White House Says Judge Sotomayor Would ‘Say Her Word Choice Was Poor’ in Controversial 2001 Speech

It’s going to be hard to become an Obama person.. if you have a propensity to apologize..

Obama and Gibbs can use some of their old campaign rhetoric to make Sotomayor a victim.
She doesn’t look like a typical Supreme Court candidate, she has a funny name–they are going to try to scare you.
Worked well for Obama–he loves being a victim.

I understood exactly what she was saying just as understood and agreed with Reagan appointed, Justice Sandra Day O’Connor when she said this as part of a tribute to retiring Justice Thurogood Marshall.
“Although all of us come to the Court with our own personal histories and experiences, Justice Marshall brought a special perspective. His was the eye of a lawyer who saw the deepest wounds in the social fabric and used law to help heal them. His was the ear of a counselor who understood the vulnerabilities of the accused and established safeguards for their protection. His was the mouth of a man who knew the anguish of the silenced and gave them a voice.
At oral arguments and conference meetings, in opinions and dissents, Justice Marshall imparted not only his legal acumen but also his life experiences, constantly pushing and prodding us to respond not only to the persuasiveness of legal argument but also to the power of moral truth.”

It’s one thing to say that one’s own life experiences will give a different perspective as to how a situation is SEEN. It is quite another to blantantly say that one’s own life experience will “more often than not reach a better conclusion” than someone else’s life experiences. And worse yet when you say one’s race will lead to a better conclusion.
BUT for Robert Gibbs to actually say that one’s experiences are relevant to the “process of judging” is an outrage. A judge is supposed to base his or her decisions according to the rule of law, the U. S. Constitution and precedents. Empathy and emotion have NO business being a determining factor in a judge’s decision process.

It’s one thing to say that one’s own life experiences will give a different perspective as to how a situation is SEEN. It is quite another to blantantly say that one’s own life experience will “more often than not reach a better conclusion” than someone else’s life experiences. And worse yet when you say one’s race will lead to a better conclusion.
BUT for Robert Gibbs to actually say that one’s experiences are relevant to the “process of judging” is an outrage. A judge is supposed to base his or her decisions according to the rule of law, the U. S. Constitution and precedents. Empathy and emotion have NO business being a determining factor in a judge’s decision process.

Whats the White House saying on justice department charges being dropped on the black panthers at obamas bequest
These THUG friends of obamas were charged with voter obstruction for weilding weapons at a polling place
What say you ABC

I see the GOP’s braintrust is alive and well on this blog. Hard to go against such reasoned and fact based arguments.

Obamacrat for Palin:”I used to support President Barack Obama, but Barack Obama is making stuff up. ”
Speaking of making stuff up, you never supported Obama. You claimed to support Hillary, but only after she was out of the running.

Let’s not forget that it was a bunch of white men who wrote the constitution that the justices are suppose to be interpreting.

Skittles – That is Rushes number. “Of the majority opinions that Judge Sonia Sotomayor has authored since becoming an appellate judge in 1998, three of them have been overturned by the Supreme Court” She returned 232 cases, but only 5 have been reviewed by the SC. So it’s 60% by the Supreme Court and 1.3% of all she has written. That is actually excellent!

LMAO:”Whats the White House saying on justice department charges being dropped on the black panthers at obamas bequest”
Would that be the same Justice Department that dropped charges in the Obama assination plot last October under the Bush administration? Or the one under the Obama administration that dropped charges against Ted Stevens in Alaska?

She is still a racist.

“BUT for Robert Gibbs to actually say that one’s experiences are relevant to the “process of judging” is an outrage.”
They are relevant to the process of judging to pretend otherwise is foolish.
Each Justice on the Court has had their judicial philosophy shaped by their experiences.

“The only thing that separates Judge Sotomayor from every other Mexican woman is that she is a racist”
I love the racism being uttered by right wingers as they attempt to infuriate their fellow racist.
If Hispanics make up 9% of the electorate again in 2010, its going to be a masscare for the GOP when historically they should be picking up a couple of seats.

