…continues to grow.
[Early afternoon update]
Her views on the Second Amendment. More here.
What kind of mental gymnastics must one go through to think that the First Amendment is incorporated, but the Second is not? As Doherty notes, though, it’s what one would expect from an Obama nominee.
Incorporating Free Speech gives the leftists the RIGHT to keep saying whatever they want, whenever they want, about whomever they want. True or false, loud or whispered.
Incorporating the Second Amendment gives the citizens the RIGHT to keep arms that would empower them to throw off, via arms, said leftists who’ve talked their way into power.
The two ideas cannot co-exist in the mind and the talking leftists are never going to protect the people first and themselves second.
She lied. Is that a big deal? I guess not. It’s just a job.
> What kind of mental gymnastics must one go through
> to think that the First Amendment is incorporated, but
> the Second is not?
I think Orwell called it New-Think.
Jon Kyle seemed to stumble at first, but just nailed her on the issue of the desire for different outcomes. She continues to lie (must be because she’s on camera!)
Looks like Senator Jeff Sessions was smacked down hard by one smart Latina (although Rahm Emmanuel may have had a hand in this, too)
Here’s a fun moment from this morning’s hearings. Remember that scene in Annie Hall where the Alvy and Annie are waiting in line at the movie and Alvy is going nuts listening to the pontificating blowhard going on about Marshall McLuhan and then Alvy pulls McLuhan himself out from behind the movie poster to tell the guy he’s an idiot. Not quite identical and Sotomayor could have driven the point a bit harder but Judge Sotomayor managed to pull off something like that.
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2009/07/classic_shades_of_annie_hall.php?ref=fpblg
Video here:
http://tpmtv.talkingpointsmemo.com/?id=2951999&ref=fpblg
So that makes it OK for her to sit there and lie about what she believes about “wise Latinas”?
Sotomayor has FAR more credibility than Powerline (IMHO of course).
The assertion that she is lying, today, first requires taking a convoluted and unsubstantiated interpretation of comments made long ago. I know we will not agree on that and to argue the point could be a waste of time.
However, I am okay with the “attack Sotomayor as a racist strategy” as it will undo considerable efforts made by the Republicans to build in-roads into the Hispanic community. Already Spanish language ads are running based on these attacks.
Expressed differently — no one except older white males and a few token others are going to be persuaded by the Rush Limbaugh / Powerline avenue of attack.
So keep on keeping on, say I.
I haven’t been wasting my time watching the hearings, but I seriously doubt that any of the Senators have said that she’s a racist. They have shown her to be a liar, though. She’s either lying now, or she was lying then. I know where I’d put my money.
It is a waste of time (but here I am.)
I am amazed how she is trying to pretend to be 180 degrees from what she has a record of being. It is such blatant lying.
She’s throwing herself under the bus.
I see it as a standard interrogation warning sign. For some reason, she chose to change her story on this particular issue. Could be a bunch of reasons for doing so, but certainly warrants further questioning to see what she currently believes and why she changed her mind.
Kelly Starks
You said,”I think Orwell called it New-Think.”
You are recalling the concept of “doublethink” from Orwell’s novel, “1984.” According to wikipedia…
According to the novel, doublethink is:
“ The power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one’s mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them….To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just so long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies — all this is indispensably necessary. Even in using the word doublethink it is necessary to exercise doublethink. For by using the word one admits that one is tampering with reality; by a fresh act of doublethink one erases this knowledge; and so on indefinitely, with the lie always one leap ahead of the truth.[1]
Bill White
You said, “The assertion that [Sotomayor] is lying today, first requires taking a convoluted and unsubstantiated interpretation of comments made long ago. I know we will not agree on that and to argue the point could be a waste of time.”
What a shame if agreement is not possible, particularly after reading this transcript of Sotomayor’s testimony, where she is questioned by Senator Kyl about her Seton Hall speech.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2009/07/sotomayor-hearings-complete-transcript-4.html
I think it’s pretty obvious the level of retraction Sotomayor is using regarding her controversial speeches has gone beyond mere spin to the point of deception.
> Kelly Starks
> You said,”I think Orwell called it New-Think.”
> You are recalling the concept of “doublethink” from Orwell’s novel, “1984.” According to wikipedia…
> According to the novel, doublethink is:
> “ The power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one’s mind simultaneously,
> and accepting both of them….To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, ===
Yup thats it, thank you.
Certainly applicable.