Sotomayor

[Valuist]

I'm shocked none of the right wingers on here have posted on this. This was a softball thrown letter high right down the middle of the plate by none other than Sonia herself. I'd comment but what do I know? I'm just another white male.

[Tom]

Just another lib racist.
Fits in well with Barry the Bigot. (Rev Wright, the Panthers, ACORN......)
She is not fit to judge chili.
So of course Barry likes her. He like them dumb. Look at Biden.

[Track Collector]

This woman is too biased to serve on the Supreme Court where one should uphold the Constitution, not re-write it. Her way of making decisions is flat out wrong, and having her on the SC where critical issues are ruled upon would be very bad, if not outright dangerous for America.

Of course we know why someone like her was nominated. The current administration understands perfectly well that many Americans find their proposed policies too offensive and DANGEROUS. Since Americans at large would never vote on implementation of these policies, the ONLY way left to inact them is via manipulation in the court system and radical judges.

It is a small, but elite BUDDY BUDDY system.

Just say NO to radical, prejudiced judges!!

[Marshall Bennett]

Par for the course with this administration . They're tearing down America , slowly but surely . Actually they're doing it quite rapidlly .

[jballscalls]

from listening to Obama talk about her, she was picked more for her ethnicity than her abilities. i mean he flat out said it basically was the case. not surprising at all

[Valuist]

Can you imagine the outcry if a white male had made similar comments? They would've been forced to not accept the position because the media would've been relentless in hammering away at it.

[Hank]

She will sail through conformation.
Stings like a bitch uh boys.


"Those were the days"

[BlueShoe]

The day Souter announced his retirement said flat out that his replacement would be a female "Person of Color".Actually,knowing the currrent political mindset it was a very easy pick;rather like saying that a 2-5 shot in a six horse field is going to finish in the money.

[Lefty]

Hank, so you stand foresquare for Socialism?

[Tom]

I don't know which is sadder, that Hank is correct or that he is actually happy about it.

Yes, Hank, it stings when this great nation is reduced to a racist playground and people applaud it. You think somehow you are "getting even" now?
Sad, and sick.

[newtothegame]

She will sail through conformation.
Stings like a bitch uh boys.


"Those were the days"


And to think...this is the reality of Obama...and it gets applauded...:bang:

[Marshall Bennett]

Qualifications and moral ethics and whatever else will be promply swept under the rug , as was the case with Nancy and all her lies regarding the CIA . Anything goes with these people . Liberals are in charge of America now , they're having their day . Several decades ago the communist party of America vowed to hold a revolution and one day control this great nation . Well folks , grab yourself a good seat , its happening now . The players may look different , but its all the same .

[BetHorses!]

Can you imagine the outcry if a white male had made similar comments? They would've been forced to not accept the position because the media would've been relentless in hammering away at it.


Yes!, the nom would be DOA

[The Judge]

the right wing press which by the way is in the majority did try to whip up a frenzy its just that the public isn't buying it. They know that like so many other things an unbiased judge is only the figment of ones imagination. The only issue is can she be fair to all sides.

If she were truly prejudice against white males may I ask who was appearing before her when she was a judge if not "white males"? These are lawyers they complain about everything well how many times has a lawyer moved to disqualify Judge Sotomayor from hearing their case. Its not only their right its their duty to make such a motion if they feel a judge in prejudice against "them or their client. These motions are public records.


What right wing lawyers, left wing lawyers and their clients all appeared before her and felt they could get a fair shake imagine that. "Move along theres nothing to see here"

[cj's dad]

Qualifications and moral ethics and whatever else will be promply swept under the rug , as was the case with Nancy and all her lies regarding the CIA . Anything goes with these people . Liberals are in charge of America now , they're having their day . Several decades ago the communist party of America vowed to hold a revolution and one day control this great nation . Well folks , grab yourself a good seat , its happening now . The players may look different , but its all the same .

You are correct and the problem from our side is that the dems are allowing the Mexicans to come in illegally to ensure that their voting base will continue to expand. Just like doing NOTHING to decrease welfare recipients which perpetuates their voter base.

this is not the party that i belonged to in the 60's and 70's. the dems are the party of all the flotsam and jetsam that floats down the stream and clings to the log (DNC) in the middle;

abortionists
homos
welfare garbage
socialists/marxists/communists
illegals
hollywood types

[jballscalls]

as much as i don't care for Sotomayor and what she has said and ruled upon, any judge they nominate will have something stupid they've done or said in their past.

[cj's dad]

You're right, with the exception that because she is a person of "color" as is Hussein, she will not be questioned as harshly as was Clarence Thomas; of course that was ONLY because he was a conservative.

[The Judge]

Democrats are responsible for illegal immigration. Even though the Republicans controlled the White House and both houses of Congress from 2002-2006.

The Repuplicans were too busy braking the bank to worry about something that you and I may care about, immigration. They were busy finishing what Ronald Reagan started stripping away regulations that protected us.

You do remember deregulation don't you see what that got you don't you.

[Lefty]

Judge, if you think the right wing press is in the majority you're outta your flippin mind, but aren't most people that call themselves Judge, these days? The left controls most newspapers, ABC, CBS, NBS and all their affliates.
The right controls radio . That's it.

[Lefty]

Hey libs' what about thos white firefighters that scored better on the tests than blacks. All were going for promotion. Since the blacks didn't score high enough to be promoted, it was decided not to promote anyone. This Judge ruled against them. So I guess you think that's just peachy ok...

[Lefty]

all.com/columnists/CharlesKrauthammer/2009/05/29/sotomayor_criticize,_then_confirm?sort=desc&comments=true

Try this.
BTW, It's said this Judge has been overruled on appeal 60% of the time. Hmm, guess she doesn't make sounder judgements than those cursed white male judges.

[The Judge]

its the Supreme Court that overturned 3 of 5 of her cases. First how does a case get to the Supreme Court well you must be in the majority of the Justices writing the opinion so the majority of the other justices on 'her" court agreed with her . 250 of her opinions where never looked at by the Court. By the way Judge Souter is reported to have had "all" his cases that reached the Supreme Court overturned before he went to the Supreme Court

http://www.newsweek.com/id/199955/output/comments/page/2

[Lefty]

Well, Judge that's 60%. And about Souter, screw that liar.

[jballscalls]

Well, Judge that's 60%. And about Souter, screw that liar.

what did he lie about?? i read mostly good things about him?

[PaceAdvantage]

She will sail through conformation.
Stings like a bitch uh boys.


"Those were the days"Frankly Hank, I don't really give a shit at this point.

Have fun!

[PaceAdvantage]

the right wing press which by the way is in the majority...Yeah, kind of like the right wing dominated this board when Bush was President....:lol:

You're on a roll today Judge, I'll give you that....

[dutchboy]

I think the term is "confirmation" not conformation.

She will sail through conformation.
Stings like a bitch uh boys.


"Those were the days"

[Lefty]

JB, it's obvious what he lied about. do you really think GH Bush would've nominated him if he knew what a flaming liberal he was?

[Tom]

Democrats are responsible for illegal immigration. Even though the Republicans controlled the White House and both houses of Congress from 2002-2006.


Yes, the dems opened the flood gates in the 80's - thank you Big-Head Ted Kennedy, you SOB - that put around 12 million illegals north of the border.

[mostpost]

Well, Judge that's 60%. And about Souter, screw that liar.

On average 75% of all cases that REACH THE SUPREME COURT are overturned. So Sotomayor's record is better than average.

[Hank]

I think the term is "confirmation" not conformation.


Right you are.She will sail through "confirmation" Stings like a bitch huh.

"Those were the days"

[CBedo]

Just another lib racist.
Fits in well with Barry the Bigot. (Rev Wright, the Panthers, ACORN......)
She is not fit to judge chili.
So of course Barry likes her. He like them dumb. Look at Biden.:ThmbUp::ThmbUp::ThmbUp::ThmbUp::ThmbUp::Thm bUp::ThmbUp::ThmbUp::ThmbUp::ThmbUp::ThmbUp::ThmbU p::ThmbUp::ThmbUp::ThmbUp::ThmbUp::ThmbUp:

:lol:

[Hank]

Frankly Hank, I don't really give a shit at this point.

Have fun!


Sure you do,if you actually didn't give a shit,there would be no need to tell yourself otherwise. Have fun...you betcha.


"Those were the days"

[Track Collector]

The Repuplicans were too busy braking the bank to worry about something that you and I may care about, immigration.

If you are so concerned about the how much the Republicans increased our debt, you must be very concerned and angered at how much more the current administration has increased debt, especially knowing that we will have no where close to the amount of money to fund this debt, right? Businesses go belly up, but the government just prints MORE money, making the money YOU and I have worth less and less. Maybe that does not bother you?

[jballscalls]

If you are so concerned about the how much the Republicans increased our debt, you must be very concerned and angered at how much more the current administration has increased debt, especially knowing that we will have no where close to the amount of money to fund this debt, right? Businesses go belly up, but the government just prints MORE money, making the money YOU and I have worth less and less. Maybe that does not bother you?