“When are White men going to unite and stop this accepted rascism?”
Umm I think its a very bad idea to call for lynch mobs to go after Rush Limbaugh.

“What would Gibbs say about Sotomayor being overturned 60-80% (depending on the source) of the time by the current Supreme Court?”
As jhw states the Supremes take up cases that are likely to overrule a lower court.
So that leaves how many decisions the Supremes left to stand without taking on a case?
Several hundred?

Apparently, racism and sexism is fine so long as you’re not a white male.

reverse descrimination is alive and well, fortunately many new suits are being filed forcing the supreme court into action.i dont care if she is elected or not but she is as much of a biggot as anyone and you cant change that no matter how much lipstick she puts on.this is the new world where acorn flaunts its corruption and the black panthers walk free from voter intimidation. the dems could care less about this country as long as they can stay in power.

Senator Trent Lott’s “bad choice” of words about Strom Thurmond cost him the Senate Majority Leadership position … but then, he was a conservative–liberals get the passes for their racist remarks.

“reverse racism”? give me a break.
…yeah because this country has been soo unfair to white men.

WOW. Many think its very cool and calculating that Obama wants to put the PARTY first by nominating a Hispanic.
What is wrong with you goons. Its our country not the Democratic party we are trying to protect from Obama but the media is continually doing damage control for him

Usually the first thing out of your mouth represents the true feelings of a person. If she was joking, saying it in jest and in person, to some white guy, I wouldn’t have a problem with what she said. The setting in which she said it is another story.

“Senator Trent Lott’s “bad choice” of words about Strom Thurmond cost him the Senate Majority Leadership position … but then, he was a conservative–liberals get the passes for their racist remarks.”
He stated the country would have been better off if Strom Thrumond running on a segregationist ticket had been elected.
Part of the reason he stepped down was pressure from other Republicans including Bush.

Where is the outrage over this?? Apparently it’s only racism if a white man says it.

Perhaps she could hook up with that old Klansman Senator Robert C. Byrd. He says he’s reformed too.

handler:”It just great Obama can do what ever he wants now no one in the government can stop him.”
What are you talking about? He couldn’t get through the stimulus he wanted without cutting it down and devoting significant portions to Republican tax cuts (NOONE thinks that $70 billion AMT cut added in a Republican amendment is a stimulus). He can’t even get his own party to agree on a rational closing of Guantanamo Bay. Yet you parrot some absurd nonsense about no one can stop him.

Thank god she was nominated to replace one of the most liberal men on the bench. Nothing will change.

“I would be thrilled if they did that.
Your allies, not so much.”
Well, I don’t have “allies” as this isn’t quite so dramatic as a war, though it may amuse you to think so. I believe that you are always RyanC, but it’s obvious that several others are using multiple names to bolster their weak points….on every side of every issue.

Republicans need to consider that there is no way President Obama will not be re-elected in 2012, nor will the democrats lose control of congress. To not see this and focus on 2016 is reflective of a party, which does not deserve the privilege of political power – (maybe ever again).

wrong, also are you aware of Joshua Packwood, last years Valedictorian at Morehouse college. He’s white, so technically many of the schools you denote as Black are integrated.

This reverse racism is a total outrage. I’m a white male and I was limited to an annual salary of only $84,000 last year. My $450,000 home is nearly 6 years old. CAN YOU BELIEVE THAT?

Clearly her statement was an expression of her great pride and love of her heritage and in herself as a woman and her achievements. She was just being a bit boastful in regard to her ethnicity and abilities and that she had risen to such a level that she could take on the established stereotypical lords of the bench. We all know that is all there is to it. So please let’s just drop it already.

“By Joe Kovacs”
ROFLMAO!
World Nut Daily! Whose WH correspondent gott laughed out the presser yesterday for asking about Obama’s birth certificate.

