Sen. Johnny Isakson made the following statement regarding his decision to join 30 other Senators who voted against confirmation of Judge Sotomayor to the U.S. Supreme Court. Sotomayor was confirmed 68-31:
“I have personally interviewed Judge Sonia Sotomayor, and I have carefully followed the Judiciary Committee hearings as well as her testimony. After thorough consideration, I voted against her confirmation for two specific reasons. First, Judge Sotomayor’s opinions and rulings on cases involving property rights are troubling, especially those favoring the use of eminent domain powers by a government to facilitate the sale or redevelopment of private property. Second, Judge Sotomayor’s statement that the Second Amendment to the Constitution is not a fundamental right and that it does not apply to state and local governments is inconsistent with my and, I believe, most Georgians’ understanding of the Constitution. I believe a qualified judge is one who understands the value and the strength and the power of the Constitution of the United States of America, who will rule based on the law and who will not legislate based on the position. I do not believe Judge Sotomayor’s record has met this standard.”
{ 17 comments }
Would someone please explain to Sen CrackerHead the difference between an ENUMERATED right and a fundamental one?
Good grieflll
Perhaps, in that case, they both apply?
Also, I wonder how this is going to hurt his reelection campaign. Latinos make a up a sizeable block of voters in this state. It cannot be good for him, or other republicans, if they decide to come out and vote against him because of this.
http://galiberal.com/?p=1673
Chambliss also voted against Sotomayor.
Of course you liberals cannot look at any issue except through the prism of race and politics.
It is racist as hell to lump all “Latinos” into one monolithic group and it is even more insulting to expect that the only thing the care about is ethnicity. I suppose to you, a Mexican, Cuban, Hondoran or Carribean Islander are all the same.
Of course not, but given the language that has coming out of the party calling her a racist… I can see why latinos would be offended.
However, statistically, groups do vote in similar patterns. And these are not solely racial groups either: Women, Jewish people, Gays and Lesbians have “voting patterns”
What would make it racist is if I singled out a Latino person in conversation and said “oh, you must vote for Sotomayor, because she is Latina.”
Big Difference Doug, but again, you being conservative, you probably have a warped view on race relations. I mean, the only Racism the republicans in Congress can see is “reverse racism.”
“Conservative” is a meaningless term, just like “liberal”. If you want to make a point, why not try bringing up specific examples. Of the various things I believe in, which make me a “conservative”? Other than grouping yet another person into a label, what other talents do you have?
Newt calls Sotomayor a racist:
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/SoniaSotomayor/story?id=7685284&page=1
Tom Tancredo: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/27/tom-tancredo-calls-sotoma_n_208172.html
Sen. Inhofe:
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/08/05/inhofe-sotomayor-racist/
There are three, take your pick.
Was this intended to be a reply to my post? None of us see the relevance, but I guess it didn’t fit your talking points instructions. “Step 3, post links to comments by Newt Gringrich and others”.
Learn to form your own opinion eventually. You’ll thank yourself later.
Legal Latinos like to have guns in their homes to defend themselves against home invaders too.
….i’d wager a guess illegals enjoy some of the same type protection as mentioned above….with the addition of an occanasional knife or machete…
Oh, come on. Johnnny and Sax voted against confirmation because she was nominated by a Democrat. Nothing else mattered and it’s useless to waste time making up reasons.
We have elected two mindless drones to the US Senate! No further explaination needed.
Ruth Bader Ginsburg(D) 96-3
Stephen Breyer(D) 80-10
Robert Bork(R) 42-58
Samuel Alito(R) 58-42
Clarence Thomas (R) 52-48
Yeah, CLEARLY it is the Republicans who play politics with judical nominations. Barring some kind of glaring deficiency, the President should get his nominations. The Dems would rather tear the country apart with ever increasing egregious last resort tactics when they do not get their way.
Yes indeed all 83,727 Hispanic registered voters in Georgia may not be happy but how do the 977,674 female black voters Feel about be passed over?
It would have been nice if he had appointed Sears instead.
Sen. Isakson takes a principled stand on an issue…when the point is moot.
In other news, Sen. Isakson consistently votes with Democrats when actual meaningful issues, like economic stimulus packages, are concerned.
I can’t wait until Georgia elects its first Republican Senator!
And we all owe fraud-pimping pseudo-conservatives like Bull Moose a big round of applause for selling us the wares of frauds like Johnny Isakson and John McCain.
It’s actually too bad (in a way) that the Democrat party has moved from being the party of the “common man” to being the party of lower standards and every manner of filth and left-wing extremism. This chic is just another typical example. On the issues, especially when discussed in detail, real conservatives understand this type of malarkey loses every time. Which is why this radical element depends on basal, race-based trench warfare. OOOOH. I’m SOOOOOO SCAAAARED.
Comments on this entry are closed.