Yes!! i was upset when the republicans did it, and even more so now that obama is doing it more than anyone

[The Judge]

deregulation is what got us here, there was no protection, so those that could steal did steal. So now the printing presses or running, does it upset me ? Yes it upsets me but that is a different question. More regulation was needed to protect the citizens of the United States from the crooks of Wall Street not deregulation,thank you very much.

Printing money to save businesses,is this the right thing to do, I have no idea
those with PHD's in every form of economics can't agree on that. So I just hope that those in power got it right.

No matter what was done I wasn't going to "like it".

[Lefty]

judge, there was too much regulation that got ushere. The Community Reinvestment Act of 1977. Then Clinton doubled down. Banks were encouraged, if not forced to make risky loans. Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac stood bhind these risky loans with taxmayor money. Janet Reno threatened banks if their accts weren't racially balanced. The dims declared that the entities were sound and those mean republicans just didn't want poor peopleto have homes. So forcing(regulation)the banks to make risky loans got us here. Thomas Sowell has a book out about it.

[dutchboy]

The Supreme Court does very little so it does not matter who is elected.

[Lefty]

If you think that, you myst have been hiding in a cave somewhere.

[Valuist]

judge, there was too much regulation that got ushere. The Community Reinvestment Act of 1977. Then Clinton doubled down. Banks were encouraged, if not forced to make risky loans. Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac stood bhind these risky loans with taxmayor money. Janet Reno threatened banks if their accts weren't racially balanced. The dims declared that the entities were sound and those mean republicans just didn't want poor peopleto have homes. So forcing(regulation)the banks to make risky loans got us here. Thomas Sowell has a book out about it.

Absolutely although I'd say the home buyers must share a great deal of responsibility for the entire mess. Caveat emptor as they......ALWAYS know what you are signing, and a little common sense (i.e. down buy a $700K house on a $50,000 income) goes a long ways.

[Lefty]

valuist, those homebuyers were not looking a gift horse in the mouth. Their problem, ultimately, became everybodies problem. But the culprits were mostly, the dim dims, who made it happen. Not let it happen but demanded that unqualified people have access to those loans. Then the bastards tried to shift the blame and along with the pravda press in this country, got away with it. If the people had been wise to the truth, maybe, just maybe, Obama wouldn't have been elected.

[PaceAdvantage]

"Those were the days"Ahh...a good ol' not-so-subtle racial reference from another Democrat or left-of-center guy...

I understand you guys can't let racism disappear from America, because that would severely impact the Democratic Party's revenue stream...but do you have to spam us in every post with this?

[The Judge]

once again it was those greedy homeowners and the Demo's for making the banks make bad loans. Are you kidding me or what "make a bank lose money" good luck trying that one out. They were making obscene profits from all sort of made up fees. "Forced them to loan money" they would have trampled you to death if you got in their way.

They wrote the terms of the loans they knew the day and the hour they would blow-up and leave you and I holding the bag. They could re-write the loans and those people would still be in their homes. Everybody would be making money, slower but still making money. WAIT they can't re-write the loans they bundled them up and sold them to US!!! Remember Freddie, Fannie, and Ginnie Mae. So why couldn't we re-write the loans maybe the banks are still in control of that process even though they sold the loans.

How does that work?

I'm still trying to figure out how banks go broke if they sold the loans to us. But hey why go into details.

Why let the facts get in the way of blaming the little guy or the Demo's great strategy. LONG LIVE THE BANKERS and you little people stop pulling the wool over their eyes and play fair .

[Marshall Bennett]

I understand you guys can't let racism disappear from America, because that would severely impact the Democratic Party's revenue stream...
:lol: now that was good !! :lol:

[The Judge]

but Newt and Rush have jumped ship they think Sotomayor is the best thing since sliced bread. I guess she has changed a lot in the last few days.

What happened? Maybe the Hispanic people threaten to boycott some of Rush's sponsors, that would shut him up, and I guess the Republican Party handled Newt. Some banner carriers they are.

Better hitch your wagon toooo..... well now that is a problem. Lets just say someone else.

Better come in out of the cold.

[ArlJim78]

but Newt and Rush have jumped ship they think Sotomayor is the best thing since sliced bread. I guess she has changed a lot in the last few days.

What happened? Maybe the Hispanic people threaten to boycott some of Rush's sponsors, that would shut him up, and I guess the Republican Party handled Newt. Some banner carriers they are.

Better hitch your wagon toooo..... well now that is a problem. Lets just say someone else.

Better come in out of the cold.

you should listen to Rush instead of just passing on what others say. he still says she's racist, but perhaps a pro-life racist. he didn't say anything close to "she's the best thing since sliced bread"

[ArlJim78]

Now we know what Sotomayor means when she speaks about the "richness of her experience.

Here’s what she said in a 1994 speech:
“Justice O’Connor has often been cited as saying that “a wise old man and a wise old woman reach the same conclusion in dueling cases. I am not so sure Justice O’Connor is the author of that line since Professor Resnik attributes the line to Supreme Court Justice Coyle. I am not so sure that I agree with the statement. First, if Prof. Martha Minnow is correct, there can never be a universal definition of ‘wise.’ Second, I would hope that a wise woman with the richness of her experience would, more often than not, reach a better conclusion.”

then 4 years later she added the "Latina" part.

So in 1994 she was merely sexist, in 1998 after achieving greater richness of her experience she became racist also.

gotcha.

[Lefty]

That's right, Judge. Rush says he won't quit calling her a racist, because she is one. As for Newt, you better read a little farther. You just take what libs say at face value. You can't do that as they take things out of context and they lie.

[The Judge]

Nothing has changed they are in favor of a racist because she might be pro-life. Strange position to take.


What made them see the light to soften their stance even a little bit on this racist? No...shout all you want your leaders are deserting you. Don't worry Rush will be hollering about something new next week. You guys can get worked up over that.

[Lefty]

Judge, you just ain't gonna get it unless you know the context. You only get that by actually listening to Rush. I think Newt made his statement in a column. Read it. read, listen, then you might "get it"

[Boris]

Nothing has changed they are in favor of a racist because she might be pro-life. Strange position to take.


What made them see the light to soften their stance even a little bit on this racist? No...shout all you want your leaders are deserting you. Don't worry Rush will be hollering about something new next week. You guys can get worked up over that.

Of coarse conservatives will take an Obama nominated SC justice who is a racist and anti-abortion. That is one more postive than they expected. When a hungry man sees a pile a shit with a twinkee in the middle, he tends to focus on the twinkee.

If she is indeed found to be an anti-abortion Catholic, will you support her?

[so.cal.fan]

She has ruled in FAVOR of imminent domain!
She rules against property owners in favor of developers.
I spend most of my time fighting this type of tyranny here in my small town.
So far, we are holding off the vultures, but it's not easy.
I don't care about any of her other statements. The imminent domain issue is a big red flag. I don't want to see this woman on the supreme court.

[Tom]

If Obama nominated her and Dingy Harry supports her, she must be bad for America. Putz-boy Harry says he has not read any of her rulings and will not, yet he supports her.........carry over from voting for all those bills he never read?


People, wake up - this government is 100% pure trash. Every member of it is an enemy of us all. And should be treated as such. It deserves no respect and we should oppose it at every opportunity. I envy Britain, they get to vote no confidence in theirs soon and kill it dead.

[Marshall Bennett]

I can just imagine a few more like her over the next two decades . Our justice system will join the rest of the government in the toilet . Thank you Obama , and all those that put this garbage in charge of our country . You asked for it , you voted for it , you got it . How ... do ... you ... sleep ??

[Secretariat]

Oh man, I really hope the rightnuts fillibuster Sotomayor. Please, please do it. This will go over so well with Hispanics, and women. We need an infusion here, and you guys just keep helping us.

[so.cal.fan]

Sec.
If you read my post, you will know my reason for being very leary of this woman.
As I type this, news stories are going up all over California about the demise of Hollywood Park....it will be paved over by developers, went to Inglewood City Council, I believe night before last.
Now there are news stories about the TOC (Thoroughbred Owners Association) trying to bid on Santa Anita....to SAVE RACING IN CALIFORNIA.
They fear.....DEVELOPERS paving it over, and putting the nail in the coffin of California horse racing.
This woman, Sotomayor, has consistently sided with big development.
She has ruled in favor of eminent domain.
This is what is destroying California and other areas.
If you like horse racing SEC, please give this some thought.

[boxcar]

Oh man, I really hope the rightnuts fillibuster Sotomayor. Please, please do it. This will go over so well with Hispanics, and women. We need an infusion here, and you guys just keep helping us.

You think the same exact way as the power-hungry vultures you vote for. Neither you or they care a whit about the country -- only that you seize control of it -- have the power. You're a pathetic excuse for a human being -- and a coward to boot because you can't handle Freedom.

