The Raw Politics of the First Latina Supreme Court Nominee

It’s a shame.
Are white males the only people who can be criticized on their merits, and not representative of a larger group?
Obama went against Alito and Roberts just because he wanted to. Nobody started up the meme that Obama was racist against white people. Obama and Reid have both been critical- without specifics- of Justice Thomas. Racist?
The WH releasing a slide show of Sotomayer’s baby pictures show they want to go BIG on biography.
Nobody should hold any Senator to a higher standard than Obama held himself in his prior SCOTUS actions.

The right wing is all too aware of their situation which is why they are trying to preempt any talk of racism being cast their way by calling the nominee racist.
While I realize that may not be a winning tactic, it seems to be the one in vogue.

If we started eliminating non-qualified white males in grand-fathered positions and the choices for fishing buddies in exchange for employment, we would reveal something very strange: there are dumb whites and dumb minorities and the best man for the job would no longer be an issue.
Next time one opens their mouth to talk about qualifications and reverse discrimination, they better consider the millennium of displacement of minorities and how they have managed despite those irrefutable holocaust crimes against humanity to arrive where they are today.
Unless you are willing and able to repeat the reverse of these atrocities as they were then and are today, you need to thank god they did not decide to use the gun power for the self proclaimed superiority like you did.
Put your scavenging minds to some real humanitarian use and you will not have to envision any racial nightmares.

@MayBee: 1) Anyone who uses the word “meme” is a tool, and 2) Obama wasn’t a senator when Justice Thomas was confirmed. Are you for real?

“If a white person said what she said they would have some explaining to do.”
The aggrieved white man….you guys tried this 1994 remix with Joe the Imposter six months ago and it failed miserably.

ALL you REPUBS crying and moaning over this
This is how our government works its written in everything you use to site against her: THE CONSTITUTION. The president gets to nominate whom he sees fit and then congress goes through the process of examining and nominating her to the Supreme Court.
Obama is the democratically elected president winning a majority of this nation’s votes, therefore Sotomayor’s nomination is within the grounds of the constitution.
What you dont like the constitution? Then LEAVE!

The Supreme Court should reflect America’s changing diversity!!
Why is that? We should just put people on the Court no matter how unqualified they are simply for the sake of diversity?
Why are there not more blind pilots?
Why are white males under-represented in the NBA? It doesn’t reflect America at all!

“Why is that? We should just put people on the Court no matter how unqualified they are simply for the sake of diversity?”
Clarence Thomas had a single year on the Appeals Court and had his ABA ratings split between qualified and not qualified.
Why was he appointed to the bench?
Was his skin color a factor?

“I was not aware the NBA was part of our system of government.”
What does that have to do with anything? Diversity is diversity.
Ever heard the Rooney Rule, you twit?

“Sotomayor has 14 years on the bench including 11 on the Appeals Court.”
Yes she does. She thinks that the Appeals Court is where policy is made- not in the legislature- and that she is superior to white men.
Her own words.

“Ever heard the Rooney Rule, you twit?”
Sure, as part of the NFL.

The Ashley Todd hoax spreader comes out from under his rock to utter the she;s a racist meme!
Shocking!

“Why are white males under-represented in the NBA? It doesn’t reflect America at all!”
Rather than the NBA why isn’t the Supreme Court today more analogous to major league baseball where equally qualified minority players had to work their way in.

“She didn’t state she was better. She clearly stated that all latino women were better than all white males.”
In her speech, Judge Sotomayor questioned the famous notion — often invoked by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and her retired Supreme Court colleague, Sandra Day O’Connor — that a wise old man and a wise old woman would reach the same conclusion when deciding cases.
“I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life,” said Judge Sotomayor,
The “racism” is as plain as the backwards B on your face.

How sad to see the fabrication of quotes and the grasping at straws being used in an attempt to smear this very accomplished woman.
And the same people day in and day out with the same personal agenda to smear the President and all that he does.
Anyone who sees what you’re doing knows exactly what you’re doing.

“I think that the only reason Clarence Thomas is on the Court is because he is black. I don’t believe he could have won had he been white. And the reason is, I think it was a cynical ploy by President Bush.” – Joe Biden”
Good, right?
Clarence Thomas had a little more than 1 year on the bench, had never argued in front of the SC (in lieu of bench experience) and has ratings between qualified and not qualified by the ABA.
Now compare that with Sotomayor who has 14 years on the Fed bench including 11 at the Appellate level. We’ll have to wait to see her ABA ratings.
Biden would appear to be quite correct.

Now Nina Totenberg can investigate Judge Sonia Sotomayor’s sex life, much like she did Justice Clarence Thomas. The AP says she hosts parties at her home and serves up alcohol to her liberal ACORN-like friends.

Concerned in Ohio,
Sotomayor is more qualified than any SC justice currently on the bench at the time of their appointment. Had she not been hispanic, she`d already be in the Supreme court by now.
Her qualification is first before her race. We are all talking about her race because she is the first.

“If confirmed for the Supreme Court, Judge Sotomayor would bring more federal judicial experience to the Supreme Court than any justice in 100 years, and more overall judicial experience than anyone confirmed for the Court in the past 70 years. …”
Quoted because it is accurate. Prove otherwise.

“It’s like some email auto-responder they got. No matter what it is, if you criticize, disagree with, or oppose, any member of their specially allocated identity groups, you are auto-racist.”
Concerned in OH,
You continued to spread the ugly Ashley Todd racial attack hoax long even after she was arrested.
People call you a racist because you are one.

“Oh they were the ones involved in spreading that Ashley Todd nonsense . . . figures.”
In fairness, drjohn was not around then.
He has his own brand of bs.

She seems very qualified, which is not to say I think she’s perfect or I necessarily agree with her.
I just can’t stand the idea that criticism of an individual could be viewed as racism against a group.
I also think Senator Obama wants a different standard applied to his nominee than he applied to previous nominees.
And I want people to recognize that, especially when he holds himself out as a seeker of common ground.

“I just can’t stand the idea that criticism of an individual could be viewed as racism against a group.”
Its not maybee.
The problem the right has on its hands are that its racists have access to microphones.
People like Rush, Beck and Savage are going to have their own agendas and that’s ratings.

Ryan C-
What do you think the last three paragraphs of Jake’s post mean?
They have nothing to do with Limbaugh or Beck.

MayBee the last three paragraphs seem to be about the Republicans worrying about their own necks and losing even more voters – and its pretty skimpy stuff – he cites “Republicans” – who aren’t willing to put their name on record – and in a very vague way “one Democrat”.

Axey . . .
“If confirmed for the Supreme Court, Judge Sotomayor would bring more federal judicial experience to the Supreme Court than any justice in 100 years, and more overall judicial experience than anyone confirmed for the Court in the past 70 years. …”
Put your little straw man of ‘empathy’ away. The woman is a seasoned professional.

MayBee:”I also think Senator Obama wants a different standard applied to his nominee than he applied to previous nominees.”
In case you missed it, he is actually President Obama (or Mr Obama) now. And could you cite where he wants a different standard applied? It’s not like he appointed the nearest lawyer he knew from Texas – Sotomayor’s credentials are very strong.

I’m not at all surprised President Obama has picked a highly qualified candidate for the supreme court – and I am not at all surprised by the criticism. She is female and is not white. It also doesn’t surprised me at all that her quotes and quotes about her are taken out of context, half cited or misstated, nor that these incomplete quotes are used in an attempt to brand her as racist, uppity and inept. Nothing surprising there at all.

nothing wrong with a little highly qualified ‘diversity on the court….without diversity, one can almost imagine, in an alternate universe where all ‘white’ jurists might come up with the following:
We think they [people of African ancestry] are . . . not included, and were not intended to be included, under the word “citizens” in the Constitution,
and can therefore claim none of the rights and privileges which that instrument provides for and secures to citizens of the United States. . . .”
— Chief Justice Roger B. Taney,
speaking for the majority

MayBee . ..
As I understand it, it is the President’s responsibility to present to Congress his or her selection of an excellent, well-qualified nominee to the Supreme Court. Naturally the President would wish Congress supports and votes for this nominee.
It is the job of Congress to support or not support that nominee using the best of their reasoning and abilities.
President Obama has done nothing of a double standard in putting forward Judge Sonia Sotomayor, nor did he in do anything hypocritical in exercising his responsibilities while a Senator in voting or not voting for previous nominees.
He performed his responsibilities as required in both cases.
Seems like you’re either not understanding the checks and balances of the process, or you’re hoping to brand him inaccurately.

Can you imagine the uproar if a conservative justice had been touted as having empathy? Empathy. Just what we all need in a SC justice. Forget the rule of law, tell us how you feel.
Posted by: Axey | May 26, 2009 10:14:54 PM
You have empathy and sympathy confused. Empathy is a very good trait where a person can understand being in the other’s shoes. I would think that would be essential for a Judge.
If the GOP wants to go after empathy, they probably won’t get too many sympathy cards as their party continues to die as a result of this patently absurd argument.

“It is the job of Congress to support or not support that nominee using the best of their reasoning and abilities.”

there have been times in America, not that long ago, where lower courts have explained their decisions like the following on Interracial marriage in 1967.
“Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix.”
reading ‘stuff’ like this through ‘modern’ eyes makes it all the more incredible that a judge made this ruling and spoke the words……
the judge in the case made the ruling based on the written state law of the time.
a Justice may be called on to rule on an established and accepted law that is wrong,.. he/she must have the courage and foresight and knowledge to go beyond the facts of case… that’s why there have been additions to the Bill of Rights, and there will be more additions as the need arises.
The ‘Prop 8′ controversy will be an interesting one when it reaches the Supreme Court, once again, a minority, will ask the court for equal rights under the law.

MayBee you incorrectly shrink “judicial philosophy” down to “politics” which I think reveals your own narrow viewpoint and interpretation, not necessarily that of others.
And you have rested your case on this thin personal viewpoint, by attributing and attaching it to somewhat else – in this case Senator Obama.
I don’t believe this is fair or accurate.

I think it’s a bit apparent, but since you asked MayBee . .. *bad* reasons to reject a nominee would be that person’s race, or gender or religion or their sexual orientation, or their hairstyle, or a physical disability that doesn’t affect their mental capabilities . ..

So danita- you do not agree that a supreme court nominee should be rejected for only special and strong reasons, but that any reason is ok as long as it isn’t a form of personal prejudice against the nominee?

I mean, I think she’s great. But if, for example, if she doesn’t speak spanish fluently, it would be a pretty strong argument against her character, touting that she’d a latina without being fluent. And it would also cast serious doubt on the truth of her empathy with the latino culture, one of the groups, if any, that most needs it at this time in history.

Dewde- IF you speak spanish, you would know what I was talking about.

This was purely a political pick by the Messiah, who has had a bad couple of weeks with Cheney nipping at his rear end over Obama’s weak war policy.
Sotomayor is NOT the best pick but she will help to quell some of his leftist base’s anxieties over their desire to have a judge of Hispanic origin. She is an admitted ACTIVIST which most of the people in this country dislikes intensely. Or so they say.

On the other hand, it takes an awful lot of intense study to go through all those schools, all those books, all those cases, and retain fluency in any language.

“Judicial power, as contradistinguished from the power of the laws, has no existence. Courts are the mere instrument of the laws, and can will nothing. When they are said to exercise a discretion, it is a mere legal discretion, a discretion to be exercised in discerning the course prescribed by the law; and when that is discerned, it is the duty of the Court to follow it. Judicial power is never exercised for the purpose of giving effect to the will of the Judge; always for the purpose of giving effect to the will of the Legislature [or, this author would add in another context, the makers of a constitution]; or in other words, to the will of the law.”
Justice John Marshall

I truly hope the “small” people of this nation will not denegrate this fine jurist. But the small is already calling her “Maria”, hispanic chick” and so forth. What is this about RACE. How Small for the truly “minority” in a country they have not yet recognized that we are a BI-racial, Bi-ethnic country. I hope the republicans doesn’t denegrate this Strong, smart, qualified woman to keep their racial viewpoints….or she will be the one to “cover” their political graves, the one they have already dug.

Jake,
You should know better than to use the word ‘inquisition’ to describe the Senate judicial confirmation process, especially in reference to Sen. Sessions.
If anyone can be accused of leading an ‘inquisition’, it is non other than the Vice President, Joe Biden, during the Anita Hill-Clarence Thomas hearings.

It’s very rare that I agree with Ann Coulter, but where was the outrage when the liberal Dems were blocking the confirmation of Miguel Estrada?
The hypocrisy – and the ignorance of the masses who allow themselves to be played this way – is just sickening…