Friday, May 24, 2013
Friday, May 24, 2013

The GOP was right to be afraid of Sonia Sotomayor

News blogs, sports blogs, entertainment blogs, and more from Philly.com, The Philadelphia Inquirer and the Philadelphia Daily News.

115 comments

The GOP was right to be afraid of Sonia Sotomayor

POSTED: Thursday, September 17, 2009, 9:36 PM

Politically, you had to wonder why the GOP was so up in arms about Sonia Sotomayor -- it was terrible politics, after all, to alienate Latino voters as their power as a voting group continues to grow. Maybe it's because Sotomayor is proving to be the Republicans' worst nightmare: A Latina who's wise enough not to buckle to the clout of American corporations:

WASHINGTON -- In her maiden Supreme Court appearance last week, Justice Sonia Sotomayor made a provocative comment that probed the foundations of corporate law.

During arguments in a campaign-finance case, the court's majority conservatives seemed persuaded that corporations have broad First Amendment rights and that recent precedents upholding limits on corporate political spending should be overruled.

But Justice Sotomayor suggested the majority might have it all wrong -- and that instead the court should reconsider the 19th century rulings that first afforded corporations the same rights flesh-and-blood people have.

This is the true battle for the heart and soul of the Supreme Court -- and of America. Not all the -- pardon my initials -- BS that wastes everyone's time during these increasingly pointless confirmation hearings. The real story of justice in America since the 2004 election is this, that George W. Bush appointed two of the most corporatist flunkies ever to the bench in John Roberts and Samuel Alito and now we have Sotomayor seeking to tip those scales back toward the people.

It's probably not enough. Sometime in the coming months, the Roberts-Alito court is going to vote 5-4 to allow a flood of corporate money into American politics, which will probably result in legislation that will make the billionaire bailout of Wall Street seem as tame as voting to rename a post office. You want to know the real problem with Justice Sotomayor...it's that we don't have four more like her.

Oh, and the best "news" coverage of the corporate takeover of America these days. It's on the Colbert Report (below). What, you thought you were going to see it in Time magazine?


