“….The end of the day, the president has chosen someone who’s accomplished a lot, is very educated, and has a long judicial record. At the end of the day, he’s asking me to do something he couldn’t do himself, and that is to look at the complete person and understand that elections matter. Quite frankly, I think, when Senator Obama voted against Alito and Roberts, he lost sight that elections really do matter. And now he’s in a different spot. I’m in a different spot. So we’ll see what happens....”
“…“I think she does have the intellectual capacity to do the job,” Graham said. “But there’s a character problem. There’s a temperament problem that they — during the time they’ve had to be a judge, that they were more of an advocate than an impartial decider of the law. And I’ve got to find out, in my own mind” about her temperament…”
The liberal daggers are out for Lindsey now that he has decided to use Barack Obama’s own personal standards for judging a SCOTUS candidate on Obama’s SCOTUS pick. Good idea. Rather interesting, actually. I’m please that Lindsey is not going after Sonia Sotomayor because of her qualifications but her temperament.
So the liberals and Obama minions are going after Lindsey, making fun and denigrating what is an excellent press conference, where he is very hard on Barack Obama.
“...Thanks for coming. Good meeting, very nice person. I was as direct as I knew how to be. A lot of the questions about case law and judicial temperament will be covered in more detail when we get more information and I’ve had time to study. This was sort of a get-to-know-you meeting.
She is a impressive person. She’s accomplished a lot in her life. And I was very direct. I said that, I’ve got to decide how to play this game, quite frankly. And I indicated to the — to her and the White House, if I used President Obama’s standard, Senator Obama’s standard, I would never vote for her.
He voted against Alito and Roberts, and he basically said – and you can look it up for yourself — that some people believe that, once the president wins the election, they should have complete authority to appoint the nominee and the only thing you look for is whether they’re intellectually capable and they’re a nice guy.
He went on to say that you have to do more. You have to look at the judge’s philosophy, ideology, and record. “And when I examined the philosophy, ideology and record of Sam Alito, I’m deeply troubled.” Well, when I look at her ideology, record, and philosophy, I’m deeply troubled, if that’s my standard.
Talented person, but there’s no way, as a conservative Republican, I would have ever picked her to be on the Supreme Court. And I think that’s what Senator Obama was trying to basically say. My base doesn’t like Alito and Roberts, and I’m thinking about running for higher office, so I’m not going to vote for him, because the people I’m trying to please here don’t like the nominee.
He used a standard that would make it impossible, I think, for a person of the opposite party to be able to confirm a nominee of someone of the other party.
There was a different day when we didn’t do it that way. Justice Ginsburg, 96-3, the general counsel executive director, I believe, of the ACLU, 96-3. Justice Scalia, pretty conservative, 98-0. What happened to those days? That’s not the Senate I’ve been part of. I would like to go back to that, but I live in a world where it may be very difficult to do that.
If I use the Ginsburg-Scalia standard, she has a chance of getting my vote. If I use the Senator Obama standard, there’s no way she will get my vote.
The hurdle that she would have to overcome if I used the Scalia-Ginsburg standard, is this temperament problem overstated, overblown, or is it fundamental to who she is? And is she more than just a liberal judge? Is she an activist advocate wearing a robe and has used the bench as a way to advocate her causes, rather than decide the law?
She said all of the things that I would like to hear. She said the things that Alito and Roberts said, that I’m bound by the law. Well, there are some cases that I’m going to look at as to – to challenge her a bit as to whether or not that withstands scrutiny.
The end of the day, the president has chosen someone who’s accomplished a lot, is very educated, and has a long judicial record. At the end of the day, he’s asking me to do something he couldn’t do himself, and that is to look at the complete person and understand that elections matter.
Quite frankly, I think, when Senator Obama voted against Alito and Roberts, he lost sight that elections really do matter. And now he’s in a different spot. I’m in a different spot. So we’ll see what happens….”
One of the more interesting aspects of this seems to be the national security experience question.
“…I didn’t ask for it. Had a great meeting. I would suggest that you ask her about this. I don’t want to put words in her mouth.
She was a very nice person. She’s well qualified, sterling character. There are some concerns about her temperament from people that have appeared before her.
But the bottom line is I think the comment you just played needs to be corrected. I don’t think most Americans agree with that. I don’t think she’s a racist. To say so is really out of bounds.
From what I can tell, she’s a delightful person. She’s accomplished a lot in her life. She should be proud of what she’s accomplished. But the statement is really, really inappropriate, and I’ll let her speak as to how she feels about that statement. But I found her to be sincere and a sterling person.
If I applied the Obama standard to her nomination, I told her directly, I couldn’t vote for her. Because we got to remember, President Obama voted against Alito and Roberts both, and his standard was that if I have a difference with the ideology, philosophy or record, that I can’t vote for you, that you can be well qualified, have a great judicial disposition and be very, very smart, but if you don’t have the empathy I think you need to judge people, I can’t vote for you. That’s what he said about Roberts.
You got to remember Ginsburg and Scalia. Ginsburg got 96 votes. Scalia got 98 votes. There used to be a time in the Senate where people didn’t use such standards….I just think — I hope a lot of Latino men and women would be offended by what she said.
You know, she could add a lot to the court. She has a terrific background. She’s a very good person. But her statement was that her experiences make her better than another group.
Alito said, “My immigrant background, the fact that some family members suffered discrimination, sure, that’s part of who I am.” He never said, “That makes me better than another group.”…..”