1. Attention: We have put together a thread with tips and a tutorial video to help with using the new software. Please take a moment to check out the thread here: Trapshooters.com Tutorial & Help Video.
    Dismiss Notice

sotomayor O/T

Discussion in 'Shooting Related Threads' started by clayshooter555, May 30, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. clayshooter555

    clayshooter555 TS Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2008
    Messages:
    80
    Time to pony up again. Check these quotes from the Wall Street Journal on her opinion of the Second Amendment. The NRA (and we are the NRA) is going to have it's hands full. Money talks and they are going to need a huge war chest while she is on the bench.

    From the WSJ:

    A three-judge panel including Judge Sotomayor rejected the claim in an unsigned opinion. The court cited earlier rulings, including an 1886 Supreme Court decision, in holding that "the Second Amendment applies only to limitations the federal government seeks to impose on this right," not to state legislative efforts.

    Another unsigned 2004 decision, U.S. v. Sanchez-Villar, rejected a defendant's claim that a New York gun law "offends" the Second Amendment. Judge Sotomayor's panel cited a 1984 Second U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling "stating that the right to possess a gun is clearly not a fundamental right."
     
  2. Heckyea

    Heckyea TS Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2008
    Messages:
    78
    She's just an Obongo tool. A token mesikan if you will.
     
  3. cubancigar2000

    cubancigar2000 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    10,521
    Location:
    Idaho
    and a racist one at that
     
  4. Bluzman98

    Bluzman98 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    840
    I am Hispanic/Puerto Rican and I am appalled by her nomination. Her nomination is nothing more than pandering to the latin/minority and leftist vote.

    I don't care how they try to spin her past comments & rulings or sway us to believe that she would "restate" things differently today (of course she would in order to get confirmed....its called lies), she has extreme left views, ties to racially motivated groups, and is a closet racist at best.

    I implore all of you to contact your senators and congressman to vote against her confirmation......for the good of this country and our constitution. It is time to start saying we have had enough......

    I do take offense to the term "mesikan" in a prior post on this thread. As Puerto Ricans, we have a long standing history as part of this country (since 1898), are american citizens at birth, and have fought & died defending the US-all of this without being a state or representation in government.

    Moronic comments like "mesikan" only provides fuel for the agenda of the current administration and make it a much easier "sell". Learn and present your facts before you gleamingly demonstrate your ignorance.

    JMHO

    Jim C
     
  5. Hap MecTweaks

    Hap MecTweaks Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    9,229
    Location:
    Mesquite, Nevada
    We'll feel the effects of this liberal for a long time to come once she's seated!! SC judges seated for life and ruling by ideals and party instead of law is a bad idea for all. Wisdom and justice?? Not hardly!!

    Hap
     
  6. tom-n8ies

    tom-n8ies Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2006
    Messages:
    332
    Here is what GOA sez about her

    Friday, May 29, 2009


    Unless you've taken a very long Memorial Day vacation, you've no doubt
    heard the big news.

    President Obama has picked an anti-gun radical to replace Justice David
    Souter on the Supreme Court.

    Obama's pick is Judge Sonia Sotomayor, who is currently on the U.S.
    Court of Appeals for the Second District. There she has racked up an
    anti-Second Amendment record and has displayed contempt for the rule of
    law under the Constitution.

    The Heller decision put the Supreme Court in support of the
    Constitutional protection of the individual right to keep and bear arms.
    Sotomayor, a politically correct lover of centralized government power
    (as long as she is part of the power elite), immediately went into
    counter-attack mode against the Heller decision.

    Sotomayor was part of a three-judge panel earlier this year which ruled
    in Maloney v. Cuomo that the Second Amendment does not apply to the
    states. As she and her cohorts claimed, the Supreme Court has not yet
    incorporated the states under the Second Amendment. Until then, she
    believes, the Second only applies to the District of Columbia.

    This is pure judicial arrogance -- something Sotomayor relishes (as long
    as she is one of the ruling judges). In fact, protection of the right
    to keep and bear arms was a major objective for enactment of the
    Fourteenth Amendment, as recently freed slaves were being disarmed and
    terrorized in their neighborhoods.

