« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Senate Judiciary Committee Votes Sotomayor Out Along Party Lines… Oh, except for Lindsey Graham…

Several years ago in a Senate Judiciary Committee Mark-Up, in a very different time, Sen. Lindsey Graham made a wise-crack to his Democrat colleagues along the lines of “well, one day, when Democrats get back in power… I mean, not in my lifetime… (laughter).”

Well, it didn’t take long, Senator. Here we are. And in a moment of clarity – you remind us, yet again – of the cancer in the Republican Party that is responsible to bringing us from 55 members to 40 in a little over two years. You are a pathetic excuse for a Senator… Incapable of maintaining an ounce of principle in your decisions – and giving up the game that your motives are entirely political.

You needn’t reach any question beyond that of whether Judge Sotomayor would be an activist judge. While she (unconvincingly) tried to sound like Justice Scalia at her confirmation hearing, when the spotlight was not on her in years past, she, by her own arrogant comments, mocked the idea that Courts should not make law. Everything else is academic.

A vote for Judge Sotomayor is a vote against the Constitution and against conservatism.

Senator Graham, you have made your position crystal clear.

NOTE: It should be noted how bad Graham’s vote truly is in light of the fact two old bulls, Senators Grassley and Hatch, in particular, found it necessary to vote against the President’s nominee. Mike gamecock Devine has posted on this topic here and throughout his diary.

COMMENTS

  • izoneguy

    stepped in it big time. Bye Bye

    • johnCV

      What were the good people of SC thinking?

      • http://www.scottbomb.com scottbomb

        Thanks, South Carolina!

  • bk

    Her answers were evasive (to be kind about it) but it did seem pretty clear that her copy of the Constitution has “the right to an abortion on demand” in it but not “the right to keep and bear arms”.

  • IJB
    • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

      http://www.redstate.com/gamecock/2009/07/25/sotomayor-sessions-un-hatch-hatch/

  • http://online.logcabin.org/about/ suzieQ

    As should any other GOP senator that votes for her next week. A vote for Sotomayor is a vote for the continued killing of the unborn. A republican senator cannot say that he opposes abortion on one hand and then vote for Sotomayor on the other.

  • nessa

    His closing comment: “I don’t believe that Judge Sotomayor has the deep-rooted convictions necessary to resist the siren call of judicial activism. She has evoked its mantra too often. As someone who cares deeply about our great heritage of law, I must withhold my consent.”

    Now thats a Senator.

    http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2009/07/opposing-view-a-confirmation-conversion–nominee-lacks-deep-convictions-needed-to-resist-judicial-activism–by-jeff-session.html

    • Warrior

      American by chance, Alabamian by the Grace of God!

  • Dafyd

    This seems like a bit of manufactured rage to me. I don’t recall much fuss over folks voting for Ruth Bader Ginsburg when the Senate confirmed her by a margin of 96-3. The 3 dissents were…Don Nickles (OK), Robert Smith (NH — Wow.), and Jesse Helms (NC.)

    During the entire hearing, Graham made it perfectly clear that while he probably disagrees with her on, oh, everything, he was willing to hear her out and keep an open mind. This is classic confirmation hearing stuff. You give them a good roast, and then you wave them in with 90+ votes.

    If you want to see nasty hearings, go back to Clarence Thomas’, or even more dramatically, Robert Bork’s. These were nasty and unpleasant. This confirmation has been pretty dull by comparison.

    • Warrior

      no matter what. And her bete noir of choice was “Anti-Semitism”, so no one wanted to be on record as voting against a Jewish candidate…

      Politically motivated personal invectives were still taken seriously back then and still had the potential to destroy or significantly damage a career.

      Now-a-days, no one could creditably be charged with “anti-Latinism” for voting against this mediocre example of a “wise Latina.”

