4:01 PM

What reality do these politicians and pundits live in? I hope they all have personal drivers because they are too stupid to drive. Hey, washington moron republicans! You don’t have the votes to defeat this nomination even though this cretin shouldn’t be allowed to stand outside the supreme court let alone be a member. So you go to the hearings with as much solid information possible, you respectfully but forcefully ask questions that need to be asked allowing the nominee to show the country exactly where she stands. Then you vote no. Plain and simple. This is the only strategy. If you dimwits(and I say that with all due respect) are able to question her affectively then it will all be out there for the country to see. If she embarasses herself enough there is a slim fantasy that democrats will be not be suicidal and vote for her. It probably will never happen but it’s the only chance in hell. barry will not be withdrawing her so suck it up, get ready for the hearings and then act like intelligent, educated public servants and ask her questions she has to answer or evade. When she evades, point it out. How frickin hard is this? I guess it’s so frickin hard our country is already going to hell in a handbasket.

peacenprosperity on May 29, 2009 at 4:01 PM

I think that if they could actually stop her it might be worth it. I think that if they knew someone worse would not come right after her it might be worth it.

But there are ways to do these things. I think they should put her on the defensive and ask her uncomfortable questions about her associations and her past remarks, but the reality is that Sotomayor will probably be confirmed.

And it is not just about offending people, it is about being smart. If they handle it right Republicans can raise questions about this woman without looking like crazy people in the process.

Terrye on May 29, 2009 at 4:03 PM

See Andy McCarthy’s musings about Sotomayor as a potential juror for one clever, non-inflammatory possibility.

Just finished reading it, and agree that it’s clever and to reasonable people, non-inflammatory. I’d love to see one of ours take this line of questioning to her.

Despite that, if you believe the left themselves wouldn’t go ballistic over that and portray it as “going nuclear”, then please inquire about the bridge I have for sale.

If we don’t push back now, knowing they’re going to portray any tough questioning as an out-of-bounds attack, then we might as well just pack it in.

thirteen28 on May 29, 2009 at 4:04 PM

WWMD ?

What would Megan do?

The only one of these clowns that I would even CONSIDER listening to is Krauthammer.

Just overlook her views on the 1st Amendment, the 2nd Amendment, racism, Property ownership rights, … Good greif, and they wonder how we got to this place in our country.

stenwin77 on May 29, 2009 at 4:07 PM

As I noted in the headlines, I would really like to hear the Constitution mentioned. There are plenty of things that the public needs to know about this judge regardless of the majority held in the Senate. There may even be things that Democrats in red states might have problems with. And why all this hand wringing over the attitudes of Republican Senators, do they ever seem hostile or rude? It’s always good to yell shut up before they say anything. Another tactic and another roll up of the white flag by the Republican insiders.

Cindy Munford on May 29, 2009 at 4:07 PM

Eh, I’d hate to agree with them all, but I do. What many conservative people want to do is fight hard on this. But what that would do is play into Democrat hands. We can’t hope to win this. This is a battle that people want to play like the democrats do and we can’t win that way. The democrats are far more experienced and have the media advantage on it. We would be schooled if we try and they would use the trouncing they gave us to push for healthcare and win because Republicans would be somewhat exhausted over the fight over a judge that Obama could just replace with someone more liberal.

Obama wanted the GOP to fight this one hard, so when he pushes his other reforms, the media will cover this fight and the reform and other options all at the same damn time.

Trov on May 29, 2009 at 4:09 PM

And it is not just about offending people, it is about being smart. If they handle it right Republicans can raise questions about this woman without looking like crazy people in the process.

I’m sure Rush Limbaugh will cooperate during the hearings by refraining from his usual incendiary rhetoric. Not. That makes it difficult to raise said questions touching on race and gender.

starfleet_dude on May 29, 2009 at 4:11 PM

Obama wanted the GOP to fight this one hard,

No he didn’t. The Precedent withers under any real fight. He likes to try to bully people. That’s all he does. That’s why Rush beat his arse like a red-headed step-child and so did Cheney. Both of them were advised to not dare do that, either.

What is wrong with so-called conservatives, these days?

so when he pushes his other reforms, the media will cover this fight and the reform and other options all at the same damn time.

Trov on May 29, 2009 at 4:09 PM

The media is going to lie about the right, anyway. Even if we don’t fight, they’ll say that we did. Haven’t you learned this game yet?

But taht is all beside the point. The right needs to fight because America needs the right to fight. This nomination is an abomination of Affirmative Action and mediocrity (at best). If this isn’t worth a fight, nothing is.

progressoverpeace on May 29, 2009 at 4:14 PM

No more, no less…treat her just like most of the recent justices.
Bork, Estrada, Thomas, Meirs, Robert…treat them all the same.
No more, no less…it’s about equality that the liberals continue to harp about.
Just treat her the same.

right2bright on May 29, 2009 at 4:14 PM

Rush made some good points today. When alito came up for nomination it did not stop any of the dems from going nuclear on him. Same with Estrada
This whole posturing about let’s not say this or that is just a suck up to people who will hate you no matter what you do. However the republicans play this will not mean a damn to how hispanics vote in the upcoming election.
Besides that is there something wrong with pursing the white vote? It is still the biggest block of voters in the country and will be for a good while.
She said something that would get any white republican ran out of the town much less get nominated to the supreme court.

kangjie on May 29, 2009 at 4:18 PM

Hussein.

As a wise Irish-Scottish-German-American woman, I think I can judge this situation better than these other people who are either none or only some of these things.

And my judgment is that we need to oppose Sotomayor on the issue of biased jurisprudence, which is antithetical to the rule of law, not of men (or women).

I don’t feel compelled to repudiate Limbaugh or Gingrich, although they have chosen a method I, in my Irish-Scottish-German-American female wisdom, would not have.

The main point is that Sotomayor would not make a good Supreme Court justice because of her preference for jurisprudence biased a priori on ethnic grounds. Nothing Rush or Newt says will make it honest for a Republican to fail to acknowledge that.

J.E. Dyer on May 29, 2009 at 4:19 PM

they would use the trouncing they gave us to push for healthcare and win because Republicans would be somewhat exhausted over the fight over a judge

What a horrible, horrible thought that these well-paid people, for lack of a better word, are not capable of doing their job for an entire term.

Unfortunately, I’m not sure you are wrong.

MamaAJ on May 29, 2009 at 4:20 PM

Again it seems my letter to Senator Cornyn must have been lost in the mail. Surely he can’t be ignoring me.

rihar on May 29, 2009 at 4:20 PM

Ugh. I wish all these so called pundits would go away.

Blake on May 29, 2009 at 4:23 PM

Before this is all over, the GOP will be stuffing the Senate ballot box in favor of the Great Latina Decider. She’ll pass the Senate 273-7.

progressoverpeace on May 29, 2009 at 3:51 PM

If this wasn’t so serious… that would be funny…
This woman is a blatant RACIST… If the quislings in the senate don’t fillibuster we’ll be in so much trouble… this is so incredibly outrageous, I can’t fathom it…How can this be? Did I mention…SHE’S A RACIST!!!!

jerrytbg on May 29, 2009 at 4:24 PM

starfleet_dude on May 29, 2009 at 4:11 PM

Last time I checked, I’m pretty sure Rush Limbaugh doesn’t work for the republican party. So you and these other losers might wanna give up attempting to hush him up

youngO on May 29, 2009 at 4:25 PM

As a conservative, now I know what it feels like to have to depend on the French for our defense. Pre-emptive surrender is the rule of the day, on the right. Pathetic. And this is all against a guy (The Precedent) who has lost every battle people have taken to him. He’s been losing this one, too, until these idiot “conservatives” started defending him and attacking us. Great work. Really. Just great …

progressoverpeace on May 29, 2009 at 4:26 PM

right-wing blog readers are a conservative nutroots

That’s a statement of fact as it applies to HA, for example.

radiofreevillage on May 29, 2009 at 4:27 PM

jerrytbg on May 29, 2009 at 4:24 PM

Even given all the idiocy and cowardice exhibited by so-called conservatives, lately, I still find this particular pre-emptive surrender to be jaw-dropping. I weep for this nation.