Boxcar

[Tom]

Oh man, I really hope the rightnuts fillibuster Sotomayor. Please, please do it. This will go over so well with Hispanics, and women. We need an infusion here, and you guys just keep helping us.

So your political agenda outweighs the good of the nation? You feel advancing a political party is more important than our justice system? You think that the best available Latino woman is more important than the best available jurist?

You agree with Dingy Harry that her legal opinions and rulings have no place in this process, and like he, do not want to read any of them? Your opinion of the American people is that they are shallow enough to just want a justice based on sex and national origin?

Explain to me how it was alright for the left to deny the hispanic appointee by Bush 100% based on the fact that he was a hispanic and they did not want Bush to get credit for appinting him. The meos are out there - Big Head Ted was involved.

[The Judge]

we didn't make the rules you did we are just playing by them. These are your rules.

You used Willie Horton, watch out the boogyman will get you. The next President of the United States mentioning a low life criminal by 'name." Good old divide and conquer now that we finally catch up its now 'dirty pool" so you cover up in the flag.

What about the good of the country "can't we just all get along". Sorry fellows we've heard and seen it all before it was bad then its worst now.

Why didn't you tell that to George Bush Sr and Jr. Obama is appointing Republicans that aren't foaming at the mouth, but thats not good enough nothing that he does will be. I think he gets the picture.

[Lefty]

sec, wasn't mMiguel Estada and Alberto Gonzalez Hispanic? Remember how the dims treated them? Wasn't Clarence Thomas black? Remember how the dims treated him? Why do you and your dim ilk always reduce everything to race? It's like PA said.
BTW, when you make statements like this; you don't give Hispanics and women a whole lot of credit.

[46zilzal]

Sec.
If you read my post, you will know my reason for being very leary of this woman.
As I type this, news stories are going up all over California about the demise of Hollywood Park....it will be paved over by developers, went to Inglewood City Council, I believe night before last.
Now there are news stories about the TOC (Thoroughbred Owners Association) trying to bid on Santa Anita....to SAVE RACING IN CALIFORNIA.
They fear.....DEVELOPERS paving it over, and putting the nail in the coffin of California horse racing.
This woman, Sotomayor, has consistently sided with big development.
She has ruled in favor of eminent domain.
This is what is destroying California and other areas.
If you like horse racing SEC, please give this some thought.
THIS woman is going to destroy California racing? that is a stretch.

[Lefty]

judge, do you have a clue who brought up Willie Horton first? It wasn't a Republican. I'll give you a chance to answer.

[46zilzal]

If the democratic party found a person who was the combination of Mother Theresa, Florence Nightingale and Sister Kenny, the other side of the isle would scream about abortion.....and nit pick it to death.

[The Judge]

Al Gore brought up the Massachusetts Work Furlough Program. An entire government sponsored program. Bush brought up Willie Horton.

Al Atwater Bush Sr. campaign manager said "by the time the campaign is over "Willie Horton will be a household name".

Gee now you want to blame a Democrat is that good for the country?

[so.cal.fan]

In regards to California racing.....46Zil......
look, our breeding farms are being bought up by developers at an alarming rate, developers will not maintain them as racetracks.
No, I'm not blaming Judge Sotomayor for the downfall of California racing, but the Supreme Court could make some scary decisions on EMINENT DOMAIN.
It's likely this could happen with enough "liberales" on the SC.
That means, even if a farm owner wants to keep his property, they could take it away and give it to a developer for other purposes.
This has happened.....in New York, a ruling by Judge Sotomayor. She is clearly for eminent domain.
You can check this out. It was widely reported.

[PaceAdvantage]

Oh man, I really hope the rightnuts fillibuster Sotomayor. Please, please do it. This will go over so well with Hispanics, and women. We need an infusion here, and you guys just keep helping us.Why not just open up the borders and grant amnesty to everyone already here illegally.

That should lock up that particular vote from here until the end of time...

What? You're above pandering?

[PaceAdvantage]

So your political agenda outweighs the good of the nation? You feel advancing a political party is more important than our justice system? You think that the best available Latino woman is more important than the best available jurist?Of course...he always has, and he always will. He once rationalized that voting for John McCain would be the best thing for the party of Democrats in the long run, in the off chance that the economy REALLY goes into the shit can...his theory was that a depression with McCain in charge would kill the Republican party for good. Of course, he'll tell you now that this isn't true, and that I misinterpreted his words.

[lamboguy]

Of course...he always has, and he always will. He once rationalized that voting for John McCain would be the best thing for the party of Democrats in the long run, in the off chance that the economy REALLY goes into the shit can...his theory was that a depression with McCain in charge would kill the Republican party for good. Of course, he'll tell you now that this isn't true, and that I misinterpreted his words.don't you think bush already killed the party? why do you think they are letting all these illigal's into this country for to begin with? the answer is to insure that they re-elect this bum. the republican party got 90% whites in it, the democrat's got only 66%. no matter what happens who do you think gets elected now?

they just broke the 2 party system right in front of your 2 eyes. that was the strength of this country, opposition parties. it's no good to have one party rule, you might as well live in cuba. this all stems from a poor ruling president, bush. as we have seen, obama never ran against mccain, he ran against a trainwreck bush. mccain could have been the greatest thing that this country could ever ask for. obama is a dope, but the power hungry guys around him figured out how to lock in the election, and they certainly did!

[Lefty]

lamby, Bush will go down in history as a very good president. What do you not like about being safe? It was the Pravda press in USA that demonized him, and Obama will bring back the repub party all by himself, when the middle class feels their wallets and realizes they were lied to.
Now that you've got your Bush bashing out of the way, tell me what you like about Obama's policies?

[PaceAdvantage]

don't you think bush already killed the party? why do you think they are letting all these illigal's into this country for to begin with? the answer is to insure that they re-elect this bum. the republican party got 90% whites in it, the democrat's got only 66%. no matter what happens who do you think gets elected now?

they just broke the 2 party system right in front of your 2 eyes. that was the strength of this country, opposition parties. it's no good to have one party rule, you might as well live in cuba. this all stems from a poor ruling president, bush. as we have seen, obama never ran against mccain, he ran against a trainwreck bush. mccain could have been the greatest thing that this country could ever ask for. obama is a dope, but the power hungry guys around him figured out how to lock in the election, and they certainly did!I refuse to give into this knee-jerk "Republican party is dead" baloney. Nothing is ever 100% black and white, and there is way too much time until even the midterm elections to ever count anything with certainty.

I remember when "Liberal" was a dirty word back during the Reagan dynasty...and we see today how dead liberals are...

So I'll take a wait and see approach as to just how dead the opposition party is and will remain in the coming years.

Building something up only to tear it down has become the American way in terms of public opinion. Methinks you are giving into the hype in this case.

[lamboguy]

lamby, Bush will go down in history as a very good president. What do you not like about being safe? It was the Pravda press in USA that demonized him, and Obama will bring back the repub party all by himself, when the middle class feels their wallets and realizes they were lied to.
Now that you've got your Bush bashing out of the way, tell me what you like about Obama's policies?i don't like nothing about this new president, to me he is worse than the last one. but the last down goes down as one of the wrost of all time. you can go to the bank on that one.-++++

[Lefty]

give me some cogent reasons why?

[lamboguy]

give me some cogent reasons why?that's to easy and black and white. first the dollar dropped from 122 to 72 while he was in office. the dow jones with all the changes that were in it for his 8 years still went down a whole bunch. the gasoline that people put in their cars went from 1.25 to over 3.00 while he was in office. average retirement fund in america lost 80% of its value. the all time record for bancrupcies was shattered during his administration. if you need more, i got got about 500 more things that went caput during his reign of operation.

[Lefty]

These things happened towards end of the run. I submit that the dems caused most of this. They were in power in Congress last 2 yrs of presidency, and you blame Bush? The stock mkt also rose to record heights, and unemployment record lows. Then came the dims. hmmm? Gas is going up again. Unemployment rising to new highs. we lost 500,000 jobs in May. hey, and Bush isn't even pres.
It's an ungrateful nation that won't applaud Bush for keeping us safe for 7 yrs.

[Marshall Bennett]

Lamboguy pretends to be neutral , but he's as liberal as they get , may have some of you fooled here but not me .:)

[lamboguy]

Lamboguy pretends to be neutral , but he's as liberal as they get , may have some of you fooled here but not me .:) trust me on this one marshall, no living human can fool you!! you are pure genious.

[46zilzal]

lamby, Bush will go down in history as a very good president.
Want to wager on that? He is already near the bottom of the heap in almost every historians evaluation of his days screwing up the peace, the economy, etc etc

[Tom]

No legit historian would have formed an opinion yet, because history has not yet judged Bush. Takes years and years to see where anything fits historically. Lincoln was judged far differently in 1860 than in 1960.

[Lefty]

What you say is not true and anybody with an objective thought in his head(not you)knows it's not true. I'd wager, if I thought i'd be alive 20 yrs from now. I'd love to wager, though. How about the winner gets to waterboard the loser?

