- ‹ previous
- 935 of 2717
- next ›
Supreme Court Kabuki Watch
The nomination of Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court is only 12 hours old and I'm already sick of it. Conservatives, who seem constitutionally incapable of viewing any non-white nominee as anything other than identity politics run wild, have already decided she's just a crass affirmative action hire. 
Out of a decade-long appelate court career, the only opinion of hers they seem to have heard of, or care about, is Ricci. And unlike all the middle class white guys on the court, who are apparently paragons of race-blind rationality, they're convinced that she's just naturally going to be incapable of judging any case before her as anything other than a woman and a Hispanic.
Not that it matters. We all know how this is going to play out. First, everyone is going to start looking for some dark secret in her background that will derail her nomination. That will probably fail. Then she'll testify before the Senate, and everyone will ask what she thinks of Roe and Casey and Kelo. She'll dutifully claim that she's never even heard of these cases, and on the off chance that any of them ring a bell, she'll sing the usual song about how it would be improper to say anything about any matter that might come before the court in the future. Which is everything. After a few weeks of this, all the Democrats and maybe a dozen or so Republicans will vote to confirm her and she'll join the court in time for the fall term.
It's all so tedious. So instead of going though with it, why don't we just pretend we did all this, confirm her tomorrow, and then get back to something important, like fighting a couple of wars, trying to rescue the world economy, creating a national healthcare plan, and stopping global warming?
Not as meaningless as you think
The Republicans are clearly going to use her confirmation (and I haven't heard one yet who thinks she won't be confirmed) to lay down markers about what's acceptable to them and what's not to prepare the ground so they can block the next SC nominee-- and t he next and the next.
That's what the kabuki is about. It's quite serious.
Bifocals
It was my first pair of "relaxed-fit" jeans that did in my morale. Next up was my first "senior" discount, but I'm not so bummed I won't take advantage of it. Cheer up! It's all downhill from here!
You're right, but can't I be
You're right, but can't I be cranky about it anyway? Please?
I had to get bifocals today, so I'm officially old and crotchety. Luckily for all of you, I don't have to wear them while blogging, or else I'd really really be cranky.
I'm with you on this...
I am completely with you on this one. (note: I lean Republican).
It's not like if the right digs up some piece of dirt, that the subsequent replacement isn't going to be just as (liberal, left leaning, fill in the blank) as she is.
The facts are that Obama won the election, so he gets to decide as to what sort of judge to install. Those are the breaks.
Sotomayor Nomination
Oh, Kevin, you are so naive.
The Republican objective here is to derail the nomination - it does not matter one whit who the nominee is or how well qualified. What matters is that the minority can create enough noise to seem to have power. If they seem to have power, then they do have power.
The President could have nominated Oliver Wendell Holmes. The Republicans would have objected. The news media would have told us that this was a "controversial choice."
At a different blog where
At a different blog where some folks were going on and on about how evil she is and acting as though they were experts and not just reciting the talking points, I asked them if they could name a single liberal judge they would be okay with, pointing out that since they were going to go up to 11 against every judge that there really was no reason to listen to them at all.
And of course, since no one has asked Rush who would be okay and he hasn't said, they weren't able to say either.
Sotomayor Nomination
Oh, Kevin, you are so naive.
The Republican objective here is to derail the nomination - it does not matter one whit who the nominee is or how well qualified. What matters is that the minority can create enough noise to seem to have power. If they seem to have power, then they do have power.
The President could have nominated Oliver Wendell Holmes. The Republicans would have objected. The news media would have told us that this was a "controversial choice."
Already cranky?
I found yesterday to be an interesting news day. Apart from the wingnut windbags, there really are interesting aspects to the Ricci case worth talking and thinking about; the same is true of the Didden case; it's fun to watch the Republicans stumble in and out of racism because they just can't help themselves, at least, it's fun to watch when they're out of power; and mostly, I was just fascinated at the speed at which the mainstream media decided that she was going to be confirmed and was an excellent, though controversial, choice. As Atrios has said, watching the media really is like watching 8-year-olds play soccer. And it's pretty rare to see them chase the ball to our side, so enjoy it when you can.
Sure, the hearings are going to be tedious and ridiculous, yesterday was kinda fun.
SCOTUS is important
Kevin, a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land is "something important". No president should expect a rubber stamp approval of his nominee, no matter how qualified she is for the job.
Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
Seriously. Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr, Kevin. Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr. Geez, forget your coffee this morning?
If I had wanted cream and sugar, why order the damn coffee?
Oh, but wait, first she has
Oh, but wait, first she has to prove she won't put her "feelings" ahead of the law.
Because, apparently, there is a huge open question as to whether a sitting appellate court justice thinks it's appropriate to set aside case law and rule with her "feelings." In fact, according to the statements of the minority leader, Orrin Hatch, and a whole pile of other Republicans yesterday, that is the CENTRAL concern they have.