    But Sotomayor disdains this important right of individuals, as indicated
    by an earlier opinion from 2004. In United States v. Sanchez-Villar,
    she stated that "the right to possess a gun is clearly not a fundamental
    right."

    Sotomayor has held very anti-gun views, even as far back as the 1970s.
    Fox Cable News reported yesterday that in her senior thesis at Princeton
    University, she wrote that America has a "deadly obsession" with guns
    and that the Second Amendment does not guarantee an individual right to
    firearms ownership.

    Sotomayor's Second Amendment views go hand in hand with her politically
    correct views on the law and the role of judges.

    In a speech given at Duke University in 2005, she made it abundantly
    clear that judges are involved in making policy. Realizing that this
    did not sound very judicial (even though most judges act on this basis),
    Sotomayor tried to laugh off her brazen admission: "I know this is on
    tape and I should never say that, [audience laughing], because we don't
    make law -- I know. Um, okay. I know, I'm not promoting it, I'm not
    advocating it." The audience continued to laugh. They got the joke.

    But Sotomayor's joke will be on us and our liberties if she gets
    confirmed to the Supreme Court. And that is why we need to start
    contacting our Senators early and often, urging them to vote against
    this dangerous nomination.

    ACTION: Please contact your two Senators and urge them to oppose the
    nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the U.S. Supreme Court. You can
    go to the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center at
    http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm to send your Senators the
    pre-written e-mail message below.


    ----- Pre-written letter -----

    Dear Senator:

    If you cherish the Second Amendment and agree that it protects an
    individual right to keep and bear arms -- as stated by the recent Heller
    decision -- then you must vote against Judge Sonia Sotomayor.

    This choice for the Supreme Court is totally unacceptable! Consider a
    partial rendering of her anti-gun record:

    * Sotomayor ruled in United States v. Sanchez-Villar (2004) that "the
    right to possess a gun is clearly not a fundamental right."

    * Sotomayor was part of a three-judge panel earlier this year which
    ruled in Maloney v. Cuomo that the Second Amendment does not apply to
    the states. This makes her more liberal than the Ninth Circuit, which
    stated in April that the Second Amendment does apply to the states.

    * Sotomayor has held very anti-gun views, even as far back as the 1970s.
    Fox Cable News reported on May 28 that in her senior thesis at Princeton
    University, she wrote that America has a "deadly obsession" with guns
    and that the Second Amendment does not guarantee an individual right to
    firearms ownership.

    I will consider a vote in favor of Sotomayor as the most anti-gun vote a
    Senator could cast. To send an anti-gun liberal judge to the Supreme
    Court for the rest of her life is to establish "legislation without
    representation." After all, she says that the courts are where policy
    is made, and once she's there, we'll never be able to vote her out.

    Again, please vote against this dangerous nomination.

    Sincerely,


    ****************************

    "Live Fire" radio with Larry Pratt is broadcast by the Information
    Radio Network on Saturdays at 12:00 Noon Eastern. "Live Fire" is
    simulcast on the web at http://inforadionet.com and previous episodes
    are archived at http://irnusaradio.com/our-programs/live-fire with a
    number of listening formats, including podcasts, supported.

    Recent guests, among many others, have included:

    * Charl van Wyk -- Gun Control in Africa
    * GOA's Mike Hammond -- Socialized Medicine and Gun Control
    * Dave Hardy -- Ranchers, Illegal Immigrants, and Guns
     
  7. Hap MecTweaks

    Hap MecTweaks Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    9,229
    Location:
    Mesquite, Nevada
    "Dear Senator:

    If you cherish the Second Amendment and agree that it protects an individual right to keep and bear arms -- as stated by the recent Heller decision -- then you must vote against Judge Sonia Sotomayor."

    Dear Senator:

    If you value your Senate seat whether or not you agree with the Heller decision, you must not vote Sotomayor for the supreme court.

    A lot of those Senators neither "cherish" the 2nd or agree it protects our right to bear arms. Their main concern is keeping their jobs!

    I know what I wrote is not PC but it should be written a tad different to get the point across with consequences. I'll contact mine too!

    Hap
     
  8. BT-100dc

    BT-100dc Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2008
    Messages:
    1,487
    If it matters to anyone, Sotomayor is a member of "La Raza" which is considered by many of being a very radical group. La Raza has connections to groups who wants to separate southwestern states from America. The Dems want to make any opposition to her as being racist, but I believe that all hispanics, just like all whites, do not think alike. Not to offend any hispanics (because it is not my intent), but are there any hispanics on this thread who would like to comment on Sotomayor? My concern here is how she thinks about gun rights; and, that she is not a puppet for Obama to trash our Constitution. Again, where in the hell is the word "empathy" in our Constitution? Also, the Constitution framers believed in checks & balances of the Judicial, Legislative & Executive branches of Government. BT-100dc
     
  9. tom-n8ies

    tom-n8ies Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2006
    Messages:
    332
    I don't understand how someone so twisted that does not believe the second amendment does not apply to individuals could be confirmed.

    If she does not believe the second amendment applies to individuals then she probably thinks the rest don't apply to individuals either.

    ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????WTF

    tom
     
  10. dbcook

    dbcook TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2007
    Messages:
    1,157
    what president appointed her to the appeals court?
     
  11. crusha

    crusha TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    5,762
    If it's true she's on the BOD of La Raza, then I would think the ethical thing for her to do would be to recuse herself from any cases where that organization is involved.


    However, I'm guessing what she'll actually do is just resign her seat on the board (wink, wink), and then rule away.
     
  12. bigdogtx

    bigdogtx Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2006
    Messages:
    10,650
    "what president appointed her to the appeals court?"

    That would be clinton....
     
  13. dbcook

    dbcook TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2007
    Messages:
    1,157
    figures
     
  14. tj303

    tj303 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    622
    Location:
    Ithaca, NY
    Her original Federal appointment came from George Bush the 1st and was approved by Republicans in the Senate. That is why the Democrats are laughing their asses off...the Republicans have already put their stamp of approval on her!

    A disgusted Republican, TJ
     
  15. bigdogtx

    bigdogtx Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2006
    Messages:
    10,650
    Just because Bush put her on the circuit, DOES NOT MEAN SHE SHOULD SIT ON THE SCOTUS. Bush's appointment came as a "package" that it seem republicans have not learned, DOESN'T work well,,,,reach your hand across the aisle and GET YOUR ARM bitten off!!!!!
     
  16. Heckyea

    Heckyea TS Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2008
    Messages:
    78
    I do take offense to the term "mesikan" in a prior post on this thread. As Puerto Ricans, we have a long standing history as part of this country (since 1898), are american citizens at birth, and have fought & died defending the US-all of this without being a state or representation in government.

    Yes Puerto Ricans do work at and present themselves as worthy people. Mesikans for the most part DON'T.

    Learn and present your facts before you gleamingly demonstrate your ignorance.

    Is your name calling any better than my using mesikans?

    The mesikans we have here in AZ are 75 percent worthless baby makers and welfare recipients and 5 percent landscapers and 10 percent gang bangers. Who knows what the other 10 percent does.
     
  17. Bluzman98

    Bluzman98 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    840
    I did not call anyone a name.

    I used the word "moronic" as an adjective and "ignorance" as a noun. Nowhere did I call you or anyone a name. Furthermore, neither of those words are discriminatory nor racist; however, "mesikan" is.

    In order to name call, I would have stated "ignorant moron"- which I did not.

    "Yes Puerto Ricans do work at and present themselves as worthy people. Mesikans for the most part DON'T."

    Sotomayor is Puerto Rican not Mexican- so what does the term "token mesikan" have to do with her in your original posting? I also don't see the need for Puerto Ricans to "work at and present themselves as worthy people." Work at what? To be worthy of what?

    Jim C
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.