Lalo Alcaraz for July 15, 2009

Looking at this comic, Alcaraz must be pretty hateful of GOP. Come on, the Republicans have some good questions to ask. Sotomayor DID get it wrong about the white firefighters!

Pretty obvious what he is saying. Enough with the questions about her comments already. 17 years of rulings and we are harping on a speech to inspire Latino students. I’m ready for her to stand up and say “no more damned questions about the wise Latina comment OK?, next one gets kicked in the nuts”. And actually she got it right legally in the Ricci case.

the toon is saying the point on the hat is the only point of the questions (or at least many of them)

oldie, you’re probably right that today’s Democrats were yesterday’s Republicans and today’s Republicans are yesterday’s Democrats. More or less, at least.

It wasn’t one speech, pilotx. She used that same phrase over half a dozen times over a period of several years.

My question is why can’t someone so “brilliant” write more than one speech?

Gary, thank you I wasn’t aware of that. Ironically, that’s the impression I’ve been getting from listening to him last couple of days! I can’t imagine this guy is now ranking Rep member on the Judiciary Committee:

from wikipedia:

“(Sessions) nomination was killed by the Senate Judiciary Committee, which refused by a 9-9 vote to let the nomination come to the Senate floor for a vote. Sessions’s opponents accused him of “gross insensitivity” on racial issues.

Sessions allegedly made a variety of comments that opponents pointed to, when he jokingly said that the Ku Klux Klan was not so bad until he found out that some of them smoked marijuana.

Sessions also allegedly referred to the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) as “un-American” and “Communist-inspired” because they “forced civil rights down the throats of people.” At his confirmation hearings, Sessions said that the groups could be un-American when “they involve themselves in un-American positions” in foreign policy.

Sessions claimed that the remarks had been made in jest. One of those voting against him was Democratic Senator Howell Heflin of Alabama.”

Would any senator have told Judge Alito or Roberts that they have “some ‘splainin’ to do”, or it’s equivalent? Would a senator ask Alito if he has any “paisanos” he wants to disclose, or why he referred to his immigrant family as important in his decisions? Would any senator dare to ask such patronizing things to a middle-aged, well respected male judge? Adora68, please back up your assertion that she has expressed the “wise latina” phrase over and over.

We must note that in Congress, in society at large, and on blogs, reside many so narrow-minded their brains would fly through the eye of a needle like a bowling ball (or sometimes a BB) through the Holland Tunnel.

Alito’s hearing…oh, yeah, that was where he made his proud declaration that he “do[es] take into account” his Italian-American heritage when deciding cases – and not one Republican senator commented on it.

But with Sotomayor, they can’t stop commenting on the analogous situation.

So it was a mistake in your view…but not in the Republicans who said nothing about it at the time.

But now they’ve seen the error of their ways, and are falling over each other to accuse Sotomayor of the same thing they gave Alito a complete pass on.

Odd…your post didn’t address this concept at all. Disingenuous, indeed!

ANandy: the merits of the law don’t exist in a vacuum. Otherwise, we could just have robot justices whose experience would be irrelevant so long as they perfectly interpret the merits of the law.

Better a pointy-head than a blockhead.

Really, Puppy? You think Sotomayor is a blockhead?

How does it feel to be so alone in an opinion, against both Democrats and Republicans?

Oldlegodad, could you please tell us what the “Emansiplation Proclamation” was? Sounds interesting.

But you’re right, the Democratic and Republican parties certainly did an exchange vis a vis race relations since Lincoln was our president.

Nandy, given the fact that you often ignore questions and comments directed at you, and lie about responses given to you by others, you are about the last person who should be judging “relevant discussion”.

Nandy, as usual you make no sense. First you declare “Both blind one to relevant discussion”, and then you call *me* “the self-appointed judge of relevance”???

As far as your last question, which you know bleeep well, it’s there for all to see:

http://www.gocomics.com/waynestayskal/2009/07/13?comments_page=2

By the way, there are unanswered questions/comment directed at you here:

http://www.gocomics.com/garyvarvel/2009/07/11/

http://www.gocomics.com/waynestayskal/2009/07/09/

anthony, ‘666 guy’ has a long history of ignoring specific questions he deems unpleasant

A bit hypocritical of him, huh?

666 guy? Haven’t heard Nandy called that before…what’s the scoop?

Hypocrite!

If you look at Nandy’s avatar, it is a caricature of Obama with the numerals “666” imprinted on his forehead. I find it offensive, and have said so directly to Nandy. Thus, for me, he’s now “666 guy.”

Like the numerous questioners who’ve asked him about his name and what we surmise it comes from, “666 guy” never responds.

That’s his right. But it’s my right to find him offensive. That’s the story.

Ah. Had never looked that closely at his avatar.

So he thinks Obama is Satan? Guess that explains a lot.

Near as I could figure, ANandy is short for A. Nandy; Nandy is an Indian name. But he seems embarrassed about it or something, because when I asked him about it, he just changed the subject.

Pretty much like he does when you ask him any direct question, come to think of it.

Anthony, actually a couple of different people have asked him if ANandy is some sort of contraction for Amos ‘n Andy. He’s never said.

Still, the pointy-head is offensive. But, it’s better than having a block-head. [=)]

This is just hilarious to me. Its the same old tactic of “call anyone who challenges you a racist and they’ll back off”. I am glad fewer and fewer people are week-kneed enough to fall for that crap.

It shows the glaring double-standard…the sheer hypocrisy. They can question and slice and dice any nominee that Republicans put up…but don’t you DARE question one of theirs.

Here you go, ezdeb:

http://tinyurl.com.au/x.php?1w1x

I trust you’ll accept the ABA as authoritative.