Interestingly, I don't remember Republicans raising concerns about being irrationally led by one's "feelings" when it was Scalia, or Alito, or, uh, anyone else being confirmed. Interestingly, there was a presumption of rationality in those cases that they don't seem willing to afford a sitting appellate court judge. According to the Republicans, she has to prove she doesn't rule with her feelings. Because, again, they have assumed for no apparent reason that she does.
It's unbelievable. And frankly, I think it's a sign of too few women and Latinos in our media landscape that Republican leaders think it's acceptable to baselessly accuse a Latina of legislating from her "feelings" rather than the law, and to then demand she prove otherwise.
all the automatic comments
all the automatic comments were disappointing, even if perfectly predictable. I even wondered whether it's true that the Supreme Court is so all-important. They take up fewer cases every year, and many times, their decisions are not such that they actually change every day life (yes, yet, I know, the election decision, OK, but that's an outlier). The court is so politicized that who really wants to take serious questions like abortion rights or gay rights to the court? I'd rather work state-by-state and legislatively, and even more broadly work to change public culture and opinion than depend on the court at this point. It's just distasteful how the appointment process is now something like a show trial... It would be better if we had a term limit or at least a retirement age for judges, so there wouldn't be this emphasis on who the specific nine judges are...
elisabeth
couldn't disagree more
Strongly disagree. Many, if not most, Supreme Court decisions have quite significant real-world implications, as Ledbetter should make clear. And here's a fascinating, if disturbing, first-person account of the consequences that Good News Club v. Milford Central School -- for which Clarence Thomas wrote the majority's opinion in 2001 -- had, and continues to have in school districts throughout the country. It forces schools to open their afterschool programs to interested evangelical programs with designs of proselytizing to young & impressionable children. Just because the Court transcripts are laden with obscure legal theories & a bunch of Latin phrases that are generally unfamiliar to those of us who didn't study law doesn't mean this stuff doesn't affect our daily lives. It does.
There's something
There's something comfortable about the Kabuki. It lulls me to sleep. I just imagine Inhofe in Kabuki makeup droning on and on and on.
bifocals
You can be as cranky as you like, Kevin. You ought to get cranky more often.
But on the bifocals -- once you get past the "Jeez, I'm old" factor, you'll find that they'll make life better. Everything will be butterflies and unicorns again. Trust me on this.
Sotomayor
The weeks ahead will be the usual moronic inferno, but with the advantage, assuming they don't find some dark secret that derails Sotomayor's nomination, that the Republicans will again demonstrate how removed they are from the concerns of most Americans. Which will be useful in 2010. Every little bit of Republican madness helps.
For me the most depressing part of the confirmation hearings won't be the usual Republican bad logic and bad faith, but the incompetence of the Democrats AND Republicans when it comes to holding a job interview. These people seem never to have hired anyone in their lives, and have no idea how to go about it. Can't somebody run a clinic for them in how to vet a new prospective hire? It's the only hiring situation I've ever heard of where the job interviewer does nearly all the talking.
Old and cranky?
Kev,
Oh yeah, I know that song. I think I even wrote a verse or two.
On a personal note, screw the bifocals and try monocular vision. Assuming you can tolerate contacts. You'll get used to it.
I think getting tired of the BS comes with covering politics. Soldier on, mon frer, soldier on. The pendulum is swinging slowly back our way.
Oh, and you know why the kabuki continues. Money. You won't collect the dough unless you put on the show.
Tripp
I think she's a great
I think she's a great choice! I hope to see her confirmed really quickly...
I disagree Kevin
While it may be tedious, this will be an important contributor to 2010 and 2012 election outcomes, hopefully to the benefit of democrats. I mean look at it ...
the Republicans will argue that a woman who was the editor of the Yale Law Review and graduated summa cum laude from Princeton is not qualified ....
talk about your white male identity politics! I'm hoping they'll follow Rush like a herd of lemmings.
(do lemmings come in herds? or is it packs)
Campaigning
The weeks of campaigning against Sotomayor have had an interesting side effect: Republicans' calls to wait until they've had time to study her record look disingenuous from the get go. It's all been out there for a while.
Of course they were disingenuous
Everybody knows Republicans can't read.
Kabuki
Oh, Kevin, you're such an idealist. "All work and no play...."
The legal community seems to
The legal community seems to think highly of her, but when all is said and done, Barack Obama put a sign on the Supreme Court human resources dept. stipulating that WHITE MALES NEED NOT APPLY.
Also meseems I smell a buildup of the drive to rig future elections by giving illegal aliens a path to voting Democratic. Part of the pander to Hispanics campaign.
One hears so much about Sotomayer and the Obamas pulling themselves up by the bootstraps, but given their background of Harvard, Princeton, Yale, one suspects they come from the pampered affirmative action sector. I don't really know, just a suspicion. How do poor folks afford Harvard? Working in the steel mill? A friend of mine made enough money in high school working in tough industrial jobs that he put himself through U. of I., but I have my doubts that the Obamas and Sotomayer came from this sort of self-made background.
thank god...
