Sotomayor

Hey everyone. I've got a couple things to talk about just real quick. I'm having computer problems today and I have almost no patience so this will probably be short and sweet.
The main thing I wanna talk about is the Sotomayor hearings that have been going on this week. I think everyone is in agreement that she is going to get confirmed, so any fight the Republicans have is on political basis, rather than a substantive one. They aren't doing a very good job though. Republicans on the Judiciary Committee can't seem to move past the "wise Latina" comment and consequently have come off this week as underprepared and uninformed. This is a judge who has been on the bench for 17 years and has seen thousands of cases, some of which have gone on the be heard by the Supreme Court. Instead of possibly questioning her on many of these, Republicans want to cast her as a racist and bigot. This is glaringly hypocritical coming from proven racists such as Sen. Jeff Sessions (Alabama.) Lest we forget, Sessions himself got rejected by a Republican-majority Committee in 1986 as a nominee for a federal judgeship. The basis for his rejection was his indefensible racial comments, including saying that he thought the Ku Klux Klan wasn't so bad except for their support of marijuana. He also called the NAACP and ACLU "un-American" and "communist." In light of this, I don't think Mr. Sessions has much ground to stand on when it comes to racism. Then there is Sen. Tom Coburn of Oklahoma. When he was able to break away from "wise Latina" talk, he went into deep conversation with Mrs. Sotomayor over gun rights. One thing that caught my ear was when he asked the nominee what her personal belief was when it came to gun rights. What does it really matter? According to critics, Mrs. Sotomayor should never allow he personal beliefs to come into her judgments. So what difference does it really make what her thoughts on gun rights are? Her job will be to uphold existing laws. As for those who say she legislates from the bench, take a look at her record. Across the board, she has been fairly moderate, and has often made of point of avoiding legislating. Read her opinions. It's all there. All in all, the hearings have been rather useless and almost comical at times. She is gonna be nominated, but Republicans don't want to be fingered in future elections as someone who voted for Sotomayor. As Richard Wolffe (who I have immense respect for; one of the best commentators out there) said, this isn't about Sotomayor, this is about not siding with the president on anything. The Party of No strikes again.

Quick note on Sarah Palin. So she said she wants to spend her time concentrating on meaningful ways to help Alaska. Does that include writing Op Ed pieces for the Washington Post supporting big oil? Because that's what she did this weekend. And on top of that, the piece contradicted her past views on this subject! I can't even think about this anymore, the utter hypocrisy makes my head hurt.

One last comical note. Newt Gingrich did an interview with Al Jazeera this weekend. In it, he said he wants a one man sabotage mission to go in and take out Iran's "only" gas refinery. The man doing the interview, Avi Lewis, laughed out loud at this comment. First, I think Mr. Gingrich has been watching too many Bond movies. Does he really think one man can go in and take down a whole refinery by himself? HA! Good joke. And second, as the reporter told him, Iran doesn't have just one refinery. They have eight. Iran is a modern, industrialized country. Nice try, Newt.

That's all for now. Whenever I write again (maybe tomorrow), I have an absolutely ridiculous Obama birther story (as if that whole concept isn't ridiculous enough). Until then, best wishes.