Newt Gingrich Calls Sotomayor a Racist and other Nonsense

by Damozel | Way back in 2001, before she knew she might be nominated to the Supremes, Sonia Sotomayor gave wingnuts all the reason they needed for clutching their pearls, fainting, and screeching for their smelling salts by saying without regard for whether it could someday be taken out of context:

"I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experience would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life," Sotomayor said in that speech, describing how life experience can inform judicial opinions.  (CNN)

Anxious for any excuse to oppose Obama's nominee, conservatives have seized on this comment.  Newt, being a twit, tweeted:

: "Imagine a judicial nominee said 'my experience as a white man makes me better than a latina woman.' new racism is no better than old racism."

Moments later, he followed up with the message: "White man racist nominee would be forced to withdraw. Latina woman racist should also withdraw."  (CNN)

From the White House, Robert Gibbs said -- or rather, responded --

"I think it is probably important for anyone involved in this debate to be exceedingly careful with the way in which they've decided to describe different aspects of this impending confirmation....

I think... when people of American and the people of the Senate get a chance to look at more than just the blog of a former lawmaker that they will come to the same conclusion as the president did... I think that when people get a chance to look at her record, I feel certain that partisan politics will take a back seat to common sense and open-minded decisions based on a full examination of the record and I think that that's what every Supreme Court and judicial nominee deserves."  (HuffPost; Sam Stein)

Sam Stein points out that too great a focus on racial issues by conservatives isn't going to make Hispanic voters feel warm and fuzzy about them.  But wingnuts are not in the business of common sense these days.  Stein notes:  "[A]s Greg Sargent pointed out first, the director of new media for the Republican National Committee, Todd Herman, re-tweeted Gingrich's post, bringing the line of attack ever closer to the rank-and-file GOP."

At belief.net, "Crunchy Con" Rod Dreher admits that his own first reaction to Sotomayor's words was wrong. 

I'm still a bit troubled by the remark, but not in any important way. Taken in context, the speech was about how the context in which we were raised affects how judges see the world, and that it's unrealistic to pretend otherwise. Yet -- and this is a key point -- she admits that as a jurist, one is obligated to strive for neutrality. It seems to me that Judge Sotomayor in this speech dwelled on the inescapability of social context in shaping the character of a jurist. That doesn't seem to me to be a controversial point, and I am relieved by this passage:

While recognizing the potential effect of individual experiences on perception, Judge Cedarbaum nevertheless believes that judges must transcend their personal sympathies and prejudices and aspire to achieve a greater degree of fairness and integrity based on the reason of law. Although I agree with and attempt to work toward Judge Cedarbaum's aspiration, I wonder whether achieving that goal is possible in all or even in most cases.

Relieved, because it strikes me as both idealistic and realistic.

I don't know; what strikes me as uncontroversial is anyone who isn't white or male or heterosexual pointing out that bringing a diversity of viewpoints into our government at least introduces elements into the system that we might not have had there before. 

You can watch Hannity and Sen. Orrin Hatch bash Sotomayor here.  Dave Neiwert says:

Sean Hannity claimed at the top of his show last night that, in nominating Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court, President Obama "turned his back on Middle America" -- because she's a radical liberal who hates them.

So he had on Sen. Orrin Hatch, the Utah Republican who cuts a major figure in the Judiciary Committee....

Hatch is probably the best gauge of where the GOP is headed on this nomination, and it's clear he intends to vote against her largely on ideological grounds, while holding up the multiple fig leaves of the various talking points they've already already established:

-- She sees an "activist" and expanded role for judges.

-- She's a racist who happily discriminates against white people.

-- She was chosen based on "empathy" as the main criterion.

-- Blah blah blah.

And you know, these things have all been thoroughly debunked.

John Cole:

Meanwhile, Karl “Permanent Republican Majority” Rove thinks she might be stupid:

Rove – “She is competent and will be confirmed….She has an interesting and compelling life story…”

Charlie – “She is very smart.”

Rove – “Not necessarily.”

Charlie – “What do you mean? She went to Princeton where she graduating with honors and then went on to Yale Law School….”

Rove – “I know lots of stupid people who went to Ivy League schools.” The crowd applauds.

Um, I think we all might know a stupid Ivy Leaguer or too, including some of the same Ivy Leaguers Rove knows.  But Sotomayor is unlikely to be one of them.  Cole points out. 

Sotomayor didn’t just attend Princeton, she graduated summa cum laude. She didn’t just attend Yale Law School, she edited the Yale Law Journal.

Meanwhile, "top Republican strategists" who are not wingnuts have indicated that they're not planning any "scorched earth policy" in re: Sotomayor. (Politico)  They at least, says The Politico, are aware that they can't really afford to offend Hispanic voters.

“The sentiment is overwhelming that the Senate should do due diligence

but should not make a mountain out of a molehill,” said a top Senate Republican aide. “If there’s no ‘there’ there, we shouldn’t try to create one.”

Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama, the top Republican on the Judiciary Committee, sounded conciliatory during a round of television interviews on Wednesday.

“We need to all have a good hearing, take our time and do it right, and then the senators cast their vote up or down based on whether or not they think this is the kind of judge that should be on the court,” Sessions said on CNN’s “American Morning.” (More at  Politico)

At McClatchy, Michael Doyle and Marisa Taylor suggest a different sort of line of attack:  her "judicial temperament" (or rather, her lack thereof).  Whatever her detractors may or may not think, she has plenty of defenders.

Judge Sonia Sotomayor can be blunt, aggressive and impatient. So get ready for another public debate...

"It's her style," said New York-based lawyer Julia Heit, who counts herself among Sotomayor's fans and who's practiced in Sotomayor's 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for three decades. "She wants answers. She wants the attorneys who appear before her to be prepared. And she's demanding, as she well should be.

"As an aside, I should say life will be easier when I don't have to confront her....

Heit said she didn't...consider the judge's questioning to be bullying. Straight talk, she said, comes with the appellate territory.

"You are well over your time, so let's wrap this," Sotomayor told one federal prosecutor in a February 2008 oral argument."

Earlier, Sotomayor had bluntly confronted the attorney for the We the People Foundation, chastising him for advocating a particular legal view "even though you know, even though you know, that every court has taken a contrary position to your own."

Efrem Fischer, as a New York assistant attorney general, lost a case before Sotomayor. Nonetheless, he said he had no complaints about her temperament. Fischer, a Republican who's now in private practice, praised her as "one of the most prepared jurists I've ever argued before on every level." 

Straight talk might be one reason Obama likes her.  "White House officials consider Sotomayor's take-no-guff temperament a sign that she can hold her own among the Supreme Court's aggressively conservative justices, starting with Antonin Scalia. They also know, however, that too much feistiness can undercut coalition building. Quietly, they surveyed Sotomayor's appellate court colleagues about her temperament, among other things."  (McClatchy)

There have been anonymous snipings, though also plenty of people prepared to praise her straightforward approach.  More at McClatchy on this angle.  I'm guessing that one's not going to fly.

More at Memeorandum!

RECENT BUCK NAKED POLITICS POSTINGS

Banking Industry Reform: Regulation by a Single Agency?

Maj. Gen. Taguba: Abu Ghraib Photographs Censored by Obama Show Rape "and Every Indecency"

Olbermann Interviews Wingnut Radio Ranter Who Conceded Waterboarding is Torture After Getting Himself Waterboarded

TPMtv's "The Day in 100 Seconds" (May 27, 2009 Video) -- Justice (Sotomayor & Gonzalez)

The Torture Administration: Gonzo on the DoJ's Role in Torture -- "I Did My Best to Defend Our Country"

North Korea Threatens Armed Strike Against South Korea; Says Will No Longer Abide by 1953 Armistice

TPMtv's "The Day in 100 Seconds" (May 26, 2009 Video): Obama Names Sonia Sotomayor as Choice for Supreme

Gay Marriage Ban Upheld in California

Bill Maher vs. Sean Hannity (Video)

CNN: Americans Have More Favorable View of Colin Powell than of Cheney and Limbaugh

Comments

[flowerplough]

RE: "lots of stupid people who went to Ivy League schools.”

And Sotomayor didn’t just attend Yale Law School, she edited the Yale Law Journal? I'm impressed, at initially, but wonder if she actually did any editing, or writing? Seen any excerpts from her Yale Law Journal work? Or was she just a minority token, like Obama at Harvard, who was some kind of silent contributor, probably the only editor of a major law review who has never published a single article.

Flowerplough

p.s. And if Scalia says, "I would hope that a wise Italian-American 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," is he a racist?

[flowerplough]

And with the Connecticut Firefighters' reverse discrimination case that federal appeals court judge Sonia Sotomayor and two other judges ruled on last year, issuing an unusually brief decision that went against white firefighters, Sotomayor seems likely to, if approved, be joining a Court that has just finishing overruling her in a high-profile decision.

[FK OBAMA]

FK obama and all the trash he has brought to this America

[FK OBAMA]

Typo.. To America