Cheat Sheet
The Best In Brief
Lindsey Graham Attacks Sotomayor
Don’t be fooled by the photo of them smiling together on a sofa: After a 30-minute closed-door meeting today with Sonia Sotomayor, Lindsey Graham said he told her “I was very direct. If I use the same standard that Sen. Barack Obama used, then I would not vote for you, quite frankly.” Graham was referring to Obama’s votes against John Roberts and Samuel Alito. "He used a standard, I think, that makes it nearly impossible for a person from the opposite party to vote for the nominee," Graham said. "When I look at her record, her ideology, I'm deeply troubled," he added. "I believe she does have the intellectual capacity, but there is a character problem, there is a temperament problem.” They were the harshest comments so far during Sotomayor’s visits with senators over the past two days.
AiriqS
I think these are the words, verbatim, Obama used in his "no" vote for Alito. I'll be interested to see mouthpiece Gibbs' response.
cbeenthere
Tit for Tat's all it is. What a kindergartner.
smitisan
"a standard that makes it nearly impossible for. . ." What? You mean, like, the one that says if you're of one party you absolutely CANNOT vote (or APPOINT) anyone from the other? Obama, quit reaching across the aisle. You're wasting your time.
AiriqS
In the words of our President:
I have no doubt that Judge Alito has the training and qualifications necessary to serve. He's an intelligent man and an accomplished jurist. And there's no indication he's not a man of great character.
But when you look at his record ..."
This speech was given before his NO vote on Alito.
squiggy
Ouch! Nice!
Ritarita
Lindsey Graham
Doesn't think Sonia Sotomayor
Is 'American enough' to serve.
I'm sure he thinks she's a woman
Of great character-
He's probably just posturing
Before his NO vote.
Issywise
Gee AiriqS:
Did you expunge the rationale for Obama's vote against Alito from your comment rendering what you did write as misleadingly out of context because of your high personal intellectual honesty and fairness or because you are a partisan or ideological hack who is just making a case even though he knows he's lying to anybody who might read him?
If you are going to quote part of what a man says, ought you not quote the relevant part--the part that explains WHY he voted as he did.
Do you work for Fox News?
Lying is lying AirqS. By the editing you did on the above quote you were purposefully misleading--lying, misrepresenting.
Partisanship and ideology doesn't justify it.
I hope your mother is ashamed of you.
That squiggy likes what you wrote should warn you that you are on the road to Predation.
AiriqS
The point Issywise,
Is that Obama chose his no vote simply based on his differences of opinion. Obama, ceded that Altio was well educated, experienced, and a man of good character.
I would bet that Graham is of the same opinion of Judge Sotomeyor. But using the Obama "Standard", Graham says he cannot vote for her.
Judge Sotomeyor is indeed qualified, and my guess is that she will be easily confirmed and I will not be surprised when Graham votes for her.
However, Obama told us that "words matter". And I think Obama's NO vote on both Alito and Thomas matter.
I would like to hear the President say that this type of politics is not constructive, and that he has been guilty of playing the game in the past. We should move on.
Issywise
AiriqS:
The thing didn't write in your post was why Obama voted against Alito?
Do you even know? You claim it is "just difference of opinion." Isn't that what the Plessy Court and the Brown Court had? Isn't that what Frankfurter (against one-man one-vote) and the majority of justice in that opinion had--a difference of opinion.
Obama was quite articulate about why he opposed Alito--jurisprudential doctrine. The very reasons he cited are relevant now regarding Sotomayor.
You selected only the part of Obama's statement that would create false light on his position. You expunged the part of the statement that explained why he voted the way he did.
You say that a persons jurisprudential values are irrelevant to his qualification as a justice, while your substitution of Thomas for Roberts in your second post here suggest you believe otherwise--that ideology determines your perspective, even as you pretend presidents and senators shouldn't consider it.
Lindsey Graham is a scum trying to vend the idea that the nomination is about something other than the law and that he isn't a ideologue or a partisan himself. You are trying to sell the same lie that the president is unprincipled when, in fact, you come to this discussion with unprincipled arguments in hand and no willingness to discuss the issues that are really at stake--the conservative Republican desire to control the court to end abortion, disable any remedy for present consequences of racial discrimination and break down the seperation of church and state. Those are the stakes. Refusing to stand up and state those principles and instead trying to attack by deception is despicable.
But let's look at your point:
AiriqS
Issy,
Thanks for picking up the mistype of Thomas instead of Roberts. Perhaps a Freudian slip - Obama was not around at the time. However, it would have been interesting to see if Obama would have voted against an African American nominee.
You are right, i am conservative - no apology needed. You rightly make the point that a SCOTUS appointment is important and we can disagree on the issues and how a judge may come down on them.
My point was, Obama disagreed with Roberts and Alito simply based on a few issues. This is fair. However, this suggests a President appointment is subject to a popularity contest, not "advise & consent" which I interpret to be the appointees qualifications and character.
IMO, that is the "Obama standard" Graham alludes to. He also has the right to disagree with her findings and statements. I am sure you disagree with Sen. Graham, & more power to you; but I think Graham is actually trying to highlight congressional hypocrisy.
The gist of my statement is that we are saddled with hypocrites on both sides of the aisle, and I think it would help if Obama points this out even though he has played the game.
