Tuesday, May 26, 2009

Has Obama Selected America's First Gay/Lesbian Supreme Court Justice?


In the proud tradition of MSNBC, CNN, NBC, CBS, and ABC and their thorough and revealing reporting on the nomination of Sarah Palin as the Republican Vice Presidential candidate in 2008, it behooves us to carry on with that investigative journalism in regards to President Obama's choice for the U.S. Supreme Court, namely Sonia Sotomayor. As we witnessed last year, the crack news teams from the above-mentioned mass media were quick to discover many revelations about a female candidate seeking a very high political office - Sarah Palin's daughter was mentioned as the actual mother of Palin's newborn son, Palin's husband was investigated as well and Palin was put into the spotlight for the "Trooper Scandal" as well as interviewed on her reading habits and knowledge of the earth's continents.


So now, we have another female nominated for a very high office in this land, and it should be very apparent, based upon the track record of Barack Obama's vetting of potential appointees, that Sonia Sotomayor should certainly be taken to task over her personal life over all of these years. As MSNBC and CNN would so proudly condone, one should actually take a fine toothed comb to Sotomayor's tax returns over the past decade to be sure she has been paying her taxes - that is only logical based upon the tax problems inherent in numerous Obama appointees to his Cabinet.


But there is one aspect of Sonia Sotomayor's life that does require some investigation. Certainly the editors of the New York Times, Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews of MSNBC would concur that the fact that Sotomayor was divorced in 1983 after a brief seven year marriage and did not have ANY children is certainly sufficient evidence to point to Sotomayor's being a lesbian. Right, Olby?


In case you haven't noticed, the Gay and Lesbian activist groups in America are THRILLED with Sotomayor's nomination. Guilt by association? Well, I'm sure these groups backing Sotomayor's nomination will be perceived as just as concrete of evidence as the fact that MSNBC reported that Sarah Palin's religious beliefs certainly made her a radical evangelical intent on making Christianity the national relgion of America. Here's what the gay and lesbian website, Bay Windows, had to say about Sonia Sotomayor:


If confirmed, she will become the first Hispanic member of the U.S. Supreme Court, the second woman on the high court bench, and the third woman ever to have served there.Early reaction from gay legal activists is positive.


Long-time gay legal activist Paula Ettelbrick said she met Sotomayor in about 1991 when they both served on then-New York Governor Mario Cuomo’s advisory committee on fighting bias."Nobody wanted to talk to the queer person at that time," said Ettelbrick, who represented Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund. "She was the only one [on the advisory committee] who made a point to come over and introduce herself. She was totally interested [in gay civil rights issues] and supportive."

And this little snippet at the end of the Bay Windows article:


There were rumors early on that the president was considering, on his short list for the nomination, two open lesbians and both Stanford Law professors - Pam Karlan and Kathleen Sullivan.

So, it appears that Barack Obama was definitely intent on naming a gay or lesbian to the Supreme Court and one could argue that his choice of Sotomayor does just that but Obama skates by some of the repurcussions of that by choosing someone that perhaps fits more into the "don't ask, don't tell" mode? Is it important if Sonia Sotomayor is a lesbian? Was it important if Sarah Palin believed in life at conception? You decide.


So, we have a new Supreme Court Justice nominee who has very little written about her personal life. A brief marriage in her college days to a man that has yet to be identified - do we actually know IF she was married? No children came out of this marriage. And the fact is that no one seems to have any idea who is in Sonia Sotomayor's life at the moment.


Let's face it - the crack investigators at the New York Times, the Washington Post, MSNBC, CNN, NBC, CBS and ABC need to get on this pronto!


Is Sonia Sotomayor a lesbian? I don't know for sure. But it is certain that if MSNBC, CNN and the three major news networks promptly being their sifting through Sotomayor's garbage, mail and public records, as they did in the dead of night in Wasilla, Alaska...the facts are sure to come out.

15 comments:

Rose said...

LOL - Did she bear her daughter's baby? A two-headed alien, whoop, no pun intended? I'm sure NOW will avoid endorsing her, since they no longer endorse female candidates, and maybe they can get Tina Fey to come up with something really derogatory.

