Ongoing Open Thread — Sotomayor Confirmation Hearings

Posted on July 13, 2009 by Uppity Woman

Please be dignified. Thank you!

 

Me? I don’t object to Sotomayor in the way I objected to a few other appointees to the court.  I find “There’s a pubic hair in my coke” to be the ultimate in disgusting, yet to be topped. But hey, that’s just me.

Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)

Filed under: Uncategorized

« »

92 Responses

  1. Nunly, on July 13th, 2009 at 9:42 AM Said:

    I won’t be around much today to watch the hearings, but maybe they’ll replay them later on C-Span. I’m going to keep an open mind. Of course, anyone that Obama would nominate would make me a bit skeptical because his judgment has never been good. But I also don’t want to rely on sound bytes of her past record to form my opinion of her.

    I’m not sure how much we’ll learn about her in these hearings, though. It will be easy to predict that the Dems will go very easy on their questions which will follow a a long diatribe on how wonderful she is and the Republicans will give a half-hearted compliment and then form their questions to make her sound like evil personified.

    I guess I’ll be looking at how she answers her questions. If she sounds smug, as if she’s got this thing in the bag, she loses me. If she sounds intelligent and explains some of her past judicial decisions in a way that makes sense…I’m in her camp.

  2. utahwoman, on July 13th, 2009 at 10:24 AM Said:

    My question is why are they even bothering with the hearings we know she is in no matter what. Me ? I do not want that thing in period !

  3. imustprotest, on July 13th, 2009 at 10:34 AM Said:

    More political theater. You could write an opera about it….. “Speech!” “blah, blah, blah” “no, no, no”….”yes, yes, yes” ….”no”…”yes”…..”no,no” ….”yes, yes” ……adjourn until tomorrow morning.

  4. ParkSlopeVoter, on July 13th, 2009 at 10:44 AM Said:

    Are you sure she’s a shoo-in, Utah? There may be some blue dog dems who are not going to be so impressed. But I agree with you on one thing – I don’t want her in either… Don’t know who I DO want, but I don’t like anything I’ve heard about her. Surely there are other women who are as if not more capable (cos’, yeah, it SHOULD be a woman!)?

    -MS

  5. leslie, on July 13th, 2009 at 11:05 AM Said:

    I’m just stopping by, I’ve tons to do today — I’m on vacation so that means “work” only this time it’s home-type work.
    I just turned on the radio and heard something about a disruption at the hearings. I believe I heard Leahy’s voice. Is he part of the Judiciary Committee? or is his health care committee halding hearings today as well?

  6. joey, on July 13th, 2009 at 11:10 AM Said:

    testing testing!!!!

  7. imustprotest, on July 13th, 2009 at 11:10 AM Said:

    leslie, it was probably this:

    Mon Jul 13, 10:50 am ET
    Forty-five minutes into the hearing, Sotomayor got a type of shout-out she probably wasn’t wanting.
    “Abortion is murder,” shouted a man in a suit from the back of the hearing room.

    “The police will remove that man,” committee Chairman Patrick Leahy said, banging the gavel.

    Police ushered him out and Leahy issued a stern warning that anyone else who disrupts the hearings will be thrown out.

    “Let me make very clear there will be no outbursts allowed in this committee,” Leahy said. “This is a hearing of the United States Senate and we will have order.”

  8. joey, on July 13th, 2009 at 11:15 AM Said:

    LMAO….yeehaahhhhhhhhha I can comment now. LOL

    Hiya all in Penguin KitmoLand

    FF, mebutt is fine here…600+miles (1348 kilometres) from the Indonesian Earthquake. Thanks for the concerned. Muahhh

    Watching sotomayor judiciary hearings here too. Hope those idiots on the hill will make wise decision. If she’s chosen, I wish USA all the best. May God be with you all.

  9. joey, on July 13th, 2009 at 11:17 AM Said:

    imust, imusthaveheard the shout too…heheheh

  10. Uppity Woman, on July 13th, 2009 at 11:22 AM Said:

    Yeah some nutbag starting screaming in the hearing and they hauled his ass out the door.

    You aren’t missing a lot Nunly. A bunch of blowass senators blowing smoke out of every major pompous orifice and primping for the camera. These people just plain make me sick and I simply cannot believe they are in charge of my country.

    Let’s be realistic here folks. The Supreme Court is a political entity and all justices are selected based on political views, they are selected based on ideology and let’s not bullshit each other that they aren’t. If this weren’t so, it wouldn’t be such a panic situation every single time a presidential election involves the potential of selecting a SCOTUS justice. If it weren’t so, there wouldn’t have been so many 5-4 decisions, particularly on major social issues. The truth is, the court appointments are a test of the same old shit over and over again. Men against women. Color against white, religion against non religion and blaaaaaaaah blaaaaaaaaah Blaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhh. They are ALL activists for THEIR opinions and always will be. It has been more than obvious in the past two decades that the constitution can, is and will continue to be interpreted by these 9 yahoos based on ideology, else most decisions qould be 9-0. which ’side’ is right depends on who is assessing them and which ’side’ the assessor is on.

  11. imustprotest, on July 13th, 2009 at 11:27 AM Said:

    Russ Fiengold just said:

    … a justice needs “courage” and so they can “stand up to the president, and to Congress, in order to protect the constitutional rights of the American people and preserve the rule of law.”

    Yeah right. As you said Uppity, I’ll believe it, when I see it.

  12. utahwoman, on July 13th, 2009 at 11:37 AM Said:

    That is why I said they are wasting time here when they could be putting some other new communistic agenda together. Come on really who believes she will not get that seat ? She is in and we know it and we have yet one more leftist, nut job in there who has clearly proved that she will make a decision based on her beliefs and not the constitution. She is crap period.

  13. leslie, on July 13th, 2009 at 11:38 AM Said:

    Thanks, imust.
    I just heard the report again… “There will be no outbursts allowed…”
    These asshats are just as arrogant as can be. There really are no words to describe my thoughts about these blowholes.

    And I’d love to believe Feingold. He is one of the few who might just speak for me. He did when the PATRIOT Act was being voted on. I think he means what he says. I just think he is in a very great minority. (Sadly, he supported Ozer0 – but then so did half the voters.)

    joey ~ So happy to hear you’re okay!
    ok. i’m out until later today.
    Be safe all….penguins and kittehs, too.

  14. Uppity Woman, on July 13th, 2009 at 11:56 AM Said:

    Eh. I would far rather see her on the court than another Mussolini family family fascist like Scalia. In my Italian family, Antonin would be called a greaseball and that’s exactly what he is.

  15. Mary, on July 13th, 2009 at 1:10 PM Said:

    Better a “greaseball” who respects the Constitution than a racist thugette from La Raza.

  16. Mary, on July 13th, 2009 at 1:12 PM Said:

    This entire proceeding is a shameful sham.

    This Congress is nothing but a rubber stamp for a Marxist Muslim who means to destroy country.

  17. finely, on July 13th, 2009 at 1:12 PM Said:

    Love the header!

  18. Mary, on July 13th, 2009 at 1:17 PM Said:

    btw, MK Bill had the decency to let UW ’s name remain legible. Those gangsters aloft….thieves and in-your-face usurpers. No, I won’t state the obvious.

  19. Mary, on July 13th, 2009 at 1:43 PM Said:

    obama has not made one single appointment or decision that is in the interests of a strong and free America. Every day in every way he is hijacking our freedom. Why on earth does anyone think his Supreme Court appointee would be any different?

  20. Freedom Fairy, on July 13th, 2009 at 2:03 PM Said:

    O/T – and coming to a restaurant near YOU if we keep going down this road. Where is the OUTRAGE from our Commander-in-Chief?

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/8147329.stm

  21. imustprotest, on July 13th, 2009 at 2:06 PM Said:

    Mary, I agree, I don’t trust Obama as far as I could throw him (to any Cyber Czars out there stalking this site, no, that was not a threat against the Teleprompter-in-chief)….that being said, I haven’t seen anything in Sotomayor’s record or past that would indicate she would be harmful, in fact, she seems very well qualified. The irony is that she is more qualified than the jerk who nominated her. I do think he looked for a woman and a latin to help him in 2012 as he makes all decisions on helping himself. In this case, in helping himself, he may have picked a good person. Just my opinion.

  22. Somebody, on July 13th, 2009 at 2:39 PM Said:

    The hearings are just a charade she’s got the nod, Obama has the votes. To the victor go the spoils. I don’t think she’ll be the worst SCOTUS nor do I think she’ll be one of the best evah, meh.

    She has quite a depth of judicial experience that’s true but I didn’t agree with her decision on the New Haven/Ricci case and some of her statements bother me too. I don’t believe that more discrimination can cure past discrimination, but that’s just my opinion and last time I checked nobody cared what I thought, LOL!

    Of course I’m not a big fan of many of the justices quite frankly. I don’t like a justice that tilts too far in either direction, but that’s just me.

  23. Mary, on July 13th, 2009 at 2:45 PM Said:

    imust,
    For another point of view on sotomayor,

    http://www.altavista.com/web/results?itag=ody&q=sotomayor+unqualified&kgs=1&kls=0

    Also, reread Anthony’s article about how she destroyred a man’s life–for nothing, for her own pride and arrogace.

    http://thesibylspeaks.wordpress.com/2009/07/09/gathering-no-moss/#comments

  24. Grail Guardian, on July 13th, 2009 at 3:10 PM Said:

    Imusthavemissedsomething,

    She also is against the 2nd amendment to the Constitution and has stated she believes she has the power to legislate from the bench.

    But I’ll give you that she’s better than the guy who appointed her!

  25. SuzanneG, on July 13th, 2009 at 3:14 PM Said:

    May I dump some quick OT rants?? I am ready to LOSE it.

    (1) The MSM just won’t let up–they seem to be determined to obliterate every trace of Sarah Palin, to beat her beyond recognition. I hope she can ignore them and we can serve the MSM a big surprise in the not too distant future in the form of a poll or two that they’ll have a hell of a time explaining away.

    (2) Related: did you see that the Surgeon General nominee went to TWO medical schools? Not only that, but her three universities were extremely non-Ivy. I guess the elites and the MSM are OK with this. They vilified Palin for changing colleges–hick colleges, no less–you will recall. As with Sotomayor, Benjamin really has nothing to recommend her for the post except her back story, spun by Ohole’s hacks.

    (3) And did you notice that, right on cue, the Ohole gang responded to his dropped approval rating by firing up another announcement about going after Bush for war crimes. They will doubtless be talked out of it again and put the posturings away until the next poll dip. Are we going to have to watch this for the rest of his term?

  26. Somebody, on July 13th, 2009 at 3:33 PM Said:

    Are we going to have to watch this for the rest of his term?? Oh yes that and so much more.

  27. Grail Guardian, on July 13th, 2009 at 3:48 PM Said:

    Suzanne,

    They will continue to do this to Palin so long as a single American says they will vote for her again. So I say let’s convince ALL Americans to vote for her!

  28. socalannie, on July 13th, 2009 at 3:50 PM Said:

    FF – that is a terrifying story. Those poor women.

  29. Grail Guardian, on July 13th, 2009 at 3:50 PM Said:

    btw, MK Bill had the decency to let UW ’s name remain legible. Those gangsters aloft….thieves and in-your-face usurpers.

    As I recall, Mary, it was very visible. You will note in the upper left corner: Uppity Woman Presents

    I tell you they are taking the blog back to defend Uppity from the catnip dealers coming around because Bill can no longer pay his tab!

  30. socalannie, on July 13th, 2009 at 3:56 PM Said:

    So, did the penguins push MKB off for a while, or did he go on vacation? Who owns MKB again? I forgot.

    Uppity, I agree wholeheartedly with your comments @ 11:22. It would probably be impossible to find a judge not colored by his political or ethnic affiliations. I don’t know about Sotomayor. Did not like what she did about the Ricci thing, but there are probably rulings from all of them that I would not like.

  31. Anthony, on July 13th, 2009 at 4:03 PM Said:

    Here’s something interesting:

    “WASHINGTON — Supporters of Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor are quietly targeting the Connecticut firefighter who’s at the center of Sotomayor’s most controversial ruling.

    On the eve of Sotomayor’s Senate confirmation hearing, her advocates have been urging journalists to scrutinize what one called the “troubled and litigious work history” of firefighter Frank Ricci.”

    http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/71660.html

  32. socalannie, on July 13th, 2009 at 4:12 PM Said:

    Oh, I see Bill is in there, standing up. Cute header!

  33. SuzanneG, on July 13th, 2009 at 4:46 PM Said:

    Remember this piece on Sotomayor? Caused quite a ruckus, but it blew some of the fairy dust off her nomination:

    http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=45d56e6f-f497-4b19-9c63-04e10199a085

    Anybody know if any of these points were addressed? Or do all the senators agree with Franken that she is the most qualified candidate for SCOTUS in 100 years?

    Oh, I AM going to lose it…

  34. Uppity Woman, on July 13th, 2009 at 4:48 PM Said:

    There has to be something obscene about a low level clown like Al Franken actually participating in picking a SCOTUS. Truly obscene.

  35. Uppity Woman, on July 13th, 2009 at 4:49 PM Said:

    Didn’t Alito have a decision overturned by SCOTUS while he was awaiting confirmation? Or was it Roberts? No it can’t be Roberts. He’s far too anal retentive and would have done the cliff if he got overturned. Cute, though!

  36. Uppity Woman, on July 13th, 2009 at 4:51 PM Said:

    What’s with Bill in the header? Look at his lower body. He….he…he’s morphing into a penquin! Or is it a digsuise? I…….I just don’t know any longer. All I know is there are all these catnip bills.

  37. deadenders, on July 13th, 2009 at 5:10 PM Said:

    UW how the hell did Jack Handy get any committee appointments? JR backmarker congressmen wait yrs to get on committees and he’s got 3 biggies.

  38. Anthony, on July 13th, 2009 at 5:14 PM Said:

    The Senate Judiciary agrees with Franken and the rest of the Dems, who are beginning to walk in lock step like their predecessors.

    The Committee told Jeffrey Deskovic that he would NOT be welcome to testify at the hearings, as they were doing all they can to ensure her confirmation.

    In the meantime, I’m out of popcorn. Too bad. The dog and pony show totally sucks. Maybe there’s some sunflower seeds in my pantry?

  39. Uppity Woman, on July 13th, 2009 at 5:29 PM Said:

    let’s face it, Anthony. WHen it comes to these two useless parties, “Lockstep R Us”. They would all hire Dracula of their leaders told them to do it. It’s all about Promises, Pork and Re-Elections. The only thing it’s NOT about is what’s good for America.

  40. Uppity Woman, on July 13th, 2009 at 5:32 PM Said:

    The Real Show starts tomorrow when all the senators get to ask their phony questions. Guys, this woman is not the worst pick I’ve seen land on the SCOTUS, so relax. And I know she’s not white with a penis, which is SO out of character for this pretend “melting pot” we live in, but I can guarantee you nobody’s cajones are is going to fall off if she’s on the court.

  41. Uppity Woman, on July 13th, 2009 at 5:33 PM Said:

    Besdies, somebody has to balance out all those dagos we have on the court, who would just as soon slap women across the mouth as look at them. Frankly, most of that court is exactly what I have spent most of my life avoiding and I certainly do not want them making decisions applying to me.

  42. Irlandese, on July 13th, 2009 at 5:36 PM Said:

    LMAO! FF, that header is the funniest one yet. It took me awhile to spot Bill, but there he is…

    UW–good one about Al Franken. Lordisa, Stuart Smalley. I cannot get that image out of my head. At least Gopher–Fred Grandy(R)Iowa–wore a uniform on the Love Boat. Stuart wore those, um, wimpy pastel sweaters. Ack.

    What’s next? My dime’s on Joan Rivers after her win on ‘Celebrity Apprentice’.

  43. artemis, on July 13th, 2009 at 5:47 PM Said:

    As I mentioned in the post down a floor, Bill has retained me as his attorney and he’s out under-cover amongst the tuxs’ usurpers “befriending” one. I can’t reveal any more of our plan — attorney -client privilege.

  44. artemis, on July 13th, 2009 at 5:53 PM Said:

    I basically think of these hearings as theater. Today was the opening, or the beginning. In the middle will be all the syrupy dem speeches then the rousing climax of the repubs’ tough talk for the voters back home. The end: Sotomayor will be voted in as our next associate justice.

  45. surfergrrl, on July 13th, 2009 at 5:55 PM Said:

    It’s Official:

    Researchers find that cats do control their human owners:

    http://tinyurl.com/ljwwzn

  46. surfergrrl, on July 13th, 2009 at 6:01 PM Said:

    The holocaust is behind schedule…..awwwwwwww darn! Looks like we get to see another Xmas!!!

    http://tinyurl.com/n2ma4k

  47. foxyladi14, on July 13th, 2009 at 6:11 PM Said:

    she will be confirmed.after all the fanfair.oh.they love the fanfair.

  48. Swell528, on July 13th, 2009 at 6:36 PM Said:

    These are the same dirty nimrods who went for Geithner. A hispanic woman? C’mon, she’s in.

  49. Grail Guardian, on July 13th, 2009 at 6:56 PM Said:

    surfergrrl,

    But WHO do the penguins control???????

  50. imustprotest, on July 13th, 2009 at 7:20 PM Said:

    Don’t forget the curtain calls, they love the curtain calls too….that’s all the interviewing in the halls and Sunday morning talk shows they get to go on hailing their wonderful decision.

  51. Uppity Woman, on July 13th, 2009 at 7:35 PM Said:

    Oh sure, Artemis. We all know the only one who will make out in this deal is you!

  52. UpWithPenquins, on July 13th, 2009 at 7:38 PM Said:

    Hi I’m the penquins’ attorney of record. Thanks for the tip, Artemis!

  53. imustprotest, on July 13th, 2009 at 7:45 PM Said:

    Aw Geez….two attorneys on one thread?? That can’t be good.

  54. artemis, on July 13th, 2009 at 8:05 PM Said:

    UW, my work on Bill’s case will be pro-bono. Bill gave me a catnip packet as a retainer’s fee.

    UWP- Bill has finished his investigation and we’re on to our strategy. You’ve only seen 4 or 5 of Bill’s cat buddies on the side margins. He has an army of friends and relatives itching to bite and hiss at some tux’s tubbies who can hardly run very fast.

  55. Uppity Woman, on July 13th, 2009 at 8:33 PM Said:

    Yes heaven knows, Artemis, those cats surely can reproduce. Oh sure, Bill have you a free niperoni packet, which he made me pay for. Therefore, you represent me as well. What about me, Artemis? My entire blog has been appropriated by a drunken Tuxie and a bunch of dirty birds in Black Tie.

  56. Freedom Fairy, on July 13th, 2009 at 9:09 PM Said:

    LMAO at the comments! About the Black Suited Boyds. Not the Hispanic SCOTUS-to-be.

    But how did LAWYERS get in here?

    Why don’t you go to Hawaii and look through some hospital files or sumpin’…..

  57. Freedom Fairy, on July 13th, 2009 at 9:11 PM Said:

    As for the New Surgeon General pick – I heard on a radio news cast she has said in the past that she did not believe doctors should charge for their services. If this is true, is it really a surprise?

  58. Freedom Fairy, on July 13th, 2009 at 9:26 PM Said:

    Heeeeeeer’s Barney (and friends, again)

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124752187967935029.html

  59. Grail Guardian, on July 13th, 2009 at 9:43 PM Said:

    Actually Uppity, your entire blog has been appropriated by some crazy people talking about a “drunken Tuxie and a bunch of dirty birds in Black Tie” (although I consider pernguins to be rather clean animals). Makes for some fun reading, though, no?

  60. Grail Guardian, on July 13th, 2009 at 9:50 PM Said:

    FF,

    I suppose it’s ridiculous to say something like “if minority owned TV and radio stations were supported by the people they claim to serve, they wouldn’t need the loans”.

    No offense intended to any minority broadcasters who are doing a good job, but seriously – have you checked any of these stations out? In my area they aren’t being targeted to income-earning or educated minority audiences, but rather to the lowest common denominator of these communities. I don’t hear many shows targeted to helping advance the cause of minority groups, but I do hear a lot of crap aimed at urban youth with little or no PDI. No wonder they have no ad income, which of course leads to crappy credit.

  61. Uppity Woman, on July 13th, 2009 at 9:50 PM Said:

    Great, GG thinks penquins are clean. Let’s move them all over to her house.

    Re: New Surgeon General. Doctors should work for free. That should go over really well with my nephew who has loans he hasn’t finished paying off for school and equipment. Perhaps medical school should also be free. Then he could just change jobs to a union plumber or something.

  62. Uppity Woman, on July 13th, 2009 at 9:53 PM Said:

    I hate paying for obscure cable channels I never intend to watch. That includes religious channels, sport channels and minority channels. I don’t want them and I don’t want to pay for them. Now I’m sure plenty of people want those channels. Terrific. Then Pay for them. The truth is, all of those channels are supported by people who don’t want them. I don’t even see where there’s a law that says we should pay for them, yet they are bundled in with more crap when I only watch three of the channels. Same goes for network TV. I don’t watch it, why do I have to pay for it?

  63. Uppity Woman, on July 13th, 2009 at 9:53 PM Said:

    Boy did I just sound like a cranky old broad.

  64. Grail Guardian, on July 13th, 2009 at 9:53 PM Said:

    Sure – I’ll take ‘em! Send them my way any time Uppity!

    Who the hell would want a doctor that worked for free? And who the hell would want a surgeon general who thinks they should?

  65. Uppity Woman, on July 13th, 2009 at 9:56 PM Said:

    The assumption that somebody should spen YEARs in college only to work for nothing is just plain stupid. It’s not only stupid but the job will eventually only attract stupid people, also known as the Creme de la Crappe. Bright people aren’t going to take this shit. They will just go do something else and we will all be treated by doctors who get their degrees part time online.

    The truth of the matter is there are people on this earth who are smarter than others, they have higher IQs and higher achievement levels. The assumption that a person with a borderline IQ should make as much money as these achievers is not only stupid but will guarantee that nobody bothers to work any longer, why stress yourself? I know plumbers who make more money than great teachers I know. So we think our toilets are worth more than our kids’ brains. Dandy. Now let’s move along and fuck up our medical caretakers too. Terrific. There are also people who have remarkable skills, such as finish carpenters. To assume the person who can’t find his ass with both hands or even program their DVR should make as much money as they do is simply ludicrous. This is where I see us heading, where everybody earns a “living wage” and nothing more. Once this stupidity is complete, there will be so many ExPats living outside this country, it will make illegal immigration look small. The funny part is, these nutjobs in charge haven’t figured out that there won’t be much left in the way of taxes to collect when they are done.

  66. Freedom Fairy, on July 13th, 2009 at 9:56 PM Said:

    GG

    three guesses….

    Obama

  67. Grail Guardian, on July 13th, 2009 at 9:57 PM Said:

    FF,

    He doesn’t think anyone should get paid for anything. We should all just gather round and adore him.

  68. Freedom Fairy, on July 13th, 2009 at 10:01 PM Said:

    Uppity – you did, but you are right. Lord KNOWS about 1 in 1000 folks MAY watch SOME of those channels so there is no way they could survive without being bundled and thie advertising subsidized by the Cable Industry (our bills. YOUR bills, I don’t pay for cable). I worked in advertising long enough and I never knew ANYONE who said “Yeah, I would like to by a 13 week insertion on The Mud Dauber Network” or half that other crap that is on.

    How about 26 weeks of how to catch a fat man?

    sure, sign me up….

  69. Freedom Fairy, on July 13th, 2009 at 10:03 PM Said:

    No, GG, you are wrong. He thinks PLENTY of folks should be paid.

    Just not anyone who actually does anything for a living but pontificate and plan ways to make our lives miserable.

    and of course, the Unions and the folks who can’t pay for the shit they have now…

  70. Uppity Woman, on July 13th, 2009 at 10:08 PM Said:

    You want to equalize? Here’s how to do it. Everybody is big on profit sharing. How about profit sharing and sharing in losses? Funny how people expect the owner to take all the risk and take on the loans but then he should Profit share with people who take NO risk at all. That’s fine. And if we lose money, we ALL take the hit too. How’s that for equalizing?

  71. Freedom Fairy, on July 13th, 2009 at 10:11 PM Said:

    Oh Uppity! Why do you hate the little guy?

  72. Freedom Fairy, on July 13th, 2009 at 10:13 PM Said:

    Well…on second thought, that is what Obama and Geithner did to the tax payer with GM and all the other crap…but if and when we earn OUR money back, you know damned well we will not see ANY “profit sharing”

    but you can bet we are going to have to pay and pay – even if they ever SO make money.

    “Excuse me, I’ll just take your wallet now sir”

    FIRST THING OBAMA DID AFTER ELECTION

  73. Freedom Fairy, on July 13th, 2009 at 10:14 PM Said:

    SO=DO

  74. artemis, on July 13th, 2009 at 10:15 PM Said:

    I’ve been in meetings with Bill, but have ya’ll read this sh*t (Hillary should quit now and join up with Palin to organize something really, really threatening to Obama)?:

    http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-07-13/obamas-other-wife-1/?cid=hp:blogunit1

    Any fog I had about Obama has lifted. I’ll work for his defeat.

  75. Uppity Woman, on July 13th, 2009 at 10:16 PM Said:

    I don’t hate the little guy. I just don’t think the little guy is going to be a millionaire unless he wins the lottery. or becomes very creative. There were many people who did that not so long ago. I know plenty of people who did it and nobody gave them free educations or government loans or anything else. Then there’s the concept of saving money all by yourself against your own future. What the hell is wrong with that?

    You can’t just hand success to someone without taking it from somebody who earned it and that’s plain wrong.

    Besides, somebody has to work for somebody else. It’s how it works. Not everybody can be the Owner of a company. If they were, where would employees come from?

  76. Freedom Fairy, on July 13th, 2009 at 10:19 PM Said:

    Uppity – i was teasing you.

  77. Uppity Woman, on July 13th, 2009 at 10:20 PM Said:

    Hillary and Sarah have very little in common philosophically or politically. The only thing they have in common is they are women, basically. I don’t see them teaming up for much of anything.

  78. Uppity Woman, on July 13th, 2009 at 10:21 PM Said:

    FF don’t tease grumpy old women.