I can't cite exact data, but Roberts, Alito, & Sotomeyor all served with appellate judge panels who were both Repub./Dem. In the case of all three, they voted with an opposing Repub./Dem judge about 95% of the time. In spite of this, our Senate and media deride very competent and talented people. This is a shame no matter what wavelength of the political spectrum you are on.
and BTW, my Mother loves me and I'm sure your Mother loves you.
Banjo1
Like Bush did.
Ottoheinz
I might respect this guy's opinion if I believed that he had actually taken the time to read Sotomayor's opinions and had a grasp of the tenor of her work, but it's clear from the lack of substance and example in his comments that he's trying to uphold the party line instead of crafting an informed opinion.
JohnStuartMill
If the imbecile Lindsay Graham actually supported Sotomayor that would mean a certain defeat for her nomination. She will easily win the seat and be a festering thorn in Scalia's and extremist righty behinds for years to come..
squiggy
She'll win the nomination and be under the thumb of Ginsberg until she quits the court. Ginsberg looks forward to female comradery and that is what is in store for Sotomayor and it doesn't change the balance of the court.
SYSPROG
Oh no Lindsay...and what about your comment 'is she AMERICAN enough?' Want to walk THAT back??? Yeah she was BORN here but no, not in SC with the other white boys...
garryboyle
That's not harsh. That's just Lindsey Graham being honest. I have no problem with him admitting that he won't vote for Sotomayor because of ideological differences. his choice of words sounds mean-spirited, but its just an admission of a partisan motivation. There is one little thing that does make this seem lame, which is that her record actually seems pretty conservative, so I just don't see what there is to gain by opposing her.
Kman821
Graham says SHE has a "character" problem??? He's just upset that she HAS character ... something very foreign to this goose-steeping partisan pr*ck! Obviously, HE HAS NO character ... IF he will vote against because he is not his own man, but just a GOP meat-puppet.
Issywise
We shouldn't blame this slippery fish of a politician for his contemptible behavior. He's only doing it to pander to the desires of his constituency: the same South Carolina anti-mescegnationist primitives who reelected Strom Thurmond until he was so old that his beak finally dried up and fell off.
Graham is just a slick schlocky panderer for the affections of throwbacks who want the world to return to the simpler times when Hispanics and Blacks knew their place--and that place most certainly wasn't on the Supreme Court.
Graham, has reduced consideration of Supreme Court nominees to simple political calculation and pretends he's following the president's example. Graham could find many examples of where the president's judgment is purely political, but not on this one--judicial nominations.
Grahams, "I'm going to act like a shit, because somebody else has also acted like a shit," won't sell this time. His finger is in the wind and the winds coming out of South Carolina have been blowing the same way since Robert Toombs last visited that wobegotten state.
Banjo1
Issywise's homosexuality informs all his views and comments. Which is to say he comes at it from the left in everything. If Dear Leader appointed a horse to high office, Issywise would tell us any opposition was based on equine discrimination.
Hawnzz
Banjo,
Give it a rest... I've never seen a person so obsessed with anything. I'm not going to name call, you have a right to your opinion. But enough already... we know what you think.
AiriqS
I believe that Obama won the SC democratic primary. Those anti-mescegnationist (spelling?) primitives just hated Hillary. But maybe it was because Hillary was married to what many call "our first black President".
Hawnzz
Can't say I'm surprised...
SharksBreath
Lindsey must have got the message from Manny Miranda.
In a letter to be delivered to Senate Republicans Tuesday, more than 145 conservatives - including Grover Norquist, Richard Viguerie and Gary Bauer - call for a filibuster of Sotomayor's nomination if that's what it takes to force a "great debate" over judicial philosophy.
But in an interview with POLITICO, Manuel Miranda - who orchestrated the letter - went much farther, saying that Mitch McConnell should "consider resigning" as Senate minority leader if he can't take a harder line on President Barack Obama's first Supreme Court nominee.
Miranda accused McConnell of being "limp-wristed" and "a little bit tone deaf" when it comes to judicial nominees.
I guess "limp-wristed Lindsey got his letter.
Twisted
I've been holding my breath waiting to see Grover Norquist perp walked after he is indicted for bilking indian tribes and foreign nationals and being a full partner in the Abromovits influence buying scams.
maxiepad
"I believe she does have the intellectual capacity", said Lindsay Graham, Dubya leftover
kansas1946
"Character problem???" A Republican, particularly Lindsey Graham, wouldn't know character if it bit them in the a**. Please.
nagor76
Good job LG.....no one has discussed her temperament. She has had terrible reviews from lawyers who have argued before her. Also... anyone who mentions Obama reaching across the aisle....his track record in the senate is partisan and sending a possible GOP rival to China(or buying pizza) is transparent and disingenuous at best.
timcruz
How is this harsh?
If he truly believes she has a temperance problem that may invalidate her in any setting.
Emotions should never influence decisions on matters of law. Compassion yes, but having emotive decisions defining law is like having JABBA the RUSH or GLEN WRECK be nominated for the position.
(you like that eh? I'm claiming those names.)
Thank you.
As a first time user, your comment has been submitted for review. It can take anywhere from a few hours to a day or two for your comment to be reviewed, depending on the time of week and the volume of comments we receive.