Topic: Sonia Sotomayor | |
---|---|
Edited by
willing2
on
Wed 07/15/09 08:23 PM
|
|
She is racist. Her comment showed that. She is anti-2nd ammendment. She is pro-open borders and granting amnesty to illegals. IMO, judges should go by Rule of Law and the Constitution, and not by their opinions. This is my opinion on the subject and I believe she is a poor choice for a position that calls for fair and unbiased decisions based on the Law. |
|
|
|
She is racist. Her comment showed that. She is anti-2nd ammendment. She is pro-open borders and granting amnesty to illegals. IMO, judges should go by Rule of Law and the Constitution, and not by their opinions. This is my opinion on the subject and I believe she is a poor choice for a position that calls for fair and unbiased decisions based on the Law. I agree. And the fact that Obama said he wanted someone that voted with their heart. The law is logical, not emotional. jmo |
|
|
|
She is racist. Her comment showed that. She is anti-2nd ammendment. She is pro-open borders and granting amnesty to illegals. IMO, judges should go by Rule of Law and the Constitution, and not by their opinions. This is my opinion on the subject and I believe she is a poor choice for a position that calls for fair and unbiased decisions based on the Law. I agree. And the fact that Obama said he wanted someone that voted with their heart. The law is logical, not emotional. jmo While I agree that the law should not always be determined by the heart it might not be such a bad idea in some circumstance, but the law is definately not always logical. Either way, no matter who you get, you can't be sure they will see things the way we might expect when the time comes to make a particular judgement. |
|
|
|
She is racist. Her comment showed that. She is anti-2nd ammendment. She is pro-open borders and granting amnesty to illegals. IMO, judges should go by Rule of Law and the Constitution, and not by their opinions. This is my opinion on the subject and I believe she is a poor choice for a position that calls for fair and unbiased decisions based on the Law. I agree. And the fact that Obama said he wanted someone that voted with their heart. The law is logical, not emotional. jmo While I agree that the law should not always be determined by the heart it might not be such a bad idea in some circumstance, but the law is definately not always logical. Either way, no matter who you get, you can't be sure they will see things the way we might expect when the time comes to make a particular judgement. I agree, there have been Supreme Court Nominees and Appointees that have reversed their voting record once elected to the high court. Time will tell. |
|
|
|
either this is about her views on abortion, or you don't like it because she is a women. if she is a racists that what does that make Jeff sessions.
|
|
|
|
She contridicts herself left and right. Ive been watching the situation daily.
One thing I keep thinking also is: If she doesnt take a stance form a personal view, but by law, and state law, then why does she keep bringing up her personal life? The question was what she thinks about gun rights, and she referred to her godson who is a member of the n.r.a. She keeps making personal refrences, but states that her personal feelings, and opinions arent relevant, and she works by the law. I think she just knows she has this in her pocket, and arrogantly doesnt give a rats ***. Her answers reguarding her speeches, and statements she made are all "out of context" no matter how specific they are. Shes a LIAR, a huge liar! |
|
|
|
She contridicts herself left and right. Ive been watching the situation daily. One thing I keep thinking also is: If she doesnt take a stance form a personal view, but by law, and state law, then why does she keep bringing up her personal life? The question was what she thinks about gun rights, and she referred to her godson who is a member of the n.r.a. She keeps making personal refrences, but states that her personal feelings, and opinions arent relevant, and she works by the law. I think she just knows she has this in her pocket, and arrogantly doesnt give a rats ***. Her answers reguarding her speeches, and statements she made are all "out of context" no matter how specific they are. Shes a LIAR, a huge liar! It apears that way to me also..but she will get the votes in the end. 9 Supreme Court Justices...she will have about 12% of the vote soon. |
|
|
|
She is racist. Her comment showed that. She is anti-2nd ammendment. She is pro-open borders and granting amnesty to illegals. IMO, judges should go by Rule of Law and the Constitution, and not by their opinions. This is my opinion on the subject and I believe she is a poor choice for a position that calls for fair and unbiased decisions based on the Law. I agree. And the fact that Obama said he wanted someone that voted with their heart. The law is logical, not emotional. jmo While I agree that the law should not always be determined by the heart it might not be such a bad idea in some circumstance, but the law is definately not always logical. Either way, no matter who you get, you can't be sure they will see things the way we might expect when the time comes to make a particular judgement. I agree, there have been Supreme Court Nominees and Appointees that have reversed their voting record once elected to the high court. Time will tell. Absolutely, there was one guy that did just that, and I believe it was the republican side at the time that was quite disappointed that he did so, can't remember what the guys name was. |
|
|
|
She contridicts herself left and right. Ive been watching the situation daily. One thing I keep thinking also is: If she doesnt take a stance form a personal view, but by law, and state law, then why does she keep bringing up her personal life? The question was what she thinks about gun rights, and she referred to her godson who is a member of the n.r.a. She keeps making personal refrences, but states that her personal feelings, and opinions arent relevant, and she works by the law. I think she just knows she has this in her pocket, and arrogantly doesnt give a rats ***. Her answers reguarding her speeches, and statements she made are all "out of context" no matter how specific they are. Shes a LIAR, a huge liar! I dont' think that makes her a liar at all, she is not giving media what they want but that doesn't make her a liar. Her references are for the hungry media folks, I don't think any of them can afford to give away too much, no matter what side they favor. She can work by the law and still have a personal preference too. We the public demand that she go by the law and expect her have the same beliefs as the law too, that's a bit strange. There are laws that I respect because they are the law, but I don't personally agree with them. |
|
|
|
i just figured it out you people wanted . Harriet Myers as a judge. she was under quillflyed. but in the end the republican have no power to do nothing but complain. so it really don't matter she is in and there's nothing the republicans can do about it.