Tim, I truly hope you are just trying to stir people up. Because you are not helping.

I am so tired of people having to apologize for everything they say.
She said what she said and there is nothing wrong with it. We need to stop this insanity.

“She brings a form of bigotry and racism to the court,”
***************************************
Man he should listen to himself!

HAHAwrong May 29, 2009 5:24:16 PM – Sincerely, congratulations on your achievements. I and I think you can agree, would hope at this time, we would be past the racial vitriol, unfortunately we are not. I’m a black female, I was fortunate enough to have parents that could pay for college, including my masters. In an earlier post I mentioned two scholarship funds that I have given to. Kids, be they black, white, orange or purple should be able to go to school. I support all, because I was lucky. You, had a hard road, but you did it. That says alot about what type of person you are. So, if you get a flier asking for a donation for a college fund, please send what you can. You might make it easier on another kid that might be in the same boat your were.

Try the Truth, Thanks. I don’t have spare money, as I work for a philanthropic organization and make a decent, but not outstanding living (when you consider the 80k in student loans) It would be nice if there was a scholarship for second chance students. Basic idea is, they didn’t do well in high school, but do manage to get into a college. Their freshman year they achieve (3.5 gpa?). There should be something out there for those kids. That is what I want to do someday. Any way, thanks for your comments.

Republicans need to consider that there is no way President Obama will not be re-elected in 2012, nor will the democrats lose control of congress. To not see this and focus on 2016 is reflective of a party, which is ignorant, and does not deserve the privilege of political power – (maybe ever again). Good ridings.

HAHAwrong, I have no doubt you will achieve that goal one day! Best of luck to you!

I truly hope this drags out the whole summer. By then the Republican party would have alienated the entire hispanic population.
Great Job GOP. (Rush, Tancredo) …. thanks…. The gift that keeps on giving.

This person will be appointed for life!…The most important issue is whether Sotomayor will remain faithful to the Constitution and NOT legislate as a Congresswoman…We are not electing her.

I don’t want a “hispanic” view on the bench. I don’t want a “white” view on the bench. I don’t want a “black” view on the bench. I want the “blind” view on the bench that recognizes that the law is the law, and is applied equally to everyone regardless of race, sex, creed, or ideaology. I don’t need someone who has “empathy”, I need someone who is blind to the feelings of those appearing before them so that the law is the ultimate decider of issues, not the feelings and views of those sitting in judgement. If the law is wrong, then change it in Congress, not at the bench.

Sotomayer is a poor choice and it has nothing to do with her comments in 2001 or with any ethnic considerations. She supported Bush era stances on anti-abortion initiatives from the bench and was principal in the New Haven firefighters decision a few months ago, refusing promotions to qualified firefighters, including a learning disabled man who busted his butt studying and also an Hispanic firefighter, because no black firefighters qualified. The test had been pre-screened for racial bias and none was found; clearly anyone who didn’t pass should have studied harder. To hold back those who did try for the sake of those that didn’t, regardless of race, is one of the worst applications of the law I’ve ever heard. All this talk about her background and comments are obscuring the fact that she is a bad choice for good reason. Diane Wood should have been chosen, she’s an anti-trust expert and that’s exactly what this country needs right now with all the financial shenanigans going on.

Ok folks….
This may hurt some but take it OK
America is not a country of blind justice.
Never has …. never will be…..
Stop being naive enough to think so. Don’t cry, just embrace that fact.
It is all about representation.
Previous justices have made remarks comparable to what she said…. but really …… really ask yourself …. why is this time it is drawing so so so much attention and controversy..
be honest with yourself and not so naive and silly

“You apprently think that all Latinos are illogical racists who stick with “their own kind” right or wrong.”
No, he think right wingers are illogical racists who lumps all Latinos in together.
And while certainly not a monolithic voting bloc, the Latino vote went for 2 to 1 for Obama over McCain and McCain was one of the few Republicans that was well liked by Hispanics.
And one can point to the racism by the right wing during the immigration reform debate as part of that.
So what does that mean when McCain was was on the immigrant side of the argument?
It means Hispanics are already associating the Republican party with racists and Rush and Newt are furthering that notion.

