Sen. Alexander backs Sotomayor

[K191145]

+1...this sure reeks of playing to the Hispanic voting block and makes me wonder if our esteemed Mr. Alexander has something in mind when he is gone from the Senate (and I cannot imagine him getting reelected, given his recent record).

On a bright note, some of the glitter is starting to wear off of the current admin and people are starting to question things...we can only hope the Chinese don't completely own us due our mounting debt by the time sanity returns.

Crikey...

I just hope there's something of America to salvage come 2010. I predict that the GOP will retake the House then. The main reason I'll support the GOP as a party in 2010 is simply to take the majority in the house and put the brakes on all this Marxist legislation. I would rather have 2 preceeding years NOTHING being passed or accomplished by the Obamov administration. A complete legislative stalemate is far better than what we are getting now.

[Guest 3pugguy]

Right, that would be the reason that...what was it, 5 out of 7 or 6 out of 7 of her rulings have been overturned by the Supreme Court?

I hope so. We need a conservative candidate to run against him.

A truly fiscal conservative would be refreshing - but rare as chickens teeth. But I think most folks now would be glad to see someone who could stay a course of tough decisions to rein in spending, at local, state, and federal levels, as anyone with a lick of sense knows SOMEONE's ox will be gored by changes and can accept it being one of their's if the change is really good and not a load of BS.

Or maybe I have been reading too many motivational books lately and giving more credit to humans than is their due .

[Guest 3pugguy]

I just hope there's something of America to salvage come 2010. I predict that the GOP will retake the House then. The main reason I'll support the GOP as a party in 2010 is simply to take the majority in the house and put the brakes on all this Marxist legislation. I would rather have 2 preceeding years NOTHING being passed or accomplished by the Obamov administration. A complete legislative stalemate is far better than what we are getting now.

The mounting debt and seemingly pervasive view that the government is the sole solution to all our ills is pretty danged scary and I, too, hope things can settle down until mid-terms. I think I am like you - we need to catch our breath and get back on track.

And I posted this the other day, but dang, it seems EVERY time I look at news, the President is TALKING...reminds me of something an Admiral said after we had a meeting with locals over airplane noise (I was in the peanut gallery of the meeting among the Navy folks): one of the Captains asked him why he held the meetings and the Admiral said as long as we were meeting and TALKING ABOUT IT, we didn't have to do anything., but the locals who were complaining thought we were and were happy. So the President can do a lot of talking and doesn't really do anything; if bills don't pass, he can (and betcha a dollar will) use Congress as a whipping boy.

I don't think the President is dumb, but being book smart does not an effective Executive make.

Edited July 31, 2009 by 3pugguy

[K191145]

The mounting debt and seemingly pervasive view that the government is the sole solution to all our ills is pretty danged scary and I, too, hope things can settle down until mid-terms. I think I am like you - we need to catch our breath and get back on track.

And I posted this the other day, but dang, it seems EVERY time I look at news, the President is TALKING...reminds me of something an Admiral said after we had a meeting with locals over airplane noise (I was in the peanut gallery of the meeting among the Navy folks): one of the Captains asked him why he held the meetings and the Admiral said as long as we were meeting and TALKING ABOUT IT, we didn't have to do anything., but the locals who were complaining thought we were and were happy. So the President can do a lot of talking and doesn't really do anything; if bills don't pass, he can (and betcha a dollar will) use Congress as a whipping boy.

I don't think the President is dumb, but being book smart does not an effective Executive make.

No, he's not dumb but I believe he's naive to think he can play Chicago style politics with the rest of the nation. I think/hope like hell, many people are waking up to the dangerous path he wants America to follow. I am still astounded at how a man with his associations was elected in the first place. Associations with radical racist clergymen (Jerimiah Wright), Proven admitted domestic terrorist (William Ayeres) and so on. Of course the GOP certainly had no prize as a candidate and with the economic collapse at the end of the Bush administration I'm not surprised he won.

[Guest 3pugguy]

No, he's not dumb but I believe he's naive to think he can play Chicago style politics with the rest of the nation. I think/hope like hell, many people are waking up to the dangerous path he wants America to follow. I am still astounded at how a man with his associations was elected in the first place. Associations with radical racist clergymen (Jerimiah Wright), Proven admitted domestic terrorist (William Ayeres) and so on. Of course the GOP certainly had no prize as a candidate and with the economic collapse at the end of the Bush administration I'm not surprised he won.

I agree with your assessment and do think some of the Bush adminstrations missteps coupled with the weak ticket the Republicans put forth eased the path for Obama. And nope, don't think the Chicago style will bear any fruit.

Next few months will be crucial, I think, as to what happens not only in the mid-terms but also for 2012 - provided the Republicans can quit shooting themselves in the foot and letting people on talk radio set the agenda.

[Guest mikedwood]

[Guest DefensiveGuy]

With the recent pro gun state laws, I was feeling pretty good about our politicians. Still am for the most part but Alexander is another on my list to vote against in the next election. I sure hope a pro Constitution / Bill of Rights candidate emerges to run against him. Ive already sent 2 emails to Alexander before and after this announcement.

