6.1.09 @ 6:01AM
Readers debate SCOTUS pick. Andrew Cline gets called out. Jeffrey Lord, safe at home. Plus more.
NOW GO GET HER
Re: Quin Hillyer’s No Patty-Cake, Please:
Mr. Hillyer’s advocating the Republicans abide by a sort of Marquis of Queensbury Rules is all very well and good, but don’t think for one New York Nanosecond the Democrats will.
Down-and-dirty is their S.O.P. Instead, Republicans should take a page or two from the Dems’ playbook — after all, they did give us the verb “to Bork.” And, if Sotomayor does go down to defeat, there will be others — many others — of her ilk who will be nominated in her stead.
It’s not going to be easy stopping Obama from using the
Constitution to paper train the puppy, but it is
imperative we try.
— Gretchen L. Chellson
Quin Hillyer says “No patty-cake” and then offers us patty-cake. We need to raise the volume on this nomination, not restrict ourselves to gentlemanly committee arguments that no one outside the Beltway will ever hear. And we should follow the evil party’s precedents on judicial filibusters, not play some game where we distinguish “our” filibuster from “their” filibuster. Do the so-called “moderate” evil party senators really want to have to explain to their constituents that they support a bigoted female chauvinist who not only will not rule objectively, but who does not believe in objective justice in the first place? Who opposes the plain meaning of the second amendment, or, at least, refuses to see it “incorporated” as all other Bill Of Rights provisions have been by the Supreme Court? Who wants to create a new Constitutional right to vote for incarcerated felons, regardless of the plain wording of the Fourteenth Amendment? And who would blow off with a few sentences of judicial claptrap the rights of white and Hispanic firefighters who were denied the fruits of their successful efforts to pass the promotions exam, because there was not a quota of blacks similarly successful? Her peers and those who practice law in her court attest that Judge Sotomayor is a jerk. They may not express it exactly that way, but that is what they are telling us.
We need to make sure that we note that this is not about abortion. The Obamamessiah will never appoint an opponent of the modern Dred Scott decision. This is about a loony left race/gender/class activist with an outrageous judicial history and a destructive view of the rule of law, all of which is clear from what she has written and said. Should we be accused of bigotry, we should remind all that it was the Republican Party who appointed the first black Secretary of State and first hispanic Attorney General, and that we will be pleased to support a qualified hispanic jurist, as we supported Judge Estrada for the Appeals Court, though he fell victim to Democrat game-playing.
We need to make these points loudly to get through the media gatekeepers. The media are busily defining Judge Sotomayor as an attractive judicial moderate. We need to change the discussion and the definition.
More Rush and Newt. Less Hillyer and Noonan.
— Stephen Zierak
Kansas City, Missouri
Mr. Hillyer is on the right path. This nomination can be defeated with the facts. Not only is she incompetent, but her personality is less than winsome. Frankly, she doesn’t have the judicial temperament to be a United States Supreme Court Justice. Based on the precedent set by Barack Obama, in the Roberts and Alito confirmations, that is enough to oppose her nomination.
Of course she’s unqualified — she’s an affirmative-action Democrat political hack masquerading as a judge. Republicans should capitalize on her inability to understand not only the rule of law, but the Constitution. This is an opportunity to reveal to the nation who the arrogant and effete Barack Obama is and how he wants to create an America that is more banana republic than even New Republic.
While Republicans can and should compliment her on her compelling story they can by judicious questioning and using the words and standards set by Senator Barack Obama make her unacceptable to the American people. The Senate is confirming a Justice to the United States Supreme Court and not buying an inflated Horatio Alger story or empathetic glorified social worker.
Now is the time to begin laying the foundations for 2010 and 2012 by showing that Republicans aren’t narrow-minded haters bent on reshaping America into a third world debtor state, but serious politicians concerned with the well-being of the country and its future.
Does anyone think Barack Obama will behave rationally if he doesn’t get his way? He’s a narcissist with the emotional maturity of a three year old. If he loses this “sure bet” he will throw an ungodly temper tantrum. Even the façade of his famed teleprompter cannot mask his juvenile and petty nature.
It is also important to note that Hispanics are not African-Americans. They are not controlled by racist group think nor are they imbued with the same sense of “victimization” and “entitlement” that pervades the African-American community. Republicans need to respect Hispanics as people and avoid adopting the racist Democrat/Obama philosophy of tokenism.
There is enough circumstantial evidence for every Republican in
the Senate to say, “NO MAS!”
— Michael Tomlinson
Jacksonville, North Carolina
WHAT IF ANDREW CLINE WEREN’T WHITE?
Re: Andrew Cline’s What if Sotomayor Were White?
As a woman I find Andrew Cline’s column on Sonia Sotomayor offensive, as is his institutional hubris as a white male who has enjoyed all the privileges that go along with that status. Those of us who are female, or even more so minority and female, live with institutional discrimination daily. In the history of the Supreme Court there have been TWO WOMEN on the bench. That is shocking, and utterly offensive in a nation that is 51 percent female. Why can’t men understand that? What is it you think you are protecting by writing statements such as this:
“Sonia Sotomayor might have been discriminated against in her life, but she never suffered the pervasive institutional discrimination Thurgood Marshall did, and as far as the public record shows the only bigotry she has experienced is the soft bigotry of low expectations being applied to her right now.”
I write this as an open letter to white men in this country. Get over it. Your power base is shrinking, and it’s about time that it did. For too long you have held closely the reins of power, and now that the 21st century is upon us, and we have the opportunity to greater advance ourselves, we all deserve a share of the pie. Stop your own brand of bigotry against accomplished women.
To Andrew Cline I say personally, you haven’t a clue of what discrimination is until you’ve had to wait in a bathroom line for 20 minutes because there are only two stalls for twice as many (women) customers. You don’t know what discrimination is until you see yourself working circles around your superior, a white male who holds his position simply because of a glass ceiling against women — and you make less than he does even as you work 20% harder. These are the realities of my life as a middle-aged, professional woman. And there are many women like me to whom your column is simply a reminder of what we put up with daily, and why it has to change.
I am tired of the bigoted yammering against Sotomayor. In the
words of Anton Scalia, “Give me a Break.”
— Jane Fuller
Question: does the nominaton of Harriet Miers say anything about
how the right views the role of the courts in this country? I
must have missed that piece when you wrote it, back in the good
— Jeff Calvin
Thank you so very much for giving voice to the likes of Andrew Cline. As a progressive, it is very comforting to hear the shrill cries of a wounded and dying beast.
What if Cline could think?
It would say a lot about the right, and it’s chances of being
relevant in ten years…
— Richard May
Re: John Tabin’s Sonia Souter Left:
Another neat analysis from Mr. Tabin, but I did find his last sentence amusing in a self-flagellating way.
“It is not, however, much of a reason for committed originalists in the Senate to support her confirmation — at least if they apply Obama’s own standard.”
This is another time when we thank the Hindu gods for the precious gift of karma and someone (I don’t know who) for the almost equally priceless gift of “The Law of Uninintended Consequences.”
Her confirmation or defeat is not going to come down to “reasons” or “standards.”
Pennsylvania’s Senator Turncoat left the Judiciary Committee where he would have been the one Republican vote to allow her nomination to go to the floor. Now, if those two gifts will work their grinning wonders once again, there should be no Republicans left to cast that one vote.
And if that happens, we’ll have Specter to thank.
Wouldn’t that be the perfect karmic unintended consequence of the
Age of Obama?
— A. C. Santore
STOP LORDING IT OVER US
Re: Jeffrey Lord’s Sonia Sotomayor Taney:
Missing from your recent column were the following facts and comments:
1. Slavery was included in our Constitution well before that Chief Justice;
2. Chief Justice Taney reflected the views of most Americans then and, to a fortunately much lesser extent, at this time, when too many Blacks enslave themselves to an uncivilized sub-culture;
3. Mr. Taney’s (majority) decision was the “law of the land” until after the USA fought its bloodiest war and amended the Constitution;
4. Before that amendment, Mr. Taney freed his slaves and helped support them in their transition to a new life.
You might wish to study history before using it as a base for an
argument, as historical errors weaken your position.
— James Pawlak
Jeffrey Lord denounces Judge Sotomayor for believing that her cultural background will bring a needed perspective to the decision-making of the Supreme Court, and calls for her disconfirmation.
How would he also feel about this testimony by Justice Alito at his confirmation hearings:
ALITO: Senator, I tried to in my opening statement, I tried to provide a little picture of who I am as a human being and how my background and my experiences have shaped me and brought me to this point…. And that’s why I went into that in my opening statement. Because when a case comes before me involving, let’s say, someone who is an immigrant — and we get an awful lot of immigration cases and naturalization cases — I can’t help but think of my own ancestors, because it wasn’t that long ago when they were in that position. […] And that goes down the line. When I get a case about discrimination, I have to think about people in my own family who suffered discrimination because of their ethnic background or because of religion or because of gender. And I do take that into account.
So Jeffrey Lord must now be advocating that the Senate begin
impeachment proceedings against Justice Alito. Oh wait, I forgot,
the conservative double standard means that it’s ok when a
conservative says it.
— Ronald Schoenberg
FLIMSIER THAN FLIMSY
Re: George H. Wittman’s Welcome to the NFL, Mr. Obama:
Doesn’t it bring you pain, Mr. Wittman, to have to be the bearer of sad tidings? It would pain me!
Excellent analysis, to which I have three comments:
Your concluding sentence, “Is that clear enough, Mr. President?” is priceless. A rhetorical question, you cheeky devil.
I challenge you for proof of this: “One thing is obvious: Barack Obama must have never understood much about the American history he read at Columbia and Harvard.” My challenge is not whether he learned anything from, but whether he even attended, any courses in American history.
And finally: If I were in a fight for my life, I’d want my opponent to wear the kid gloves while I wore the brass knuckles.
Now imagine what I’d want to wear in a fight for my country’s life.
Someone like Netanyahu could do it bareknuckled and still win, and we’re being defended by the equivalent of the Marquis of Queensbury’s maid.
With one arm tied behind her back.
— A. C. Santore
LIKE A CLOWN CAR, THEY JUST KEEP COMING
Re: The Prowler’s From Senator to Lowly Secretary:
Why stop at the Secretary of State? Naming the grossly incompetent in Mr. Obama’s staff could replace character annihilation as the nation’s favorite prime time reality show. From Biden, Clinton, Holder, and the list is nearly endless, to the recent Supreme nominee, Obama is showing his naiveté and inexperience as a manager in picking people obviously inferior to his own lofty intellect to manage this once great country. Once I thought he was cagey like a fox and was really shelving anyone remotely dangerous to him, but then I woke up and looked at every young manager I’ve ever known and see every characteristic that would have been trained out of him years ago if he’d ever had a real job managing real people, and a real budget.
The truly incompetent manager looks everywhere for a victim to
blame for their inadequate performance.
— Greg Mercurio
FOR THE THRILL OF IT
Re: Jeremy Lott’s “We Are Out of Money”:
The Prez has already admitted, “We are out of money,” without the
Left easing off on their spending spree. When they pursue their
dream of a single payer system without any basis in funding, we
can’t be too surprised. After all, it’s not the money but the
power that’s such a rush, baby.
— I.M. Kessel
Rochester, New York
MAKE THE CALL
Re: Jeffrey Lord’s Colin Powell and the Failure of Moderate Republicanism:
Regarding your writings about Colin Powell, it was very well
written, to the point, and substantiated by history. Keep up the
— Jerry Dale
National League, Baseball Umpire (Ret)
Sign up for our weekly newsletter:
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
By John Corry
By Mark Steyn
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
By Mark Steyn
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
By Brit Hume
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
The American Spectator Foundation is the 501(c)(3) organization responsible for publishing The American Spectator magazine and training aspiring journalists who espouse traditional American values. Your contributions are tax deductible to the extent permitted by law. Each donor receives a year-end summary of their giving for tax purposes.
Copyright 2013, The American Spectator. All rights reserved.