Will Sotomayor Get Confirmed? Yes.

By Justin Gardner | Related entries in Supreme Court

Does anybody think Sonia Sotomayor isn’t going to get confirmed? Well, if you do, here are some reasons why you may want to rethink.

First, the rollout went off without a hitch. Even moderate Republicans lavished praise on her credentials, which are impressive and exactly what you’re looking for from a SCOTUS nominee. And there was Obama, smiling ear to ear, having just nominated the first Hispanic to the SCOTUS. Hello electoral jackpot.

Second, the right wing’s attacks are particularly poor this time around. Claiming that she could be a liberal judge is one thing, but claiming she’s a racist? Come on folks…

Third, well, she’s going to do the same song and dance that every other SCOTUS nominee does these days when they’re getting confirmed and not really answer any questions. And so she’ll sail through.

Fourth, Obama is trying to lure Republicans into a trap, and they know it. So they’ll let the fringe scream loudly, but the GOP isn’t going to fall on their sword and alienate an increasingly dwindling base by opposing the first Hispanic nominee to the court. Yes, it’s not fair, but it’s politics. This is a contact sport.

But hey, I’m willing to entertain some reasons why she won’t. However, make them plausible please. I don’t want to see the weak sauce.


This entry was posted on Wednesday, May 27th, 2009 and is filed under Supreme Court. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

14 Responses to “Will Sotomayor Get Confirmed? Yes.”

  1. kranky kritter Says:

    I have not heard anyone sensible claim otherwise. Given the composition of the senate, everyone ought to presume she will be confirmed with no problems whatsoever.

    The remaining question is whether she will be a good scotus justice. We’ll all be stuck speculating, then waiting and seeing. And then mileage will vary, obviously.

    I’m ready for the next subject. That is unlikely to stop left-leaning cheerleaders from obsessing about dumb things said about the nom by Limbaugh, Gingrich, and other uncle toms of the fringe base.

    [BTW, I might not have said that about Gingrich in the past, as I have some respect for his intellect. But I feel he has ratcheted up and accentuated his base-pacifying kook-spin lately.]

  2. Tillyosu Says:

    “having just nominated the first Hispanic to the SCOTUS. Hello electoral jackpot”

    Oh yes. You know “those people.” They all stick together right? I mean, they’re all brown anyways right?

    But could it be that there are many Mexicans who won’t fall in line right behind Obama simply because he chose a Puerto Rican for the SC? Obviously, the author has not spent much time in the Hispanic community…

  3. Simon Says:

    KK, I take it you’re accusing Rush and Newt of racism, but isn’t it a little illiterate to use that particular pejorative? Wasn’t the whole point that Uncle Tom was black? I thought that slur was used exclusively to accuse someone of a particular ethnicity or color of doing things injurious to that ethnicity or color, to which they supposedly owe some kind of loyalty?

  4. kranky kritter Says:

    NO, Simon. Just pandering.

    If my off-the-cuff remark was inapt, I apologize. I don’t think either one is racist. Only that their acts are schticky choir preaching.

    I see your point, though. There’s no “traitorous to your own side” element to either of them. My bad.

  5. Tully Says:

    Tillyosu, it’s not so much the Hispanic community he’s pandering to here as the PC community. My two cents, anyway.

  6. Reaganite Republican Resistance Says:

    Unless you are delusional, Sotomayer is a racist, as are all members of the treasonous La Raza -by definition- who’s motto is “For our race everything- for others, nothing”. Her record is nothing to shout about either, and frankly -if you’ve heard her speak- she’s not what you’d call a towering intellectual.

    And clearly Eric Holder has some racial hangups and agenda too… as does Obama IMO, since his behavior betrays a wierd pro-Kenyan grudge against the British… and he’s the one who nominated all these kooks.

    Whatever happened to the idea of a colorblind society? Team Obama define their world in racial terms all the time- and unlike any white people I know. I wouldn’t want to be judged by any of them after what I’ve heard come out of their own mouths- they sound like Jesse Jackson.

    If Obama is going to go on with his “justice” agenda largely based upon race- the double standards need to stop, and NOW.

    http://reaganiterepublicanresistance.blogspot.com/

  7. theWord Says:

    Triple R-

    Please keep speaking. It will help to drive in the last spike.

    It would however be nice if you didn’t make up racist mottos. It makes you look dishonest or stupid or willing to take advantage of the willfully ignorant.

    Palin Bachman 2012

  8. Tully Says:

    RRR — That’s not the motto of the NCLR (National Council of La Raza) and never has been. It’s an unoffical motto of “Aztlan” splinter factions of MEChA, a different organization. It’s a bastardization of the motto of Castro’s Cuban communist Revolution, “Por la revolución todo, fuera de la revolución nada!”

    Attributing it to La Raza is somewhat akin to attributing the Ten Point Program of the Black Panthers to the NAACP.

  9. michael reynolds Says:

    Tillosu:

    But could it be that there are many Mexicans who won’t fall in line right behind Obama simply because he chose a Puerto Rican for the SC?

    Not the point. They’re feeling dissed by the GOP. That’s why it’s good for the Dems.

  10. Macpoetsgirl Says:

    It would be great to see all genders, religions, nacionalities and cultures equally represented in the Supreme Court. I think she is a great start. I think the Supreme Court should be the epitome of an Equal Opportunity employer. It should represent the people and since we are melting a pot that should be reflected. So I say it should be 50% female, 50% male it should represent the married, single, divorced, gays, straights, blacks, hispanics, asian, whites, jews, catholics, baptist, buhdist, muslim, irish, italian, puerto rican, single parents, same sex parents. We have a long way to go but electing her covers a lot of bases. I don’t feel we should just fill a position to meet a quota but I dream of the day where we can continue to search for the candidate that indeed really represents the people.

  11. Macpoetsgirl Says:

    It’s really ridiculous that having ONE HISPANIC that could represent the numerous number of AMERICANS that are from Argentinian, Bolivian, Chilian, Columbian, Costa Rican, Cuban, Dominican, Ecuadorian, El Salvadorian, Guatemalan, Honduran, Mexican, Nicaraguan, Panamanian, Paraguayan, Peruan, Puerto Rican, Uruguyan and Venezuelan decent can create so much havoc and ruffle so many feathers. What does that say about our country? Yes! We have a long way to go.

  12. ExiledIndependent Says:

    Mac, you miss the point. Having positive or negative views of Sotomayor based on her ethnic background is racist. And her race hasn’t ruffled feathers. Her race-based rulings, affiliations, and personal commentary have.

  13. Simon Says:

    Macpoetsgirl Says:

    It would be great to see all genders, religions, nacionalities and cultures equally represented in the Supreme Court.

    No it wouldn’t. It would expose the person advocating it as lacking even a basic working knowledge of what the court does. (As would talking about “electing” a justice.) The supreme court isn’t a representative institution – it’s a court. Its job is to decide questions of law. And ill-conceived liberal conceptions of multicultural experience have little if anything to say to that task, properly-conceived.

  14. Back to Reason Says:

    Macpoetsgirl, you forgot to mention the bigamist/polygamist, the racist, the murderer, the child molester, the schizophrenic, the neo-nazi, the black panthers, the mentally insane, the high school drop out, the car mechanic, the college teacher fired for plagiarism, the illegal immigrant (oops too late)….and on and on and on. That is the problem with PC we try so hard to impress ourselves with how much we want to approve someone just because they represent a small percentage of the population. Appointing someone just because of their ethnicity or race is racist, look up the word before you use it. I have been to many other countries and believe me we are more diverse than any other country. I will tell you this, we will never see a European or African or even Tibetan become the president in China or Cuba (places that the left love to revere). So, get off your PC high horses and look at that facts, not the color of someone’s skin or sexual deviation.

Leave a Reply


NOTE TO COMMENTERS:


You must ALWAYS fill in the two word CAPTCHA below to submit a comment. And if this is your first time commenting on Donklephant, it will be held in a moderation queue for approval. Please don't resubmit the same comment a couple times. We'll get around to moderating it soon enough.


Also, sometimes even if you've commented before, it may still get placed in a moderation queue and/or sent to the spam folder. If it's just in moderation queue, it'll be published, but it may be deleted if it lands in the spam folder. My apologies if this happens but there are some keywords that push it into the spam folder.


One last note, we will not tolerate comments that disparage people based on age, sex, handicap, race, color, sexual orientation, national origin or ancestry. We reserve the right to delete these comments and ban the people who make them from ever commenting here again.


Thanks for understanding and have a pleasurable commenting experience.


Related Posts: