Hope and change
Tam wonders why we’re all shocked about Sotomayor being anti-gun when she would replace someone who is, err, anti-gun. Quips Tam:
If we’re lucky, their feelings towards firearms will only be mild antipathy rather than active loathing.
May 27th, 2009 at 9:47 am
I thought Obama SAID that he believed the 2nd Amendment protected an individual RKBA and that he promised to leave our guns alone. It would seem he would nominate a judge who thinks like him. No?? Maybe he CHANGED his mind.
May 27th, 2009 at 10:26 am
The default position should not be an acceptable “Guns are bad, mmmkay…”a nd the rest of us shuffling our feet and looking at our toes and mumbling under our breath that it makes no sense.
The default position should be to confront those with such irrational anti-human rights positions, and demand and demand and demand that they review their positions with respect to current research on crime, data on misbehavior by legal handgun carriers, and historical precedent. Then demand and demand and demand that they defend their indefensible stand against human rights.
Frame the situation to make them defensive. Then crush them, because they cannot defend their positions.
May 27th, 2009 at 2:19 pm
We should still oppose her.
By the way, this happens to be a reason that many democrats will go along with, if only to avoid getting unelected.
May 27th, 2009 at 3:16 pm
With her views of the Constitution being that it’s a “living document”, and that the “2A doesn’t extend to the states”, I’d say that she actively loathes the 2A. In fact, I’d call her dwnright hostile to it.
May 27th, 2009 at 7:26 pm
What Crotalus said, plus the fact that she is a racist most certainly disqualifies her. Not that she will be rejected, but she should be.
“A wise white man with all the richness of that experience should be able to reach better conclusions than a Latina woman who hasn’t lived that life.”
Does that work for you? Doesn’t work for me. Neither did the way she said it the other way around.
May 27th, 2009 at 8:11 pm
I agree we should oppose the nomination, even if it’s just pro forma.
And it doesn’t get much more pro forma than a poll at KABA.com saying, in effect:
“How much do you hate Judge Sotomayor?
A. A lot.
B. A whole lot.
C. So much it makes me want to just bite my lip and scream.“
May 28th, 2009 at 7:30 am
I agree to oppose her, not because it’s going to work, and certainly not because there’s a prayer of Obama appointing anyone better if it did. We should oppose her now so the public sees what a loopy lib she is, and the GOP can then ask voters in ’10 if they really want to give Obama such a free hand to go on appointing more people like that.
I’m reserving judgment on the incorporation case until I’ve read it. I’m not sure how much precedent there is for Courts of Appeal to incorporate amendments, and for all I know, existing Second Circuit jurisprudence may not have given them that choice, anyway. Or she may have ruled as she did because she’s rabidly anti-gun.