    • AceInTX

      and there is nothing manufactured here…The Democrats changed the game when it cam to Bush’s appellate judges and I see no reason why we should just capitulate as the Republicans always have with Ginsburg and long before that…

      It’s long past time for this party to learn from it’s mistakes and start fighting…If little miss Lyndsey wants to run around in skirts and high heels…by all means…let her…but don’t blame us for pointing him out as the pandering fool he is!

  • DavidSage

    I’m reluctant to get rid of moderate incumbent Republican Senators in primaries that are in “deep” blue states. But here is a perfect situation to take down an incumbent Republican Senator and replace him with a more conservative Republican. South Carolina is as deep red state as you can get. The winner of the Republican primary is the winner of the election.

    Graham’s vote has given cover to all sorts of Democrats that will now feel comfortable voting for Sotomayor.

    We’ve already had problems with Graham on numerous other issues, including the whole amnesty debate. He really relishes his “maverick” role in the Senate, taking his cue from McCain. Graham needs to remember his state is much more conservative than his voting record.

  • AceInTX

    A vote for Judge Sotomayor is a vote against the Constitution and against conservatism.

    Graham, Snowe, Collins, McCain and the rest of these unprincipled appeasers care not one whit about the Constitution, let alone Conservatism!

    Those of us who cling to antiquated ideas like liberty and justice which is the embodiment of conservative thought and principled are ignorant and impudent peasants to be ruled over by their ilk because we’re to stupid to be trusted with our own self determination!

    Graham and half the Republicans in the US Senate need to be shown the door.

    The sooner the better!

  • http://www.marklaiminger.org Lammo

    of the Senate completely but, being from the other side of the country, I have no idea how realistic that is. What I’m wondering is, would it be more realistic to get him bounced out of the Judiciary Committee? How would we go about it and who do we have to contact and put pressure on?

    • AceInTX

      as was Specters…the old guard won’t change the rules on seniority because they enjoy the perks and privileges it gives them.

  • johnCV

    Posting decorum prevents me from saying that graham is a lame-a$$ political crapweasel who craves the nurturing accolades of the presstitutes in the media.

    I can only hope there will be opportunity to convey onto this turncoat all of the karma he richly deserves. Sooner rather than later.

  • centrist1968

    nt

    • AceInTX

      thanks to him and those like him!

  • http://impudent.blognation.us/blog kyle8

    Will no one rid us of this charlatan? I guess it’s been tough for him, when McShame’s election came to a crashing halt, Lindsey had to extract his head from Big John’s rectum.

    /Rectum? damn near killed him.

  • BillM

    http://www.nytimes.com/2001/06/26/opinion/judging-by-ideology.html

    As for the topic, Graham voting for Soto is far worse than Snowe and Collins voting for her. There are no electable GOPers in ME other THAN Snowe & Collins, IIRC. Both always crush easily each election, to the koskids frustration, and the Dem alternatives are far worse, imo.

    /.02

    • http://impudent.blognation.us/blog kyle8

      Catholics.

      • izoneguy

        on America and hard-working Americans that don’t like all the porky admendments.

  • LittleL1954

    Sen. Cornyn (Tx) , my Senator, is Chair of the Reb. Nat’l Senatoral Comm, and they keep asking for money to help “Relect” Republican Senators. I keep saying NO No No as long as there are RINO’s like Graham getting money from the RNSC I will continue to say NO NO NO!!!

  • http://curiousmojo.blogspot.com/ Patrick McGarry

    How is it possible that a weak RINO like Lindsay Graham can continue to get reelected in the same state that brough us Jim DeMint? They must hold one election for smart people and another for everybody else, sheesh.

  • igcblogger

    Maybe Sen. Graham was impressed with her “compelling personal story” as the redundant beltway echo chamber put it.

    If only Miguel Estrada or Clarence Thomas had a compelling story to tell…

    http://ingeneralcounsel.blogspot.com/2009/07/justice-clarence-thomas-son-also-rises.html

  • http://edwardcropper.blogspot.com/ edward_cropper

    check my blog for a photo salute to the twit from SC

    edwardcropper.blogspot.com/