... somebody remembered to bring a six pack of stupid to the party. Apparently, you're completely unfamiliar with the concepts of academic scholarships & student loans. Idiot.
Sonia Sotomayor nomination
dePaul Consiglio
Amen.
the only characters missing
the only characters missing from your slick, sarcastic and weary screed is the chorus of esoteric cognisanti...soiled bitches like you
/60% of her rulings have been overturned
60% of her rulings
60% of her rulings overturned? I can't get the numbers to work out to 60. Is there a new "Limbaugh math" somewhere?
In regular math, 3 overturned out of 380 rulings gets you to around 0.8%.
Or you could say 3 overturned out of 6 appealed gets you to 50%, but then that would suggest she has a lower rate of being overturned than just about any other sitting judge. (75% is the average.)
Or maybe you could just say 3 overturned out of 3 overturned. then you're at 100%! That's a much more solid number, I think you should run with that one.
How do poor folks afford
How do poor folks afford Harvard?
Scholarships are how they do it. If you come from a family that makes less than $250K a year and are accepted into Harvard you don't pay a thing. As far as other schools many people get scholarships based on their academic merit, but some consideration is given to financial need. Just because you earned scholarships due to hard work in high school doesn't mean you aren't "self-made"
Partly Agree...
The "We're Not Them" Industrial Complex of Think Tanks and PACs will happily (both sides) fuel the "controversy" of Obama's selection for as long as they can print out bogus surveys attached to fund raising letters to keep their organizations chugging along.
What is more interesting to watch are the angry white men and the GOP, but I repeat myself, as they continue to self destruct. The prudent course of action here is to realize that Obama won Hispanics by 85% and play your hand accordingly. What gain, since her nomination is all but imminent, would they receive for holding hearings full of vitriol and questioning her rise to this opportunity as nothing more than affirmative action and she herself a racist? And though Obama polled poorly with white woman they'll also do themselves no service by repeatedly attacking her on what is essentially trumped up charges. Joan Welsh will be leading the sexism charge at full speed.
But they just can't help themselves, can they? It's another assault on the "white man citadel" and every reflexive core of their being says counter attack, Neanderthalish as that strategy maybe.
Don't get me wrong, I am all for exposure. I have no legal background and so I think it helpful for me and other legal laymen like me to have her record nitpicked and presented to us, though I prefer to have it presented as 'here is the case, here is how she ruled' without the added this is why you should think it is good or bad thrown in. I'll make that own decision for myself. And yeah, a little background is fine, I don't need to know if she sleeps on a first date but if she, during her days at Princeton, was say a radical Puerto Rican nationalist, it would be nice to know.
But what the GOP will do is not attack her judicial record (perhaps because initial reports seem it is quite vanilla and lacks controversy) but her race, her gender, cherry picked sentences, the term empathy (um, which was used by GHWB when nominating Clarence Thomas) and other things that don't play well in the xenophobic, pseudo hyper masculine, Anglocentric, perpetually angry world view which is the current GOP. And so they reduce their existing and potential membership even more (one can already see the Spanish language ad campaigns for 2010 quoting Republican leaders decrying her as an affirmative action recipient in the swing states out West). One more coffin in the nail.
So let them howl, in fact, encourage it.
A few cases in point:
"White man racist nominee would be forced to withdraw. Latina woman racist should also withdraw," - Newt Gingrich, twittering.
Unfortunately for her and fortunately for us there are plenty of things that we've even talked about her already. I'm telling you, she appears to be a racist. She said things that are racist in any other context ... You can still be a racist and have all those things in your background. You can be a racist and have all that stuff in your background.
Tom Tancredo
"Putting the emphasis on the final syllable of Sotomayor is unnatural in English... and insisting on an unnatural pronunciation is something we shouldn't be giving in to."
National Review Online's Mark Krikorian
"Here you have a racist, you might want to soften that and say a reverse racist..."
Rush Limbaugh
"Obama seems to have the views of a 21-year-old Hispanic girl -- that is, only by having a black president, an Hispanic justice, a female secretary of State, and Bozo the Clown as vice president will the United States become a true 'vanguard of societal ideas and changes.'"
Michael Goldfarb (Weekly Standard)
In the months ahead, it will be important for those of us in the U.S. Senate to weigh her qualifications and character as well as her ability to rule fairly without undue influence from her own personal race, gender, or political preferences."
Sen. James Inhofe
You almost feel sorry for them, they just can't seem to control themselves. Almost. Actually, I get Rush, his job is to stir the soup but the elected dudes, they need to rise above it, at least this time, or speak a little more coded.
nike af1 light up shoes
Yes ,your article is very good, we have the same belief with you,so let me introduce
thearea to you.Now nike ,as the worldwide brand, is beloved by more and more people.Recently,i purchase a pair of Nike Men's AF1 Light-up Shoes in a online srore,they specialized in nike air force one sheos ,the air force one light-up shoes are high in quality.To buy af1 lights up shoes this time,i feel happy. because light up air force one give my feet utmost comfort.I recommend this best online store : http://www.af1star.com .