Surprise, Surprise, exactly who everyone thought it was going to be. I've been listening to the reaction by the media and their guests in regards to the Sonia Sotomayor nomination and have some thoughts.
- Very good political pick by Obama (gotta leave a legacy of hope and change...) and its all going to be about how great her story is- Hispanic Woman grew up in government housing in the Bronx, underprivileged, law degree from Yale, worked way up through system (approved by H.W. Bush-see link below), Supreme Court Nominee. I can see it already, Republicans who ask tough questions, will be sexist and racist, which could cause them to take it easier on her for the fear of backlash from the Hispanic Community. She does have a great story, I didn't think stuff like this (the American Dream) happened though until Obama got into power...
- She will absolutely try to legislate from the bench. After 'joking' about it during a conference, Sotomayor ruled against white firefighters who didn't get promoted over minority firefighters even though they had higher scores on the testing criteria. Prime example of reverse descrimination and the left being so tolerant and empathetic (or you can leave off the 'em').
- She already has the votes in the Senate so unless she says something damning during the confirmation hearings she's going to breeze though and probably be a pretty outspoken voice on the Court.
'It's at the top of the Left's talking-points that Judge Sotomayor was first put on the bench by a Republican president, George H. W. Bush, in 1991. That's pretty funny when you think about it — the Bush seal of approval is not usually thought an imprimatur by the Left, and it wouldn't likely be much comfort to conservatives given that Sotomayor's district court nomination came around the same time GHWB put Justice Souter on the Supreme Court. But there is even less to it than meets the eye.
The appointment of judges, U.S. attorneys, and other high federal offices filled by presidential appointment has been controlled for eons by the U.S. senators from each state. That is because a nominee must win confirmation by the senate, the rules and customs of which permit a single senator to block consideration of a nominee. For years and years (until Schumer beat D'Amato), the U.S. senate delegation from New York was split — one Republican, one Democrat. In order to keep the peace and, more importantly, to ensure that the senator from the party out of power (i.e., not in the White House) did not use senatorial privileges to block appointments desired by the party in power, there was an arrangement in New York: for every X number of appointments controlled by the party in power, the party out of power (from 1980 through 1992, the Democrats) would get Y number (a smaller number, but at least something, which is better than nothing). I believe in 1991 it was on the order of 2 Democrat appointments for every 5 Republican appointments.
That is how Sonia Sotomayor was nominated by Bush-41. She was a selection of Democratic Sen. Pat Moynihan. The Republicans agreed to her appointment in order to ensure that Moynihan would not block nominees urged by Republican Sen. Al D'Amato.
It is surely true that Judge Sotomayor is a Bush-41 appointee, and I have no doubt that our regrettably race-and-ethnicity-obsessed Republican Party would point to her appointment by Bush as more proof of how indulgent they are of Hispanic sensibilities. But Sotomayor was not a Republican idea; she was a Republican accommodation.'
Oh.... and Cubs win! Cubs win!