Jeez. I am such a geek. I have been watching the Sotomayor confirmation hearings from beginning to end every day.
What I have learned is this:
- The Democrats would wipe her butt with a silken cloth if given the chance; and
- The Republicans can’t get over the “…wise Latina…” comment.
Here’s a thought. Why not limit the questions to those concerning the legal basis for her decisions as both an attorney and a Judge. What precedent? What case law?
There is much that can be learned from her record without wasting our time singing her praises or rehashing her “modest upbringing in the Bronx…raised by a single parent…” Blah, blah, blah.
I know that many people will disagree with me. And, truly, this is all moot because she will be confirmed. The only power we have in this decision is the right to phone our Senators and state our opinion of Judge Sotomayor as these proceedings progress. I don’t believe “We the People” will change their minds one way or the other; however we can make our opinions known.
I want to know if she truly based her decisions on Constitutional Law. Does she respect the Constitution and strictly adhere to its fundamental principles as is her duty as a Jurist? Has she attempted to set precedent or make laws? If so, she should not be confirmed. There has to be a record of the cases and precedents she cited in each decision she made. Personally, I don’t care what was in her heart as she put pen to paper…I care what was in her head.
If it can be proven that she has made decisions outside of the fundamentals of the Constitution, she should not be confirmed…period.
After listening to the hearings for the past three days, I believe that she has not always made decisions based upon the Constitution. I do not feel that she will make future decisions based upon the Constitution and I would not like to see her confirmed.