Robert Gibbs

Right Wing Round-Up

Right Wing Round-Up

  • Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand tells The Daily Beast she has secured the commitment of Senate Armed Services Committee to hold hearings on “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” this fall.
  • Box Turtle Bulletin: An estimated 10,000 people turned out to celebrate Charlotte Pride yesterday, while an anti-gay protest organized by local evangelist Michael Brown and TheCall’s Lou Engle attracted about 500 participants. While the Charlotte Observer reports that the number of protesters this year was a significant over previous years, it appears to have fallen short of the thousand that the organizers had hoped for ... Charlotte police report no problems and no arrests.
  • Steve Benen notes that the people at Fox News apparently do not take criticism or mockery particularly well.
  • Think Progress: Sen. Hutchison attacks Gov. Perry for turning down stimulus funds that she voted against.
  • I feel like I say this just about every day, but Glenn Beck gets more ridiculous by the day.
  • Finally, in today's Birther news: Joe.My.God points out that the woman who hijacked Rep. Mike Castle's town hall meeting is known around Delaware as "Crazy Eileen" and posts audio in which she claims to have talked to an angel who came down in human form; even Ann Coulter says that the Birthers are crazy; Greg Sargent reports that Rep. Neil Abercrombie of Hawaii is going to put GOP members on the record by introducing a resolution on the House floor commemorating the 50th anniversary of Hawaii’s statehood which describes the state as Barack Obama’s birthplace; and White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs concisely explained why this issue won't go away: "Because for $15, you can get an Internet address and say whatever you want."

Maybe the JCN Should Hire Some Researchers

Yesterday, the Judicial Confirmation Network's Wendy Long demanded that the White House release the full video of Sonia Sotomayor's remarks in which she stated that the "court of appeals is where policy is made":

"An important controversy and debate continues to brew over Judge Sotomayor's comments at Duke University in which she said that appellate courts "make policy," and in her published words tucked away in law review articles ... [W]e are calling on White House Press Secretary Gibbs to post the Duke University video on The White House web site and let the American people judge her comments.

I ignored this at the time because it was an blatant attempt to generate controversy where none exists, with JCN insinuating that the White House was somehow trying to hide the complete video from the public.

Of course, it's not and Media Matters posted a link to it several days ago (you can get the webcast here) and a more complete transcript of her remarks, which makes it clear that Sotomayor was making a distinct and utterly non-controversial point about the difference between the roles of district and circuit courts:

SOTOMAYOR: The saw is that if you're going into academia, you're going to teach, or as Judge Lucero just said, public interest law, all of the legal defense funds out there, they're looking for people with court of appeals experience, because it is -- court of appeals is where policy is made. And I know -- and I know this is on tape and I should never say that because we don't make law, I know. OK, I know. I'm not promoting it, and I'm not advocating it, I'm -- you know. OK. Having said that, the court of appeals is where, before the Supreme Court makes the final decision, the law is percolating -- its interpretation, its application. And Judge Lucero is right. I often explain to people, when you're on the district court, you're looking to do justice in the individual case. So you are looking much more to the facts of the case than you are to the application of the law because the application of the law is non-precedential, so the facts control. On the court of appeals, you are looking to how the law is developing, so that it will then be applied to a broad class of cases. And so you're always thinking about the ramifications of this ruling on the next step in the development of the law. You can make a choice and say, "I don't care about the next step," and sometimes we do. Or sometimes we say, "We'll worry about that when we get to it" -- look at what the Supreme Court just did. But the point is that that's the differences -- the practical differences in the two experiences are the district court is controlled chaos and not so controlled most of the time.

If JCN had bothered to do any basic research, they would have known about this webcast days before they issued their demand to the White House ... and White House spokesman Robert Gibbs would have been saved from this inane exchange with a reporter during yesterday's press briefing:

Q Given what you said about keeping Judge Sotomayor's previous remarks in context ... For example, the YouTube video of her remarks at Duke and the speech at Berkeley -- has the White House considered releasing those full YouTube videos to urge people to watch them in context, for example, on whitehouse.gov, or transcripts as Judicial Confirmation Network is challenging you to do?

