[9V42h1eT]

Has anyone claimed she wasn't qualified?

[squicscor]

I take it you are denying that she was picked because she was a women and hispanic then?

[jakitula]

I don't prefer any left of center judge

I would have prefered anyone whose nomination annoucement was more concerned with their professional qualifications instead of any number of irrelevancies, including Sotomeyor if Obama had felt like picking her for those reasons.

[MightyMasd]

Did my sarcastic smilie not load fast enough for you?

[usacomm]

By the way, St. Ronnie:

Within the guidelines of excellence, appointments can carry enormous symbolic significance. This permits us to guide by example, to show how deep our commitment is and to give meaning to what we profess.

One way I intend to live up to that commitment is to appoint a woman to the Supreme Court.

I am announcing today that one of the first Supreme Court vacancies in my administration will be filled by the most qualified woman I can find, one who meets the high standards I will demand for all my appointments.

It is time for a woman to sit among our highest jurists. I will also seek out women to appoint to other federal courts in an effort to bring about a better balance on the federal bench. Oh noes! Identity politics!

-Arrian

[WenPyclenoWex]

I'm confused, Arrian. Are you claiming she's an AA pick or just saying that there's nothing wrong with being an AA pick?

[AAAESLLESO]

There seems to be a fairly large pool of qualified people, and that pool includes men, women, white people, black people, hispanic people, etc. The court is a tad low on females and has no hispanic presence. Given a large pool of qualified judges, I don't see a problem with chosing a hispanic female from the pool. I have a huge problem with picking any professional for such a job based on race or gender. When people are not doing olympian gymnastics around it (or just waving their hand like you are), the law does too.

The "AA pick" smear is based on the idea that she's either not qualified or she's less qualified than some other (presumably white male?) candidate. Of course, you can't show that she's less qualified can you? You are falling victim to your own strawman. Please quote who said she was not qualified.

[mdUzAMbG]

Try reading what I wrote again, Patty:

The "AA pick" smear is based on the idea that she's either not qualified or she's less qualified than some other (presumably white male?) candidate No one here has yet asserted that she isn't qualified. Several have asserted that she's less qualified (than ??), but was chosen ahead of those other, more qualified candidates as an AA pick. The subtext is pretty similar: she sucks (or kinda sucks, or doesn't rock as much) but is getting in 'cause she's a latina. Damn liberals. Get off my lawn.

-Arrian

[Heacechig]

I thought Sarah Palin was awesome because she was hot, not because she was a woman. Duh.

Get with the story dude.

[usatramadolusa]

There seems to be a fairly large pool of qualified people, and that pool includes men, women, white people, black people, hispanic people, etc. The court is a tad low on females and has no hispanic presence. Given a large pool of qualified judges, I don't see a problem with chosing a hispanic female from the pool.

I do. People think having women/minorities on the Supreme Court is great because it shows how far women and minorities have come. But it DOESN'T show that as long as the reason they get appointed to the court is to pander to political groups.

[paulaglober]

how does it say anything meaningful about the status of minorities in society Easy -- because the minorities themselves think it's meaningful.

As Rufus noted, politics is an inevitable part of this. And hispanics are a very fast-growing voting bloc. So it's not so much a placating gesture as it is blatant pandering to a potentially key constituency. And even bright, informed, open-minded hispanics are fine with that. No one has pandered to them before, except in the heat of a campaign.

So this nomination says nothing about the "status of minorities in society."
Rather, it says, "We just locked up a big pile of votes in 2010/12."

[frkksptn]

Tomato, tomahto.

[duawLauff]

Top Senate Republican strategists tell POLITICO that, barring unknown facts about Judge Sonia Sotomayor, the GOP plans no scorched-earth opposition to her confirmation as a Supreme Court justice.

More than 24 hours after the White House unveiling, no senator has come out in opposition to Sotomayor’s confirmation.

“The sentiment is overwhelming that the Senate should do due diligence but should not make a mountain out of a molehill,” said a top Senate Republican aide. “If there’s no ‘there’ there, we shouldn’t try to create one.”

Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama, the top Republican on the Judiciary Committee, sounded conciliatory during a round of television interviews on Wednesday.

“We need to all have a good hearing, take our time and do it right, and then the senators cast their vote up or down based on whether or not they think this is the kind of judge that should be on the court,” Sessions said on CNN’s “American Morning.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0509/23022.html

GOP

[JulietOreira]

“The sentiment is overwhelming that the Senate should do due diligence but should not make a mountain out of a molehill,” said a top Senate Republican aide. “If there’s no ‘there’ there, we shouldn’t try to create one.” GOP attempting to revive one of their oldest memes... civility.

Apparently Sotomayor has managed to keep that partially-eaten cloned stem-cell fetus well hidden...

[slimfifa]

Still, a refreshing change in tone.

[Lyikmcmb]

OBNOXIOUS... BUT IN A GOOD WAY?

On the other hand, here's the possible good news in the Sotomayor nomination. A conservative legalist friend notes that the all-important 5th vote on the Supreme Court is Justice Anthony Kennedy's. The Reagan-appointed Kennedy has drifted to the left in recent years - in part (it's gossiped) because of his negative reactions to the brilliant but sometimes acerbic Antonin Scalia.

Having lost in 2008, Republicans had no hope of a conservative or even a moderate judicial nominee. What we should therefore be hoping for, my friend continues, is the most personally obnoxious liberal, someone certain to offend and irritate Kennedy - and push him careening back rightward. For this reason, the politic Elena Kagan would be the very worst pick from a conservative point of view. As dean of Harvard Law School, she proved herself adept at wooing conservative support. By contrast, if Jeffrey Rosen's reporting is correct, Sotomayor was almost unanimously disliked by her colleagues on the Second Circuit and even more by their clerks. And she's unlikely to gain humility from this latest promotion... so who could be better?

http://www.newmajority.com/ShowScrol...4-f533327c01d4

Let Sotomayor through! News flash for conservatives who oppose Sotomayor . . .

she IS a moderate! I consider anyone just to left or just to right of center basically almost as moderate as dead center.

[bettingonosports]

I think that article was being sarcastic.

You can be liberal or conservative and still be moderate if you're only just to left or right of center. Liberal-moderate or conservative-moderate.