[Indulto]

I have misgivings about Sotomayor.

I hope the Senate vets her as carefully as Thomas was, and provides the opportunity for her to offset the collection of negative video clips of her, if in fact she is capable of it.

Expressions of ethnic/gender superiority hardly encourage visions of sober, carefully thought-out judgements. They are more disqualifying than problems with tax returns. Franken is enough comedy for one administration.

I haven't heard any particulary convincing statements from her supporters, either. OTOH she would certainly be better than the Lady Lawyer GW tried to get through. I give the Reps credit for insisting on better.

I predict Sotomayor will take her own name out of consideration.

[lamboguy]

I have misgivings about Sotomayor.

I hope the Senate vets her as carefully as Thomas was, and provides the opportunity for her to offset the collection of negative video clips of her, if in fact she is capable of it.

Expressions of ethnic/gender superiority hardly encourage visions of sober, carefully thought-out judgements. They are more disqualifying than problems with tax returns. Franken is enough comedy for one administration.

I haven't heard any particulary convincing statements from her supporters, either. OTOH she would certainly be better than the Lady Lawyer GW tried to get through. I give the Reps credit for insisting on better.

I predict Sotomayor will take her own name out of consideration.a supreme vet out job? there has never been anyone giving solid proof that obama is even a legit citizen! these guys are professional bambooszelers.

[lamboguy]

These things happened towards end of the run. I submit that the dems caused most of this. They were in power in Congress last 2 yrs of presidency, and you blame Bush? The stock mkt also rose to record heights, and unemployment record lows. Then came the dims. hmmm? Gas is going up again. Unemployment rising to new highs. we lost 500,000 jobs in May. hey, and Bush isn't even pres.
It's an ungrateful nation that won't applaud Bush for keeping us safe for 7 yrs.hey lefty, nobody out there is accusing this guy of being any better than bush. he probably is worse. but that don't make bush good. maybe compared to obama he is great. but what in gods name ever happened to standards? cingular telephone raised the bar, and the population of this country has just lowered the bar with their selection's of president's to lead this country.

[Lefty]

what made Bush good was: After 9-11 this country had the potential of slipping into a depression. Tax cuts kept that from happening. We could have been hit again, Bush policies thwarted those attempts. He kept us safe. He wasn't perfect, but he was very good. Those accomplishments are fact. He was attacked for 8 yrs by the US pravda media. look at the facts, abandon the koolaide.

[lamboguy]

what made Bush good was: After 9-11 this country had the potential of slipping into a depression. Tax cuts kept that from happening. We could have been hit again, Bush policies thwarted those attempts. He kept us safe. He wasn't perfect, but he was very good. Those accomplishments are fact. He was attacked for 8 yrs by the US pravda media. look at the facts, abandon the koolaide.get a hold of yourself pal. during the bush watch they blew up tall buildings in new york with over 3000 people in it that never came back to their family's. what the hell did he protect, they lost more people on this soil in one day than any other day in the history of this country under any other president's watch.

[Track Collector]

I predict Sotomayor will take her own name out of consideration.

Not likely. This person likes confrontation, AND, she thinks very highly of herself.

I think a more realistic prediction is that the opposition doesn't have the fight in them to keep her from gaining the nomination.:(

[Lefty]

Bush was barely in office a yr. Do you really think that attack was planned in that time? And the various law enforcement agencies could not communicate with ea other because of a dim construct called "the wall" I know you libs' wanna blame Bush, but it won't fly.

[PaceAdvantage]

get a hold of yourself pal. during the bush watch they blew up tall buildings in new york with over 3000 people in it that never came back to their family's. what the hell did he protect, they lost more people on this soil in one day than any other day in the history of this country under any other president's watch.Too bad the great Bill Clinton didn't take the ball and run with it when the terrorists failed the first time at WTC (they may have failed to bring the building down, but they sure sent a helluva signal that maybe WE NEEDED TO DO SOMETHING MORE).

Who needed the "Bin Laden determined to attack inside America" memo when we had the first 1993 attack as a huge reminder of what was out there...

Oh well. They all deserve plenty of blame.

[lamboguy]

why just blame clinton for all the mistakes george bush made while he was president. you guys should keep going back to every single president before the bum took office. go back all the way to george washington, after all he was the first guy to be president here and his face is on the dollar bill to remind you of that all the time.

it will never be george bush's fault for anything bad that went on during his tenure
it might even be his own father's fault, or the great ronald reagan or kennedy
for that matter.

[lamboguy]

Too bad the great Bill Clinton didn't take the ball and run with it when the terrorists failed the first time at WTC (they may have failed to bring the building down, but they sure sent a helluva signal that maybe WE NEEDED TO DO SOMETHING MORE).

Who needed the "Bin Laden determined to attack inside America" memo when we had the first 1993 attack as a huge reminder of what was out there...

Oh well. They all deserve plenty of blame.the sickest thing was that about a week before the 9-11 attack the secret service were protecting the bin laden family in cambridge, ma. when the attack came down they shuffled the family out of the country. they knew the attack was coming and who was behind it, they just didn't know exactly how they were going to do it.

[dutchboy]

http://wcbstv.com/local/sonia.sotomayor.supreme.2.1033108.html

[The Judge]

protected us "after" 9-11 the proof we weren't attacked again. The actual attack well you see that was Bill Clintons fault. So if something happens and its "good" Bush did it, if its bad its "Clintons" fault or now "Obama's" fault. Gee if thats the case why are you out of office?

Sounds like Bush should have been given a parade not cast to the side by his own party. Any Republican running for re-election wouldn't even let him campaign for them. They wouldn't even put up a picture of him in their campaign office. Some protector! His own party knew this sitting President was the kiss of death if he even got near a viable candidate.

You right wingers on this board see things that even the right wingers in the real world don't see.

Isn't if strange how the American people would rather accept a black man from Chicago ,by way of Hawaii/Kenya/ Malaysia , who isn't a real citizen,who isn't a Christian, who is a Muslim,with "NO" presidential experience, with ties to bomb throwing radicals, who won't let you see what he wrote when he was in college,who had a wild eyed preacher on every T.V in America, whose wife said its the 1st time she felt "proud as an American",and who didn't own a dog or a cat, the American people said yes to him rather then the failed policies of George Bush.

What a sad commentary on a sitting President even from you guys perspective.

[ArlJim78]

Isn't if strange how the American people would rather accept a black man from Chicago ,by way of Hawaii/Kenya/ Malaysia , who isn't a real citizen,who isn't a Christian, who is a Muslim,with "NO" presidential experience, with ties to bomb throwing radicals, who won't let you see what he wrote when he was in college,who had a wild eyed preacher on every T.V in America, whose wife said its the 1st time she felt "proud as an American",and who didn't own a dog or a cat, the American people said yes to him rather then the failed policies of George Bush.

What a sad commentary on a sitting President even from you guys perspective.
Which of Bush's policies that you consider to be failures has Obama changed?

[lamboguy]

protected us "after" 9-11 the proof we weren't attacked again. The actual attack well you see that was Bill Clintons fault. So if something happens and its "good" Bush did it, if its bad its "Clintons" fault or now "Obama's" fault. Gee if thats the case why are you out of office?

Sounds like Bush should have been given a parade not cast to the side by his own party. Any Republican running for re-election wouldn't even let him campaign for them. They wouldn't even put up a picture of him in their campaign office. Some protector! His own party knew this sitting President was the kiss of death if he even got near a viable candidate.

You right wingers on this board see things that even the right wingers in the real world don't see.

Isn't if strange how the American people would rather accept a black man from Chicago ,by way of Hawaii/Kenya/ Malaysia , who isn't a real citizen,who isn't a Christian, who is a Muslim,with "NO" presidential experience, with ties to bomb throwing radicals, who won't let you see what he wrote when he was in college,who had a wild eyed preacher on every T.V in America, whose wife said its the 1st time she felt "proud as an American",and who didn't own a dog or a cat, the American people said yes to him rather then the failed policies of George Bush.

What a sad commentary on a sitting President even from you guys perspective.pretty sharp observatons there. all these guys that stand up for bush can only claim it was the other guy's fault before him, or whoever they can blame for a lost 8 years in the history of this great land.

i could care less which party is the boss, as long as they don't cave to special interests. the most solemn thing we have in this country is our vote, and we must abide and respect it. when the best you can do is knock the guy before you you have squandered the opportunity to lead in a fair direction. that is precisely what happened between 2001 and 2009.

[The Judge]

that tells exactly that look it up. Anything else about the post. His party was voted out of office, his party didn't want him anywhere around . Yet he is the American protector, anything about that? Does that make sense to you?

[ArlJim78]

that tells exactly that look it up. Anything else about the post. His party was voted out of office, his party didn't want him anywhere around . Yet he is the American protector, anything about that? Does that make sense to you?
I didn't think you could name a single policy change. thanks

[The Judge]

didn't think you would look it up. Want one here it is: Heading "Obama Reverses Key Bush Security Policies" Now you look up the rest, hint; there are plenty and they are easy to find.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/23/us/politics/23obama.html

[ArlJim78]

didn't think you would look it up. Want one here it is: Heading "Obama Changes http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/23/us/politics/23obama.html
how embarrassing for you. want to try again?

you just cited Obama's haphazard signing of a bill to close GITMO within a year with no plan as to how to do so, as an example of how he has changed Bush's failed policies?:lol:
This was a horrible blunder on behalf of Obama, did you not know that?

[The Judge]

he signed the order 1/22/09 a year would be in 1/22/10 of course that would be a left wing year not a right wing year.

Now anything else,how about looking up a site on your own and rather then deflect my post of how the Republican could lose when they had 'Bush the Protector in Office", anything on that? I thought not!!

Hey I have an idea how about another deflection.

[ArlJim78]

he signed the order 1/22/09 a year would be in 1/22/10 of course that would be a left wing year not a right wing year.

Now anything else,how about looking up a site on your own and rather then deflect my post of how the Republican could lose when they had 'Bush the Protector in Office", anything on that? I thought not!!

Hey I have an idea how about another deflection.
Gitmo is not closing anytime soon certainly not by 1/22/10. Where will they be taken?

I know how and why the Republicans lost in this last election. I never claimed that the fact that Bush did a good job protecting the US after 9/11 should automatically mean that McCain should have beaten Obama. that seems to be your issue, but it way over simplifies everything.

I was mainly interested to hear YOUR defense of Obama, not some referrals to other links where I can find that info. I've already looked at all that. I would just like for once to hear someone make the case in their own words, or back up statements regarding Bush's bad policies with actual cases where they have been revised. It just seems that you guys can't or won't defend what Obama does, instead you want to discuss Bush.

[boxcar]

Here's a bit of irony about the left wing whackos: They all thought Bush was stupid; yet, none of them can get unstuck from it. Goes to show: Stupid is as Stupid does.

Boxcar

[Tom]

Not one single country - including Europe, the bunch of losers who are so high and mighty in criticizing us for having Gitmo, will take any of the prisoners. They are so fired that theses poor boys have had their rights compromised, yet not a one of them has the balls to take any of them.

Obama opened his big mouth and now he can't back it up.

There is no legitimate reason to close Gitmo. Unless we just cut our losses and kill them all and be done with them. I like that idea, but still, having Gitmo there just sends a real message to our enemies......as it should.
Muck wit us and you pay, sucka. :lol:

[The Judge]

on why the Republican Party wouldn't let "Bush" an his glorious policies near their campaign. If he save the US from further harm why run from him?

Nothing on that left wing so lets change the subject to Gitmo. NICE!

[lsbets]

PA, could you please bring a translator on staff for the Judge? It seems English is not his primary language.

[The Judge]

anything else? Any problem with post #93 how about a reply to that post. Everybody else seems to understand. Another deflection.

Any post of mine that you can't read ignore.

Waiting for a reply to post #93. "Bush The Protector" couldn't come near a Republican campaign. WHY?

[Lefty]

judge, easy answer. The MSM demonized Bush for 8 yrs and so did the liberal entertainers. Bush was the devil and Obama was the Messiah, according to the MSM.
BTW, ALGORE, in 2000 didn't embrace Clinton either; because of Clinton's proclivity to have sex with everybody but Hillary.

[PaceAdvantage]

why just blame clinton for all the mistakes george bush made while he was president. you guys should keep going back to every single president before the bum took office. go back all the way to george washington, after all he was the first guy to be president here and his face is on the dollar bill to remind you of that all the time.

it will never be george bush's fault for anything bad that went on during his tenure
it might even be his own father's fault, or the great ronald reagan or kennedy
for that matter.I said, THEY ALL DESERVE PLENTY OF BLAME...did you miss that part of my reply? ALL includes GWB.

But in my mind, GWB gets a pass for some of the blame because at least he, unlike all the others, recognized the threat for what it was (unfortunately, AFTER the WTC came down), and went about instituting sweeping changes to try and combat what everyone said was more attacks to come...

[PaceAdvantage]

Isn't if strange how the American people would rather accept a black man from Chicago ,by way of Hawaii/Kenya/ Malaysia , who isn't a real citizen,who isn't a Christian, who is a Muslim,with "NO" presidential experience, with ties to bomb throwing radicals, who won't let you see what he wrote when he was in college,who had a wild eyed preacher on every T.V in America, whose wife said its the 1st time she felt "proud as an American",and who didn't own a dog or a cat, the American people said yes to him rather then the failed policies of George Bush.The media has become very effective at what they do...you are correct.

[Lefty]

Far as most people knew, he was from Hawaii, and that's it. He was elected because he read Axlerod's speeches really well and the economic crisis hit hard at just the right time. The media and dims were real adept at blaming Bush for the bad economy instead of placing the blame where it really belonged. And then there's all them "peggies"

[The Judge]

blaming it on the left wing media when the reality is its "the right wing media", thats how we know about all that stuff.

The left wing media did a great job of quashing "Reverend Wright".

[Tom]

She tripped at the airport and broke her ankle today. OUCH!

[Secretariat]

judge, easy answer. The MSM demonized Bush for 8 yrs and so did the liberal entertainers. Bush was the devil and Obama was the Messiah, according to the MSM.
BTW, ALGORE, in 2000 didn't embrace Clinton either; because of Clinton's proclivity to have sex with everybody but Hillary.

http://la.indymedia.org/news/2003/04/47530.php

The MSM?

You mean NBC owned by General Electric which downated 1.1. million to GW's 2000 campaign.

Or Disney which owns ABC and donated 640 thousand to GW's 2000 campaign.

Or Time Warner which donated 1.6 million to GW's 2000 campaign.

Or FOX owned by Rupert Murdoch (who also sits on the Board of Directors at
Phillip Morris) which donated 2.9 million to GW in 2000.

.....

Lefty, wake up. The corporate owned media loved GW and they spent their own money to prove it.

[Lefty]

sec, i'll bite, How much did they contribute to ALGORE and Kerry? BTW, the MSM also includes newspapers. Now, you're not trying to tell me they didn't run mostly negative stories about Bush are you? And further, you're not trying to tell me the didn't run but mostly positive stories about Obama, are you?

[mostpost]

She tripped at the airport and broke her ankle today. OUCH!
Did you trip her? :confused:

[lamboguy]

i always visit this board after i am done betting on my horses all day. i bet the last race at the mountain, and the last race at grand river.

nothing changes, its blame this, or blame that guy, or blame that woman, or just blame "LOUIE BARFETT" that's the fictional guy that i alway's blamed my whole life. this thread got over 100 responses, basically all the same, just blaming differnt characters.

NANCY REAGAN had it right, she said just say no. i say just blame "LOUIE"

[newtothegame]

Court Rules for White Firefighters in Discrimination Case


WASHINGTON — DEVELOPING: The Supreme Court ruled Monday that white firefighters in New Haven, Conn., were unfairly denied promotions because of their race, reversing a decision that high court nominee Sonia Sotomayor endorsed as an appeals court judge.

New Haven was wrong to scrap a promotion exam because no African-Americans and only two Hispanic firefighters were likely to be made lieutenants or captains based on the results, the court said Monday in a 5-4 decision. The city said that it had acted to avoid a lawsuit from minorities.

The ruling could alter employment practices nationwide, potentially limiting the circumstances in which employers can be held liable for decisions when there is no evidence of intentional discrimination against minorities.

"Fear of litigation alone cannot justify an employer's reliance on race to the detriment of individuals who passed the examinations and qualified for promotions," Justice Anthony Kennedy said in his opinion for the court. He was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Samuel Alito (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,529409,00.html#), Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas.

In dissent, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said the white firefighters "understandably attract this court's sympathy. But they had no vested right to promotion. Nor have other persons received promotions in preference to them."

www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,529409,00.html (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,529409,00.html)

[ArlJim78]

maybe she's not the wise latina she thinks she is. has a supreme court nominee ever been over-turned during the senate approval process? of course this isn't her first time, as I recall she gets over-turned by the supremes quite regularily.

[Tom]

Court got one right. Amazing. :eek:


Ruthie - someone wake up Ruthie.
To old bitty is napping again.
Must have been with Denny Crane this weekend.

[andymays]

Court got one right. Amazing. :eek:


Ruthie - someone wake up Ruthie.
To old bitty is napping again.
Must have been with Denny Crane this weekend.


Isn't it a little scary to know the vote was 5-4? It should have been 9-0 in this case.

Didn't Michael Savage write a book about Liberalism being a mental disorder?

[mostpost]

maybe she's not the wise latina she thinks she is. has a supreme court nominee ever been over-turned during the senate approval process? of course this isn't her first time, as I recall she gets over-turned by the supremes quite regularily.

