It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Ironically, on the recommendation of Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ) — an ardent proponent of SB-1070 — Bolton was nominated to the United States District Court for the District of Arizona by President Bill Clinton back in 2000. During her confirmation hearing, Kyl stated:
Well, there is one person in our state who’s a real expert on this in the judiciary, and that’s Judge Bolton. And because of her expertise and fairness, all of the contending interests from Arizona have been willing to place their concerns before her to be resolved, and she is right in the middle of this important litigation right now. They will be very sorry to see her leave in Maricopa County Superior Court bench. So, I have some mixed emotions in helping to nominate or to confirm Judge Bolton, but that’s how highly thought of she is.
Originally posted by madhadder545
reply to post by ProjectJimmy
Well thats where AZ went wrong.. They should have just tried to stay with the fed bill thats already in place that no one uses instead of adding on to it.
Originally posted by SmedleyBurlap
The chain of reasoning behind the OP:
1) I am a "Conservative"
2) Those who disagree with "Conservatives" are called "Liberals"
3) This judge disagrees with me
4) Therefore this judge is a "Liberal"
Now, if you are a racist and bigot as your signature implies, I am sure that you discussed this law with other racists and bigots, or at least those unfavourable to high immigration levels. Of course this company would be in favour of this law! Your statement has no more content than "All the Christians I have talked to think that Christ is the saviour!"
Of course, I could be wrong to assume that you discussed it with racists, xenophobes and nationalists - - maybe you discussed stricter immigration laws with your 'black friend'!