  79. Freedom Fairy, on July 13th, 2009 at 10:33 PM Said:

    Uppity – did you see the RBO piece on Patraeus? Now there is an interesting combo – but would HRC run as his VP?

  80. Freedom Fairy, on July 13th, 2009 at 10:34 PM Said:

    Uppity – about teasing grumpy old women.

    I’m just practicing in case I have to disguise myself as a bot.

  81. artemis, on July 13th, 2009 at 10:34 PM Said:

    I was thinking about their using their political experience in training or assisting women for political careers, pulling together some funds and shooting the congress numbers up to 51% — o, in a couple of years!

    Recently, Palin said she would stump even for conservative or moderate dems if they shared her belief in limited government, energy independence, and strong defense. After her experience with the One, Hillary may be more than ready.

    I love long, l-o-n-g, shots.

  82. Freedom Fairy, on July 13th, 2009 at 10:35 PM Said:

    I think Bill is frozen. He looks so stiff. All those guys in the tuxes look like they could move around…..

    but Bill…

    stiff as a Popsicle.

  83. Uppity Woman, on July 13th, 2009 at 11:09 PM Said:

    I can’t speak for Sarah but I know for a fact that Hillary has championed a number of women in NYS election runs in the past decade. As a student of Hillary, I would be willing to be a good sum that she’s not quitting her job as SOS. Overall, I would say she is lying in wait to run on the I Told You So party.

  84. Freedom Fairy, on July 13th, 2009 at 11:09 PM Said:

    ok – it appears everyone else is frozen too.

    I am off to bed.

  85. Uppity Woman, on July 13th, 2009 at 11:20 PM Said:

    I’m not frozen!

  86. artemis, on July 13th, 2009 at 11:27 PM Said:

    I certainly hope so, UW. I’ll think about that thought: she’s acquiring foreign policy creds and is lying in wait to run again.

    Are you thinking 2012 for a run? Say, “yes”!

  87. Uppity Woman, on July 13th, 2009 at 11:35 PM Said:

    I’m thinking so, if this administration’s efforts continue to go belly up as they appear they are. If not, then No.

  88. imustprotest, on July 13th, 2009 at 11:42 PM Said:

    She could run on the “Can We Have a Mulligan Party”. Or the “Coulda, Woulda, Shoulda Party”

  89. imustprotest, on July 14th, 2009 at 12:42 AM Said:

    Sarah Palin on Cap’n Crunch…opps….I mean Cap-and-Trade. She sure doesn’t let grass grow….

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/13/AR2009071302852_pf.html

  90. socalannie, on July 14th, 2009 at 1:55 AM Said:

    I liked that Palin editorial, imust. Thanks!

  91. Mary, on July 14th, 2009 at 2:37 AM Said:

    Yes, Suzanne, I understand about losing it. I’ve been in danger of doing so since I first saw obama in January ‘08. And it finally happened yesterday when I read the story at RBO to which UW ilinked us about 0’s proposed Gestapo chief “regulatory czar,” the insane Harvard lawyer Cass Sunstein, who is married to 0’s equally demented and twice as vicious foreign policy advisor, Samantha Power.

    Lost it. Yes I did. Don’t know if I’ll find it again, though I suppose I will.

    Do you remember the myth about Cassandra? She was a Trojan princess of whom the god Apollo was enamored. To win her favors, he gave her the gift of prophecy. Cassandra spurned Apollo. Now, once a God gave a gift, he could never take it back. But he could offset it. So he gave Cassandra a second “endowment.” When she prophesied, no one would believe her. A terrible fate– to warn people, and be either humored or blown off.

    It’s no fun being Cassandra.

  92. Fredster, on July 14th, 2009 at 2:41 AM Said:

    Completely off topic but I’ve seen these commercials for a few days and it blows me away. Talk about crude and rude:

    http://www.nameourholes.com/

    You have to skip the intro and click on commercials.

Comments are closed.