Reply
Blogger
L_Monty
Posts: 900
Registered: ‎12-30-2008
0 Kudos

Sotomayor's Confirmation Hearing: It Can Bust Someone's Skull

[ Edited ]
Someone told me about this, and I refused to believe it was true until I read a transcript:

HATCH: As a result of this very permissive legal standard — and it is permissive — doesn't your decision in Maloney mean that virtually any state or local weapons ban would be permissible?

SOTOMAYOR: Sir, in Maloney, we were talking about nunchuk sticks.

HATCH: I understand.

SOTOMAYOR: Those are martial arts sticks.

HATCH: Two sticks bound together by rawhide or some sort of a—

SOTOMAYOR: Exactly. And — and when the sticks are swung, which is what you do with them, if there's anybody near you, you're going to be seriously injured, because that swinging mechanism can break arms, it can bust someone's skull.

HATCH: Sure.


I don't know about you, but I don't think this is a deep concern or even a concern at all for millions of Americans. In fact, of the two Americans I can think of who'd be most distressed, both are fictional; both live in the sewers; one is an athropomorphic talking rat, and the other is a teenaged mutant ninja turtle named after the guy who carved the David.

 

Has anyone else been watching/listening? Thoughts?

Message Edited by L_Monty on 07-14-2009 03:31 PM
Distinguished Bibliophile
dulcinea3
Posts: 4,274
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

Re: Sotomayor's Confirmation Hearing: It Can Bust Someone's Skull

So let me get this straight - allowing something to be banned is a sign of being overly permissive?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Grand Dame of the Land of Oz, Duchess of Fantasia, in the Kingdom of Wordsmithonia; also, Poet Laureate of the Kingdom of Wordsmithonia
Blogger
L_Monty
Posts: 900
Registered: ‎12-30-2008
0 Kudos

Re: Sotomayor's Confirmation Hearing: It Can Bust Someone's Skull

His concern in that case is that her reasoning for supporting the ban on nunchucks is evidence of an over-permissiveness toward bans and toward the restriction of, presumably, Second Amendment rights. Basically, that she's liberal in her interpretation of the validity of banning weapons.

 

The whole thing is just theater at this point. She's getting confirmed, so it behooves conservative lawmakers to bait her into replies that make for helpful soundbites in 2010 and 2012. E.g., "President Obama and the liberal congress want to take away your right to defend yourself. (cue Sotomayor clip out of context defending restrictions on nunchucks)." You get the idea. Really, since they can't block the confirmation, the ideal tactic is to slow it down to try to milk her responses for the shrillest or most potentially frightful responses. They know, as do liberal and centrist lawmakers, that one a justice is confirmed, 90% of America will never hear about them again.

 

It's just interesting that what happened today was about nunchucks.

 

Cowabunga. 

Distinguished Bibliophile
Ryan_G
Posts: 3,281
Registered: ‎10-24-2008
0 Kudos

Re: Sotomayor's Confirmation Hearing: It Can Bust Someone's Skull

As Monty has already explained Hatch's whole reasoning behind the questioning was trying to figure out if she is going to rule on 2nd amendment issues in such a way that limits gun owners.  I'm not sure how those on his side really get from a martial arts weapon to hand guns, but there you go.

 

By the way I think she is doing fine.  She is holding her own, showing deference, and staying calm.  Something totally unexpected would have to happen for her not to get confirmed.  Most of what the Rep. are doing is show for their base.


dulcinea3 wrote:
So let me get this straight - allowing something to be banned is a sign of being overly permissive?

 

"I am half sick of shadows" The Lady of Shalott

http://wordsmithonia.blogspot.com
Distinguished Bibliophile
TiggerBear
Posts: 9,489
Registered: ‎02-12-2008
0 Kudos

Re: Sotomayor's Confirmation Hearing: It Can Bust Someone's Skull


L_Monty wrote:

His concern in that case is that her reasoning for supporting the ban on nunchucks is evidence of an over-permissiveness toward bans and toward the restriction of, presumably, Second Amendment rights. Basically, that she's liberal in her interpretation of the validity of banning weapons.

 

The whole thing is just theater at this point. She's getting confirmed, so it behooves conservative lawmakers to bait her into replies that make for helpful soundbites in 2010 and 2012. E.g., "President Obama and the liberal congress want to take away your right to defend yourself. (cue Sotomayor clip out of context defending restrictions on nunchucks)." You get the idea. Really, since they can't block the confirmation, the ideal tactic is to slow it down to try to milk her responses for the shrillest or most potentially frightful responses. They know, as do liberal and centrist lawmakers, that one a justice is confirmed, 90% of America will never hear about them again.

 

It's just interesting that what happened today was about nunchucks.

 

Cowabunga. 


Well considering the nunchuck was originally used for threshing grain, then converted to a peasents wepon. Are they going to ban farm implements wide spread?

Distinguished Bibliophile
Ryan_G
Posts: 3,281
Registered: ‎10-24-2008
0 Kudos

Re: Sotomayor's Confirmation Hearing: It Can Bust Someone's Skull

The only problem I'm having is with the coverage.  I would like to watch more than what the cable stations are showing.  Most of them only show questions done by Rep. or high profile Dems.  I would like to see more of the questioning and less of the pundits. 
"I am half sick of shadows" The Lady of Shalott

http://wordsmithonia.blogspot.com
Inspired Bibliophile
Psychee
Posts: 7,307
Registered: ‎04-17-2007

Re: Sotomayor's Confirmation Hearing: It Can Bust Someone's Skull

Ryan, C-Span has been televising it live.  Check it out here:

 

http://www.c-span.org/Supreme-Court-Sotomayor-Senate-Confirmation-Hearings.aspx 

 


Ryan_G wrote:
The only problem I'm having is with the coverage.  I would like to watch more than what the cable stations are showing.  Most of them only show questions done by Rep. or high profile Dems.  I would like to see more of the questioning and less of the pundits. 

 

 
Distinguished Bibliophile
Ryan_G
Posts: 3,281
Registered: ‎10-24-2008
0 Kudos

Re: Sotomayor's Confirmation Hearing: It Can Bust Someone's Skull

Thank you. I didn't think to look at their website.  I checked both Cspan and Cspan 2 on tv but neither carried it.  I did watch some of the committe health care debate for about an hour though.

Psychee wrote:

Ryan, C-Span has been televising it live.  Check it out here:

 

http://www.c-span.org/Supreme-Court-Sotomayor-Senate-Confirmation-Hearings.aspx 

 


Ryan_G wrote:
The only problem I'm having is with the coverage.  I would like to watch more than what the cable stations are showing.  Most of them only show questions done by Rep. or high profile Dems.  I would like to see more of the questioning and less of the pundits. 

 

 

 

"I am half sick of shadows" The Lady of Shalott

http://wordsmithonia.blogspot.com
Scribe
debbook
Posts: 1,823
Registered: ‎05-03-2008

Re: Sotomayor's Confirmation Hearing: It Can Bust Someone's Skull

Watching any confirmation hearing or any hearing with at all, especially with ALberto Gonzales or the oil men, makes me want to bust my skull. It really does seem like they must be joking for Candid Camera.
A room without books is like a body without a soul.~ Cicero...
"bookmagic418.blogspot.com
Correspondent
JennGrrl
Posts: 54
Registered: ‎04-23-2009

Re: Sotomayor's Confirmation Hearing: It Can Bust Someone's Skull

Be careful!  If we discuss this too much, someone will find out and the government will think there's a need for a study on how widespread the use of nunchuks is!  We'll be out millions in taxpayer dollars!
Distinguished Bibliophile
TiggerBear
Posts: 9,489
Registered: ‎02-12-2008
0 Kudos

Re: Sotomayor's Confirmation Hearing: It Can Bust Someone's Skull

I've been watching off and on; and all can think is how stupid, geeky, akward, lame, or prat the interviewers come across as.