@161. Chuck Pelto:

The ‘task at hand’ is the Law of the Land. And yet, David S, can’t seem to make a ‘connection’ between that and the actions of an apparent ‘racists’ and ’sexist’.

There is no evidence at hand of any actions that would indicate Sotomayor to be racist or sexist. Her rulings are well regarded, and generally better than the average. There is no evidence of sexism or racism in her record, despite your continued attempt to misrepresent the facts. Quoting a speech on diversity out of context is expected, and also easily dismissed. Show me a ruling where Sotomayor does not follow the Law of the Land, or can the righteous indignation schtick.

Maybe, if The One, or perhaps Bush II, had proposed a white male for a position on amongst the ‘Supremes’, he might have presented a ‘different argument’.

Bush II proposed two white males for a position amongst the “Supremes”, but my argument against their appointments was based on their records, not on their race or gender. It is interesting to make the observation that Bush appointed less experienced and less moderate justices than Obama has in Sotomayor. Perhaps you would like to reconsider your inflammatory comments and make an argument based on Sotomayor’s judicial record? It would certainly carry more weight than your vapid mouthing of epithets.

Peace.

DS