« | »

Obama Picks A ‘Three-fer’ In Sotomayor

From an elated Associated Press:

AP sources: Obama to nominate Sotomayor

Associated Press – May 26, 2009

WASHINGTON (AP) – President Barack Obama has chosen federal appeals judge Sonia Sotomayor (SUHN’-ya soh-toh-my-YOR’) for the opening on the Supreme Court.

That word comes from two officials who spoke on condition of anonymity because the announcement hasn’t been made. That’s expected to happen at midmorning.

If confirmed by the Senate, Sotomayor would be the first Hispanic to serve on the nation’s highest court. She would succeed Justice David Souter, who is retiring.

Sotomayor grew up in a Bronx housing project after her parents moved to New York from Puerto Rico.

She is a graduate of Princeton University and Yale Law School. She was a prosecutor and private attorney before former President George H.W. Bush appointed her a federal judge for the Southern District of New York in 1992. Former President Bill Clinton made her an appeals judge in 1997.

In 1 (sic) of her most memorable rulings as federal district judge, Sotomayor essentially salvaged baseball in 1995, when she ruled with players over owners in a strike that had led to the cancellation of the World Series.

Just as we suspected, given that Ms. Sotomayor gives him several grievance groups in one.

Ms. Sotomayor is not only a Puerto Rican and a woman – she is also a diabetic.

This article was posted by Steve on Tuesday, May 26th, 2009. Comments are currently closed.

8 Responses to “Obama Picks A ‘Three-fer’ In Sotomayor”

  1. Confucius says:

    “. . . Ms. Sotomayor gives him two grievance groups in one. Women and Hispanics.”

    Yes, Ms. Sotomayor has a distaste for men and whites. She also has a distaste for the Constitution.

    Another Ivy League-educated hater vaunted by Obama and the mainstream media.

  2. proreason says:

    Wouldn’t it be swell if the man-child in the WH picked people based on the power of their intellect instead of their yearbook pictures?

    This woman has an extremely high rate of decision reversals by higher courts.

    That’s like a doctor having a high rate of deaths in his patients, isn’t it?

  3. curvyred says:

    Um but she ISN’T THE FIRST HISPANIC TO SERVE AS SUPREME COURT JUSTICE – why is the media lying again? I really do not care about race/gender categories but they are once again manipulating people.

    (Cardoza was the first Hispanic SOTUS justice)

    She also made a very controversial ruling in the Firefighter’s case which is currently being decided in the Supreme Court.

    • BannedbytheTaliban says:

      I believe Cardozo was actually Portuguese.

    • Confucius says:

      From Wikipedia and Yahoo:

      –Cardoza was born in America to Portuguese parents.
      –The U.S. Census Bureau does not consider Portuguese-Americans Hispanic.
      –Portuguese-Americans, however, are considered Latino.

      –Sotomayor was born in America to Puerto Rican parents.
      –Puerto Rican-Americans are considered both Hispanic and Latino.

      To summarize, Sotomayor is unfit to be a judge, let alone a Supreme Court justice.

    • proreason says:

      “To summarize, Sotomayor is unfit to be a judge, let alone a Supreme Court justice.”

      Confucius, I didn’t see that coming. You set it up beautifully with the wiki quotes.

      I really did laugh out loud when I read your punch-line.

  4. BannedbytheTaliban says:

    This is great, another defender of the Consititution who has never read it.

  5. proreason says:

    Another thought on Red Sonia’s “demographics”.

    She’s a home run, right? …..woman, Latina, diabetic, lunatic.

    Elsewhere, we have discussed her Latina-ness. It probably doesn’t amount to much. If she’s Catholic, she’s not much of one…..divorced, no kids, highly likely to be pro-abortion.

    But what about the woman angle? Divorced, no children, her law clerks are her family (??), elitist liberal. It looks to me like the only women she represents are lesbians. I don’t have the actual statistics, but childless, unmarried, 50’ish women have to be a tiny slice of this country. Remove lesbians and the % would be very small. And of those remaining, very few would be Ivy-league educated elitists.

    I think her female sub-group has about a dozen people in it.

« Front Page | To Top
« | »