Tuesday, May 26, 2009

  1. Do you honestly have any problem with a single word she said in that clip?  Or is this just activist judge bogey man speak?

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on May 26, 2009 at 0910 hrs


  2. It sounds and looks to me like Sotomayor herself knows it’s an issue.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on May 26, 2009 at 0921 hrs


  3. This is probably the stupidest act on Sotomayor. What she is saying is essentially that water is wet.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on May 26, 2009 at 1036 hrs


  4. Stupidest attack, I meant.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on May 26, 2009 at 1038 hrs


  5. The apocalypse is upon us…...I find myself leaning toward agreement with Lefty.

    Posted by Steve on May 26, 2009 at 1040 hrs


  6. Can someone please explain how posting a video clip of someone speaking in a public forum is attacking them?

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on May 26, 2009 at 1042 hrs


  7. The attack is conservatives saying that this is a big deal that should disqualify her from joining the Supreme Court. Why? It’s completely ridiculous. Judges make decisions all the time that affect policy, and it’s insane to argue otherwise.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on May 26, 2009 at 1056 hrs


  8. I see no attack in exposing her views.  At least not here.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on May 26, 2009 at 1148 hrs


  9. Why did Owen put it up, then? Does he just find it interesting and worthy of discussion?

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on May 26, 2009 at 1213 hrs


  10. Look at the title of his post.  My assumption was that Owen has a blog and welcomes comments.  He was pointing out a controversial Obama pick for SCOTUS and opening it up for comment.  The attacks will come and rightly so.  But to characterize this post as an attack made me ask the question.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on May 26, 2009 at 1401 hrs


  11. Perhaps “attack” is too strong a word. However, knowing Owen’s political leanings and comments on judicial “activists” in the past, I assumed that in posting it, he was trying to be as critical as most everyone else on the Right who is talking about this non-controversial statement by Sotomayor. If I’m wrong in that assumption, I apologize.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on May 26, 2009 at 1412 hrs


  12. Her comment on how an Hispanic woman would make a better decision than a White man should disqualify her, but not this video.

    Posted by Steve on May 26, 2009 at 1432 hrs


  13. Three weeks ago called, they want their story back. What’s next, you going to break it to us that Rickie Weeks is out for the season?

    The folks at Volokh, not really liberals, have a good non talking point, non 30 second soundbite, actually sit and think about the nuance of the argument instead of jumping to conclusions explanation:

    http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2009_05_03-2009_05_09.shtml#1241390040

    Of course, anyone who actually thinks the right is opposed to activism when it suits their interests could probably be talked into AIG stock at $35 a share.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on May 26, 2009 at 2106 hrs


Commenting is not available in this channel entry.