After this one it's four out of six. But as a wise and brilliant poster pointed out in #30 the overall average is 75%. I don't know that the timing has any relevance.
As far as the decision by the Supreme Court (I think you should all sit down and have your heart medicine close at hand), I agree with the courts decicion. I think that once you have given the test and people have taken the test in the good faith belief that it is fair, then you should abide by the results. Later, if evidence arises questioning it's fairness, you can work on improving it for the next group of applicants.
Let me also say that the fact that no minorities passed this one test this one time is not proof that it is unfair. Perhaps a different group of minority applicants would have done much better. Perhaps a different group of white applicants would have done much worse.

[Secretariat]

In this particular instance I agree with the Court. The burden was on New Haven to show HOW the test was discriminatory, and they were unable to do that. This was the fundmental issue to me. I see where Sotomayor was coming from in her decision even if i disagree with it, the fear is that towns will set up tests that DO in effect set up discriminatory hiring practices.

Now, the irony is that the Justice that Sotomayor would replace is Souter who AGREED with her decision and affirmed her decision. The ones who didn't agree with her are the right wing cabal of Roberts, Alito, Scalia, and Thomas. The swing justice Kennedy agreed with the right this time. Could have gone either way with him. The decision was 5-4 on Ricci.

I certainly hope that people on this board are not naive to beleive that Obama is going to appoint right wing judges to the Court as GW did. Give me a break. My hope though is that the right keeps pounding Sotomayor as it is good for Democrats that they do so, since Hispanic support among Republicans has dropped to an all time low since the continual attacks on her. The attacks on a Hispanic woman by the right are good for us politically. Keep it up. As that population continues to grow their numbers get stronger at the polls.

[ArlJim78]

she's takes a racial view on most issues and thinks the court makes policy, that is very troubling. her reasoning on the Ricci case was reject 9-0. she's obviously a lightweight compared to those sitting on the court now. but it's not like Obama was likely to nominate a qualified person anyway. I would go ahead and approve her, she won't be writing any majority opinions, it could be worse.

[Tom]

She's the racist, Sec, SHE said all that racist crap on her own, long before we knew about her. Oh, wait, you aren't allowed to think. Sorry.

[PaceAdvantage]

My hope though is that the right keeps pounding Sotomayor as it is good for Democrats that they do so, since Hispanic support among Republicans has dropped to an all time low since the continual attacks on her. The attacks on a Hispanic woman by the right are good for us politically. Keep it up. As that population continues to grow their numbers get stronger at the polls.I have so little use for this kind of rhetoric these days. It's so destructive and ultimately anti-American.

People often accuse me on here of being a "my party, right or wrong" kind of guy, but nothing tops Sec evidently.

[Secretariat]

I have so little use for this kind of rhetoric these days. It's so destructive and ultimately anti-American.


I agree that the racial epithets thrown here on this board towards a Hispanic woman are indeed destructive and ultimately anti-American.

[BenDiesel26]

Can you direct me to the posts containing the racial epithets you speak of on this board? Thanks.

[Lefty]

Ben, I want to see them too. Show us the epithets, Sec or apologize.

[Secretariat]

Ben, I want to see them too. Show us the epithets, Sec or apologize.

Here's a couple just doing a quick scan:

"The Supreme Court does very little so it does not matter who is elected. At least now they will have someone to clean the bathrooms."

- dutchboy

And a response to thay:

Well , while the first sentence of his quote is dead wrong , the second is an improvement over the first

- Marshall Bennett

There are others as well. There are other racially veiled attacks alluded with lines like: "the dems are allowing the Mexicans to come in illegally to ensure that their voting base will continue to expand."

Sorry, it's racist in tone. I have no problems with disagreements with her eminent domain decisions, or the merits of the Ricci case (which I stated I disagreed with her on), but the continued accusations of racism against her are absurd especially when met with attacks like the above. The Supreme Court vote was 5-4, not 9-0. I figure some of you that justify torture will justify these posts above as well.

My point is these posts do your party more harm than good, and if you want to continue with this stuff, fine, it only does Republicans harm in the long run.

[PaceAdvantage]

Here's a couple just doing a quick scan:

"The Supreme Court does very little so it does not matter who is elected. At least now they will have someone to clean the bathrooms."

- dutchboyI replied in that thread, and I STILL MISSED that comment, even though someone pointed it out right after it was written.

I wish more people would use the little function of this board where inappropriate posts are flagged and emailed to me so that I can more efficiently police this romper room of a board. (Exclamation point surrounded by red triangle)

No excuse though for me...I flat out missed that comment. It has now been deleted...

[newtothegame]

Well, before we as a country nominate her to a lifetime position, her past should be well documented. And, what the story below implies is that she makes decisions based on race. Is that what we really need in the Surpreme court if found to be true. After all, she was just over turned (even if as sec say's 5-4). Over turned is over turned no matter what the count.



Sotomayor Helped Hispanic Police Officers Challenge Promotions Exam

A Puerto Rican legal advocacy organization that Sonia Sotomayor was a member of helped a group of Hispanic police officers in the 1980s challenge the promotion exams for New York police officers, arguing they were discriminatory.

FOXNews.com

Wednesday, July 01, 2009


WASHINGTON - Sonia Sotomayor's controversial decision to oppose white firefighters in a reverse discrimination case overturned by the Supreme Court this week was not the first time the high court nominee was involved in a discrimination case involving public safety employees.

A Puerto Rican legal advocacy organization that Sotomayor used to belong to helped a group of Hispanic police officers in the 1980s challenge the promotion exams for New York police officers, arguing they were discriminatory.

On Tuesday, the organization, Latino Justice PRLDEF, sent the Judiciary Committee more than 350 pages of documents from the 12 years Sotomayor spent on its board, opening what could be an ugly new chapter in the debate over confirming the federal appeals court judge as the first Hispanic justice.

The Title VII discrimination case involving the police officers was settled, leading to twice as many Hispanics being promoted than before. A group of white officers fought the case all the way to the Supreme Court but lost primarily because they didn't intervene in the case sooner.

www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/07/01/sources-puerto-rican-group-sends-sotomayor-documents-senate/ (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/07/01/sources-puerto-rican-group-sends-sotomayor-documents-senate/)

[mostpost]

Well, before we as a country nominate her to a lifetime position, her past should be well documented. And, what the story below implies is that she makes decisions based on race. Is that what we really need in the Surpreme court if found to be true. After all, she was just over turned (even if as sec say's 5-4). Over turned is over turned no matter what the count.



Sotomayor Helped Hispanic Police Officers Challenge Promotions Exam

A Puerto Rican legal advocacy organization that Sonia Sotomayor was a member of helped a group of Hispanic police officers in the 1980s challenge the promotion exams for New York police officers, arguing they were discriminatory.

FOXNews.com

Wednesday, July 01, 2009


WASHINGTON - Sonia Sotomayor's controversial decision to oppose white firefighters in a reverse discrimination case overturned by the Supreme Court this week was not the first time the high court nominee was involved in a discrimination case involving public safety employees.

A Puerto Rican legal advocacy organization that Sotomayor used to belong to helped a group of Hispanic police officers in the 1980s challenge the promotion exams for New York police officers, arguing they were discriminatory.

On Tuesday, the organization, Latino Justice PRLDEF, sent the Judiciary Committee more than 350 pages of documents from the 12 years Sotomayor spent on its board, opening what could be an ugly new chapter in the debate over confirming the federal appeals court judge as the first Hispanic justice.

The Title VII discrimination case involving the police officers was settled, leading to twice as many Hispanics being promoted than before. A group of white officers fought the case all the way to the Supreme Court but lost primarily because they didn't intervene in the case sooner.

www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/07/01/sources-puerto-rican-group-sends-sotomayor-documents-senate/ (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/07/01/sources-puerto-rican-group-sends-sotomayor-documents-senate/)

Good Grief!!! Most judges were lawyers before they were judges. Lawyers argue for the side which hires them. They have to. It's the law. It is unethical to do otherwise. When lawyers become judges AND WHEN THEY ARE DECIDING CASES they put aside their feelings and decide the cases based on the evidence and the law.

To say Sotomayor is unqualified to be a Supreme Court justice because she successfully argued for her clients when she was a lawyer is beyond ridiculous. (However you spell ri re that word) :bang: :bang:

[newtothegame]

Good Grief!!! Most judges were lawyers before they were judges. Lawyers argue for the side which hires them. They have to. It's the law. It is unethical to do otherwise. When lawyers become judges AND WHEN THEY ARE DECIDING CASES they put aside their feelings and decide the cases based on the evidence and the law.

To say Sotomayor is unqualified to be a Supreme Court justice because she successfully argued for her clients when she was a lawyer is beyond ridiculous. (However you spell ri re that word) :bang: :bang:

ok lol...here we go again most...show me where I said she was "unqualified". Or is this your "interpretation" of what you would of liked me to say regarding your agenda?

[BenDiesel26]

It's now obvious why Obama wants her. It came out yesterday that she used to sit on the board of a group that is in cohoots with criminal enterprise Acorn. What a surprise.

[Marshall Bennett]

I replied in that thread, and I STILL MISSED that comment, even though someone pointed it out right after it was written.

I wish more people would use the little function of this board where inappropriate posts are flagged and emailed to me so that I can more efficiently police this romper room of a board. (Exclamation point surrounded by red triangle)

No excuse though for me...I flat out missed that comment. It has now been deleted...
I still maintain that the first line of the quote in question was the more inappropriate of the two . The second was a joke , plain & simple . Why would anyone take it seriously . I've seen far worse on this board than that , certainly far more insulting . Sec was grasping aimlessly when he chose this quote to state his case .

[Tom]

So Sec, you got a post deleted. Congratulations. Soros will be proud of you.
Now, are you man enough to address the racial comments SHE made repeatedly or are you just passing through?

You got two posts in the OFF TOPICS section of a horse board. Woop de do!

HER comments were much more public, more frequent, and from a supposed unbiased judge!

What say you?

[Secretariat]

I replied in that thread, and I STILL MISSED that comment, even though someone pointed it out right after it was written.

I wish more people would use the little function of this board where inappropriate posts are flagged and emailed to me so that I can more efficiently police this romper room of a board. (Exclamation point surrounded by red triangle)

No excuse though for me...I flat out missed that comment. It has now been deleted...

Thanks PA. I appreciate your action on that post.

[BenDiesel26]

Sec, I'd recommend that you look up the word epithet. You still haven't posted any.

[itsme]

She's just the beginning of the end. IMO

[mostpost]

ok lol...here we go again most...show me where I said she was "unqualified". Or is this your "interpretation" of what you would of liked me to say regarding your agenda?
I see the game you're playing. You post something, then when someone takes issue with the opinion expressed or the "facts" stated you come back with "I didn't say that. It was just in the article I posted". You seem to think that absolves you of the responsibility of defending your position. Not that you ever have a defensible position. Or you deliberately misinterpret a word, such as the word "Unqualified", which used in its strictest sense refers to someone who does not meet minimum standards of knowledge or experience.
But "Unqualified" can also mean someone whom you do like according to your own standards, which is how I obviously used it.

[mostpost]

It's now obvious why Obama wants her. It came out yesterday that she used to sit on the board of a group that is in cohoots with criminal enterprise Acorn. What a surprise.
Please post some proof that Acorn is a criminal enterprise. Because Acorn never submitted any invalid names as registered voters to election officials. As has been stated here numerous times, and conveniently ignored by you and others, invalid names were submitted to Acorn by some contractors working for them.....Time out....a clarification is needed.... As required by law, Acorn did submit ALL names gathered by its people and contractors, but ALL NAMES WHICH ACORN DETERMINED TO BE INVALID WERE CLEARLY FLAGGED AS SUCH, and never got on the voting rolls. Again, Acorn, not the election officials were responsible for keeping those names off the voting lists.
Do you have anything else.

[newtothegame]

I see the game you're playing. You post something, then when someone takes issue with the opinion expressed or the "facts" stated you come back with "I didn't say that. It was just in the article I posted". You seem to think that absolves you of the responsibility of defending your position. Not that you ever have a defensible position. Or you deliberately misinterpret a word, such as the word "Unqualified", which used in its strictest sense refers to someone who does not meet minimum standards of knowledge or experience.
But "Unqualified" can also mean someone whom you do like according to your own standards, which is how I obviously used it.

Your A funny guy...but all you can do is attempt...(and a terrible one might I add) is to say things that "you interpret" in other peoples post. I merely stated that before we as a country nominate this lady to the highest court in the land, to a lifetime position none the less, that we should know her past. Now if you interpret that somehow as me saying she is "unqualified", well then thats on YOU. I would just like to know more about her decision making process and what were the results of those decisions.

[lsbets]

Please post some proof that Acorn is a criminal enterprise. Because Acorn never submitted any invalid names as registered voters to election officials. As has been stated here numerous times, and conveniently ignored by you and others, invalid names were submitted to Acorn by some contractors working for them.....Time out....a clarification is needed.... As required by law, Acorn did submit ALL names gathered by its people and contractors, but ALL NAMES WHICH ACORN DETERMINED TO BE INVALID WERE CLEARLY FLAGGED AS SUCH, and never got on the voting rolls. Again, Acorn, not the election officials were responsible for keeping those names off the voting lists.
Do you have anything else.

:lol: :lol: :lol: Defending ACORN without any smily faces. That's too funny. :lol: :lol:

[BenDiesel26]

Please post some proof that Acorn is a criminal enterprise. Because Acorn never submitted any invalid names as registered voters to election officials. As has been stated here numerous times, and conveniently ignored by you and others, invalid names were submitted to Acorn by some contractors working for them.....Time out....a clarification is needed.... As required by law, Acorn did submit ALL names gathered by its people and contractors, but ALL NAMES WHICH ACORN DETERMINED TO BE INVALID WERE CLEARLY FLAGGED AS SUCH, and never got on the voting rolls. Again, Acorn, not the election officials were responsible for keeping those names off the voting lists.
Do you have anything else.

They are currently under investigation in 14 states for voter registration fraud. In addition, they are taking millions of tax payer dollars that is somehow magically disappearing. Where there's smoke there's fire mostpost. You honestly cannot believe that there is not all kinds of criminal activity going on here. Employees themselves who were on the boards calling it a shell game with money laundering are kicked out and barred from even entering the Acorn buildings yet ACORN refuses to open their books. Congressional member calls for investigation but is told by the "powers to be" cough cough Obama Administration cough cough not to proceed. Former leader embezzle's one million from the group yet is not prosecuted, goes on to form other groups that are linked with ACORN and part of the same shell game. They are about as corrupt an organization one could possibly think of. Not to mention their exploitation of the less fortunate is horrible. Their national spokesman goes on TV blaming the "rogue employees" for the voter registration fraud, despite the fact that several of these employees testify to the fact that they were given a quota. Hire the less fortunate then throw them under the bus if you get in trouble, that's the game ACORN plays. Threaten to sue the whistleblowers knowing they can't afford legal counsel. Meanwhile, the people running the shell game run off with millions in taxpayer money. Don't you find it odd they are dismantling CCI right now (only to send the money somewhere else of course) and planning to change their name now that they have been exposed? Now the investigation will have to start over. Maybe one day somebody in congress will man up and put the fools to bed. It would be a VERY bad day for many politicians.

[newtothegame]

Please post some proof that Acorn is a criminal enterprise. Because Acorn never submitted any invalid names as registered voters to election officials. As has been stated here numerous times, and conveniently ignored by you and others, invalid names were submitted to Acorn by some contractors working for them.....Time out....a clarification is needed.... As required by law, Acorn did submit ALL names gathered by its people and contractors, but ALL NAMES WHICH ACORN DETERMINED TO BE INVALID WERE CLEARLY FLAGGED AS SUCH, and never got on the voting rolls. Again, Acorn, not the election officials were responsible for keeping those names off the voting lists.
Do you have anything else.
Recent Fraud

State Year Details AR1998A contractor with ACORN-affiliated Project Vote was arrested for falsifying about 400 voter registration cards.

CO2005Two ex-ACORN employees were convicted in Denver of perjury for submitting false voter registrations.

2004An ACORN employee admitted to forging signatures and registering three of her friends to vote 40 times.
CT2008The New York Post reported that ACORN submitted a voter registration card for a 7-year-old Bridgeport girl. Another 8,000 cards from the same city will be scrutinized for possible fraud.

FL2008Election officials in Brevard County have given prosecutors more than 23 suspect registrations from ACORN. The state's Division of Elections is also investigating complaints in Orange and Broward Counties.

2004A Florida Department of Law Enforcement spokesman said ACORN was “singled out” among suspected voter registration groups for a 2004 wage initiative because it was “the common thread” in the agency’s fraud investigations.

IN2008Election officials in Indiana have thrown out more than 4,000 ACORN-submitted voter registrations after finding they had identical handwriting and included the names of many deceased Indianans, and even the name of a fast food restaurant.

MI2008Clerks in Detroit found a "sizeable number of duplicate and fraudulent [voter] applications" from the Michigan branch of ACORN. Those applications have been turned over to the U.S. Attorney's office for investigation.

2004The Detroit Free Press reported that “overzealous or unscrupulous campaign workers in several Michigan counties are under investigation for voter-registration fraud, suspected of attempting to register nonexistent people or forging applications for already-registered voters.” ACORN-affiliate Project Vote was one of two groups suspected of turning in the documents.

MO2008Nearly 400 ACORN-submitted registrations in Kansas City have been rejected due to duplication or fake information.

2007Four ACORN employees were indicted in Kansas City for charges including identity theft and filing false registrations during the 2006 election.

2006Eight ACORN employees in St. Louis were indicted on federal election fraud charges. Each of the eight faces up to five years in prison for forging signatures and submitting false information.

2003Of 5,379 voter registration cards ACORN submitted in St. Louis, only 2,013 of those appeared to be valid. At least 1,000 are believed to be attempts to register voters illegally.

