Printable View
Wow!!! What a super pick....
Experienced on the federal bench!
Reared by a widowed single mom in NYC housing project!! Mom focused all her energies on raising her children to be educated, contributing professionals!!
Educated at Yale (just like the Bushes!) and Princeton!!!
Oh yeah...female and born in Puerto Rico...
What an inspiration!
Better then who, and why? Seriously we should be beyond gender and race by now in this Country.Quote:
Originally Posted by Edwina's Secretary
She was born in the Bronx BTW.
I am sooooo wrong!
She was born in the Bronx.
What a FABULOUS choice!!!
A woman of the people....someone who understands the REAL people!!!!
Who could argue with such a choice!!!
Why?Quote:
Originally Posted by Edwina's Secretary
Please read above. You will understand.Quote:
Originally Posted by blue
Ild rather a nominee who believes in and understands the Constitution. That is after all what the Supreme Court is all about, not understanding people, real or otherwise.Quote:
Originally Posted by Edwina's Secretary
ETA: Ild even accept for a liberal Constitutional scholar over someone who understands REAL people.
Please state your objections to her qualifications or when she has not followed the Constitution.Quote:
Originally Posted by blue
If you do not wish to engage in conversation about her qualifications please do not post.
She has handed down decisions that have gone on both sides of the so-called "political divide."
Please explain when she has decided based on anything BUT the Constitution!
No, you show us where she is a Constitutionalist. According to you, understanding REAL people is qualification enough to be a SC Justice :ETA: and it is, a SC Justice dosent even have to be a judge TMK:. So make your case as to why she is such a great choice.Quote:
Originally Posted by Edwina's Secretary
She clearly has a magnificent story. One that she should be proud of.
But she is NOT color blind. Lady Justice is supposed to be. Just look at her ruling in the Ricci vs. DeStefano case. Its all you need to know about her.
When she rules based on her "empathy", she will set back the civil rights movement by DECADES.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edwina's Secretary
Wow, is right.:) It was a masterful stroke politically. The fact that
she is more than qualified, is the icing on the cake.:D
Masterful indeed on every level!Quote:
Originally Posted by lizbud
I look forward to her confirmation hearings. It will be fun to watch the flailing and wailing as the RR try and find SOMETHING to whine and bash her about.
I have read some of her more important decisions and while I do not agee with everything I respect her reasoning.
These are surely exciting times!
There is plenty to "bash" her about. Plenty. But I reckon it all depends on hopw much you really know and care about the Constitution. And Liberty. REAL Liberty.Quote:
Originally Posted by Edwina's Secretary
Granted, given the current climate, she will be confirmed with no major problems... And the civil rights movement will suffer a major setback.
Oh how I would love to have a real, face to face debate with you on the Constitution ES. You can even pick the moderator.
Rah, Rah...Sish boom bah!
Maybe you can explain why its a masterful stroke, since ES wont?Quote:
Originally Posted by lizbud
Well, she has received appointments from both Bill Clinton and George H.W. Bush.
Obama is a liberal constitutional scholar but I understand that he already has a job. ;)
Quote:
Originally Posted by catland
LOL :) She has already been confirmed twice for Federal courts but
the GOP is grasping any straw they can find to stay relevant in the
current political world.
Does she actualy have a stand on Roe v. Wade? She seems untested in this area, even the hardcore lefties are calling a flag down on this.
Her stand on the Second Amendment is a red flag for me.
2 cases she dissented on are heading for the SC, is she going to recuse herself from the deliberations if she is confirmed?
Her story is great, but her judicial career doesnt seem that remarkable.
ETA: To echo my first question in this thread, why is she better, and better then who?
If she is such a constitutionalist.. tell me where in the constitution it says that the Justices of the Supreme Court 'make policy'? She also thinks an Hispanic woman would make much better decisions than a white man. Oh, I know, she said that awhile back and now she said she just made the wrong choice of words. I doubt it. She is a member of La Raza... and I know, they are just an advocacy group for poor latinos. Another liberal justice on the bench is NOT what this country needs right now. Red 46
Judicial activist....Legislating from the bench
This is Politically Correct Speak (RR version)
It means...this judge makes decisions I do not agree with!
Liberal judge...conservative judge....isn't qualified the more important adjective?