progressoverpeace on May 29, 2009 at 4:28 PM

Last time I checked, I’m pretty sure Rush Limbaugh doesn’t work for the republican party. So you and these other losers might wanna give up attempting to hush him up

If you don’t think Limbaugh is firmly identified with the Republican Party after numerous apologies by those Republican office-holders who dared to criticize him, you’re not going to get how that brands the GOP in the minds of moderates and independents. I’m not going to pretend I can hush him up, but the Republican Party is increasingly having a problem with the spite-mongering rhetoric that comes from Limbaugh and his ilk, and the Democrats are more than happy to take advantage of it.

starfleet_dude on May 29, 2009 at 4:29 PM

“Given how the likes of Limbaugh, Gingrich, Liddy, et. al. have messily chumned the rhetorical waters on Sotomayor’s nomination, there’s no freakin’ way questions about race, empathy, etc. can now be legitimately asked during her nomination hearings in the Senate without all that sorry crazy base rhetoric being gleefully repeated by the Democrats.”

Why’s that? If the Republicans had any courage they’d use Sotomayor’s own words or at least ask her the pointed questions that need to be asked. I listen to Rush everyday and I have not heard any chumming of the rhetorical waters. None. Zip, zero, nada. You obviously don’t listen so stop accepting the left’s premise that that’s what is going on.
That’s what our Republican leaders like Cornyn and Steele are doing, accepting the liberal’s premise.

ncjetsfan on May 29, 2009 at 4:34 PM

As a dim Scottish-Jewish-German-English-god knows what else American male, I have an opinion about what the wise Irish-Scottish-German-American woman above said, but I really don’t see why any of you should listen to me. I think you should listen to her, but I’m kind of unclear – wouldn’t you know it – about whether that might actually mean you shouldn’t listen to her.

Are there any wise Latinas here who can help clear that one up for me? Or was I wrong even to have asked? Or am I wrong to have asked that?

Never mind.

CK MacLeod on May 29, 2009 at 4:36 PM

Of maybe you shoud go ahead and mind. Don’t take my advice. I’m still working on my moment of enlightenment I guess.

CK MacLeod on May 29, 2009 at 4:37 PM

radiofreevillage on May 29, 2009 at 4:27 PM

I suppose that depends on your definition of nutroot. I think I’m mainstream right, for instance, as opposed to a nutroot. A nutroot, based on the examples I’ve seen over the past 8 years, is someone who constantly sputters intense invective and hate and/or advocates violence against others. But being passionate is not the same as being a nutroot.

AUINSC on May 29, 2009 at 4:38 PM

I weep for this nation.

progressoverpeace on May 29, 2009 at 4:28 PM

As do I.

jerrytbg on May 29, 2009 at 4:38 PM

What does Meghan McCain have to say about this?

yogi41 on May 29, 2009 at 4:44 PM

CK MacLeod on May 29, 2009 at 4:36 PM

Well, since we are playing the lefty game of ‘heads, I win! tails, you lose!’…and you seem to be a conservative, whatever you asked is wrong and offensive and you’ll lose all the elections from here on out, wingnut.

AUINSC on May 29, 2009 at 4:46 PM

I listen to Rush everyday and I have not heard any chumming of the rhetorical waters.

Well, here’s an example for you:

LIMBAUGH: I care about whether she’s qualified, and I think she’s disqualified herself. Not only does she lack the often-discussed appropriate judicial temperament, it’s worse than that. She brings a form of bigotry or racism to the court. I don’t care — we’re not supposed to say it, we’re supposed to pretend it didn’t happen, we’re supposed to look at other things, but it’s the elephant in the room. The real question here that needs to be asked — and nobody on our side, from a columnist to a TV commentator to anybody in our party has the guts to ask: How can a president nominate such a candidate? And how can a party get behind such a candidate? That’s what would be asked if somebody were foolish enough to nominate David Duke or pick somebody even less offensive.

