Wise Latina wise enough for three GOP yes votes so far

posted at 3:30 pm on July 17, 2009 by Allahpundit

McConnell, Bunning, Inhofe, and Roberts say no but Snowe, Lugar, and Martinez say yes oh yes. I predicted 75 yays; how’s that shaping up so far? Kennedy and Byrd are out sick, so with every other Democrat plus the three committed Republicans voting yes, we’re at 61. Graham is almost certainly a yes, so that’s 62. Maverick and Kay Bailey Hutchison are both running in states with huge Latino populations next year and Cornyn, as head of the NRSC, is now a party spokesman and can’t risk being seen as, ahem, “intolerant,” so there’s 65. Grassley, Collins, and Voinovich are reliable RINOs, which makes 68. Ensign might be eager to extend an olive branch to the Democrats given his troubles of late, so he’s, er, 69. Gregg, Hatch, and Kyl will probably hold true to their “statesmen” personas and give the new president the benefit of the doubt, which gets us to 72. Toss in a few wild cards — Murkowski, maybe, and possibly even Jeff Sessions to position himself as a “reasonable” minority leader on the Judiciary Committee ahead of The One’s next nomination — and we’re right there. In fact, when I made this prediction, I’d forgotten that Teddy and the Kleagle aren’t voting these days and assumed Sotomayor already had 60 votes banked. If that were true, we’d already be past 75.

Elsewhere, Byron York calls the GOP’s efforts during the hearing a failure. Eh. I think it was a victory strategically, for reasons DrewM explains:

First, they got Obama’s own nominee to disagree with his ‘empathy’ standard. No, she doesn’t mean it but it will make for some nice issue adds in the future.

Second, the nominee of the most liberal President ever, in a Senate with 60 Democrats still felt compelled to parrot the conservative view of judicial philosophy. That shows the power of the issue and how deeply unpopular the liberals know they are in this area. Yeah, that’s dangerously close to a useless moral victory but it shows the impact 20+ years of harping on this issue has had. It’s a long game and we are winning with the voters.

Control of the language is important and dispiriting the liberal legal community is simply delicious.

It’s more than a moral victory. Throwing a tantrum over Sotomayor would have been pointless, not only because she’s a lock given the current make-up of the Senate but because she’s never been known as a liberal firebrand from the bench. The smart way to play it was they played it: Not crying wolf over someone who’s never been a bombthrower but getting her to pay lip service over and over again to a Roberts-esque form of judicial conservatism, which they can use as a bludgeon if the next nominee is, in fact, a firebrand. It’s none too persuasive to tell a Democratic nominee that they’re out of the mainstream vis-a-vis Scalia, but if they’re out of the mainstream compared to The One’s own first pick for the Court? Rhetorical gold.


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

This is why “conservatives” would have been wise to focus their efforts on the Congressional elections vice arguing over who is the lesser of two evils for the Presidency. Then again, it’s not like “conservatives” have it together enough to vote on principle moreover party allegience, so I guess I’m asking too much of people.

Send_Me on July 17, 2009 at 7:07 PM

Not enough. We need to grill her on issues and make her explain her decisions in terms simple enough that EVERYONE can see how corrupt they are … and then challenge every Senator who votes for her in the next election, and on those grounds. We need to make her look so toxic that a few Dems peel off.

njcommuter on July 17, 2009 at 8:07 PM

“I don’t want to argue about this. The way I see it, she’s the best we could have hoped for from Obama and to vote against her doesn’t help anything.”
-
Amen. I don’t understand why yall hate her so much. She made a few racist comments in speeches pandering to minority audiences. Big deal, that and a couple verbal gaffes is all anyone has on her. It doesn’t change the fact that she’s probably the most conservative nominee a Democratic president has ever put forward and Obama is probably furious. This battle is a really stupid one to pick.

Simona on July 17, 2009 at 8:34 PM

Martinez is retiring next year so he doesn’t give a flying….

Besides, he apparently supports her because their both Hispanic. Great.

Dr. ZhivBlago on July 17, 2009 at 8:35 PM

“They’re”, dangit…how about an edit function around here?

Dr. ZhivBlago on July 17, 2009 at 8:36 PM

The only question left is

just how deep will the GOP drive the dagger into its own heart?

The GOP doen’t seem to realize the resentment/offense among conservatives and other Americans of principle (I know folks who just won’t “label” themselves).

THEY ARE TODAY’S WHIG PARTY…if not “today” literally, then soon. And quickly.

Lockstein13 on July 17, 2009 at 8:58 PM

Snoew and Lugar are RINOs. Martinez does not want to appear anti-Hispanic.

Phil Byler on July 18, 2009 at 9:30 PM

Lugar is a senile disgrace to Indiana. Time to go.

SKYFOX on July 19, 2009 at 8:17 AM

Comment pages: 1 2