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Andson
on
Tue 07/21/09 01:22 PM
|
|
I think she should be held accountable for her words, thoughts, and actions just like any other person who holds or held an office should be held accountable, after all if we say anything about a minority in the work place. We our brought up on charges or even fired. Isn't that going to be her work place? It is sad the greatest nation on the planet with freedoms that we have fought for and some died, are letting our public servants that make law and rules and a boat load of MONEY, are not held to standards and a way of living that they want us to live by and sometimes forces us to live. Keep in mind we left Europe because of what is happening now. To much government and to much control over us. We have alot of good government that came from our own life's lessons, Just remember if we give the government the power to gives us something, then they have the power to take it away. It seems as though they are above the law these days. she to interpret the law not write it.
|
|
|
|
yes i think your talking about the firefighter case. but i personal believe we should be allowed to have guns, i,m going to protect my child regardless of what the law says. we can't pick which laws we abide by |
|
|
|
the main reason the republicans don't want her is. because she believes in abortion. bush put his people in like Roberts, she its Obama turn. you can whine all you want. republicans lost the election.
|
|
|
|
The Supreme Court is supposed to be a separate branch in the government..but it has never been more political than it is now. Much of that since the hanging chad debacle of Gore and Bush.
|
|
|
|
She contridicts herself left and right. Ive been watching the situation daily. One thing I keep thinking also is: If she doesnt take a stance form a personal view, but by law, and state law, then why does she keep bringing up her personal life? The question was what she thinks about gun rights, and she referred to her godson who is a member of the n.r.a. She keeps making personal refrences, but states that her personal feelings, and opinions arent relevant, and she works by the law. I think she just knows she has this in her pocket, and arrogantly doesnt give a rats ***. Her answers reguarding her speeches, and statements she made are all "out of context" no matter how specific they are. Shes a LIAR, a huge liar! Their all liars....and the ones questioning her integrity don't have any either. |
|
|
|
lets go to the fact sheet.Jeff session a none racist. [in the 70s he said black don't need the right to vote]. yet he called her a racist.
|
|
|
|
She contridicts herself left and right. Ive been watching the situation daily. One thing I keep thinking also is: If she doesnt take a stance form a personal view, but by law, and state law, then why does she keep bringing up her personal life? The question was what she thinks about gun rights, and she referred to her godson who is a member of the n.r.a. She keeps making personal refrences, but states that her personal feelings, and opinions arent relevant, and she works by the law. I think she just knows she has this in her pocket, and arrogantly doesnt give a rats ***. Her answers reguarding her speeches, and statements she made are all "out of context" no matter how specific they are. Shes a LIAR, a huge liar! Their all liars....and the ones questioning her integrity don't have any either. I can't agrue or debate that fact. Let us ask the questions for a change. |
|
|
|
i no what it is first she is a women second she is not white. but i really no what it is. after years of abusing other races. the white man feels his power slipping away. they might be afraid of paid back.
|
|
|
|
Edited by
franshade
on
Wed 07/22/09 06:30 AM
|
|
She contridicts herself left and right. Ive been watching the situation daily. One thing I keep thinking also is: If she doesnt take a stance form a personal view, but by law, and state law, then why does she keep bringing up her personal life? The question was what she thinks about gun rights, and she referred to her godson who is a member of the n.r.a. She keeps making personal refrences, but states that her personal feelings, and opinions arent relevant, and she works by the law. I think she just knows she has this in her pocket, and arrogantly doesnt give a rats ***. Her answers reguarding her speeches, and statements she made are all "out of context" no matter how specific they are. Shes a LIAR, a huge liar! Their all liars....and the ones questioning her integrity don't have any either. All speak out of their behinds - say what is expected or what others want to hear. |
|
|