home

Sotomayor Nomination Senate Floor Debate And Vote

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Supreme Court
Posted on Tue Aug 04, 2009 at 08:52:03 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

It starts today at 10 am EST. You can watch it on C-Span2 or online here.

I believe a vote is scheduled for the end of the day tomorrow. The Sotomayor nomination should capture around 66 Aye votes - 58 Dems (assuming Kennedy and Byrd vote), 2 Independents and 6 Republicans (Graham, Lugar, Snowe, Collins, Alexander and Martinez) though I suppose Voinovich of Ohio may also vote Aye. 34 Republicans will likely vote No for the first Latina nominee to the Court.

< When Protests Matter: "The Vocal Minority" | Can Obama Fight? >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Sotomayor Nomination Senate Floor Debate And Vote | 17 comments (17 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    I think Kennedy and Byrd won't show (none / 0) (#1)
    by andgarden on Tue Aug 04, 2009 at 08:59:20 AM EST
    Otherwise, keep track for me, folks. Travel day.

    Good point (none / 0) (#2)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Aug 04, 2009 at 09:00:28 AM EST


    Parent
    Should it matter that she is a Latino? (none / 0) (#3)
    by Slado on Tue Aug 04, 2009 at 09:23:21 AM EST
    Did it matter that Alito was an Italian American and democrats mostly voted no?

    Race has nothing to do with this.  Partisan politics have everything to do with this and it bothers me that progressives are able to play the race card when partisan politics are used against a democrat who just happens to be latino.

    What if she was a white women.  Would you be playing the gender card?

    Nobody here cared that Alberto Gonzales was Hispanic, or Rice was black when they took partisan shots at them.   Nobody cared and nobody should have cared.

    Why is the race card reserved for the left?

    Should it? (5.00 / 2) (#4)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Aug 04, 2009 at 09:24:12 AM EST
    No. Does it? Yes.

    the history of the world did not start today, no matter how much white males like to believe so.

    Parent

    I should say (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Aug 04, 2009 at 09:51:08 AM EST
    SOME white males.

    Parent
    Probably wouldn't have mattered as much (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by vicndabx on Tue Aug 04, 2009 at 09:31:40 AM EST
    if Republicans and other opponents hadn't kept talking about a "wise Latina."  IMO this is more reap what you sow.

    Parent
    And wondered about her "temperament" (none / 0) (#9)
    by nycstray on Tue Aug 04, 2009 at 09:54:26 AM EST
    I don't know if I'm up for watching more of the "show" today . . .

    Parent
    I am sure (none / 0) (#6)
    by Steve M on Tue Aug 04, 2009 at 09:48:25 AM EST
    you were equally outraged when Republicans played the race card on behalf of Miguel Estrada and Janice Rogers Brown.

    Parent
    Played the race card? (5.00 / 0) (#7)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Aug 04, 2009 at 09:50:40 AM EST
    come now.

    Parent
    Are you saying (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by Steve M on Tue Aug 04, 2009 at 09:59:09 AM EST
    that the Republicans didn't accuse Democrats of being anti-black and anti-Hispanic for blocking those two nomination?

    Heck, during the nuclear option fight, when Democrats were blocking Brown, Owen, and Pryor, Democrats were supposedly anti-black, anti-woman, and anti-religion... all at the same time!  Apparently they never got the memo about crying wolf.

    ...but I think perhaps you might have been making a different point.  Tell me what it is.

    Parent

    They did indeed (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Aug 04, 2009 at 10:04:44 AM EST
    I find the phrase "playing the race card" distasteful.

    Parent
    Fair enough (none / 0) (#12)
    by Steve M on Tue Aug 04, 2009 at 10:20:01 AM EST
    In my mind it is reserved for phony accusations of racism.  I understand it is indicative of a certain mentality, but I may have a predisposition to that mentality!

    Parent
    Me too. It is used in a way similar to the way (none / 0) (#16)
    by Dr Molly on Tue Aug 04, 2009 at 12:46:05 PM EST
    that the phrase "identity politics" is used. I.E., to trivialize real issues of race, gender, etc. and pretend that they are just 'playing cards' or 'identifying'.

    Parent
    You must not remember (none / 0) (#13)
    by lilburro on Tue Aug 04, 2009 at 10:24:02 AM EST
    TANCREDO: If you belong to an organization called La Raza, in this case, which is, from my point of view anyway, nothing more than a Latino -- it's a counterpart -- a Latino KKK without the hoods or the nooses. If you belong to something like that in a way that's going to convince me and a lot of other people that it's got nothing to do with race. Even though the logo of La Raza is "All for the race. Nothing for the rest." What does that tell you?

    SANCHEZ: Alright. We're not talking about -- we're not talking about La Raza -

    TANCREDO: She's a member! She's a member of La Raza!

    (link)

    Parent

    Why don't our elected representaives look at what (none / 0) (#14)
    by Pragmatist on Tue Aug 04, 2009 at 11:35:50 AM EST
    really matters?

    No matter who the nominee is, the opposing party will call them an activist jurist.  I can accept that - don't agree with it, but it's politics as usual.

    What concerns me about Judge Sotomayer are the questions about her finances and tax issues (SOP for Obama appointees?)  I don't know if these allegations are true or not, but isn't that part of the Senate's job in this process -- (to investigate)?

    Also, I'm curious, why is everyone still referring to Judge Sotomayor as the "first Hispanic" nominee?  I believe Herbert Hoover nominated the first Hispanic, Benjamin N. Cardozo.  Cardozo's grandparent were from the Iberian Peninsula.  Wouldn't that make him Hispanic?

    Politico reporting (none / 0) (#17)
    by jbindc on Tue Aug 04, 2009 at 01:25:02 PM EST
    that CSPAN is reporting there are enough votes to confirm, but the whip count shows 14 "uncommitted" Dems.

    It has Bob Casey and Carl Levin uncommitted (none / 0) (#18)
    by andgarden on Tue Aug 04, 2009 at 09:19:32 PM EST
    I don't buy it.

    Parent
    Sotomayor Nomination Senate Floor Debate And Vote | 17 comments (17 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment