Comments on: Kopel on Sotomayor

By: PB

PB — Wed, 27 May 2009 09:27:56 +0000

I think it needs to be made an issue, but whether it’s enough to scuttle her, I don’t know. It also has the same problem the Holder nomination did…. even if you win, Obama will have something right behind her who is just as bad on the gun issue. You’re not likely to get a pro-2A justice out of this administration.

By: Mike123

Mike123 — Wed, 27 May 2009 01:28:36 +0000

You have to deal with what you have in your hand, not what might be down the road. From Kopel’s research she seems anti-2nd Amendment so we need to make an effort to stop her.

By: jones

jones — Wed, 27 May 2009 01:01:19 +0000

“The question is whether Sotomayor might be better than alternatives.”

Seems there are better alternatives (even on the Left), but we won’t get them.

By: Ian Argent

Ian Argent — Wed, 27 May 2009 01:01:06 +0000

Obama is (finally) keeping a campaign promise. Let’s see if he follows through with this one the way he’s followed through with closing Gitmo, or bringing unparalleled transparency to goverment, or ending the drug war, or…

(Based on his statement about what he would look for in a SCOTUS judge).

By: Sebastian

Sebastian — Wed, 27 May 2009 00:13:32 +0000

Yes, that’s true. I actually didn’t think about that. But yeah, if the Republicans hold strong, they can prevent her from being voted on. The question is whether Sotomayor might be better than alternatives.

By: jones

jones — Tue, 26 May 2009 21:47:55 +0000

I seem to remember that discussed when Specter bailed.

By: jones

jones — Tue, 26 May 2009 21:47:05 +0000

Doesn’t she need one minority vote to get out of committee?

I’m not saying she should be blocked; just that she could be blocked.

By: TexasFred

TexasFred — Tue, 26 May 2009 20:54:10 +0000

OK, we knew that Obama was going to nominate a libber to the SCOTUS, that was a given. It was suspected that he would nominate a female and a minority too, so, no real surprises there either. A libber president doing what a scumbag libber is expected to do, take this nation down the sewer by seating a scumbag libber on the SCOTUS. Just sayin’…

By: Bitter

Bitter — Tue, 26 May 2009 20:11:10 +0000

Ah, I see now. I think most groups are neutral on guys like Castle. The biggest problem that I suspect comes to play here is that most people aren’t single issue voters. (We’re not, we’re just single issue activists.) I would also look at guys like Castle and say a sizable level of support comes from anti-gun voters.

On the whole, we do have better numbers. And the GOP should be begging for our support. That’s something I’d like to help us change. We actually became known as the volunteers who like guns because we made sure that all of the volunteer organizers knew that what we wanted from candidates was a pro-gun rating. I even opted not to do one call script because it mentioned a candidate who wasn’t terribly pro-gun. You better believe they noticed something like that. I suspect this overall issue really will be won at the local level.

By: Sebastian

Sebastian — Tue, 26 May 2009 20:10:40 +0000

Gun control has become a fringe issue, and it’s time for the GOP to realize that it isn’t 1999 any more.

I agree with you on this Ken, the problem is, even if all the Republicans stand firm, they still can’t stop the confirmation. Either way, the point was that if you want to get rid of someone like Mike Castle, and that indeed would be a worthy cause, it’s going to take local activism in a primary to get rid of him.

Delaware has a closed primary system, so to a large degree, it’s Delaware GOP voters that are keeping him there. All politics is local.