Conditioned Response Over Sotomayor

Soooo are you saying that Democrats control the sexism and racism inherent in some of the GOP's leading voices? Nobody MADE these ass holes jump the shark whether it was predictable or not. And I think you absolve them of their bigotry by making it seem like they just couldn't help themselves. But then again maybe you are really just calling them dogs, then I would probably agree with you.

Soooo are you saying that Democrats control the sexism and racism inherent in some of the GOP's leading voices? Nobody MADE these ass holes jump the shark whether it was predictable or not.
.
I don't think Scherer's saying the Dems forced Repubs to act like a bunch of bigoted jerks; rather, they merely provided the rope for the Repubs to hang themselves.
.
Speaking of which, Newt Gingrich comments, "Latina woman racist".

Why would the Republicans object to a lawless, political activist and militantly race-obsessed race baiter who chose to post a quote from Nornam Thomas, the six-time (six-time!) presidential nominee of the Socialist Party of America, in her 1976 Princeton yearbook and who said: "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"?

http://blog.beliefnet.com/stevenwaldman/2009/05/sotomayors-socialist-yearbook.html

Why would the Republicans object to a lawless, political activist and militantly race-obsessed race baiter who chose to post a quote from Nornam Thomas, the six-time (six-time!) presidential nominee of the Socialist Party of America, in her 1976 Princeton yearbook
.
This is hilarious. You're attacking her based on her yearbook quote? Do you even realize how ridiculous you sound?

Via ThinkProgress, we get this little gem from the National Review.
-
Writing from the Center for Immigration Studies, Mark Krikorian basically takes people to task for pronouncing Sotomayor's name correctly, because the pronunciation is "unnatural" in English, and thusly compares it to "adapting to a newcomer" rather than forcing a "newcomer" to adapt to us. It's not even really subtle enough to be called dog whistle politics.
-
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MzkwYzY3ZTc4NTkwZjRiMjM3OGVlMzlmNTZjYmY2ZDI=

Elected Republicans know all of this. So do elected Democrats. And that's why the Democrats are so giddy. They rang the bell. And the salivating began.
.
Good call.

The question, Mr. Scherer, is whether we want to have a judge who talks in terms of ethnicity making a better judge. You minimize the problematic nature of linking race to the quality of judges. Wasn't Pickering attacked on similar, narrow grounds? And Mr. Scherer, if you were in a dispute with some member of a politically correct group, would you want Ms. Sotomayor judging your case? Or what about your kids?

At risk of engaging in some overgeneralizing myself, I think a lot of what we're seeing is simply the result of the difference in attitudes between urban and rural dwellers. A large but shrinking proportion of the population still live in areas that are still quite homogenous in their racial make-up. People who have few aquaintances who don't share their background are not likely to see the downside in alienating people who differ.

When I hear this "identity politics" attack from the Right, I ask myself: "what would satisfy them?" Only if every nominee, appointee and cabinet member were a white man? Does anything less mean that "identity politics" are being played?
.
Is it ever possible in the eyes of the right that a woman or minority might be best person for the job? Does that EVER happen in their opinion? Or is it always "affirmative action"?
.
Needless to say, I don't remember a lot of moaning from the right wing over "identity politics" when Condi Rice became Secretary of State.

Well, as a white female of a certain age, I would far rather have her judging questions than most of the white males and the one African-American currently on the bench.
.
And, as some here choose to ignore, the phrase about a Latina female was about 6 seconds of a 40 minute speech. Really dumb to blow that up.

Oh, textee, girlfriend, I think you should read to the end of that story you linked to:
.
perhaps the White House planted it there knowing that it'd send the wingnuts into a hysterical frenzy, thereby distracting the sane wing of the party, what little there is left of it anyway, from forming any sort of cogent opposition to Sotomayor, making them all look like rabid fools in the process, just as they have each and every time they've tried to throw the socialist card on Obama in the past?
.
Satire is dead.

In the background behind all the debates of political correctness is an undercurrent that is significantly uglier than anything that makes it's way into comment threads like this.
.
For example:
.
http://dequalss.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/obamas-air-force-1-tail-number3.jpg
.
We can pretend we're all being high-minded but Rush's actual audience doesn't even put up the effort.

