Liberal Jonathan Turley: Sotomayor Lacks Intellectual Depth

NewsBusters ^ | May 27, 2009 | P.J. Gladnick

[PJ-Comix]

Until yesterday, liberal law professor Jonathan Turley was generally hailed by the leftwing blogosphere for speaking "truth to power." However, now that same group is attacking Turley for speaking truth to MSNBC. Chris Matthews probably thought Turley would support Sonia Sotomayor's nomination right after it was announced. If so, he was in for a big surprise as you can see in this video clip. The same video also shows Turley making the same critique with David Shuster...and taking a swipe at justice Thurgood Marshall as well. First Turley blindsides Matthews with his completely unexpected criticism of Sotomayor:

[PJ-Comix]

Jonathan Turley needs to prepare himself for his shunning as punishment for his "heresy."

[PJ-Comix]

PING!

[Always Right]

That is impossible. All liberals have superior intellect. This is blaspemy. Someone take this guy’s liberal card away. Absolute hate speech!

[hoosiermama]

IS there a transcript anywhere for those of us with dial up.

[I Buried My Guns]

"...Liberal Jonathan Turley: Sotomayor Lacks Intellectual Depth...

But she hates white people, so it ultimately evens out. You folks need to chill out and get on the Sotomayor bandwagon. After all, she has been oppressed for over 400 years.

[silverleaf]

When it comes to smarts and qualifications to have gotten where she is, and how- Sonya is all hat, no cattle.
But she is belligerent and full of herself.

She and fellow Ivy League law school graduate Michelle will get along famously. No wonder o picked her.

[freedomwarrior998]

Turley is right. We dodged a bullet with this nominee. She isn't any worse than Souter, and unlike some of the other names, she has the reputation is being a bully and intellectual lightweight.

The worst possible scenario for us is a far-left ideologue who could drag Kennedy along with her/him. Sotomayor doesn't fit that bill.

Thankfully, the Kenyan screwed up with this nomination, now we have some people here that want to screw up things for us.

Apparently some here think that having a Kagan, Karlan or Sullivan would somehow be better for us.

[y6162]

“heresy.”

In the immortal words of Avril Lavigne,

“She’s so stupid What hell were you thinking?

“Hey! Hey! You! You! I don’t like your justice”

Now if he were a Republican criticizing a conservative nminee, he would be “maturing”.

[truthkeeper]

I always enjoyed watching and listening to Turley during the impeachment days of yore. A voice of reason.

[ETL]

"Sotomayor Lacks Intellectual Depth"

Naaaah.....

Judge Sonia Sotomayor: "Court is Where Policy is Made"

Link to YouTube video of her making the comment:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OfC99LrrM2Q

[al baby]

Dial up, How quaint

[silverleaf]

Don’t exhale yet.

The Kenyan, in his first term, will probably be picking at least 2 more Justices to replace the 89 yr old Stevens, and Ruth Ginsburg, who is being treated for pancreatic (metastatic colon?) cancer.

Sotomayor is the token “moderate”- with Stevens and Ginsburg he can go full balls to the wall liberal (sarc)

[PJ-Comix]

Why don’t you CLICK to the original article? Transcript is there.

[PhiKapMom]

I second your comments on Turley. The man is almost always a voice of reason and was surpised to see ‘liberal’ before his name. If he is liberal, then he is my favorite liberal because on TV or in his articles he goes by the Constitution and the Law. I have always enjoyed listening to his approach on how he sees different events and the law.

[penelopesire]

Transcript at the link.

[US Navy Vet]

“Intellectual Depth” it’s a lawyer way of calling her STUPID!

[Old Retired Army Guy]

I love it when the left is eating their own.

[P-Marlowe]

This brings up the question as to whether the Left is going to treat Sotomayor as their Harriet Miers. Miers was not attacked from the left for being too conservative; she was pulled because she had no support from the right because she, like Sotomayor, was simply not of the intellectual caliber of a true Supreme Court justice and was, like Sotomayor, an intellectual lightweight.

The fact of the matter is that she was chosen solely because she was a woman and she was "Hispanic" (Whatever the hell that means). Those were the qualifications that Obama wanted in a Supreme Court justice. And most likely she will be confirmed, with the help of a number of RINOs.

[ClearCase_guy]

I think that's true. And it puts us in a awkward position -- if we fight Sotomayor really hard, it won't be terribly difficult for the media to paint Obama's opponents as "totally unreasonbable". Then, win or lose, a follow-up nominee could be William Ayers (or equivalent), and if we protest a second time, the media will give a wink and a yawn and say "There they go again."

I don't like Sotomayor, but I think she may be harder to oppose than some think.

[junta]

The left has a large obnoxious faction that would naturally come out against the Kagan wing, and now we see it.