[9teeneleven]

who is this guy trying to appeal to? He is trying to play the middle ground in a red state. Oopps. I don't think any democrats want to adopt him.

[Guest GhostHunter]

No one respects a traitor. God only knows how much damage he can cause before we vote him out.

Is there any way we can impeach this basta*d?? He is a low-life P.O.S. and a disgrace to the citizens of Tennessee. Hope he's still got his plaid walking shirt, cause he's going to need it!!!

[Guest 70below]

“Today, it would be equally wrong for me to vote against Judge Sotomayor solely because she is not on my side on some issues,†Alexander said.

Hmmmmm.........I thought he was a representative of the PEOPLE.....

and that his views were supposed to reflect that of the PEOPLE.....

hence his voting against her to SUPPORT THOSE IDEALS........

is kinda the point isn't it?

[Guest PapaB]

Sotamayer has said she believes in the idea of legislating from the bench. This violates the Constitution and the oath she takes. There is no way for Alexander to justify his condoning of that. He's just a steaming pile in my eyes.

[Tim Nunan]

Ok, Lamar just lost my vote in the next election he's in. NRA needs to drop his rating to a D (for dummy).

NRA has responded to this question:

From: NRA Auto Responder [mailto:nra.auto-responder@nrahq.org]

Sent: Sunday, July 26, 2009 3:36 PM

To: ILA-Contact

Subject: Contact from NRAHQ web site: Legislative and Legal Action Information

Message: I would like to know if you are going to cut off support of any Republicans, especially Sen. Lindsey Grahm, if they vote for Sotomayor.

From: ILA-Contact <ILA-Contact@nrahq.org>

Subject: RE: Contact from NRAHQ web site: Legislative and Legal Action Information

Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2009 13:30:37 -0400

We have made it clear to all Senators that we will be scoring their vote and it will effect their NRA rating.

Best Regards,

Miranda Bond

NRA-ILA Grassroots Division

[Guest oldfella]

Your Senator is About to Stab Gun Owners in the Back... Again!

-- Alexander announces support for anti-gun Sotomayor

Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert

8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151

Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408

http://www.gunowners.org

Friday, July 31, 2009

You've probably seen the news in your state. But in case you missed it,

the Associated Press is now reporting that Republican Senator Lamar

Alexander will "break with the rest of his party's leaders to support

Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor."

This is outrageous. Not only is Sotomayor EXTREMELY anti-gun, she has

expressed racist views in multiple speeches over the years and she has

proven -- in her actions and words -- that she is committed to IGNORING

THE CONSTITUTION!

This is not the first time this year that Sen. Alexander has stabbed gun

owners in the back. The Senator also voted to confirm Attorney General

Eric Holder to his post, and he voted to stop the filibuster which could

have potentially stalled the nomination of State Department attorney

Harold Koh.

Both Holder and Koh are anti-gun radicals who don't believe people like

you should be able to use a gun in self-defense. And Senator Lamar

Alexander voted to confirm both of these men!

Now, Alexander says he is going to vote for another gun grabber who has

consistently ruled against the Second Amendment. It is imperative that

you contact your Senator right away. There are three main reasons why

he should oppose Judge Sonia Sotomayor:

1. Anti-gun Judicial Record. Judge Sotomayor has held that there is

"not a fundamental right" to keep and bear arms and that the Second

Amendment -- whatever little it protects in her estimation -- does not

apply to the states, only in Washington, DC.

2. Inability to Support Self-defense. When asked during the Senatorial

hearings if she favored the right of self-defense, Sonia Sotomayor

stated that such a proposition was an "abstract question" and

that she

couldn't think of a Supreme Court case that addressed that issue.

However, she ignored the more than a dozen cases where the High Court

has examined the issue.

3. Misled Congress in Regard to Following the Law. Judge Sotomayor

repeatedly told Senators that she would follow statutory law and

existing precedents. But she's already failed to do that during her

judicial career. Sotomayor has been overturned on numerous occasions

(6) by the Supreme Court and has been rebuked by both the Supreme Court

and by appellate judges for not following precedents and statutes.

So does anyone really think that she will be a stickler for precedent if

she is confirmed to the high Court? Never mind the fact that in her

rulings and in her statements, she has ignored a very important

"precedent" -- the common understanding in this country for

150 years --

that the Second Amendment protects an individual right.

At a time when President Obama is trying to shove socialism down our

throats, we can't afford to have another anti-gun, anti-constitution

judge on the U.S. Supreme Court.

It doesn't matter if you are a Republican, Democrat or Independent... or

are liberal or conservative. You need to contact your Senator today and

urge your family and friends to do the same.

URGENT ACTION: Please contact Senator Alexander right away and urge him

to vote against confirming Judge Sotomayor. You can contact Senator

Alexander by going to his webform at:

http://alexander.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Contact.Home

----- Pre-written letter -----

Dear Senator Alexander:

I find it outrageous that you are actually going to support Judge Sonia

Sotomayor!