MN2004During a traffic stop, police found more than 300 voter registration cards in the trunk of a former ACORN employee, who had violated a legal requirements that registration cards be submitted to the Secretary of State within 10 days of being filled out and signed.

NC2008County elections officials have sent suspicious voter registration applications to the state Board of Elections. Many of the applications had similar or identical names, but with different addresses or dates of birth.

2004North Carolina officials investigated ACORN for submitting fake voter registration cards. NM2008Prosecutors are investigating more than 1,100 ACORN-submitted voter registration cards after a county clerk found them to be fraudulent. Many of the cards included duplicate names and slightly altered personal information.

2005Four ACORN employees submitted as many as 3,000 potentially fraudulent signatures on the group’s Albuquerque ballot initiative. A local sheriff added: “It’s safe to say the forgery was widespread.”

2004An ACORN employee registered a 13-year-old boy to vote. Citing this and other examples, New Mexico State Representative Joe Thompson stated that ACORN was “manufacturing voters” throughout New Mexico.

NV2009Nevada authorities indicted ACORN on 26 counts of voter registration fraud and 13 counts of illegally compensating canvassers. ACORN provided a bonus compensation program called “Blackjack” or “21+” for any canvasser who registered more than 20 voters per shift, which is illegal under Nevada law.

2008Nevada state authorities raided ACORN's Las Vegas headquarters as part of a task force investigation of election fraud. Fraudulent registrations included players from the Dallas Cowboys.

OH2008ACORN activists gave Ohio residents cash and cigarettes in exchange for filling out voter registration card, according to the New York Post. Some voters claim to have registered dozens of times, and one man says he signed up on 72 cards.

2007A man in Reynoldsburg was indicted on two felony counts of illegal voting and false registration, after being registered by ACORN to vote in two separate counties.

2004A grand jury indicted a Columbus ACORN worker for submitting a false signature and false voter registration form. In Franklin County, two ACORN workers submitted what the director of the board of election supervisors called “blatantly false” forms. In Cuyahoga County, ACORN and its affiliate Project Vote submitted registration cards that had the highest rate of errors for any voter registration group.

PA2009Seven ACORN workers in the Pittsburgh area were indicted for submitting falsified voter registration forms. Six of the seven were also indicted for registering voters under an illegal quota system.

2008State election officials have thrown out 57,435 voter registrations, the majority of which were submitted by ACORN. The registrations were thrown out after officials found "clearly fraudulent" signatures, vacant lots listed as addresses, and other signs of fraud.

2008An ACORN employee in West Reading, PA, was sentenced to up to 23 months in prison for identity theft and tampering with records. A second ACORN worker pleaded not guilty to the same charges and is free on $10,000 bail.

2004Reading’s Director of Elections received calls from numerous individuals complaining that ACORN employees deliberately put inaccurate information on their voter registration forms. The Berks County director of elections said voter fraud was “absolutely out of hand,” and added: “Not only do we have unintentional duplication of voter registration but we have blatant duplicate voter registrations.” The Berks County deputy director of elections added that ACORN was under investigation by the Department of Justice.

TX2008In Harris County, nearly 10,000 ACORN-submitted registrations were found to be invalid, including many with clearly fraudulent addresses or other personal information.

2008ACORN turned in the voter registration form of David Young, who told reporters “The signature is not my signature. It’s not even close.” His social security number and date of birth were also incorrect.

VA2005In 2005, the Virginia State Board of Elections admonished Project Vote and ACORN for turning in a significant number of faulty voter registrations. An audit revealed that 83% of sampled registrations that were rejected for carrying false or questionable information were submitted by Project Vote. Many of these registrations carried social security numbers that exist for other people, listed non-existent or commercial addresses, or were for convicted felons in violation of state and federal election law.

In a letter to ACORN, the State Board of Elections reported that 56% of the voter registration applications ACORN turned in were ineligible. Further, a full 35% were not submitted in a timely manner, as required by law. The State Board of Elections also commented on what appeared to be evidence of intentional voter fraud. "Additionally,” they wrote, “information appears to have been altered on some applications where information given by the applicant in one color ink has been scratched through and re-entered in another color ink. Any alteration of a voter registration application is a Class 5 Felony in accordance with § 24.2-1009 of the Code of Virginia."

WA2007Three ACORN employees pleaded guilty, and four more were charged, in the worst case of voter registration fraud in Washington state history. More than 2,000 fraudulent voter registration cards were submitted by the group during a voter registration drive.

WI2008At least 33,000 ACORN-submitted registrations in Milwaukee have been called into question after it was found that the organizations had been using felons as registration workers, in violation of state election rules. Two people involved in the ongoing Wisconsin voter fraud investigation have been charged with felonies.

2004The district attorney’s office investigated seven voter registration applications Project Vote employees filed in the names of people who said the group never contacted them. Former Project Vote employee Robert Marquise Blakely told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel that he had not met with any of the people whose voter registration applications he signed, “an apparent violation of state law,” according to the paper.


Here is just a list of the trouble ACORN has brought upon themselves based on their employee and contractors actions. This list was found on the internet....

[mostpost]

Here is just a list of the trouble ACORN has brought upon themselves based on their employee and contractors actions. This list was found on the intern
Most of your list consists of just what I was talking about. Employees and/or ex employees of ACORN who submitted invalid registrations in order to pad their paychecks. (A fraud against ACORN). Not an organizational crime.
Below is a link to an article in the dallas news which argues that the charges of voter fraud are part of a Karl Rove type attempt to disenfranchise certain types of voters by alleging voter fraud where no exists. In case your wondering, I agree with the sentiments expressed in the article. IN GENERAL

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/points/stories/DN-hasen_10edi.ART.State.Edition1.436da28.html

BTW What do you think would be the result if we exposed a Republican voter registration group to similar intense scrutiny?

[mostpost]

Your A funny guy...but all you can do is attempt...(and a terrible one might I add) is to say things that "you interpret" in other peoples post. I merely stated that before we as a country nominate this lady to the highest court in the land, to a lifetime position none the less, that we should know her past. Now if you interpret that somehow as me saying she is "unqualified", well then thats on YOU. I would just like to know more about her decision making process and what were the results of those decisions.
Ok Newt, let's go with your definition. You say you would "like to know more about her decision making process, and what are the results of those decisions." Fine. What I am saying is you can't be certain that what Sotomayor advocated as a member of the Puerto Rican advovacy group would be the same as the rulings she would issue from the bench. You need to look at other factors, including the facts of the particular case.

I just looked back at your original post on the Puerto Rican group. It says a group which Sotomayor used to belong to gave legal help to a group of hispanic officers challenging a promotions test. I clicked on the link at the bottom and learned that Sotomayor was NOT a member of the legal staff which participated in the case. She was a member of a policy board which did not take part in day to day operations.

You may decide that Sotomayor will act in ways you don't like, but as they say in those online investment ads "Past performance is not necessarily indicative of future results"

[newtothegame]

Ok Newt, let's go with your definition. You say you would "like to know more about her decision making process, and what are the results of those decisions." Fine. What I am saying is you can't be certain that what Sotomayor advocated as a member of the Puerto Rican advovacy group would be the same as the rulings she would issue from the bench. You need to look at other factors, including the facts of the particular case.

I just looked back at your original post on the Puerto Rican group. It says a group which Sotomayor used to belong to gave legal help to a group of hispanic officers challenging a promotions test. I clicked on the link at the bottom and learned that Sotomayor was NOT a member of the legal staff which participated in the case. She was a member of a policy board which did not take part in day to day operations.

You may decide that Sotomayor will act in ways you don't like, but as they say in those online investment ads "Past performance is not necessarily indicative of future results"

Alright MOST.....I am proud of you. And let me say that I appreciate you taking the time to actually express a view versus an awful attempt at belittling someone personally with an opposing view. If you would like to have an actual conversation (even though we may oppose each others views), I would be happy too.
As for Mrs Sotomayor, as I have said about other political people, I do not know her personally. I can only make informed decisions about what I read. I do my best to support those people who hold MY family's best interest in their decision making process. I really dont care alot about democrat, republican, conservative, libertarian, independent, or whatever. I DO NOT GO TO THE POLLS AND GO DOWN THE LIST OF ANY CERTAIN POLITICAL AFFILIATION and cast a vote. I truly try to determine what platforms they stand for or against and base a decision from that.
Thats why I said I would like to know more about her past (meaning Sotomayor). From the cases that she has been either directly or indirectly involved with that I have read, decisions have been AGAINST WHITE people. That shows me that there may be some racial agenda with her. Now I am not at all saying she is racist. I am saying that based upon what I have read, there is or was race involved. I see that as a problem. Race should not be involved.
Does that make my "agenda" clearer?
And again...thanks for a reply

[Tom]

BTW What do you think would be the result if we exposed a Republican voter registration group to similar intense scrutiny?


Nothing close to ACORN. You just get off the boat? :lol: