I am not sure, but I know the democrats do not remember these things, because they are things they did, that goes completely against what they are saying we have to do now, as Republicans and Conservatives, when it comes to Obama’s nomination of Federal Judge Sonia Sotmayor for the Supreme court. We are not supposed to be against her in any way or it will be racist, or sexist, and the problem is, most all the Republicans are cowing down to this pressure to be “fair”. And all I can say is, Oh come on now! You mean you democrats have never ever ever done this before? If you say no, then I have proof that you are lying and are living what you know to be a total and complete double standard. What is good for you, cannot be done by us.
We are getting stories from the press, and from Obama himself that she is the best person for the job, when, her own statements, have completely disqualified her for the position. And if we allow her to become a supreme court judge, we will have to live with her socialistic ideals for the rest of her life. Remember folks, this is a lifetime nomination! For someone who is not Supreme Court Judge material.
The sad part of this whole thing, is in the past, it has been the democrats who have done their best to shoot down supreme court nominees that because they were not Democrat liberals, they were not fit to be sitting on the Supreme Court. Remember Samuel Alito, how the democrats almost filibustered to keep him from being on the Supreme Court? Remember Miguel Estrada? The Democrats destroyed him. He is now in private practice in Washington D.C., after being filibustered for several years after George Bush nominated him, a Hispanic, for a seat on the Supreme Court. Here is what happened there:
*Unless something entirely unforeseen happens, confirmation hearings for Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor will be a lovefest for the Democrats who run the Senate Judiciary Committee. There will be much talk about Sotomayor’s historic opportunity to become the first Hispanic on the Court, about her inspiring background, and about the sterling qualifications she would bring to the job. Sotomayor will have the majority party strongly on her side, and odds are things will end happily for her.
For some Republicans, however, it will be hard to avoid thinking back a few years, to a confirmation hearing that didn’t end happily at all. In 2001, President George W. Bush nominated former Justice Department lawyer Miguel Estrada to a seat on the federal courts of appeals. In that instance, as today, the nominee was was a Hispanic with a compelling story and impressive qualifications. And some of the very people who are today praising Sotomayor spent their time devising extraordinary measures to kill Estrada’s chances.
Born in Honduras, Estrada came to the United States at 17, not knowing a word of English. He learned the language almost instantly, and within a few years was graduating with honors from Columbia University and heading off to Harvard Law School. He clerked for Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, was a prosecutor in New York, and worked at the Justice Department in Washington before entering private practice.
Estrada’s nomination for a federal judgeship set off alarm bells among Democrats. There is a group of left-leaning organizations — People for the American Way, NARAL, the Alliance for Justice, the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, the NAACP, and others — that work closely with Senate Democrats to promote Democratic judicial nominations and kill Republican ones. They were particularly concerned about Estrada.
In November, 2001, representatives of those groups met with Democratic Senate staff. One of those staffers then wrote a memo to Democratic Sen. Richard Durbin, informing Durbin that the groups wanted to stall Bush nominees, particularly three they had identified as good targets. “They also identified Miguel Estrada as especially dangerous,” the staffer added, “because he has a minimal paper trail, he is Latino, and the White House seems to be grooming him for a Supreme Court appointment. They want to hold Estrada off as long as possible.”
It was precisely the fact that Estrada was Hispanic that made Democrats and their activist allies want to kill his nomination. They were determined to deny a Republican White House credit, political and otherwise, for putting a first-rate Hispanic nominee on the bench.
Durbin and his colleagues did as they were instructed. But they had nothing with which to kill the nomination — no outrageous statement by Estrada, no ethical lapse, no nothing. What to do?
They brainstormed. Estrada had once worked in the Justice Department’s Office of Solicitor General, right? (Appointed under the first President Bush, Estrada stayed to serve several years under Clinton.) That office decides which cases the government will pursue in the Supreme Court, right? And that process involves confidential legal memoranda, right? Well, why don’t we suggest that there might be something damaging in those memos — we have no idea whether there is or not — and demand that they be made public?
Durbin and his colleagues knew the Bush Justice Department would insist the internal legal memos remain confidential, as they always had been. It wasn’t just the Bush Administration that thought releasing the documents was a terrible idea; all seven living former Solicitors General, Republican and Democrat, wrote a letter to Judiciary Committee chairman Patrick Leahy begging him to back off.
But the Democrats didn’t back off. They had a new, very serious question to ask: What is Miguel Estrada hiding?
The answer was nothing, of course. But the strategy worked. Democrats stonewalled Estrada’s nomination, and, after losing control of the Senate in 2002, they began an unprecedented round of filibusters to block an entire slate of Bush appeals-courts nominees, Estrada among them. The confirmation process ground to a halt. More than two years after his nomination was announced, Estrada, tired of what appeared to be an endless runaround, withdrew his name from consideration. Instead of being on the federal bench, he is now in private practice in Washington.
And that was how Democrats treated the last high-level Hispanic court nominee. Think about that when you watch their lovefest with Sonia Sotomayor.
And this wasn’t the only time the democrats have done this. They do it every time a Republican president nominates someone who is a law following, Constitution following judge for the Supreme Court.
But don’t take my word for it here folks. Here are some of the words from the democrats themselves about supreme court nominees of the past:
I oppose giving Justice Brown this lifetime promotion to the second highest court in our land because the American people deserve judges who will interpret the law fairly and objectively. Janice Rogers Brown is a committed judicial activist who has a consistent record of using her position as a member of the court to put her views above the law and above the interests of working men and women and families across the nation.”
Now, before I tell who said this, I ask you, now doesn’t this sound like something that a Republican would say about someone? *This question is aimed at the liberals who read this blog*. If you say yes, then you have to be surprised that the person talking here was none other than Senator Patrick Leahy, Democrat of Vermont, when Janice Rogers Brown, a black woman was nominated for the Supreme Court. These were lies that Leahy told, yet they worked because the Republicans don’t work like that and for the most part couldn’t believe what they were hearing. Especially since the democrats are always accusing them of doing the same things. Yet for Janice Brown, the attacks continued. The democrats accused Brown of racism; they accused her of sexism, and it did not hurt them with the black vote did it? But yet, they claimed that their opposition to her was not sexist or racist. Well then, what the hell was it? It wasn’t because she couldn’t do the job, because she was very well qualified.
Clarence Thomas, who was a black man, was another. We had people like syndicated columnist Julianne malveaux, discussing Clarence Thomas, when she said on the air, on PBS in November of 1994 on the McLaughlin Group show, said: I frankly, personally, the man is on the court, you know, I hope his wife feeds him lots of eggs and butter and he dies early like many black men do of heart disease. And the panel on the show giggled. Now if this had been a Conservative saying something like this about a democrat, the crap would have hit the fan. But when a democrat says it……just giggling ensues.
I was listening to Rush Limbaugh today talking about this and he said that he remembers this, he saw the show. And if my memory serves me right, I saw it too. I was shocked that there was no outrage.
But here is the difference between the democrat liberals and the Conservatives. We want the best for everyone, and we do not look at people based on race, sex, sexual orientation, or gender. And we don’t group people. We don’t victimize them. They do. They do it all the time and when the time comes that someone gets up the gumption to say something about what they are doing, they become indignant about it and deny deny deny. Trouble is, it is usually caught on tape and the proof is there. But that is where the republicans differ. When confronted with opposition…..The Democrats do not back down, even when they have lied. The republicans always back down. Especially when right. But I am hoping that that time is ending. I will not back down. I am tired of this crap that the democrats are always spewing…and I for one will always call them on it. But do not be dismayed my friends. If the republicans do the same thing, I will call them on it too. And I will NOT let either one of them talk their way out of it like they always do.
Even Samuel Alito, who sits on the Supreme Court now, had his troubles with the Democrats as they were up in arms about him being nominated. They filibustered and everything. Protested and tried to get the nomination stopped. Thankfully they were not successful this time. But it continues.
This woman, Sonia Sotomayor, is not qualified for this postion. Her own words tell the story. She thinks that she being a latina makes her the most fit person for the job and in that position she can set straight things that were wrong before…like setting loose like people, who had broken the law….just because they are latino. Mark my words here people. Give her that position, and she will not follow the law. She will, like almost every major democrat today, circumvent the law every chance they can get.
God Bless America and her troops
God Bless my readers and my listeners on BTR and my viewers on You Tube….
*NOTE: This article was written taking information from Rush Limbaugh, and the Washington Examiner.