Sorry, been under the weather

Methinks the whole damn Love Boat crew has been sick!

Anyway, some scattershot thoughts on the Sotomayor hearings.

Nothing surprising really happened in light of the absurdity of having someone with Jefferson Beauregard Session's record leading the inquisition questioning and what that said about the party. It turned out to be exactly what I expected, the Repubs using the forum to rile up their base on brown people.

That said, the GOP and the Dems both screwed with it. The GOP tried to rally their base, the Dems failed to aim at the twisted direction of the Roberts court.

And THEN the Republicans dragged out one of the Bush administration's tired old tricks, using people in uniform as props. Exactly WHY were the firefighters there? [as an aside, it should be noted that Mr. Ricci is a very litigious fellow. Whenever he feels wronged, he calls one of those pesky "trial lawyers" the Republicans loathe. he is a serial litigator.] Litigants do not appear before appellate court judges. His case before Judge Sotomayor's panel was strictly a paper affair. The judges saw the district court record, read the briefs and heard the lawyers. Period. They would not have seen Frank in person, unless he was in the spectators' benches. He had nothing to add to the hearings except "I'm white, and I'm in uniform. She's not in uniform and she's brown!"

We have also seen the end of confirmation hearings as evaluative and informational inquiries. Now they are just a circus.

First, both sides grandstand, with the liberals equating her to Oliver Wendell Holmes and then the conservatives, after greeting her with some nice platitudes, ask why she hates America and has puppy smoothies for breakfast. Conservatives ask if we can kill this "little baby," liberals ask if an ex-con child rapist meth addict should be able to buy a shoulder-mounted rocket launcher under the 2nd, and of course the judge rightfully says that she can't speculate on future rulings.

Spector came close to an opportunity during his ever-so-predictable "why doesn't the court hear more cases" rant but wandered off into asking about one specific one. Of course she can't answer that, Senator. She wasn't there. She didn't read the briefs, wasn't in on conference how could she say that any particular case could have been heard.

Senators, STOP WASTING TIME and leave the community theater to me. Sen. Spector, ask her and future nominees about their GENERAL PHILOSOPHY of court docketing. What KINDS of cases need to be heard? What are your philosophical criteria in the abstract for seeing a case as decision-worthy?

And to the rest of you, leave your pet issues behind. Ask about judicial philosophy, her views on 14th amendment incorporation, the proper balance of federalism, etc.

For the love of God, ask questions that might actually be answered.

The Word is REPREHENSIBLE, Senator Hatch. Can You Say It?

In light of the following exchange between Senator Orrin Hatch and Judge Sonia Sotomayor, in which the Senator indignantly condemns an ad campaign by People for the American Way against the New Haven firefighter litigants, compelling Judge Sotomayor to call the ad -- sight unseen -- “reprehensible,”



Senator Hatch is invited to revise and extend his remarks regarding this utterly despicable anti-Sotomayor ad by the wingnut group with the incongruous title of “Committee for Justice”:



Senator Hatch’s mild rebuke of such right wing garbage, calling the spot “pretty harsh” and “not the type of ad I would run,” in a statement released by his office, is inadequate and offensive. The ad is an outrageous pack of lies.

The word is “REPREHENSIBLE,” Senator. Can you say it?

Perhaps Sen. Hatch’s reticence to condemn the ad in the strongest terms and in person has to do with the fact that he headlined a 2003 fundraiser for CFJ in which he raised $50,000 for the group.

Context is everything.

End this Session

So the Republicans have decided to make Jeff Sessions, too racist to be confirmed to a judgeship by a Republican Senate



their point man in the Sotomayor attacks.

His parents

must be so proud.

That crazy radical activist judge!

When you say ""I can walk in the shoes of the people who are affected by what the Court does" and I can "bring something different to the Court," that is just wrong. That is irresponsible and shows the judge is prejudiced.....right?

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Oh, wait--Clarence Thomas said that.

We've been Dicked. Isn't that "Special?"

C'mon, Mr. Attorney General. Do your job. Protect and defend the constitution. Name a special prosecutor NOW.

Absentee

I'm hoping to come back around here soon, but I'm back in the hospital again. This time it's for a slightly different reason, and when I finish recovering from this surgery, I'll essentially be back to normal. 'bout damned time.

In other news, we have good health care, so this whole process is something we can afford. I've gotten quality nursing and medical advice, I get supplies when I need them, and everyone is nice. There are tens of millions of Americans who don't get this, and that turns a very hard experience into something unbearable.