MR. GIBBS: Go to Google, type in a couple of key words, hit enter, it pops up.

Q We could also get, let's say, this briefing on video by doing that, but you guys post it on the White House YouTube --

MR. GIBBS: But I think the implication in your question, and I think the implication in the interest group making this, is that somehow these are some top-secret documents that are contained in some undisclosed location in or around the grounds of the White House. If you go to newyorktimes.com, and you're a moderately good Googler like my five-and-three-quarter-year-old son, I have a sense that you and the interest group can find exactly what it is that they're desirous to see.

Q And is that what you're encouraging the American people to go look at it in context --

MR. GIBBS: Sure. Once the vault gets dug up from the front yard -- this I think is symptomatic of exactly the type of game that you have already seen and that you're likely to see. If somebody can find it on YouTube, if somebody -- I don't doubt that -- they produced a commercial, if I'm not unfamiliar with this, that has some of this stuff in there.

Did we somehow give them the secret document in order for them to make the Internet commercial, so that they can then put out a press release asking us to release the secret document that they used to make the commercial" This is the sort of semantical dance that professional interest groups play that pop up like dandelions after a spring rainstorm when there's a confirmation upcoming. Again, I think somebody with a dial-up Internet account can find said secret documents.

Gibbs is right - both of Sotomayor's remarks at Duke and her speech at Berkley are readily available to anyone willing to spend a few minutes searching for them. 

Perhaps people like Long and organizations like the Judicial Confirmation Network should spend a bit more time doing some basic research about Sotomayor instead of filling the airwaves and newspapers with their knee-jerk opposition.

Sotomayor: Right Wing News

Over the last few days, we posted two new Right Wing Watch In Focus pieces analyzing the Right's response to the nomination of Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court.

A Justice For All: Themes from the Right -- Nomination Day

Right-wing political and legal groups and pundits responded to President Barack Obama’s nomination of federal appeals court Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the U.S. Supreme Court by cranking up their well-funded attack machine, following their pre-fab attack script (they have been attacking her for months as a potential nominee), launching ads against her confirmation, and threatening to use the nomination as a political bludgeon against Democrats from more conservative states.

A Justice For All: Themes from the Right -- Day 2

The second day of right-wing attacks on Supreme Court nominee Judge Sonia Sotomayor continued many of the themes of the first day’s attacks, mostly distortions of her judicial record and public remarks and distortions of President Obama’s desire for judges who exhibit empathy. National Review published a wave of anti-Sotomayor commentary on its website. (Some of this information may have been distributed on Day 1 but didn’t make our initial analysis.)

We are also going to start regularly posting some of the raw material we use in these RWWIF analysis pieces on the blog, as well.  Here is the news from yesterday:

Committee for Justice

Using Sotomayor to Define Obama

The Democrats have the numbers to make a Sotomayor confirmation all but inevitable, but Ed Morrissey picks up on another opportunity that her nomination affords the GOP.

“They have an opportunity to use the hearings to show Sotomayor as a routine appellate jurist with a spotty record who got elevated to this position as an act of political hackery by a President who couldn’t care less about his responsibilities to find the best and brightest for the job.”

Like many of Obama’s other appointments, it demonstrates a lack of executive talent and intellectual curiosity on his part. This appointment makes an argument for more Republicans in the Senate after the midterms, if for no other reason than to force Obama to start putting a little effort in making his nominations."

Bloomberg - Sotomayor Took Cautious Approach in Cases on Race, Gun Rights

Her detractors say Sotomayor, 54, was trying to divert attention from the cases, hoping to prevent Supreme Court review and possibly enhance her resume for a promotion.

“It makes me wonder whether she’s just cautions by nature or whether she was already thinking about being appointed to a higher court,” said Curt Levey, executive director of the Committee for Justice in Washington and a critic of the Sotomayor nomination. He said Sotomayor might have been “covering her tracks” by limiting the scope and prominence of the opinions.

The Washington Post - Battle over Obama’s nominee begins

Curt Levey, executive director of the conservative legal group Committee for Justice, said her judicial record would probably not be enough to stop Sotomayor's confirmation, given the Democratic dominance in the Senate, but her speeches are another matter.

"The best predictor of whether a controversial nominee can be stopped is whether the case against her is based on more than just her legal analysis," he said.

Although Levey acknowledged that his description of Sotomayor as a "wild-eyed judicial activist" would be hard to extract from her record on the bench, he said "her words are the best indication" of how she would see her role as a justice.

The New York Times - Obama Hails Judge as ‘Inspiring’

Other conservatives said they would focus on her ruling in a New Haven affirmative action case or on how she might rule on same-sex marriage.

“Abortion is in some sense a stale issue that has been fought over many times, but gay marriage is very much up for grabs,” said Curt Levey, executive director of the Committee for Justice, a legal group. “Gay marriage will be bigger than abortion.”

Judicial Confirmation Network

Wendy Long Calls on Obama Administration to Provide Transparency via YouTube

White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs' comments yesterday that "We can all move past YouTube snippets and half sentences and actually look at the honest-to-God record" raise an important question for Mr. Gibbs. The Duke University comments by Judge Sotomayor are quite clear and unequivocal. Is Mr. Gibbs suggesting that Judge Sotomayor was lying in the tape or that she really didn't mean it?

President Obama promised the American people a transparent presidency. In that spirit, we are calling on White House Press Secretary Gibbs to post the Duke University video on The White House web site and let the American people judge her comments.

JCN has also launched a website campaigning against Sotomayor, it can be found here.

The Durango Herald - Sonia Sotomayor, Nominee has intriguing history, solid qualifications

Recognizing that personal history is at least a factor - if not a significant one - in judicial decision-making is an important step, and one that Sotomayor has taken.

She has already been criticized for it. Wendy Long, a spokeswoman for the conservative Judicial Confirmation Network, said Sotomayor's background will trump fairness. "Judge Sotomayor will allow her feelings and personal politics to stand in the way of basic fairness," Long said.

Coalition for a Fair Judiciary

Human Events.com - Republicans Withhold Full Judgment on Sotomayor

Conservative grassroots groups began to weigh in on the Sotomayor nomination immediately yesterday, among them the Coalition for a Fair Judiciary, a group of over 350 organizations working together during the confirmation process in support of most of President George W. Bush’s nominees, Harriet Myers being the exception.

“Although Justice dons a blindfold when weighing the scales of justice, Sotomayor admits that she lifts that blindfold so as to peek at her own complexion and the skin color of the parties before her,” said Kay Daly, President of the Coalition for a Fair Judiciary.

“That might explain why she held it was constitutional for white firefighters to be denied promotion based on their skin color. Sotomayor's own words should be her nomination's undoing.”

Gary Bauer

OneNewsNow - Sotomayor-discriminatory and unqualified?

Gary Bauer is chairman of American Values. He says while the American people should celebrate Sotomayor's story of overcoming poverty after growing up in New York City's South Bronx, it is not a reason to select her as a justice for the nation's highest court.

"Unfortunately, when you do look at the reasons for putting somebody on the Supreme Court, their judicial philosophy -- whether they respect the rule of law, whether they'll be impartial or not -- she fails on those criteria, so I'm disturbed by the selection," he notes.

“She is somebody who believes in reverse discrimination,” he contends. “We have evidence that she thinks it's okay to discriminate against white Americans because she's inclined toward believing in quotas.”

Pat Robertson

Newsmax - Pat Robertson: Sotomayor Nomination an ‘Outrage’

Robertson cited Sotomayor’s views on judicial activism as he criticized her nomination during an interview with Fox News’ Sean Hannity Tuesday.

“I think Obama has reached out to one of the most left-wing judges that there is in the United States,” Robertson said. “I think it's an outrage.”

Richard Land

Christian Post - Justice Sotomayor? – More for Some, Less for Others?

“Lady Justice is blindfolded for a reason: she’s supposed to be impartial, not empathic. Empathy belongs in the legislature and the executive branch, and not in the judicial branch. Sotomayor is a living, breathing example of making the law subjective and relative, rather than objective and impartial.”

Family Research Council

Hill Blog Question of the Day: Will Sotomayor face serious opposition?

I hear all over the place that Ms. Sotomayor has a “compelling story” that makes her more in tune with her feelings. With all due respect to the popular daytime television queen, a judge needs to be more like John Roberts and not Oprah Winfrey.

That is why this process can not be rushed and why the role of the Senate Judiciary Committee is so important in properly vetting any nominee to ensure that the nominee has the requisite competence, temperament, character, knowledge of the law, and experience to make a good jurist.

LA Times - GOP looks for alternate route to block Sotomayor’s path

Conservative critics are already spotlighting a ruling by the U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals in New York, including Sotomayor, that found that the 2nd Amendment's protection of citizens' gun rights did not apply to state or local regulations.

"These senators will jeopardize their seats if they vote to support an anti-gun radical for the Supreme Court," said Ken Blackwell, a senior fellow with the conservative Family Research Council.

USA Today - Supreme Court pick Sotomayor faces nomination politics

For now, though, it shows Obama has united liberals behind his pick and left conservatives scouring her record for ammunition.

"How aggressive the effort is depends on whether more comes to light," said Tony Perkins of the conservative Family Research Council. "This is still kind of in the discovery process."

Many of Sotomayor's potential opponents, ranging from groups opposing abortion rights to those backing gun rights, have not committed to an aggressive campaign against her.

Every President But Bush Is a Godless Heathen

The National Day of Prayer was established back in 1952 and it wasn't until 1988 that President Reagan decreed that it would be held on the first Thursday of May.

Well, today is the first Thursday of May and, as I noted the other day, President Obama will be issuing the proclamation but won't be holding an official White House event.  That is a change from the last administration, when George W. Bush hosted White House observations annually.

The official Bush events were themselves an anomoly, because no president had ever done anything like that.  But apparently the fact that Bush alone among presidents did it means that it is now a tradition for which Obama can be slammed for desecrating by the likes of the Family Research Council:

A presidential spokesman did make it clear that there would be no NDP event at the White House. That, of course, is a break with the tradition of the Bush administration, which hosted an annual NDP event at the White House.

Should we be surprised? Concerned? No and yes. While there is a long history of Presidents praying and calling the nation to prayer (dating all the way back to George Washington), a de-emphasis on prayer in this administration should not come as a surprise. What can we expect of an administration whose policies cheapen human life, increase dependence upon government and threaten religious freedoms?

And Vision America:

The theme for this year is "Prayer... America's Hope" and is based on the verse from Psalm 33:22 which states: "May your unfailing love rest upon us, O Lord, even as we put our hope in you." Unfortunately for our nation, our current President apparently doesn’t agree. In his press conference on April 6 in Turkey, President Barack Obama stated, "One of the great strengths of the United States is... we have a very large Christian population -- we do not consider ourselves a Christian nation or a Jewish nation or a Muslim nation. We consider ourselves a nation of citizens who are bound by ideals and a set of values."

So perhaps it’s not surprising that President Obama has now cancelled the annual public observance of the National Day of Prayer! For the last eight years, prominent evangelical and other spiritual leaders were invited to attend an event in the East Room of the White House. But this year, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs announced the Obama administration plans to recognize the National Day of Prayer on Thursday with a paper proclamation, rather than a public event at the White House.

Not to be outdone is Wendy Wright of Concerned Women for America, who sees the decision as proof that Obama has no faith and hates everything for which America stands:

"For those of us who have our doubts about Obama's faith, no, we did not expect him to have the service," said Wendy Wright, president of Concerned Women for America. "But as president, he should put his own lack of faith aside and live up to the office."

Referencing a remark the president made at a recent press conference in Turkey that Americans "do not consider ourselves a Christian nation," she added: "That was projecting his own beliefs, but not reflecting what the majority of Americans feel. It's almost like Obama is trying to remake America into his own image. This is not a rejection of Shirley Dobson; it's a rejection of the concept that America is a spiritual nation and its foundation is Judeo-Christian."

Allow me to just point out once again that there have been 12 presidents obligated to proclaim a National Day of Prayer and exactly one of them, George W. Bush, held annual observances at the White House ... something even the sainted Ronald Reagan did not do.

Yet somehow this return to tradition by Obama is seen by the Right as a sacrilege and proof of his own "lack of faith."

Syndicate content

Robert Gibbs Posts Archive

Kyle Mantyla, Tuesday 08/17/2010, 5:42pm
PFAW Memo: Robert Gibbs, the “Professional Left”, and the Opportunity We Can’t Miss. Steve Benen: Dropping an already-thin pretense. Good As You: 'Pro-family' radio host Penna Dexter blames 15-year-old for his own shooting death. David Weigel: A Mosque You Can't Believe In. Sam Stein: Conservative Muslim-Americans' Letter To GOP Leaders: Don't Bring Mosque Debate Into Elections. Timothy Kincaid @ Box Turtle Bulletin: Mexican Catholic Archdiocese completely jumps the shark. Andy Birkey @ Minnesota Independent: NOM’s... MORE >
Kyle Mantyla, Monday 07/27/2009, 5:53pm
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand tells The Daily Beast she has secured the commitment of Senate Armed Services Committee to hold hearings on “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” this fall.Box Turtle Bulletin: An estimated 10,000 people turned out to celebrate Charlotte Pride yesterday, while an anti-gay protest organized by local evangelist Michael Brown and TheCall’s Lou Engle attracted about 500 participants. While the Charlotte Observer reports that the number of protesters this year was a significant over previous years, it appears to have fallen short of the thousand that the... MORE >
Kyle Mantyla, Friday 05/29/2009, 5:57pm
Yesterday, the Judicial Confirmation Network's Wendy Long demanded that the White House release the full video of Sonia Sotomayor's remarks in which she stated that the "court of appeals is where policy is made":"An important controversy and debate continues to brew over Judge Sotomayor's comments at Duke University in which she said that appellate courts "make policy," and in her published words tucked away in law review articles ... [W]e are calling on White House Press Secretary Gibbs to post the Duke University video on The White House web site and let the... MORE >
Kyle Mantyla, Friday 05/29/2009, 1:17pm
Over the last few days, we posted two new Right Wing Watch In Focus pieces analyzing the Right's response to the nomination of Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court.A Justice For All: Themes from the Right -- Nomination DayRight-wing political and legal groups and pundits responded to President Barack Obama’s nomination of federal appeals court Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the U.S. Supreme Court by cranking up their well-funded attack machine, following their pre-fab attack script (they have been attacking her for months as a potential nominee), launching ads against her confirmation, and... MORE >
Kyle Mantyla, Thursday 05/07/2009, 11:50am
The National Day of Prayer was established back in 1952 and it wasn't until 1988 that President Reagan decreed that it would be held on the first Thursday of May.Well, today is the first Thursday of May and, as I noted the other day, President Obama will be issuing the proclamation but won't be holding an official White House event.  That is a change from the last administration, when George W. Bush hosted White House observations annually.The official Bush events were themselves an anomoly, because no president had ever done anything like that.  But apparently the fact that... MORE >