Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Sotomayor grilling on Second Amendment begins

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,863

    Post imported post

    Sotomayor grilling on Second Amendment begins, and she won't say how she would vote on incorporation of Second Amendment to the states.

    http://www.examiner.com/x-4525-Seattle-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2009m7d14-Sotomayor-will-not-answer-how-she-would-vote-on-incorporation-of-2A

    If that doesn't work, try this:

    http://tinyurl.com/mmv4m4

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Rockingham, North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    861

    Post imported post

    I was gravely disappointed in Judge Sotomayor's referencing the Second Amendment in the terms of hunting rights .

    Orrin Hatch gave Sonia Sotomayor a better grilling over the Right to Keep and Bear Arms . Senator Hatch carrys a North American Arms mini revolver .

    The Obama Standard of transnationalism must be fought and stopped .

    UNITE & VOTE * 2010 & 2012 :quirky:quirky

    Ignorance can not be blamed at our highest levels of government . The criminal left wing extremist must be exposed .

    As a moderate centrist I am getting scared .






  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Rockingham, North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    861

    Post imported post



    Senator Orrin Hatch tried to corner Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor into revealing her personel agenda on Gun Control . Sotomayor would not .

    http://www.deseretnews.com/article/7...nkTrack=rss-30



  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Pierce is a Coward, ,
    Posts
    1,100

    Post imported post

    Dave Workman wrote:
    Sotomayor grilling on Second Amendment begins, and she won't say how she would vote on incorporation of Second Amendment to the states.

    http://www.examiner.com/x-4525-Seattle-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2009m7d14-Sotomayor-will-not-answer-how-she-would-vote-on-incorporation-of-2A

    If that doesn't work, try this:

    http://tinyurl.com/mmv4m4
    She's an absolutely horrible person and a judge who believes the law is her own opinion.

    If she'll bring this country closer to a breakup, let's install her with all haste.

  5. #5
    Regular Member zoom6zoom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Dale City, VA, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,694

    Post imported post

    Have you noticed that when she's asked questions by democrats the answers come right out and they are smooth and polished, but when questioned by repubs it's the opposite? It's always nice getting the questions ahead of the test.

    I don't care about her race or gender. To my way of thinking, someone who's decisions have already been overturned by the SC as often as hers shouldn't even be under consideration.

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Pierce is a Coward, ,
    Posts
    1,100

    Post imported post

    zoom6zoom wrote:
    Have you noticed that when she's asked questions by democrats the answers come right out and they are smooth and polished, but when questioned by repubs it's the opposite? It's always nice getting the questions ahead of the test.

    I don't care about her race or gender. To my way of thinking, someone who's decisions have already been overturned by the SC as often as hers shouldn't even be under consideration.
    Ever notice that there's no hard-core pro-Liberty Federal judges?

  7. #7
    Regular Member shad0wfax's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Spokane, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,067

    Post imported post

    smoking357 wrote:
    Ever notice that there's no hard-core pro-Liberty Federal judges?
    That's because the incrementalist/socialists "Bork" them all. As SCOTUS Justices go, Roberts, Scalia, Thomas, and Alito aren't terribly bad. Kennedy is a flip-flopper and the rest are Marxists. We had a winner when Robert Bork got nominated and then the Marxists in the Senate went nuts and refused to confirm him. The moronic middle-of-the-road bi-partisan compromiser goons (Republicans) who let incrementalists (Democrats) swing our country farther and farther towards socialism need to grow backbones and "Bork" Sotomayor, but I don't see it happening.

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    , Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,715

    Post imported post

    shad0wfax wrote:
    That's because the incrementalist/socialists "Bork" them all. As SCOTUS Justices go, Roberts, Scalia, Thomas, and Alito aren't terribly bad. Kennedy is a flip-flopper and the rest are Marxists. We had a winner when Robert Bork got nominated and then the Marxists in the Senate went nuts and refused to confirm him. The moronic middle-of-the-road bi-partisan compromiser goons (Republicans) who let incrementalists (Democrats) swing our country farther and farther towards socialism need to grow backbones and "Bork" Sotomayor, but I don't see it happening.
    lulzz

  9. #9
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    In re 'wise Latina', does no one else know how to say 'wise woman' in Old English?

    From Old English wiċċa m., wiċċe f., from Proto-Germanic *vikkan, from Proto-Indo-European *weik-.
    edit] Noun Singular
    witch

    Plural
    witches
    witch (pluralwitches)
    1. A (usually female) person who is learned in and actively practices witchcraft (according to the OED, its use in the masculine is "now only dialectal").

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •