Myths and falsehoods surrounding the Sotomayor nomination, page 2

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 3 times

reply posted on 30-5-2009 @ 09:39 AM by grover

Originally posted by RRconservative
Obama said Alito and Roberts were qualified, but still voted against them.
Why can't that be justification enough for Repubicans to do the same?

Is that the whole of your argument for voting against her?

How totally lame... if it were any lamer it would need a wheelchair.

reply posted on 30-5-2009 @ 09:57 AM by RRconservative

reply to post by grover

We could just call it the "Obama Doctrine".

How could Republicans go wrong to following the path of illumination set forth by the one called "Obama"?

The real opposition to Sotomayor should be because she is a racist plain and simple.

Her own words make the strongest case against her.

reply posted on 31-5-2009 @ 07:30 AM by grover

reply to post by RRconservative

Why don't you use your God given brains and read the whole speech in question as opposed to just parroting the talking points...

The whole speech can be found here:

www.nytimes.com...

And if that is too many words for you I have summarized the speech here:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply posted on 31-5-2009 @ 09:42 AM by RRconservative

reply to post by grover

You know what Grover? Your right! How dare Republicans question the wisdom of "The One" known as Obama. Pointing out racism can only be done by Democrats against Republicans, and racism charges can only be applied to white men.

We also can't criticize her because she is the first hispanic to be nominated to the Supreme Court. (Only because Democrats threatened to block Alberto Gonzalez when his name came up....no racism there!)

I don't see any problem at all nominating someone based on race, life experiences, empathy, and the fact that she correctly pointed out that she can make better decisions than a white male.

So we should all sit back at let the first President in history to lead a filibuster against a Supreme Court nominee, have his way...no questions dare be asked.

blogs.abcnews.com... tml

First President in US History to Have Voted to Filibuster a Supreme Court Nominee Now Hopes for Clean Process

Of couse he does!

and one more for emphasis

reply posted on 31-5-2009 @ 10:45 AM by grover

reply to post by RRconservative

Given the fact that your own words on other threads have proved you a bigot... you have zero credibility on the subject of racism.

And your idol mush loosebowels has zero credibility on the subject as well given his incredibly vocal bigotry.

And I say that not as a Democrat or liberal bashing a conservative or Republican but as someone who is opposed to racism period.

Unlike you I have actually made the effort to read her entire speech, not just the sound bites.

[edit on 31-5-2009 by grover]

reply posted on 31-5-2009 @ 11:00 AM by RRconservative

Originally posted by grover

And your idol mush loosebowels has zero credibility on the subject as well given his incredibly vocal bigotry.

Rush has no credibility on the subject?

briefingroom.thehill.com...

Rush Limbaugh all but predicted 12 years ago that Sonia Sotomayor was headed to the Supreme Court.

In 1997, when President Bill Clinton nominated Sotomayor to become a U.S. Circuit Court judge, Limbaugh urged Senate Republicans to block her confirmation.

The conservative radio host said, on the day of Sotomayor's confirmation hearing, Sept. 30, 1997, that she was extremely liberal and was on a "rocket ship" to the high court, according to a 1998 New York Times story on GOP efforts to stop her confirmation.

Rush is famous for the phrase "See, I told you so."

Also if opposing racism makes me a bigot....so be it.

reply posted on 31-5-2009 @ 01:26 PM by grover

Originally posted by RRconservative