Monday, June 22, 2009

A Handful Of GOP Obstructionists Still Want To Rail Against Sonia Sotomayor-- Just For The Sake Of Being Dicks


Maybe Lord Corker will vote to confirm Sonia Sotomayor just to protect the equal rights of his lovely daughter Julia

Their own polling and focus groups warn the Senate Republicans that the right-wing jihad against Sonia Sotomayor's nomination to the Supreme Court is a loser for them-- in every way. They never thought they could actually derail the confirmation. They just wanted to make a lot of noise to satisfy their drooling base and get them to donate some money to the faltering party. Instead, the public has been very sympathetic to the nominee, has wondered why the Republicans are so automatically obstructionist on everything, and even the drooling base has not been forthcoming with the cash. Predictions are that as many as a dozen Republican senators will abandon the far right of their party and vote to confirm. “She doesn’t have the punch out there in terms of fundraising and recruiting, I think-- at least so far,” said Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.), who most likely will be elected as the No. 4 Republican in Senate leadership this week, following the abrupt departure of former GOP presidential hopeful, John Ensign, currently embroiled in a rapidly unfolding sex scandal and cover-up and fighting for his political survival.

The worst of the hard core obstructionists, and the unreconstructed racists and misogynists, don't care what the polls and focus groups say. Opposition is all they know-- opposition to everything and anything Obama does. Somehow it didn't surprise me last week when I read how the Senate's most extremist fanatic, Jim Inhofe (R-OK) said he's already made up his mind to oppose Judge Sotomayor-- he just hates all foreigners (New York City is "foreign" to the dimwitted Inhofe... unless he's using it to demagogue about 9/11. And because he made up his mind he refused to talk with her. Like I said, I wasn't surprised but it does make me wonder about Oklahoma voters. They just re-elected this bigoted kook to represent them by a very wide margin, 66-34%, against an enlightened and accomplished state senator, Andrew Rice.
Inhofe's spokesman explained that since the Senator has already decided to vote against the nomination, there's no reason to waste time on a sit-down discussion.

Earlier this week, Inhofe called his vote against Sotomayor a "foregone conclusion," citing his vote against her nomination to a circuit court in 1998.

...Inhofe's Oklahoma colleague Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) did meet with Sotomayor, however, and had some kind words.

"She's got the demeanor of a judge," Coburn told He added that the two had a "philosophical discussion [about] life, problems in our country, difficulties we face."

Coburn is one of 71 senators that Judge Sotomayor has sat down and talked with and Inhofe had been the only one rude enough to turn down the courtesy call. Until today. And then came Tennessee elitist, Bob Corker.

The multimillionaire businessman and real estate speculator-- and a very squirrely attitude about disclosures-- Corker has taken easily to the customs of the American House of Lords. Voters back in Tennessee are constantly complaining about his inability-- or unwillingness-- to represent regular working families. Last week his Lordship got all huffy when Sonia Sotomayor "hobbling along with her leg in a cast" was 10 minutes late. NO ONE IS 10 MINUTES LATE FOR LORD CORKER! He bailed.

UPDATE: Is Jeff Sessions Even Fit To Sit In Judgment of Sonia Sotomayor?

Back on May 5 we looked at the differences between an ill-educated KKK sympathizer (at best) from an unaccredited Bible "college" and one of the most qualified people ever nominated to a federal judgeship. Jeff Sessions was rushed into his position as Republican ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee because he is a partisan hack and vicious racist. His appointment is a disgrace and an insult. Yesterday NPR asked the question: Cab Jeff Sessions Fairly Evaluate Sonia Sotomayor? They interviewed Gerald Hebert-- a former DOJ attorney who worked with Jeff Sessions and testified at his 1986 hearings-- and one is drawn to the same conclusion I came to.
NPR: Is there something in [Sessions’] record at the time that causes you to believe that he did cross that line from being merely conservative in his approach to social issues to being racially hostile or insensitive was the word that was commonly used?
Mr. HEBERT: Oh, definitely back in 1986, I had no doubt about that and testified to that effect, I believe, that it wasn’t a question of, you know, he was joking about these things or saying them in a joking manner. He was someone who was a product of the Deep South, and his racial attitudes reflected at that time a continued hostility towards equal-opportunity efforts by African- Americans, particularly in Alabama. And that was true back then, and obviously he now represents many of those same people as a U.S. senator. […]
He will ask questions that he thinks he’s entitled to ask, and he’ll ask them in a very professional and what I would believe would be a very polite way. At the same time, ultimately, many of us feel that no matter what the answers are, he’ll still ultimately vote no.

No doubt... and along with most of the other hackish obstructionists who make the GOP Senate caucus so despised and loathed by normal Americans.

Labels: , , , , , , ,


Post a Comment

<< Home