The Colbert ReportMon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c
Jeffrey Toobin
colbertnation.com
Colbert Report Full EpisodesPolitical HumorHealth Care Protests
Will Bunch @ 9:36 PM  Permalink | 115 comments
115 comments
Comments  (115)
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 12:29 PM, 09/18/2009
    RG: Although both are improbable, would you not agree that it is more likely that Bush had inside knowledge of 9/11 than that Obama is the anti-christ?
    mxlplk
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 12:32 PM, 09/18/2009
    my goodness, are you really trying to say either is a reasonable opinion? And to take it a step further, do you really think people were serious in the A/C answer? How ridiculous of a poll is it, when you are asking if the POTUS is the A/C? Of course those who oppose his policy are going to answer yes to get their point across. Doesn't mean they actually believe it.
    RG
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 12:36 PM, 09/18/2009
    "Have you ever befriended a lump of coal?" No, but I sure like electricity. Corporations lobbying to gain favor isnt a new phenomenon, but the fed govs power to grant it to them is growing or is being abused more often. I'll use the Wall st bailouts as exhibit a, the surviving banks are consolidating even more, and have a rotating alumi memmber at the Fed or Treas at nearly all times.
    RG
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 12:39 PM, 09/18/2009
    Unfortunately, RG, there are those who belive that Obama is the anti-christ. I know some of them and you may, as well. Does that bother you? It should.
    mxlplk
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 12:40 PM, 09/18/2009
    Instead of restricting contributions why don't we just restrict what a campaign can spend? Cap a congressional campaign at $1.5M, a Senate campaign at $20M and $200M for a Presidential campaign and require full disclosure of where every dollar came from to finance a campaign. If a candidate wants to take all their money from one source fine but it will be known. Wouldn't it be easier to decide on a candidate if you knew 75% of their money came from ABC Corp? Regardless of what the candidate promised all you would have to know is what was best for ABC Corp to see if the promise held water.
    bird11
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 12:40 PM, 09/18/2009
    "Does that bother you? It should." No, people are entitled to their opinion, no matter how off the wall. But thanks for telling me what mine should be.
    RG
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 12:50 PM, 09/18/2009
    feltonville 07:00 AM, 09/18/2009 - YOU are the victim of thought police - I guarantee everyone that you haven't watched one of Michael Moore's movies...with an open mind...Moore goes after the Status Quo and they in turn smear him throughout their daily talking point media channels. Why wouldn't they? They don't want US watching his "subversive" movies about job loss and health care. We might get a different point of view than theirs. If you threaten their bottom line, power and influence in any real way the gates of hell will ring loud and clear. To the extent Moore is their target - is what lead me to watch his movies in the first place. Where there is smoke there is fire. Don't just repeat what you hear some paid talking head spew on corporate networks. But sit down and watch the movies with an open mind and judge for yourself. Don't be so loyal to mega millionaires who don't give a rats a** about you. Michael Moore is just some schlub from Detroit who watched his family and neighbors jobs get shipped overseas. He got mad and did something about it - the powers that be don't like that sort of behavior. All they want is for you to vote once every four years and then shut up and go away. They don't care about anybody who's net worth is less than a million dollars.
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 1:10 PM, 09/18/2009
    "You're really scaring me RG with your willingness to surrender or subordiante your franchise to corporate money." And how are you defining corporation? Do you count NPOs, unions, media conglomerates, newspapers, etc? Past that what prevents a rich individual from holding sway over legislators?
    RG
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 1:20 PM, 09/18/2009
    @JourneyHome - how much did they charge you to see the movie against capitalim?? "They don't care about anybody who's net worth is less than a million dollars.".....so I guess they care about Michael Moore.
    bird11
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 1:37 PM, 09/18/2009
    "The year that Moore claimed in "Stupid White Men" that he didn't own any stock, he told the IRS that a foundation totally controlled by Moore and his wife had more than $280,000 in corporate stock and nearly $100,000 in corporate bonds. Over the past five years, Moore's holdings have "included such evil pharmaceutical and medical companies as Pfizer, Merck, Genzyme, Elan PLC, Eli Lilly, Becton Dickinson and Boston Scientific," writes Schweizer, whose earlier works include "The Bushes" and "Reagan's War." "Moore's supposedly nonexistent portfolio also includes big bad energy giants like Sunoco, Noble Energy, Schlumberger, Williams Companies, Transocean Sedco Forex and Anadarko, all firms that 'deplete irreplaceable fossil fuels in the name of profit' as he put it in ‘Dude, Where's My Country?' "And in perhaps the ultimate irony, he also has owned shares in Halliburton. According to IRS filings, Moore sold Halliburton for a 15 percent profit and bought shares in Noble, Ford, General Electric (another defense contractor), AOL Time Warner (evil corporate media) and McDonald's. "Also on Moore's investment menu: defense contractors Honeywell, Boeing and Loral." Does Moore share the stock proceeds of his "foundation" with charitable causes, you might ask? Schweizer found that "for a man who by 2002 had a net worth in eight figures, he gave away a modest $36,000 through the foundation, much of it to his friends in the film business or tony cultural organizations that later provided him with venues to promote his books and film."
    bird11
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 2:06 PM, 09/18/2009
    Assuming what you say about Moore is true, I wouldn't necessarily hold it against him. He still focuses his guns on those very companies he is profiting from. Sounds to me he may just be going after them out of guilt, or at least he knows he can reach a broader audience if he's rich. I am much more comfortable with him using his politics to harm his personal financial interests than say politicians that lie us into wars only to get rich off of war profits!
    pagoda
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 2:42 PM, 09/18/2009
    pagoda - Moore is a fraud. Moore knows that his movies will have no effect other than getting the fringe left to run to the theatre and put more money into his pocket. Moore is the poor and downtroddens equivalent to a rapper from Greenwich, CT.
    bird11
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 2:46 PM, 09/18/2009
    I understand your feelings, but you greatly underestimate Moores reach. The mere fact you continue to write about him here says it all.
    pagoda
  • Comment removed.
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 2:50 PM, 09/18/2009
    The only way to get the rot out of our political system is to get the disproportionate influence of those who are disproportionately wealthy out of the system. The only way to do that is with public financing. Short of that, we will have continued corruption - although limiting spending would be a reasonably beneficial step to take. Too bad that Republicans and "conservatives" would lay down their lives to protect corporations' rights to buy political influence.
    Talking point sleuth


View comments: 1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5  | 
About this blog
Will Bunch, a senior writer at the Philadelphia Daily News, blogs about his obsessions, including national and local politics and world affairs, the media, pop music, the Philadelphia Phillies, soccer and other sports, not necessarily in that order.

PLEASE COMMENT WITH PASSION...

...but not with racial slurs, potentially libelous allegations, obscenities or other juvenile noise. Such comments will, at our discretion, be deleted in their entirety, and repeat offenders will be blocked from commenting. ALSO: Any commenter advocating killing any government official will be immediately banned.

Reach Will at bunchw@phillynews.com.

Will Bunch
Blog archives:
Past Archives:
Blog Roll