New Haven Independent

Posted by: Two Good Hands | August 6, 2009 2:15 PM

So Simmons' "position" is this: An otherwise qualified judge ruled in a way that I didn't like, once. So in retribution for not doing what I want, I would have voted against her as a Supreme Court nominee.

Does this sound familiar? Isn't it what we've been hearing from every conservative white crybaby?

*Professor Gates hurt my feelings when he yelled at me, so I arrested him.

*It's not fair that I got suspended (with pay!) just because I called Prof. Gates a banana-eating jungle monkey! And anyway I apologized so that means you can't punish me!

*I don't like what the Democrats are saying about health care reform so when they speak I'll scream really, really loud so no one can hear them.

*When affirmative action helps me get a job because of my 'learning disability' then that's good...but if it helps other people instead of me, then I'll sue!

Ironic that these clowns have been talking for years about self-reliance and standing on your own two feet, and criticizing people who have suffered worse treatment than they can even imagine for "playing the victim."

Posted by: ctkeith | August 6, 2009 8:21 PM

Paul,

I really think you're off the mark when you paint Simmons as the "leading Republican"in this race.

Right now the only thing that matters on the Republican side of this race is showing the ability to raise money and Foley is by far the "LEADER" in that race.Simmons inability to crack the 1 million barrier last quarter even with all Dodds troubles kinda puts him in second place at best.

Posted by: cats | August 7, 2009 10:26 AM

Dodd is done. If he wasn't before, he is now by voting for a Supreme Court justice who, for political reasons and ambitious self-interest, tried to bury the claims of these firefighters who are his constituents, and who the vast majority of the American public supported in their struggle for justice. Obviously doesn't give a shit about them and had nothing to say in their support, never once. ... He's just lost more votes and more campaign contributions.

Posted by: Two Good Hands | August 7, 2009 12:49 PM

Hey Cats, have you even read the Ricci decision that Sotomayor authored? Are you aware that it was a decision by a three judge panel? Or that the decision was issued in February 2008 - long before Obama was president much less before Sotomayor could have expected she would be a Supreme Court nominee? Or that it was upholding a decision by a well-respected and experienced distict court judge issued in 2006? Or that the vote by the Supreme Court was 5-4?

The Supremes said what they said, and Ricci won. All well and good. You agree with that decision. I disagree with it. But it's contrary to all of the facts to claim that Sotomayor's decision was politically self-serving or that the position she took in that decision is outside of the mainstream of case law on race discrimination.

You might also want to consider whether you really trust a politician who tells you that he would have voted against a Supreme Court nominee because in one case - a case that, really, does not have a huge impact on the law - she made a decision with which he disagrees. I call that political pandering.

Posted by: jim | August 10, 2009 2:54 PM

This guy Ricci's 15 mins of fame up yet??
The guy gets his job by looking for special treatment then he testified infront of congress against a woman that has come over much steeper hills and didn't sue once!!!
I hope this guy supports Simmons they deserve each other.