My money's on Katie Couric.

sofa said...

She says that as a hispanic women she is more qualified than a white man to be on the court.

That statement and her history of such statements reveal her as a openly racist, and sexist. Not the sort you want a a judge at any level.

She is over the top crazy against the 2nd amendment, in words and deeds, over many years. Anti-constitution is not the sort of judge you want at any level.

Clearly one of 'Obama's people': a free-rider on the society they hate. But the damage to the laws that underpin our society would be revolutionary.

Any chance she'll be blocked? If not, the damage resulting from this one appointment may so unbalance the republic, that the wheels come off. Just saying - I hope there is a way to block her. The alternative may well be .. messy.. when people who remember america are forced to resist.

sofa said...

How many of these nutjobs can be "Borked" in the next 18 months?

sofa said...

Roses - Katie Couric has 'empathy', so maybe?

Maggie Thornton said...

Whether she is or isn't, it drives me crazy that we see opposition to her as a MAJOR mudslide, because she is after all female and Hispanic. Neither should matter. To think that conservatives cannot stand against her judicial philosophy, which certainly is not constitutionally-based, is unacceptable. Yet, it appears that most pundits believe that Republicans will not vote against her.

Your points about the MSM and their investigation of her are spot-on. The media no longer cares that their job is to serve the people. They believe their personal opinions serve the people, and oh by the way, shut up and do as we say.

What happened to Sara Palin, with the help of her own pitiful party, was the warning shot heard by all not deaf and dumb.

Excellent post. I hope you can get this widely read.

Findalis said...

She is straight I do believe. From the gossip I heard her ex was abusive. And I personally know couples who have chosen never to have children. So there is no proof of her being Lesbian. Unless someone produces a photo or two, we can assume she is straight.

Ed Miller said...

As much as I hate to insult garbage (since it can't help what it is, after all) this "Judge Somodmizer" is nothing more than human garbage.

Anyone who deliberately denies or takes liberty or property from others without just cause is a tyrant.

Plain and simple.

And we all know what tyrants deserve....

She has voted against gun rights, saying that the Second Amendment does not secure an individual right and that it does not apply to the States.

She has voted against using a cost-benefit analysis when considering environmental regulation (read that as an unjust taking of property and liberty).

She has voted to throw out a test used to determine which firefighters should receive promotions, simply because no black firefighters taking the test were able to pass it.

Americans should not be hyphenated or segregated and they should not be classified when it comes to rights, privileges, or immunities.

After all, look at one portion of section 1 of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution:

"No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

Isn't this the law of the land?

But no, sorry... Sotomayer is one of those radical liberals who believes that the Constitution is a "living" document whose interpretation must change with the times, and that one must take into account "feelings" and "life experience" when ruling from the bench.

This is of course in sharp contrast to what the Framers intended, which was acting as an “umpire calling balls and strikes” as Justice Roberts so aptly put it.

Feelings should follow facts, not the other way 'round.

Call your Senators today and tell them you want the Constitution respected, not rejected.

Tell them to vote “NO” on Sotomayer!

- pupista

Esquerita said...

"Is she gay?" - does that really affect ones intellect or determine what kind of judge someone will be. Most folks in South Carolina figure Lindsey Graham is a little light in the loafers but it does not affect his job as a descent and well qualified Republican Senator. There are MANY lesbians in our military who are exceptional soldiers, sailors, and Marines.

Bush was a Republican president who picked Conservative judges for the Federal bench and the Supreme Court. Democrats gummed up the works enough to stall some of his federal appointments. John Roberts has solid credentials and was appointed to the Supreme Court (Harriet Myers was not ready).

Now Obama is a Democratic president who will nominate Liberal judges to the Federal bench and the Supreme Court. Republicans will stall some of his nominees but not all. Sotomayor has solid credentials, and if she were that Liberal she would not have been nominated by the first George Bush to the Federal Courts. She will probably be appointed, but maybe not.

Different presidents select different types of judges - THIS IS CALLED CHECKS AND BALANCES.

I disagree with her ruling concerning the Connecticut firemen but I doubt I'd agree with 100% of any judges rulings.

Miller - to call someone "human garbage" because you disagree with them politically betrays a complete lack of intellect on your part. Her life seems to be quite a success story, not many go from the projects to Federal judge.

"Judge Somodizer"? Can you not even spell sodomizer? Lesbians are more in to oral sex. If you are such a prude that you consider oral sex "sodomy" then all I can do is sit back and laugh. No wonder you are so uptight.

Maggie Thornton said...

@ Esquerita, checks and balances no longer exist because Liberals are so far left, that as Mr. Miller said, they are now taking our personal property.

Holger's point was how Sotomayor will be "reported" in the MSM, and let's face it, she could be a full-fledged Hitlerite or an Hispanic that worships at her local mosque and it would NOT be reported. We saw that with Barack Obama. They hid everything and continue to do so.

Then, they created false news about Sarah Palin, and not only did they report it but they hyped it.

Sharku said...

It matters not that she may or may not be gay, it matters not that she may or may not be female, it matters not that she may or may not be Hispanic, the only thing that matters is that this "person" thinks that it is her job to re-work the Constitution via the bench instead of an actual Constitutional Convention. She is completely wrong for the position.

Esquerita said...

Maggie - Obama is in office for 5 months and you think checks and balances don't exist?
Remember when Republicans were talking up the "nuclear option" of removing the right of filibuster? Remember Tom "the hammer" Delay's talk of a "permanent Republican majority"? Oh what a difference four years makes.

Nobody likes to loose- but damn, Conservatives seem to have so little faith these days. America is a strong country and it will survive any one president or any one Supreme Court nominee. Your day will come again, probably in 2016. The American electorate is good about not letting either side go too far. This is the way the framers intended (though Washington cursed the existence of any political parties).

Shark - nice to see someone argue a point without resorting to name calling. Kudos to your sense of decency.

She's probably anti-abortion which I disagree with but its not a deal breaker for me. I'm stereotyping here because she is a Catholic of Puerto Rican heritage.

We'll see what happens - she'll probably get appointed. This is not the kind of thing I loose sleep over.

Maggie Thornton said...

Esquerita, America felt good about the contract with America and when that went by the wayside, Republicans began paying for their inattention to the contract.

The difference between today and the past is that now our country will change fundamentally if Obama has his way.

We will have Obama's health care, we will have Obama's viewpoint on SCOTUS once Bader resigns and then we will even have to rewrite the oath the justices takes. We already have government ownership of one of our largest companies and our banks have been cowed into submission.

And we have the media square in the middle of misprepresenting truth. As Holger pointed out, the media will ascend on any conservative and stop at nothing to bring down an opponent.

These are different times, and it will take years, perhaps a generation to bring America back to the core of the Constitution, if we can't stop Obama now. And no, I do not see Obama's four months in office as a system of checks and balance - because there is no balance and there are certainly no checks possible in this political atmosphere.

Sharku said...

Rita,

How dare you accuse me of having a sense of decency!!

This woman does not belong on the High Court. It is her views that I abhor, I don't care if she is green with purple polka dots. Her thoughts of the Constitution are abominable.

Holger Awakens said...

Wow! what great comments by all. Good to see some different points of view here.

Rita, I even agreed with you on a couple of things - but as usual, you made about 20 points so it's still about 10%.

And Rita, you shared this:

Lesbians are more in to oral sex. If you are such a prude that you consider oral sex "sodomy" then all I can do is sit back and laugh. No wonder you are so uptight.Well...you obviously have never been to the dildo and strap on aisles of your local adult fantasy store! HAHAHAHAAHA!

:Holger Danske

Anonymous said...

Talking about Gay/Lesbian.... have you ever wondered how many of us have never touched ourselves? :)

Whoever that has never touched him/herself, please identify yourself!

Loosen up folks and don't be hypocrites like Newt Gingrich; the Boston child abusing priests (and the Vatican folks that protected them for decades until they all got caught), Larry Craig; Strom Thurmond; etc.