Obama’s choice of a nominee was poor.

stupid Republicans! Obama won. Get over it. There is a mandate for CHANGE from the white male hegenomy. Furthermore Sodomeyer, or any woman or minority, cannot be racist de facto. As a woman of color Sodomeyer is the victim of the white male European-ancestry run exploitative capitalist, racist system that is the USA. The exploited cannot be racist becaused they do not benefit from this system. Until the capitalistic, racist system is changed no minority or woman can be racist. However, all white people are racist whether they manifest the racism overtly or not because they benefit from the system. Well, guess what. It is a new day and the exploited workers and especially people of color are going to “CHANGE” this system!

I guess with that argument, we can now say the same thing about Imus when he misspoke on his show. There is no difference, there is no room for interpretation. There is no debate when a Caucasian person makes a racist statement, why then is there a debate when another ethnic group makes a racist statement? She is not immune and the entire debate is sheer hypocrisy.

“most latinos are catholic….mr obama and catholics dont seem to get along to well”
Obama gets along with Catholics just fine.
He won the Catholic vote 54% to 46%
A poll 2 weeks before the election:
Taken as a group, Hispanic voters solidly support Barack Obama over John McCain for president, but there is a significant difference in the Hispanic vote by religion. Catholic Hispanics support Obama by a 39-point margin, while Hispanics who are Protestant or who identify with some other non-Catholic Christian faith support Obama by a much smaller 10-point margin.
And from early this month
Gallup Poll Daily tracking during President Obama’s first 100 days in office finds broad support for him among Americans affiliated with most major U.S. religions. U.S. Muslims and Jews give Obama his highest job approval ratings, at 85% and 79%, respectively. He also receives solid majority support from Roman Catholics (67%) and Protestants (58%), and more approval than disapproval from Mormons.

Jordan
Judge Sonia Sotomayor is listed as a member of the National Council of La Raza, and that was what Tancredo was referring to when he compared La Raza to the KKK, I just watched him do it live, again, on Hardball today.

I cannot understand why Gibbs is in this position; he is laughable. I think putting someone on the bench who thinks they can re-write the law is a dangerous thing….but with the oblessedone…America is down the tubes anyway.

“ ‘She brings a form of bigotry and racism to the court,’
***************************************
Man he should listen to himself!”
I think he knows perfectly well what he said. I guess if you hate white males it isn’t bigotry or racism now, is it. didn’t she also uphold reverse discrimination? reverse discrimination is like any discrimination, and in a way worse because sometimes it makes those doing it look good.

“Steele ran for Lt. Gov in Maryland and did everything he could to hide that he was a Republican.
He ended up with 25 of the African American vote accord. to exit polls.”
The exit poll is from his Senate run not his run for Lt Gov (which he won) that came earlier.
Sorry if there was any confusion.

.i am second genearation white trailer raised italian american who worked his way out of the trailer park….i guess i am qualified to be the new supreme ct justice.
catman
and i’ll bet your legal degrees and experience as a lawyer and a judge are identical ….. right?

Johnathan,
“National Council of La Raza” is simply Spanish (or “Spanglish”) for “National Council on Race”. Nothing more. It has no more sinister meaning than NAACP or CORE or SCLC or B’nai B’rith or the Anti-Defamation League … unless, of course, one is a WASP Supremacist, in which case it is still not “more” sinister because one would then consider ALL of the terms sinister!
The term “La Raza” does turn up in the names of several other organizations, and SOME of those are indeed rather – “slanted” – perhaps. But the NCLR is pretty mainstream insofar as I understand.

she dont need that job at all kick her and lieing obama out of this country

But the NCLR is pretty mainstream insofar as I understand.
Posted by: Jordan
agreed, which makes Tancredo’s comparison to the KKK weird even for fringe talk, Tancredo, as much as I disagree with him, can’t be that stupid and angry not to realize that what he says is just plain dumb, …. and it also places the rest of the GOP and Republicans in Congress in a bad position trying to deflect what he said, unless folks like M. Bachman agree with his sentiments.

by GOP I meant RNC

The comment in question is no more “racist” than if Condoleezza Rice were to State that she might have better insight into the problems of people in a pluralistic society than would a white man whose only contact with African Americans was the man who served him his mint julep each afternoon!
People sure will make mountains out of mole-hills!

C’mon Ryan, stop with the faux outrage. Clearly the White House is worried about her comment or they wouldn’t have made the statement we’re all discussing here.

oh yeah….checkmate…there are many qualified candidates….this one was not picked soley on her merit…everyone knows it even the leftist of the liberals. her biggest case is currently before the supreme court.if overturned she will have as much crdibility as nancy pelosi.

Tancredo, as much as I disagree with him, can’t be that stupid and angry not to realize that what he says is just plain dumb, …. Posted by: Johnathan Swift
Well, much of what I have heard out of the far right (and even the middle-right) in the past year has seemed about equally stupid, IMO. Chicken Little crying about being hit on the head by an Acorn; people who can see Russia from their porches; Joe the not-a-plumber who is going broke because his $60K annual income (if that) exceeds the $250K tax threshold; the “Joe Isuzu” CIA that never-ever lies; the “missing” birth certificate that the State of Hawaii keeps certifying is indeed on file;… the list just keeps getting longer and longer and longer…
I guess when you find the TRUTH terrifying, you just go make up whatever fantasy you can think of!

I do believe that the staff the President has in place is so afraid to not to give him what he wants that they do a poor job (as indicated in many appointments) of digging into backgrounds enough to avoid these type of problems and distractions. I have no problem with the selection just the fact that here we go again in such a hurry and mistakes are being made in the entire political process not just appointments.

Anyone…I mean anyone, on the supreme court should not be making decisions based on empathy, ethnicity, or past experiences no mater what the president thinks. When it comes to the constitutional law, it’s cut and dry. If not, they should not be in government or they should be impeached. And this also goes for the president.

Imbehaving4u:”.I mean anyone, on the supreme court should not be making decisions based on empathy, ethnicity, or past experiences no mater what the president thinks. When it comes to the constitutional law, it’s cut and dry. ”
Can you cite a single past case where she made a decision on empathy? Perhaps Pappas v. Giuliani, where she wrote in favor of the right to free speech (racist hate speech)?
And if constitutional law is cut and dry, why did the founding fathers waste time in the famously concise Constitution so carefully defining the Supreme Court as part of the revolutionary (and in my opinion, best in the world) checks and balances method of government?

rennin1,
I would not even say “ethnocentric” but perhaps rather “experiocentric”.
Sotomayor’s statement is roughly equivalent to “I’ve been there and done that, and that makes me more sensitive and more qualified than one who has not.”
Which is why she was probably right.

Racism is racism, black, white, brown, yellow, etc. She made a blatantly racist comment and should be judged accordingly.

It used to be that you had to perform some outrageous act, such as bombing a black church or burning a cross in someone’s yard, in order to be considered a racist. Now, we are told that someone is racist for even thinking that their race is better than all others. If so, then what is the word ‘ethnocentric’ for? According to Dictionary.com, ethnocentric means ‘the belief in the inherent superiority of one’s own ethnic group or culture.’ Unless someone has evidence of Sotomayor actually performing a racist act, then the only thing she is guilty of is being ethnocentric, not racist.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++
One only need to look back at this past presidential election to see examples of people being called racist for far less than what you describe. Any time a proposed policy of Obama’s was challenged, you were obviously racist. Just ask Bill Clinton. The left on this very site are calling people racist for expressing concerns s over Ms. Sotomayor’s own words, which obviously the White House is concerned could be perceived as racist.