Not only is she EXTREMELY anti-gun, she has expressed racist views in

multiple speeches over the years and she has proven -- in her actions

and words -- that she is committed to IGNORING THE CONSTITUTION!

Throughout her career, Judge Sonia Sotomayor has shown that she:

* Opposes the right to keep and bear arms;

* Denies there is a constitutional right to self-defense; and,

* Frequently ignores constitutional and statutory precedents.

I was upset that you voted to confirm Attorney General Eric Holder to

his post, and that you voted to stop the filibuster which could have

potentially stalled the nomination of State Department attorney Harold

Koh.

Now I am very upset with your intended support for Sotomayor and will do

everything I can to make sure that after your next election you will not

be able to do this again.

Sincerely,

[Guest Renegade]

Rumor has it he is bucking for a cabinet position with the current marxist regime in D.C.

[mcurrier]

Yeah, and his phone is steady busy.......wonder why!

oldogy

They take it off the hook and lay it there. Seriously.

[mcurrier]

but Alexander said that he wanted to bring the Senate back to previous situations where nominees were judged solely on their credentials.

Solely on their credentials?!?! We wish that would happen. The problem is that if Sotomayor can not get her own rulings correct and has them turned over by higher courts, then that means that she is NOT QUALIFIED to sit on the Supreme Court! Not to mention her own self-admitted racist tendencies.

“It is my hope that my vote now not only will help to confirm a well-qualified nominee but will help to return the Senate to the practice only recently lost of inquiring diligently into qualifications of a nominee and then accepting that elections have consequences, one of which is to confer upon the president the constitutional right to nominate justices of the Supreme Court of the United States.”

Any President is welcome to nominate, but it is left to the Senate to determine qualification and acceptability.

Nice try being all 'noble' Alexander, but every time you spineless morons do this we get screwed. STOP trying (or acting) to take the high road and fight fire with fire. And do you think that your 'noble' gesture will EVER be reciprocated by the left? EVER? No! It will not. Can we remember Bork? Thomas? Gonzalez?

Edited August 1, 2009 by mcurrier

[mcurrier]

Of course the GOP certainly had no prize as a candidate and with the economic collapse at the end of the Bush administration I'm not surprised he won.

coupled with the weak ticket the Republicans put forth eased the path for Obama.

Unfortunately the Republicans were not the ones who put forth such weak candidates, it has been for quite some time that the left has done the "choosing" for us. If we were to have closed primaries and all on the same day nationwide this would not happen. The left chose McLame for us.

[mcurrier]

Hmmmmm.........I thought he was a representative of the PEOPLE.....

and that his views were supposed to reflect that of the PEOPLE.....

I can count on two hands the number of people working in Washington that fit that description anymore. It's time to clean house out there. COMPLETELY!

[greenego]

I can count on two hands the number of people working in Washington that fit that description anymore. It's time to clean house out there. COMPLETELY!

This is soooo true. Term limits are what we need. Won't happen on a national level. Could a state pass a law to limit terms in Federal Congress? States rights! But then again states have no rights. Lost them along time ago.

[Guest oldfella]

They take it off the hook and lay it there. Seriously.

Yes, they do!

Pete

[GLOCKMEISTER]

he might as well switch partys... IMHO!

[Guest SUNTZU]

Sing us a song your the pianoman, sing us a song tonight...

You sold your vote to the liberals, and you are a quisling all right...

YouTube - Mike Curb Congregation - Burning Bridges (1970)

[Guest 3pugguy]

who is this guy trying to appeal to? He is trying to play the middle ground in a red state. Oopps. I don't think any democrats want to adopt him.

I honestly think he is pandering to the hispanic voters, but doubt this will change the minds of anyone in the hispanic community who would already not vote for him. Makes me wonder what he is up to in the long run.

[Guest DefensiveGuy]

On his wiki;

On June 25, 2009, much to the chagrin of conservatives and 2nd Amendment supporters, Lamar Alexander was one of 8 Republicans to cross the aisle and vote for confirmation of Harold Hongju Koh, a gun control advocate, as Legal Adviser to the State Department.

Something is obviouly

Excuse me if I have to go outside and throw up.

[Worriedman]

On his wiki;

On June 25, 2009, much to the chagrin of conservatives and 2nd Amendment supporters, Lamar Alexander was one of 8 Republicans to cross the aisle and vote for confirmation of Harold Hongju Koh, a gun control advocate, as Legal Adviser to the State Department.

Something is obviouly

Excuse me if I have to go outside and throw up.

A small correction, Alexander voted against confirming Koh, but he did vote for cloture on the nomination, which effectively broke the filibuster that was keeping the Koh appointment from the full Senate. Had he not worked with 8 other RINOs to skewer us, Koh could not have even been voted on. He will try and say that he did not actually vote"for" the appointment, but once it got to the floor, it was a simple majority thing, so he tries to hide his treason with a "no" vote, when 1 would make no difference, after making all the difference in the world on the cloture measure.

Don't forget he was the lone Republican to vote against the Coburn Amendment allowing guns in National parks.

Bill Haslam is his guy, keep that in mind.