Thursday, July 23, 2009

Sotomayor and the Senators

Employment attorney John Phillips, whose blog is a must-read, on the Sonia Sotomayor confirmation hearings and the confirmation process:

The Judiciary Committee members who are part of the majority party ask questions filled with adoration. They might as well ask, “Isn’t it true that you are a great American?” And the nominee can answer, “Well, that’s not for me to say, but I’ve always tried to be.” The members of the minority party ask questions about suspicions, alleged contradictions, and concerns — all within the the scripted framework of showing servile abasement over learning some new truth about the nominee.

Execupundit note: I'm not sure if politicizing of the votes on Supreme Court nominees has recently been indulged in to the same degree by the two parties.

Ruth Bader Ginsburg was confirmed by a vote of 96 to 3.

Stephen Breyer by a vote of 87 to 9.

Both were Clinton nominees. But what of the Bush nominees?

Samuel Alito: 58 to 42.

John Roberts: 78 to 22.

6 Comments:

At 7:45 PM, Anonymous Rob said...

Dissent of the popular can only be detrimental to your own existence. - Rob 2009

 
At 4:56 AM, Anonymous John Phillips said...

Michael,

Your note is noted. Thanks.

John

 
At 11:42 AM, Anonymous James said...

Michael,

I'm wondering if you are aware of the percentage of your editorial comments that are pro-Republican or anti-Democrat.

In fact, it's easy to guess what your position will be on any political issue in this context. Which is why I find your political posts considerably less interesting than your non-political ones.

I'm not sure whether this is unconscious bias or just you speaking from your own, very predictable position; at any event, it makes "Execupundit" a decidedly pro-Republican, anti-Democrat site.

No inherent problem in that, I just wondered if you were aware of it yourself.

 
At 12:07 PM, Blogger Michael Wade said...

James,

Oh, I'm decidedly conservative and/or classical liberal although I don't think I'm anti-Democrat. Fortunately, I have quite a few liberal 9and Democrat) readers who intelligently and politely disagree with my take just as I try to do with theirs. I don't think either side has a monopoly on being correct. That's one reason why I link to liberal magazines as well as conservative ones in my sidebar. I also link to bloggers who are on the left.

There are some areas, such as the appointment of Supreme Court justices, where I believe matters have gotten way too ideological. Conservatives should have voted to confirm Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Liberals should have voted to confirm Samuel Alito. Barring something extreme, a president should be able to make the appointment. At this point, the left seems to be applying an ideological litmus test to selections but if conservatives go that route they'll deserve to be criticized and I'll be glad to do it.

I appreciate your note. Any blog that includes "life" as part of its scope may ultimately reflect the bias of the writer. Similar bias can be seen in a number of blogs, many of which I disagree with and all of which I enjoy. I'll try not to go too crazy on you!

 
At 12:59 PM, Anonymous James said...

Thanks for your response, Michael. I do enjoy your blog and find many of the issues you tackle interesting and thought-provoking, particularly in the area of managing people.

 
At 1:13 PM, Blogger Michael Wade said...

James,

It is an honor having you as a reader.

Best wishes.

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home