Let’s compare judge Sotomayos with Hillary Clinton, Both west to Yale law school, but Sotomayos got full scholarship in law school and had the leisure of being a law journal editor like what Obama did, because she is from low income Latino neighborhood, while Hillary got no financial assistance because she is from middle class family, so she had to work in summers by cleaning fish in Alaska and washing dishes in summer resort to support her study in law school. I hope pres. Obama would pick a Latino woman as supreme court justice who has not made any racial remarks to show her superiority over white people .

Let’s take the White House at their word-That Judge Sotomayor “misspoke”. The reality is that for judges, their words are their livelihood. People spend years parsing the words of judges because their words literally mean life and death for every citizen in this country. This sets up a potential scenario of Judge Sotomayor issuing an opinion on a 5 to 4 Supreme Court case, only to later try and recind it and say, “Ooops!! That was a bad choice of words that denied people of their lives and constitutional rights. My baaaad!” What a joke……..

Well,
George HW Bush first nominated this woman and he’s a while male. Patrick Moynihan suggested he nominate her and he’s a white male. I’d say she has gratitude for these men.
Her words were ill chosen, but she is not the first Supreme Court nominee (or sitting Justice, currently or on prior Court seatings) — to have ever made an ill spoken comment.
Get over it.
The advise and consent period will commence, Judge Sotomayor will be confirmed with all likelihood.
NEXT
… there is sure to be another “big deal” coming along soon at a political ideology fracas TBD………..

The National Council of La Raza (NCLR) is a non-profit and non-partisan advocacy group in the United States. It is not to be confused with La Raza Unida. Its stated focus is on reducing poverty and discrimination, and improving opportunities for Hispanics. According to the organization’s website, it is “the largest national Hispanic civil rights and advocacy organization in the United States” and “serves all Hispanic subgroups in all regions of the country”. NCLR receives funding from philanthropic organizations, such as the Ford Foundation, and corporations such as Citigroup and Wal-Mart. NCLR serves its constituency by means of its Affiliates, nearly 300 community-based organizations.

Thank you danita,
I live in an area of the country with a very large Hispanic population due to being a border city… there are many fine Hispanic civic leaders here and La Raza (NCLR – not the Unida group, which IS more militant) is active in the ENTIRE community.
It is very unfair to slam them.
What? Are you going to say the YMCA is a divisive group because it has ‘Men’s” and “Christian” in its name…

The reverse racism card is pretty lame in a historical context and used as an argument with the chip-on-shoulder crowd. . .
The question does she have the legal qualifications? Sound record and judicial experience for the job?
I think we all know the answer without being the nominee. Sotomayor is far more qualified than the chief justice and the current justices on the bench now.
That is the bigger picture… Mona Lisa, if you will.

The only thing right about Tancredo is that he is very far “right wing”.

dassis . . .
Yes, the National Council of La Raza is an accredited and widely recognized and funded organisation. Unfortunately, some people who post here would rather just try to brand it a racist organisation for their own personal political agendas. It’s a transparent argument to anyone who can read and do research.
The National Council of Raza has its own website which can be easily accessed and assessed. The National Council of La Raza recieves funding from many sources including the Ford Foundation and is a nationally respected organisation.
Labelling it a racist organisation says more about the people using that label, than about the organisation itself.

The reverse racism card is pretty lame in a historical context and used as an argument with the chip-on-shoulder crowd. . .
The question does she have the legal qualifications? Sound record and judicial experience for the job?
I think we all know the answer without being the nominee. Sotomayor is far more qualified than the chief justice and the current justices on the bench now.
That is the bigger picture… Mona Lisa, if you will.

Why does this administration always feel the need to “explain” what someone meant by what they said? That shows me one of two things 1) that people in this administration need to learn how to say what they mean or 2) they really mean what they say & it doesn’t play politically. I’m going with #2.

