Video: Graham plans to get tough with Sotomayor
posted at 1:35 pm on June 1, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
How tough? Lindsey Graham suggests that he will want a complete accounting for Sonia Sotomayor’s 2001 assertion that she would make a better judge than Graham himself due to her ethnicity. Graham points out that he would never have made it to a confirmation hearing had he said something even remotely close to this in reverse:
Graham’s right, but all of the advance warning has given Sotomayor plenty of time to adjust the rhetoric. Graham will probably get an apology and a retraction, and that will probably suffice with this hearing, too. I’d prefer to see Graham demand an explanation of the passage Orrin Hatch discovered, where Sotomayor claims that the judiciary exists to “overhaul” the law. If Graham found the first passage offensive as a white male, he should find that a lot more offensive as a legislator.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
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:
Screech fights Slater.
MadisonConservative on June 1, 2009 at 1:38 PM
I heard he might skip a ‘yes ma’am’ once or twice, just to tweak her.
Vashta.Nerada on June 1, 2009 at 1:38 PM
WASP(m)
He should know better by now.
/s
bluelightbrigade on June 1, 2009 at 1:38 PM
A Gay on Latina cat fight.
Line forms in the rear.
///snark
seejanemom on June 1, 2009 at 1:41 PM
He’s had enough. He’s gonna be tougher than a soap bubble.
LibTired (KO) on June 1, 2009 at 1:42 PM
Hey…he will eat her alive. When he is properly inspired he is a tremendous advocate.
tomas on June 1, 2009 at 1:44 PM
To be serious, I AM glad SOMEONE is calling her to the mat for this one…especially because Windsey is WHITE, and MALE.
But Sotomayor never insulted white, male, GAY jurists.
seejanemom on June 1, 2009 at 1:44 PM
I’m from South Carolina—its only you outlanders who don’t know the open secret.
seejanemom on June 1, 2009 at 1:47 PM
Great guys I can hear it now. “Graham himself embattled within his own party with comments on his sexuality, matched wits with Sotomayer over he controversial comments”
tomas on June 1, 2009 at 1:48 PM
I heard it live and thought it sounded insincere. He didn’t even mention La Raza or her ruling on the case which also affirms her reverse-racist feelings. I’m sure Graham will bring it up but only to the smallest extent he thinks he can get away with by the base; the same base he proclaimed to La Raza that he would tell the racist bigots to shut up.
FloatingRock on June 1, 2009 at 1:49 PM
Get tough with a Latina? Right. *snort*
Pull the other one.
tickleddragon on June 1, 2009 at 1:51 PM
It doesn’t matter if she’s prejudiced against whites. Racism towards whites, isn’t really racism. It’s justified, for the sins of the past, present, and future.*rolling eyes*
capejasmine on June 1, 2009 at 1:51 PM
Don’t count me in that. I’m not in his Party. Hell, HE’S not in his Party.
tickleddragon on June 1, 2009 at 1:51 PM
Going to be a tough slog, a racist bigot who is a Constitutional dunce isn’t going to go easy. I doubt Graham has the metal.
tarpon on June 1, 2009 at 1:53 PM
I predict that “Mini Me” votes for her nonetheless.
I’d actually be impressed if he didn’t or would resist McCain and the next “gang of” that forms and shows some conservative action.
wildcat84 on June 1, 2009 at 1:53 PM
I hope graham gets ‘tough’ on getting to the bottom of her view on the 2nd and have her rulings as back-up to counter her.
L
letget on June 1, 2009 at 1:57 PM
I look at it this way…We all new Obama would win…we know the democrats would take over congress…what we have to do is make sure people know they are just that People.
This is harder to do with Obama because he is a religious figure, but little by little the job can be done by pointing out his mistakes.
Change came pretty quick with the republicans…it will in time with the dems. Probably quicker.
tomas on June 1, 2009 at 2:00 PM
If Graham is making a stand, then the polls must show he’s losing in South Carolina. This backstabbing McCain lapdog only gets conservative when the polls make him.
volsense on June 1, 2009 at 2:00 PM
Graham has both Sotomayor doors covered. I agree that the “overhaul” of Constitutional law is the specific rallying cry. Leftists want moral relativism from prejudiced judge decisions. Conservatives want the supreme law of the land to be observed.
maverick muse on June 1, 2009 at 2:00 PM
If it had not been for the sins of all those evil, very unwise white men we would not have cars, planes, light bulbs, refrigerators, computers, etc (the list is almost endless) and hence the world would not be doomed to fry to a crisp because of Global Warming. Wise latina women have never done anything like that as far as I know.
MB4 on June 1, 2009 at 2:01 PM
volsense on June 1, 2009 at 2:00 PM
Given that he’s the one in place to make the stand, applaud; our eyes are wide open.
maverick muse on June 1, 2009 at 2:02 PM
It’s nothing more than a show of “getting tough”, when you telegraph a punch coming out of left field you are intentionally giving your opponent the chance to dodge. Besides, as far as Republicans are concerned the racist statement she made has run it’s course.
If they were concerned about their constituants they would be questioning her rulings concerning the Second Ammendment, and her belief that the Constitution doesn’t apply to individual states. I thought all states had to ratify the Constitution before becoming a state.
Rode Werk on June 1, 2009 at 2:04 PM
It would be easier to take him seriously if he wasn’t such a girly man.
milwife88 on June 1, 2009 at 2:06 PM
Time will tell on Mr. Sugarbritches. He usually shows incredible judgement on the direction of politics in general especially the republican party.
Oh, wait……..
JeffinOrlando on June 1, 2009 at 2:07 PM
I’ll believe it when I see it.
MarkTheGreat on June 1, 2009 at 2:08 PM
o/t: fox news just said that the UN security council would have a comment at the end of the week about NK’s move of ICBM to where they can blast Alaska.
well, sh*t, by then, Palin would have mobilized the Alaska Nat’l Guard & blown the little dictator to bits.
kelley in virginia on June 1, 2009 at 2:10 PM
Ouch!
whitetop on June 1, 2009 at 2:12 PM
I want a complete accounting of her conduct in the Ricci case. Reverse discrimination aside, she and the other two on the panel sat on this case before finally issuing a half-a**, one-paragraph order in a case involving one of the great constitutional issues of the day. Even a prominent liberal colleague was so appalled that he made sure that his dissent, in a later en banc hearing, was so strident that SCOTUS had to grant certiorari. I can’t wait until the reversal gets tatooed to her forehead.
BuckeyeSam on June 1, 2009 at 2:13 PM
Bull*@^%!
peacenprosperity on June 1, 2009 at 2:13 PM
Yeah, well how exactly is he going to criticize anyone for being a member of a group that has honored The Great Man, and received his most vociferous pandering?
Not.Likely.
Jaibones on June 1, 2009 at 2:22 PM
I hope the process is polite. I’m pretty tired of hate-filled rhetoric, regardless of the side.
AnninCA on June 1, 2009 at 2:22 PM
Anyone can see that he is an effeminate sissy (two different things), but I didn’t know he was actually gay.
Jaibones on June 1, 2009 at 2:23 PM
Yep, that secret about Lindsey has been known for years. As a fellow native of SC, I was openly amused at the “shock” about Strom Thurmond’s half-black daughter. EVERYONE in SC knew of her.
SouthernGent on June 1, 2009 at 2:36 PM
Graham is full of crap. he’s going to try to make himself look good before he votes for her. Read the rest of her speech where she defends her bigoted remark.
He’s just another liar in office.
dogsoldier on June 1, 2009 at 2:41 PM
So…….what do we do now, as conservatives? Foam at the mouth, snarl, and get all rabid on him, and throw him out of the party, while throwing holy water, and brandishing crucifixes on him?
I’m sure the left is getting their popcorn ready, for that show. pffffffffft.
capejasmine on June 1, 2009 at 2:42 PM
Man?
LevStrauss on June 1, 2009 at 2:43 PM
WND quote :
captivated_dem on June 1, 2009 at 2:44 PM
LevStrauss on June 1, 2009 at 2:43 PM
I was using the term loosley. VERY LOOSLEY! :)
milwife88 on June 1, 2009 at 2:45 PM
From my years of watching Washington, “getting tough” means making a big deal about a small item with a camera present, little bit of finger wagging, maybe even a useless no vote, followed by the person being scrutinized either being confirmed, promoted, etc.
LevStrauss on June 1, 2009 at 2:46 PM
captivated, while I agree that the seven can keep the nominee from being discharged for a while, there may be a discharge petition that can be filed in the Senate as a whole, but that also might require at least one signature from the minority party.
eaglewingz08 on June 1, 2009 at 2:48 PM
What would the numbers look like for the discharge petition to pass in the Senate? Simple majority including the one minority signature?
captivated_dem on June 1, 2009 at 2:55 PM
I was expecting Graham to do this because he has already cried in front of La Raza while bashing all those evil white bigots who want common sense enforcement of immigration laws. He’s a weasel’s weasel.
