She’s Lying
By Johnny Roosh
…and she’s pretty good at it too.
I spent a fair amount of time watching video excerpts of the Sotomayor hearings last night.
Initially, her cool, calculated and over-enunciated responses disarmed me and left me thinking if we have to live with a SCOTUS appointee borne of Comrade Obama’s rule of the administrative branch any way, I can live with this.
…and then I slapped myself.
She’s good…or her coach is.
Sotomayor: “No, sir. As I’ve indicated, my record shows that at no point or time have I ever permitted my personal views or sympathies to influence an outcome of a case. In every case where I have identified a sympathy, I have articulated it and explained to the litigant why the law requires a different result. … I do not permit my sympathies, personal views, or prejudices to influence the outcome of my cases.”
Her repeated assertions that forging policy remains the domain of Congress flies in the face of…
“Court of appeals is where policy is made…and I know, I know this is on tape and I should never say that”
I found her responses in sharp contradiction with the record she ironically kept referring to and moreover with her own widely-publicized statements of the past.
Judge Sonia Sotomayor said President Barack Obama didn’t ask her about abortion before her U.S. Supreme Court nomination, as she renewed her promise to lawmakers that she would interpret the law impartially.
“I was asked no questions by anyone including the president about my views on any specific legal issue,”
True or not, this is really immaterial. He didn’t have to. Her record and public statements are well documented. She is likely a token appointee. Furthermore, vetting has not been a strength of the Obama administration.
She is by no means unqualified – but is she suitable? Did President Obama select the best candidate at hand, or the best “Wise Latina?”
I’d like to hear what our crew of commenters think of Sotomayor and her confirmation hearings.
- Do you think it’s a waste of time (she’s going to be confirmed any way)?
- Do you believe her assertions these past couple of days or is she just reading from a prepared inventory of talking points?
- Does she really disagree with the president who said “[in] 95 percent of the cases, the law will give you the answer, and the last 5 percent legal process will not lead you to the rule of decision. The critical ingredient in those cases is supplied by what is in the judge’s heart.? Eighty percent of judging is the law”?
- Does her judgment of the New Haven, Connecticut firefighters race-bias lawsuit, subsequently overturned, unwind her repeated “look at my record” plea?
- How would the court (or your life) be impacted by the addition of Sotomayor, judging by her record and not her testimony?
July 15th, 2009 at 3:42 pm
“She’s Lying …and she’s pretty good at it too.”
I’ve coined the name “SotoLiar”. Feel free to use and distribute.
July 15th, 2009 at 3:59 pm
First, to be intelectually honest, we must consider her comments. It wasn’t a one time comment, she has repeated these things on several occasions.
Second, look at her record. She has contradicted herself, when it suites her biases. How is that for impartial?
Third, especially to all the Obama supporters, is this the best candidate? We are talking about the highest court in the land. It is a lifetime appointment. Shouldn’t we expect the best from Obama?
I have tried several times to get a straight answer from Obama supporters. I will try again:
Flush/Peev/DG/stooj/et al, is this the best Obama can do?
Shouldn’t we expect Obama to nominate the best of the best, the cream of the crop?
How is that HOPE and CHANGE treatin ya?
July 15th, 2009 at 4:47 pm
And don’t forget she LIED when she said her ‘wise latina” remarks were in concert with O’Connors (sp?), while in fact they were contrary.
July 15th, 2009 at 6:33 pm
Are you really expecting any level of candor from the Obama admin? The man is a shameless liar. That he promotes people like himself is no surprise.
July 15th, 2009 at 8:50 pm
I think that is key, that she is not the best qualified. Even if one wanted a token Hispanic, Miguel Estrada is vastly superior as a judge.
She has been overturned 2/3 of the time on appeal. That’s not good enough.
She’s lying, it’s obvious.
Somebody needs the cajones (that’s the Spanish word) to point out her lies. Maybe she gets confirmed anyway, but if you don’t oppose you always lose.
July 15th, 2009 at 10:12 pm
1. Do you think it’s a waste of time (she’s going to be confirmed any way)?
Yes.
2. Do you believe her assertions these past couple of days or is she just reading from a prepared inventory of talking points?
The latter.
3. Does she really disagree with the president who said “[in] 95 percent of the cases, the law will give you the answer, and the last 5 percent legal process will not lead you to the rule of decision. The critical ingredient in those cases is supplied by what is in the judge’s heart.? Eighty percent of judging is the law”?
At the Supreme Court level? The smartest judges in the country disagree, by definition. The Supreme Court makes the law. Scalia and Thomas no less than the others.
4. Does her judgment of the New Haven, Connecticut firefighters race-bias lawsuit, subsequently overturned, unwind her repeated “look at my record” plea?
No.
5. How would the court (or your life) be impacted by the addition of Sotomayor, judging by her record and not her testimony?
Replacing Souter? Very little.
July 15th, 2009 at 10:54 pm
JDoosh said: “over-enunciated”
Johnny was expecting her to go all Rosie Perez once Jeff Sessions started asking her questions.
July 15th, 2009 at 11:31 pm
“Replacing Souter? Very little. ”
Yep. We get more of the same. Low quality, but reliability. Whoopie.
July 16th, 2009 at 9:37 am
Hey Mrs…..oops, I mean Miss, after that failed marriage…but anyway, does it bother you knowing that the only reason The One picked you is because your ancesters came from Latina/o-land?
July 16th, 2009 at 9:54 am
Clownie revealed “The Supreme Court makes the law.”
So, we can just get rid of that whole Congress thing? The Capitol building would make a great venue for flea markets, and we’d free up lots of office space on K St.
July 16th, 2009 at 11:39 am
Johnny was expecting her to go all Rosie Perez once Jeff Sessions started asking her questions.
Well, that would be pretty entertaining.
July 16th, 2009 at 1:39 pm
The questioning is important even though she will be confirmed. She could tell the truth and still get confirmed, heck, she could read the phone book or discuss Perry Mason episodes and get confirmed.
She has been prepped for the questions she is getting. Any nominee would be.
The President knows exactly what kind of Judge he is getting. She has passed the liberal litmus test.
Ricci v New Haven exposes that liberals want the quota system, that any means is acceptable as long as you reach the desired goal.
I don’t expect that life will change much as she is replacing another fellow traveller.
She is the President’s nominee and therefore should probably be confirmed. What we as voters should do is take note of the kind of nominee The One appoints.
July 16th, 2009 at 3:49 pm
Flush/Peev/DG/stooj/AssClown et al, is this the best Obama can do?
Shouldn’t we expect Obama to nominate the best of the best, the cream of the crop?
Response: *crickets*
July 16th, 2009 at 4:32 pm
Dang, I hate it when AC is right.
Slightly off topic, does her nomination now make it acceptable to use the phrase Affirmative Action as an insult?
Barak Obama, the Affirmative Action President, nominated The Wise Latina as an Affirmative Action justice. Neither are overly well qualified for their positions except for their victim status – they’re minimally qualified in every other respect.
Can we talk about it openly now?
.
July 17th, 2009 at 6:43 am
Idiot. Princeton/Yale Law. On the federal bench since 1992, she’s a well-regarded judge on the most important circuit court in the country. “Minimally qualified.” Dude, you are underqualified as a bathroom attendant.
July 20th, 2009 at 8:34 am
Confirmed yet?