I had the tv on for a few minutes trying to deal with a cable problem and saw Pat Buchanan and Lawrence O'Donnell on MSNBC. Buchanan insisted that this was obviously an affirmative action appointment and therefore really bad because Obama only chose among four women. O'Donnell asked if he thought that only white males were appropriate and got a bit of bluster. Obviously that's what he does think.

But Michael, it's not about political strategy. Movement conservatives are standing on principle! In Rushbo's case it is the principle that he can sell lots of advertisement if he makes nonsensical arguments to his niche audience.

darius3 Says:
Wednesday, May 27, 2009 at 4:30 pm
"Why would the Republicans object to a lawless, political activist and militantly race-obsessed race baiter who chose to post a quote from Nornam Thomas, the six-time (six-time!) presidential nominee of the Socialist Party of America, in her 1976 Princeton yearbook"

.

"This is hilarious. You're attacking her based on her yearbook quote?"

-

It must be safe now for students to post, adoringly, quotes from Hitler, William Ayers, Osama bin Laden, Jeremiah Wright, Ted Kennedy ....

spob:
.
The question, Mr. Scherer, is whether we want to have a judge who talks in terms of ethnicity making a better judge.
.
What did you think of Sam Alito's statement before the Senate Judiciary Committee?

U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing on Judge Samuel Alito's Nomination to the Supreme Court
.
U.S. SENATOR TOM COBURN (R-OK): Can you comment just about Sam Alito, and what he cares about, and let us see a little bit of your heart and what's important to you in life?
.
ALITO: Senator, I tried to in my opening statement, I tried to provide a little picture of who I am as a human being and how my background and my experiences have shaped me and brought me to this point.
.
ALITO: I don't come from an affluent background or a privileged background. My parents were both quite poor when they were growing up.
.
And I know about their experiences and I didn't experience those things. I don't take credit for anything that they did or anything that they overcame.
.
But I think that children learn a lot from their parents and they learn from what the parents say. But I think they learn a lot more from what the parents do and from what they take from the stories of their parents lives.
.
And that's why I went into that in my opening statement. Because when a case comes before me involving, let's say, someone who is an immigrant -- and we get an awful lot of immigration cases and naturalization cases -- I can't help but think of my own ancestors, because it wasn't that long ago when they were in that position.
.
And so it's my job to apply the law. It's not my job to change the law or to bend the law to achieve any result.
.
But when I look at those cases, I have to say to myself, and I do say to myself, "You know, this could be your grandfather, this could be your grandmother. They were not citizens at one time, and they were people who came to this country."

Can you really --honestly-- say that Sam Alito's point is substantially different than Sonia Sotomayor's?
.
Aren't there serious grounds on which to disagree with Sotomayor's nomination, spob? Or are you truly contending that Alito's sensibilities are different than Sotomayors?

Michael-Don't want to burst anyone one's bubble who wants to think this thing is a lock and there is no way to screw it up. But this is the democratic party we are talking about here. No one should misunderestimate that particular party's lovable ability to screw up a perfectly good wet dream.

Can you really --honestly
.
No.
.
This has been another edition......

And Mr. Scherer, if you were in a dispute with some member of a politically correct group, would you want Ms. Sotomayor judging your case? Or what about your kids?
.
Well, at least you're not calling her stupid yet.

By the way I know the Judge has to have eaten some type of food the GOP doesn't approve of. Can't wait for that scandal to break.

yes, SZ, I can. Alito's position states the obvious proposition that you cannot be oblivious to the results of your decisions. Judging cannot be done in a vacuum. But it's a leap to say that a wise Latina judge is going to be better than a white male. And Alito, of course, stated that the law was going to be followed.
.
Cliff, Sotomayor is not stupid. She's no Scalia in the brains department, but she's not stupid. Probably brighter than Souter and Kennedy.

And SZ, what about her comments about "group needs and values". Good god . . . .

The White southern racist party is in a demographic nightmare. I truly pity them. Dare I say, I even feel their pain.

Out of curiosity, what's your measuring stick for SCOTUS intelligence?

"They rang the bell. And the salivating began."
~