Buddahpundit on June 1, 2009 at 2:56 PM
Finally the other thing that kills me about these confirmation hearings is just how fake they are. A bunch of people who know what’s really going on better than any of us, acting like they don’t know which way the judge will come down on issues, fussing around with stupid hypotheticals. Frankly if I had a chance to question Sotomayor, I’d bring out a dictionary and go over the meaning of words like “Congress”, “People”, “States”, “shall not be infringed”, and just go over it to make sure she knows what the hell the distinctions between these words and phrases are. That’s what it comes down to, make them admit they are full of sh!t.
LevStrauss on June 1, 2009 at 3:04 PM
No questions about La Raza?
Dr Evil on June 1, 2009 at 3:06 PM
…sooooo…Senator Milquetoast plans to get cowboy up…what’s he gonna do? Hit her with his purse?
…this ol’ boy strikes me as having about as much lead in his pencil, so to speak, as…er…I don’t know…the Church Lady….
Puritan1648 on June 1, 2009 at 3:07 PM
She was born in New York and by all accounts of Portuguese descent I want her to explain how she can be any kind of Latina born in New York? Is she of Portuguese descent? Puerto Rico is an island not an ethnicity. Example, I am an American guess how many different ethnicities I could be?
Dr Evil on June 1, 2009 at 3:09 PM
…on behalf of Genus Mustela, I must request a retraction of this comparison….
…the United Brotherhood of Cockroaches, the Fraternal Order of Earwigs Local 375 and the International Order of Pond Scum are willing to walk out in solidarity with our furry carnivorous brothers….
…power to the vermin….
Puritan1648 on June 1, 2009 at 3:11 PM
Huh Sonia Sotomayer’s ex husband is a Chicago lawyer what were the odds on that/sarc
Dr Evil on June 1, 2009 at 3:15 PM
LOL, this guy get tough? He’s the most tender piece of cheap meat in Washington.
South Carolina, you can give us much better than this. What’s up?
Daemonocracy on June 1, 2009 at 3:22 PM
1. Senator Grahamnesty is a spineless weasel. He won’t do *schnitzle*, except lick the boots of whomever makes him momentarily relevant by putting his mug back on TV.
2. Could I please ask Sonya Sotomeyor what the ranking system is, because I’ve gotten a little lost. Would a gay, black, male be a better judge than a straight, hispanic/latino woman? Is it a point system, or is it a formula?
3. Two rabbis walk into a bar…no wait, that doesn’t work. OK, try again. Two latino males file suit against each other and the case is brought before the SCotUS, what is the tie breaker for who is ‘right’ in the case?
Geministorm on June 1, 2009 at 3:23 PM
As tough as Obama is with North Korea, no doubt.
drjohn on June 1, 2009 at 3:24 PM
I watched Graham’s interview on Fox News yesterday…he’s all talk.
ladyingray on June 1, 2009 at 3:26 PM
I believe the order of preference goes something like this:
Race
Sex
Sexuality
Religion
Ideology
So in your scenario, both are Latino and both Male. In order for one to win over the other he’s have to be gay. If both or neither are gay, then one would have to be a member of a minority religion, preferably atheist. If they cancel eachother out on this then Ideology comes into play, whoever is the most liberal mustbe protected. If none of these works, just find a white male as the guilty the party.
Daemonocracy on June 1, 2009 at 3:28 PM
No reason to get your panties in a bunch Senator Graham. She never said she’d make a better judge than a gay white male. She probably see’s you as an equal.
warden on June 1, 2009 at 3:31 PM
I’m going to try a novel approach and hold my fire until we see what happens in the confirmation hearings. As I said before, she would be taking the place of another liberal so I can’t get too worked up until I actually hear what all parties are saying.
Vince on June 1, 2009 at 3:33 PM
National Council of La Raza.
jcrue on June 1, 2009 at 3:49 PM
Economic status/class, should be added to your list. In the event of a tie, the most responsible/successful loses.
FloatingRock on June 1, 2009 at 3:55 PM
Oh brother! Lindsay Grahmnesty is going to get tough! That’s rich! He will need to change from light pink panties to light blue…that should make him feel like a man for the day!
sabbott on June 1, 2009 at 4:19 PM
OK, so I want to make sure I have this right…
Race (what’s the sub-catagory order here?)
Sex (Transgender > F > M, I’m guessing)
Sexuality (obviously homosexual > heterosexual, but what about polygamist, pedophile, asexual, bisexual, etc.?)
Religion (atheist > Muslim? > ? > ? > Catholic > Protestant > Baptist?)
Economic status ($0 > $1 > $2… > $100B, correct?)
Ideology (Statist > ? > ? > ? > ? > Conservative)
What about immigration status?
What about single parent vs. same gender parents vs. traditional family?
