"Our surveys of her opinions put her in essentially the same ideological position as Justice Souter." Translated into Rotspeak: Sotomayor=Scalia. In other words, x\simeq -1 => x = 1.
Yes, worse.... Scalia is far more removed from Souter than Stalin was from Castro. A small instance: Castro has never hid his admiration for Stalin and his methods. Souter has hid his admiration for Scalia's extraordinarily well.
Anyway, to note the obvious, the article Rott posted is particularly laughable; even by the standards of der ouzoing Rott. We do have quite a track record of Soto-Mayor's opinions. A first class racist all the way down, and more. She upholds the State over individual rights, the collective "will" over the individual conscience, the socialist economy over the free market, "blood and skin" over the "I have a dream" ethos. Souter's little game was cute, but whatever his masquerade as a moderate leftist in conservative garb, he was at least not nearly as much of the above. Soto-Mayor ain't moderate, but she sure is a leftist.
If the guy's claim has any validity, then all it is really claiming is that Souter's masquerade went further than even his supreme record would indicate.
Second, for the "hey, quien sabe what a muchacha will do when in office?" riff, let's note that in DC the New Found Respect game only goes in one, blood red, direction.
Third, you think Obamakles is just a 1 term guy? That the Repubs in DC have the cojones for major revanchism? That the Dems are not going to take absolute advantage of their grip on power to maximize the perpetuation of that power? That Chicago has gone Marquess of Queensbury just in the nick of time? Now that, komrads, is comedy gold.
Not a matter of Olympia Snowe's balls on the revanchism front, AA. It has to do whether voter anger holds up and can be held up. Seems to be so far.
I am already surprised that after the length of a Seinfeld episode, the US is still polling against Obamacare.
Let's recall that your feeling that W's halfassedness in going and personally drinking the blood of every last muslim led to your 'solution' of a Kerry-McCain groß koalition to beat him.
We know now what Kerry and McCain were made of in detail.
Sometimes, like almost always, in media stat virtus. That holds on the right as well as on the left.
"We know now what Kerry and McCain were made of in detail."
Again, you keep "forgetting" the obvious. Kerry/McCain in 1984, had they joined and won, would have face a republican controlled congress. A duo of tweedle dum and dee [you did have a throb for the Mcain dee as late as 2008, dintcha?] would have not nearly as radical and forceful as Obamakles, and would have had almost no ground for making such a push anyway.....And no Obamakles now. But that is group of notions so simple that the rott is bound to the trivial normalities.
We should have let the more moderate left step on that landmine, rather than let Bush stumble straight into the Mother of All Political Traps. With a chunk of the Left blown to pieces, this country would have had a fighting chance.
There ain't no Reagan among the repubs, and Obamakles' machine is far more powerful than the gaggle around Jimmah. The Jimmah poison did bad, and lasting, damage--but it was poison ivy compared to Obamakles' polonium cocktail.
Der Rotter has been cavorting with them mountain goats for too long today -- that bracing air of the Alps is firing up the ouzo-laden neurons like gangbusters.
Well argued AA. Just a small correction: that Kerry-McCain putative ticket woulda been in 2004, not 1984. But yes, it does seem like eons ago.
12 comments:
"Our surveys of her opinions put her in essentially the same ideological position as Justice Souter." Translated into Rotspeak: Sotomayor=Scalia. In other words, x\simeq -1 => x = 1.
Is that any worse than your Castro = Stalin?
Yes, worse.... Scalia is far more removed from Souter than Stalin was from Castro. A small instance: Castro has never hid his admiration for Stalin and his methods. Souter has hid his admiration for Scalia's extraordinarily well.
Anyway, to note the obvious, the article Rott posted is particularly laughable; even by the standards of der ouzoing Rott.
We do have quite a track record of Soto-Mayor's opinions. A first class racist all the way down, and more. She upholds the State over individual rights, the collective "will" over the individual conscience, the socialist economy over the free market, "blood and skin" over the "I have a dream" ethos.
Souter's little game was cute, but whatever his masquerade as a moderate leftist in conservative garb, he was at least not nearly as much of the above. Soto-Mayor ain't moderate, but she sure is a leftist.
If the guy's claim has any validity, then all it is really claiming is that Souter's masquerade went further than even his supreme record would indicate.
Second, for the "hey, quien sabe what a muchacha will do when in office?" riff, let's note that in DC the New Found Respect game only goes in one, blood red, direction.
Third, you think Obamakles is just a 1 term guy? That the Repubs in DC have the cojones for major revanchism? That the Dems are not going to take absolute advantage of their grip on power to maximize the perpetuation of that power? That Chicago has gone Marquess of Queensbury just in the nick of time? Now that, komrads, is comedy gold.
Not a matter of Olympia Snowe's balls on the revanchism front, AA. It has to do whether voter anger holds up and can be held up. Seems to be so far.
I am already surprised that after the length of a Seinfeld episode, the US is still polling against Obamacare.
Let's recall that your feeling that W's halfassedness in going and personally drinking the blood of every last muslim led to your 'solution' of a Kerry-McCain groß koalition to beat him.
We know now what Kerry and McCain were made of in detail.
Sometimes, like almost always, in media stat virtus. That holds on the right as well as on the left.
BTW, is there an echo in here?
"We know now what Kerry and McCain were made of in detail."
Again, you keep "forgetting" the obvious. Kerry/McCain in 1984, had they joined and won, would have face a republican controlled congress. A duo of tweedle dum and dee [you did have a throb for the Mcain dee as late as 2008, dintcha?] would have not nearly as radical and forceful as Obamakles, and would have had almost no ground for making such a push anyway.....And no Obamakles now.
But that is group of notions so simple that the rott is bound to the trivial normalities.
So we should've moved to the left then?
We should have let the more moderate left step on that landmine, rather than let Bush stumble straight into the Mother of All Political Traps. With a chunk of the Left blown to pieces, this country would have had a fighting chance.
Dunno. End effect of Jimmah was Reagan... No Jimmah, no Reagan.
There ain't no Reagan among the repubs, and Obamakles' machine is far more powerful than the gaggle around Jimmah. The Jimmah poison did bad, and lasting, damage--but it was poison ivy compared to Obamakles' polonium cocktail.
Der Rotter has been cavorting with them mountain goats for too long today -- that bracing air of the Alps is firing up the ouzo-laden neurons like gangbusters.
Well argued AA. Just a small correction: that Kerry-McCain putative ticket woulda been in 2004, not 1984. But yes, it does seem like eons ago.
But yer gotta admit, Tecumseh, it's a telling anachronism.
Post a Comment