“I’m sure the KKK did policy analysis and training for its racists as LaRaza does.”
Really have done your research? NOT! What a purely racist statement! And you have the audacity to critize Sotomayor’s nomination? All of you GOPers better realize wheels have come off the bus and you are riding on the hubcaps

Judge Sotomayor: “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,”
 If a white man had made a similar statement ” I would hope that a wise white man with the richness of his experience would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a Latina woman who hasn’t lived that life.” he would be called a racist. As Thomas Sowell said  “Racism doesn’t have a very good track record. You would think you would want to put an end to it rather than put it under new management.”

Judge Sotomayor’s statements about how her Latina and gender makes her superior to a white male would disqualify her as a juror much less a Supreme Court Justice.

Not true Denver, completely different context… and you are just quoting something already said over and over and soundly discredited.
Linda…
She has had only 6 cases come before the Supreme Court… 3 of 5 were overturned and 1 is still being decided.
By the way a 60% overturn rate is actually very good. A 70% overturn rate is the norm from the thirteen Appeals courts.

Linda, So in O’bamaland, jurors are held to a higher ethical and legal standard than judges are. Here is a standard Juror instruction:
“You have two duties as a jury. Your first duty is to decide the facts from the evidence in the case. This is your job, and yours alone. Your second duty is to apply the law that I give you to the facts. You must follow these instructions, even if you disagree with them…. Perform these duties fairly and impartially. Do not allow sympathy, prejudice, fear, or public opinion to influence you. You should not be influenced by any person’s race, color, religion, national ancestry, or sex.”
Judge Sotomayor: “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,”
The above statement would most certainly disqualify her as a juror.

Fischer . ..
You have totally got the wrong group!
The National Council of La Raza (NCLR) is a non-profit and non-partisan advocacy group in the United States. It is not to be confused with La Raza Unida. Its stated focus is on reducing poverty and discrimination, and improving opportunities for Hispanics. According to the organization’s website, it is “the largest national Hispanic civil rights and advocacy organization in the United States” and “serves all Hispanic subgroups in all regions of the country”. NCLR receives funding from philanthropic organizations, such as the Ford Foundation, and corporations such as Citigroup and Wal-Mart. NCLR serves its constituency by means of its Affiliates, nearly 300 community-based organizations.

Instead of reversing the roles in Sotomayor’s statement, why not try making them generic?
Like this: “I would hope that a wise underprivileged woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a privileged male who hasn’t lived that life.”
Now the REAL sense of Judge Sotomayor’s remarks can be seen, and once again that sense IS NOT RACIST: it is REALITY!
Posted by: Jordan | May 29, 2009 10:06:34 PM
I agree Jordan, this is what Judge Sotomayor meant to express within the context of her remarks and from what we know so far (as cited on this site in another column by Tapper) is TOTALLY BACKED up by her legal rulings where issues of prejudice were involved.
It is unfortunate the right wing is so hot to trot on smearing anything President Obama undertakes, and it is also unfortunate her remarks were stated in such a way that they’re very easy to take out of context.

dassis, Judge Sotomayor’s quote about how her race and gender makes her superior to a white male is on the record so a judge and counselor would be aware of her remarks and would most certainly not want a bigoted person such as herself as a member of a jury. As to my O’bamaland quote, I was not saying anything negative about President Obama, I was referring to his followers who would be screaming bloody murder if a white guy said his background and experience as a white male made him superior to a Latina.
As Thomas Sowell said  “Racism doesn’t have a very good track record. You would think you would want to put an end to it rather than put it under new management.”
By the way I thought the whole idea of the Constitution is to protect minority rights from the tyranny of the majority. I guess people in O’bamaland want to trash the Constitution and go back to a tribal society where your rights are not determined by the rule of law but by the might of a King or dictator who passes out favors based whether you are part of his subservient tribal group.
Again, As Thomas Sowell said “Racism doesn’t have a very good track record. You would think you would want to put an end to it rather than put it under new management.”

Get over it. She will do a great Job. She is correct you know.

None of this would be an issue if she hadn’t tipped her hand at Duke University where she said that policy is made in appeals court. Perhaps the President should nominate a judge that to interpret legislation, rather than legislate from the bench.

Why does this administration always feel the need to “explain” what someone meant by what they said?
Posted by: ellsbells930 | May 29, 2009 9:39:35 PM
The are smart – you guys not so much – so they have to word it in ways that you are able to understand.

It is unfortunate the right wing is so hot to trot on smearing anything President Obama undertakes… Posted by: danita
Well, that IS the motivation. This hoopla is not at all about Judge Sotomayor, nor about “race”, nor even about Latinos. (Her heritage is trom Puerto Rico – not Mexico or Central/South America – and Puerto Rico has been a part of the U.S. for a VERY long time!)
Rather, this is all about right-wingers and dedicated Republicans trying to tar everything President Obama does. Essentially, they got caught with their hands in the cookie jar and now they are screaming every way they can to try to get the attention off of their own stupid acts. Moreover, they are engaging in foot-dragging in every manner they can figure – some even trying to find more than two feet to drag!
It all reminds me of trying to get a cranky 5-year-old to go to bed!

And let’s get one other thing straight. This woman, for the lack of a better term, ISN’T making history as hispanics would like to believe. There are already racists, women, and a latino on the SC. Just not all wrapped up in one big package like this loser.

“So will the left be condemning Sotomayor’s for her direct support of La Raza who is calling for the Southwestern States to secede from the States? Hmmm ”
A) This is factually incorrect.
B) Didn’t the Governor of Texas talk about secession just a few weeks ago? The REPUBLICAN Governor?

“I would hope that a wise underprivileged woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a privileged male who hasn’t lived that life.”
Now the REAL sense of Judge Sotomayor’s remarks can be seen, and once again that sense IS NOT RACIST: it is REALITY!
…Except – that is -, in the minds of a bunch of Republican LOSERS who are trying desperately to prop up their own fallen egos in the face of their own blatant failures and the imminent successes of their more successful opponent!
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
….Except- that is NOT what she said, is it?

The double standard being portrayed is rediculous. I don’t care what party you belong to. What would the results be if a white male made a comment in reverse? Can you imagine!!!

As a Latina woman, also from the Bronx, I understand the sentiment Judge Sotomayor was attempting to communicate. That is, none of us are divorced from our heritage, our families, our communities – be it North, South, East, West, rural, urban, immigrant, native-born, male, female – after all, none of us sprung from the womb at the age of 21 (luckily for our mothers); and when she said that as a Latina woman her esperiences would allow her to “reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life”, what I understood her to mean was that she had a different perspective. After all, neither Judge Sotomayor nor this Latina have ever been white males.
I do believe that we are stronger as a society when we strive to respect our varied opinions and perspectives. Since, after all, those are some of the founding principals of our country.This is how we ultimately come to learn that we all share the same hopes and dreams for ourselves and our families. As is all too clear from the world’s current political strife, intollerance is not something we should be promoting at home. To suggest that racism should be injected into her comments is quite a stretch.

Her getting caught was the problem. Like with Comrade Nancy. What do they care? They’ll just go on with whatever it is they want to do anyway.

Instead of reversing the roles in Sotomayor’s statement, why not try making them generic?
Like this: “I would hope that a wise underprivileged woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a privileged male who hasn’t lived that life.”
“Now the REAL sense of Judge Sotomayor’s remarks can be seen, and once again that sense IS NOT RACIST: it is REALITY!”
Nope, now it is a sexist comment. Next try to explain away her bias.

DON’T FORGET THAT Sotomayor is also a member of La Raza, the most racist Hispanic organization in the country. It’s not only words that indicate she is a racist.

Is Obama ready to call the next liberal scarecrow’s rant nonsense. Let’s just see. The truth is we are as conservatives more sensitive and careful about this than liberals. What idiots!!