What about state, city or residence? (NY > CA > ? > ? > ? > … > TX ?)
Marital status?
Home owner, renter, leasing, etc. ?
I’ve got to narrow this down because I want the absolute best SCotUS candidate we can find, and so far it doesn’t look promising for Sotomayor based upon these criteria…
Geministorm on June 1, 2009 at 4:22 PM
Oh, and do you get special consideration if you were residing in New Orleans during hurricane Katrina?
Just asking…I’ve been through hurricanes Charlie, Frances, Jeanne and TS Fay, so I’m just trying to get a feel for what those storms were worth vs. Katrina.
Geministorm on June 1, 2009 at 4:25 PM
If the GOP is smart, they’ll be very polite.
Turn back around on these nominations. Turn the tables on Biden, who introduced drama into nominations.
This is Obama’s nominee. It could be a lot worse.
This is a wonderful opportunity for the GOP to demonstrate they are not simply obstructionists.
They can vet without being insulting.
AnninCA on June 1, 2009 at 4:39 PM
AnninCA,
While I think that the GOP gains nothing by filibustering Sotomayor, it would be naive to say that we should not do so to demonstrate ______________ (not simply obstructionists, the party of ‘no’, etc.).
The Democrats have never demonstrated a better half or a more noble side, in fact they did their best to besmirch selections such as Thomas, Alito, Estrada, etc. The problem here is, they NEVER pay a price for their hypocrisy or actions. Why should the GOP play like mature adults, take the losses and then submit to the crap that the Dems pull when they are in the minority?
No, the whole point is that we’re damned if we do and damned if we don’t. We oppose Obama or Sotomayor, its racism. The Dems oppose Estrada, its because he’s ideological. We let through Sotomayor without contention, and the Dems will still attack the next Republican appointee. There is no “wonderful opportunity” here, being polite and mature will buy the GOP nothing. Nobody in the general populace gives a crap if the GOP plays nice, in fact it will mean nothing and no one will remember a thing about how nice the GOP played the next time a conservative appointment is made. As you said, Biden started this crap, it won’t end until THEY change their ways, not the GOP.
So, we should vet her on her record and her statements. In other words, we should play her like we would anyone else. Any other candidate makes the racist remarks she made, they get called to the carpet. Do the same for her. I’m not saying we need to filibuster, just vet her like you would anyone. If she’s an activist judge, point it out and let the country know that’s what they are getting (a little reminder about Kelo wouldn’t hurt either). No kid gloves necessary, and we don’t need to play “nice”. We’ll get no such consideration from the other side of the aisle, the game has changed and only suckers (read, losers) keep playing by the old rules.
Geministorm on June 1, 2009 at 5:08 PM
Linsday Graham is gay? Seriously? I honestly had no idea. I need to start focusing more on people’s gender, race, religion and sexual orientation.
ihasurnominashun on June 1, 2009 at 6:41 PM
That’s the problem with all of us racist nutjob conservatives, we don’t pay attention to those things…or something.
Geministorm on June 1, 2009 at 7:02 PM
It’s fun to watch these people (Graham, McCain, et al) tear liberals apart, but it’s a pity that they only seem to do it when they’ve personally been shafted by said liberal.
OneGyT on June 1, 2009 at 8:24 PM
If Graham has announcd an intention to challenge Sotomayor on the ‘white guy’ remark, it means he isn’t trying to take her out. It means he is working to get her in and to get some points with the white guys
The announcement is as useful as the real hearing
The white guy remark has become the point of strategy for those who intend to get her nominated, because it diverts attention from other remarks in the same speech
When a minority does the ‘white guy’ routine, we are already program to understand she speaks that way because of racial oppression, she really does not mean she hates white guys, and her bad word choice is a sign she is good hearted and sensitive. It won’t happen again. Case closed.
I had figured McCain would be the useful RINO to ‘go after’ the white guy remark, to clear the way for her nomination, but I forgot about McCains’s little sidekick
Advice to Limpet, when you get your turn at Sotomayor, bite your lip and frown, sternly question her explanation, and declare you are relieved to find it was a tempest in a teapot. Remind the audience you are a guy, and then apologize for doubting her. Then you and McOain can go out dancing
If they were serious they would go after ‘moral relativism’ and foreigh law and if they were dead serious the would go after the La Raza membership
entagor on June 2, 2009 at 2:27 AM
The information I found most offensive about Sotomayor was her membership in La Raza and yet there seems to be no mention of it in the media so far. Why is this being suppressed? How any SCJ can be a member of an organization called “The Race” is hard to understand.
Ernest on June 2, 2009 at 9:23 AM
Comment pages: