So, Obama decided to just throw another one in the face of Constitution-loving, freedom-loving Americans, just to remind us that he won. Big surprise, that. He picked a tax cheat of dubious skill to run Treasury. He picked a crook and Clintonista bagman for Attorney General. And so on – a cabinet and administration full of stooges, yes-men, crooks, and thugs.
So since nothing else about the office of the President of the United States is sacred, why would he not use his constitutionally mandated power to nominate to the Supreme Court of the United States a person so desperately lacking in judicial timbre that people of reason stand amazed, mouths open in awe.
In 5 years as a District Judge and 11 years as a judge on the Second Circuit, she’s had 7 decisions that were reviewed by the Supreme Court. 6 were overturned. The 7th was affirmed, but the court specifically rejected (unanimously) her reasoning.
Think about that for a second. Ruth Bader “former ACLU general counsel” Ginsburg, John Paul Stevens, Stephen Breyer, and David “eminent domain” Souter — a motley crew that can find emanations, vapors, penumbras, and whole-cloth invented rights with the best of them — rejected her reasoning. In a court system fouled by leftists, she can’t seem to even meet their standards for fair application of the law.
…nearly none of them raved about her. They expressed questions about her temperament, her judicial craftsmanship, and most of all, her ability to provide an intellectual counterweight to the conservative justices, as well as a clear liberal alternative.
The most consistent concern was that Sotomayor, although an able lawyer, was “not that smart and kind of a bully on the bench,” as one former Second Circuit clerk for another judge put it. “She has an inflated opinion of herself, and is domineering during oral arguments, but her questions aren’t penetrating and don’t get to the heart of the issue.”
Some former clerks and prosecutors expressed concerns about her command of technical legal details.
This from her political kindred spirits.
She sees the bench as a vehicle to legislate and impose policy, regardless of what the Constitution and duly enacted laws say.
You should read the transcript of this lecture she gave at the Cal-Berkeley Law School in 2001. You should read every word of this thoroughly bigoted piece of rotting carp that probably went over well, considering where it was delivered. From top to bottom it advocated the notion that the judiciary was only fair insomuch as the racial and gender makeup of the judiciary approached that of the population. It said, in so many words, that only women and minorities were truly capable of rendering justice. This whopper has already been made famous:
I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life.
To quote one of my RedState colleagues:
So she explicitly rejects, more than once, the idea that there is an objective standard in judging that should be aspired to by judges. She says that judgment springs primarily from experience, and secondarily from one’s inborn cultural and racial tendencies. She accepts with complete comfort that a white male judge and a black or Latina judge will reach different decisions when judging the same facts and the same law. Ergo, judging definitionally is of a higher quality when there are more female and colored judges.
Sum : FAIL
America deserves better. This is a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land. She’s demonstrated no qualifications other than being incompetent, activist, and bigoted.
[UPDATE] And the fun is just beginning. There’s a Soros connection, kids. Stay tuned!
Share on Facebook 1 1 SHARES His supporters are going to say “no he didn’t, he just told you what someone else called him.” But that’s because those people are dishonest and think you are stupid. He called him a pussy, in as snidely and as “cute” a way as possible. And yes, just like his F-bomb from the weekend that he lied about, he | Read More »
Share on Facebook 1 1 SHARES You know what they hate? Being called harpies. It’s sexist, you see, because you aren’t allowed to insult someone from a protected gender. And that’s part of the problem isn’t it? Take a look: My friend and fellow Truth Revolt writer Paul Bois has new project out this month, a film, that confronts the radical feminist (read: anti-male) movement | Read More »
Share on Facebook 1 1 SHARES While there’s no doubt that in a lot of ways, Obama is successful as a president in that he set out to reshape the country in his image and has succeeded in frightening ways, there have also been several examples Obama being a fairly incompetent leader who is prone to shoot himself and the country as a whole in the foot. Case | Read More »
Share on Facebook 1 1 SHARES As the Republican primary season kicks into high gear, a debate is playing out among various groups as to how one effectively takes down Donald Trump. Dave Weigel writes about this, live from New Hampshire, at the Washington Post, covering an ad that Rick Wilson and I created for the anti-Trump SuperPAC, Make America Awesome. In essence, as Weigel notes, | Read More »