Right, let’s compare Sotomayor to David freakin’ KKK Duke! That’ll show ‘em!! 1111!!!!1111

starfleet_dude on May 29, 2009 at 4:46 PM

starfleet_dude on May 29, 2009 at 4:11 PM

Stop with the straw men. Is that all you people can do in an argument?

Friggin’ obsessed with a radio personality… That’s not healthy. Not that I really give a crap about your health.

I don’t listen to Rush that much, but I’ll take him any day of the week over the slimeball, underhanded libs.

I guess that’s hate-filled, too.

OK I can’t stand liberals, and I hate their policies, sue me.

reaganaut on May 29, 2009 at 4:47 PM

What the hell difference will it make? If the GOP oppose this Latino woman they will be made out to be racist-haters of Hispanics and will lose Hispanic voters. OK, first let’s ask McCain how that Hispanic vote work out for him. Yeah, if we be real nice, perhaps the GOP might not lose the black vote as well. The Hispanic community has become the new african-american community thanks to the damn demacract. Next ,the Muslim community will be looking for a free ride and a little welfare. I agree with Rush, go after the fat bitch and bring a rope.

try again later on May 29, 2009 at 4:48 PM

Right, let’s compare Sotomayor to David freakin’ KKK Duke! That’ll show ‘em!! 1111!!!!1111

You’re just not very smart, are you?

reaganaut on May 29, 2009 at 4:48 PM

Stop with the straw men.

Limbaugh’s quite real enough, and quoting him is legit.

starfleet_dude on May 29, 2009 at 4:52 PM

starfleet_dude on May 29, 2009 at 4:46 PM

That’s hilarious…your going apoplectic over that?

Define racist then.

AUINSC on May 29, 2009 at 4:53 PM

This is asinine. These people are too wrapped up in their liberal cocktail party circuit to have a clue. I didn’t hear ANY voices in the Democrat party when they went after Bork, Alito or anyone else!

Frankly, these people have zero credibility any more with the conservative base.

MCPO Airdale on May 29, 2009 at 4:54 PM

Screw. Them. All.

madmonkphotog on May 29, 2009 at 4:54 PM

With friends like Limbaugh who say stuff like this:

Rush said he thinks Republicans want Hispanics to replace conservative Christians in the party.

The Republican Party will find itself only needing a pup tent.

starfleet_dude on May 29, 2009 at 4:56 PM

Levin said something to the effect that She’s a mental lightweight and won’t have the ability to sway a reed much less the other Justices. The Democrats seem to agree that she’s not that bright compared to the others on the bench. Let her in so she can humiliate herself AND Obama endlessly.

But … make her work what brain cells she has to get the job. My guess is she won’t be able to handle a real grilling and will resort to screaming. Should be good c-span viewing if the GOP delivers. If the GOP gives her a pass I am going to be seriously disappointed.

Why the hell is Noonan still allowed to write?

BrideOfRove on May 29, 2009 at 4:56 PM

It seems that “don’t be mean” is a way of saying “don’t embarrass anyone with the truth.” But when one of the parties involved has something that should be exposed for the good of the country, the truth must come first.

It’s been said that when you have to kill someone it costs nothing to be polite. I’m not sure that’s true, but I would argue that civility is called for … but not hiding from the truth. Put the damning questions in a civil but firm tone; challenge the prevarications and evasions in a no-nonsense tone, deliver the verdict in a somber tone. But get the truth out.

njcommuter on May 29, 2009 at 4:56 PM

Noonan, Cornyn, Steele, Krauthammer: We have no memories of anything beyond last week. Democrats are so sweet!

kahall on May 29, 2009 at 5:01 PM

Even more rhetoric from Limbaugh:

“If we want to talk about richness of experience, there’s a group of people that were here before we got here, gang: the Indians, the Native Americans, the chiefs, the redskins. I don’t see any of them being put up on the courts. Talk about a richness of experience — hell, these clowns beat Custer. They have cred. You don’t see them being put up, do you?”

Yep, that’s racist, insensitive and stupid. And that’s identified with the Republican Party, dudes.

starfleet_dude on May 29, 2009 at 5:01 PM

Comment pages: 1 2