SShepherd
New member
that lieing bitch should be asked to resign
http://news-political.com/2010/06/2...nd-amendment-before-she-didnt/comment-page-1/
http://news-political.com/2010/06/2...nd-amendment-before-she-didnt/comment-page-1/
that lieing bitch should be asked to resign
http://news-political.com/2010/06/2...nd-amendment-before-she-didnt/comment-page-1/
You're not shocked are you?
that lieing bitch should be asked to resign
http://news-political.com/2010/06/2...nd-amendment-before-she-didnt/comment-page-1/
Where is it shown that Sotomayor is deserving of the title "lieing bitch?"
if she lied in her conformation hearings.........she deserves the title
Did you visit the link JP ...it's all there.
The news is in: Sonia Sotomayor explicitly endorses and supports the individual right to bear arms as decided in the Supreme Court case DC v. Heller.
“I Can Find Nothing In The Second Amendment’s Text, History, Or Underlying Rationale That Could Warrant Characterizing It As ‘Fundamental’ Insofar As It Seeks To Protect The Keeping And Bearing Of Arms For Private Self-Defense Purposes.”
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Both cases hinged on the 2bd amendment right to bear arms. In both instances, local municipalities had banned the ownership of handguns. Heller, as the court stated it, also applied to the states. They only confirmed this in the Chicago case.
The right to bear arms is the right to bear arms, and as the constitution states "shall not be infringed".
OT for sure ..., you look a little old to have a 'baby sitter' but I bet play time could sure be 'interesting'I am with you on this JPR.... The second quote lacks some punctuation (I think) to be grammatically correct which can make it seem contradictory when it isn't. The key word here is "insofar." I also don't see what makes her a "bitch" either... I usually reserve that title for women I actually know.. like my baby sister whom I love, but don't like most of the time...
rotfl.........you can poo poo my use of the word "bitch " all you like
anyone who lies just to get elected is a bottom feeding, no account bitch--man or woman
http://thehill.com/homenews/adminis...gan-nomination-as-key-vote-against-gun-rights
Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) has called Sotomayor’s testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee last summer a “confirmation conversion.”
Cornyn on Tuesday referred to Sotomayor’s recent dissent to Monday’s Supreme Court decision on guns in which she wrote that the “framers did not write the 2nd Amendment in order to protect a private right of armed self defense.”
“Now it is disconcerting to say the least,” Cornyn said. “It appears to be a direct contradiction to what Sotomayor said in her hearings.”
Or Senator Cornyn is engaging in intellectual dishonesty for purposes of political gain.
Contrast that with her Senate testimony: "I understand the individual right fully that the Supreme Court recognized in Heller." And, "I understand how important the right to bear arms is to many, many Americans."
Explain please.
While I don't see any politician as honest, I don't see your point being made by the evidence in the story or other similar news stories about her seeming support of gun rights from the hearings to the McDonald v Chicago dissent where she says she sees no individual right.
One and the same.Where did she say that she supports individual gun rights, versus those expressly protected by the 2nd?
Where did she say that she supports individual gun rights, versus those expressly protected by the 2nd?
One and the same.
I was referring to this comment you made and asking you to explain why you believe that Senator Cornyn may have been intellectually dishonest: Or Senator Cornyn is engaging in intellectual dishonesty for purposes of political gain.
While I realize that, in the insulated bubble world of politicians and lawyers, people can and will professionally parse words for ill intent, I believe the "intellectual dishonesty for purposes of political gain" charge should be leveled at Justice Sotomoyer not as Senator Cornyn. She is the one who used very selective wording to gain politically.
However back to your post where you asked "Where did she say that she supports individual gun rights, versus those expressly protected by the 2nd?" (which is a point I was not addressing) it is clear that Justice Sotomayer stated this: "I understand the individual right fully that the Supreme Court recognized in Heller." Now it doesn't say she agrees with it, or supports it, it just says she understands it. See my paragraph above about intellectual dishonesty.