The Trail: A Daily Diary of Campaign 2008

Archives

Supreme Court

Court Watch: As GOP Hangs Back, Conservatives Attack Sotomayor

By Garance Franke-Ruta
Only one Republican senator, Pat Roberts of Kansas, has come out so far and said he'll vote against Obama Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor, but conservative pundits and interest groups are already working overtime to make her nomination a subject of controversy. Radio host Rush Limbaugh and former House speaker Newt Gingrich have both dubbed her a "racist" for her views on the impact of difference on judicial decision-making within a diverse society, while interest groups and even one potential GOP presidential candidate are using her nomination to raise funds.

That's the story moving online today.

* The Associated Press's Julie Hirshfield Davis takes a detailed look at these interest groups' advertisements and actions, noting: "Republican senators are speaking in cautious but measured tones about Sotomayor's qualifications and fitness for the court while Democrats are joining the White House in singing her praises. But the outside organizations that have a major stake in a high-court fight are taking up warring positions."

* TPM's Brian Beutler catalogs the principle players at conservative groups who will be looking to raise funds and their profiles from attacks on Sotomayor. "If you take a step back from all the angry noise on cable news about Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor, you realize that all of the conservatives directing outrage her way don't really seem to have tons of representation in Congress. Aside from the occasional backdoor insult from conservative senators like James Inhofe (R-OK) and Jeff Sessions (R-AL), the response from the GOP has ranged from modest skepticism to modest congratulations," he writes.

"There are a lot of reasons for that, but, breaking it down to its simplest components, Sotomayor is a qualified and politically sympathetic figure; there's no clear precedent for killing her nomination, and there's just about nothing to gain--and much to lose--by attacking her. But the calculus is different if you work in the conservative movement. By ginning up controversy where none exists, these activists get free press and free money and a micro-movement with which to corral fellow travelers into common cause."

* The attacks have already grown so frenzied that Slate sister site Double X has launched "the Sotomayor Buzzword Watch" to keep track of the growing "arsenal of insults from her attackers." "We'll be keeping track of what epithets they throw at her, from 'Maria' to 'racist,' and measuring them on a scale from mild to mean," write the staffers.

Posted at 1:04 PM ET on May 28, 2009  | Category:  Supreme Court
Share This: Technorati talk bubble Technorati | Tag in Del.icio.us | Digg This
Previous: Sotomayor's Views on Abortion, Gun Rights Come Under the Microscope | Next: Gibbs Slams British Press and Denies Telegraph Story


Add 44 to Your Site
Be the first to know when there's a new installment of The Trail. This widget is easy to add to your Web site, and it will update every time there's a new entry on The Trail.
Get This Widget >>


Comments

Please email us to report offensive comments.



Mr Gingrich thinks, he has the right to say anything about anybody. He falsely accuses people. He likes throwing mud to other people and expects them to prove that they are innocent.I think Mr Gingrich should learn from his past experiences.

Did you not forget why Mr Gingrich himself had to resign his Speaker position back in 1998?

He led the campaign to impeach Bill Clinton for the Lewinski affair at the same time he was cheating on his wife, Marianne Ginther. In addition, there were 84 ethics charges filed against Gingrich during his Speaker Term.... Remember?

Look who's talking AGAIN :)

Posted by: mina99usa | May 29, 2009 3:08 PM

Rush, Newt, Glen Beck......why is the republican base represented by hysterical fat scaredy-cats? Maybe on some unconscious level, they know they don't deserve the privileges hoarded to the detriment of real hardworking Americans. These guys need money like they need more cholestrol.

What does it profit a man to gain the world, if he loses his soul? It's bad enough that these guys are willing to go to hell for a few million dollars, but it's tragic that they've done a good job of taking innocent Americans, and much of the world, with them.

Posted by: rooster54 | May 29, 2009 11:39 AM

"I think the single most revealing thing about this whole ordeal is that it has utterly exposed Newt Gingrich as a complete and utter thoughless hack."

What kills me is that I thought he was pretty thoroughly exposed as such 15 years ago, when his party threw him out of the Speaker position.

It's as though Gary Hart were still a major spokesman for the Democrats.

A record of failure doesn't seem to make much of a difference in the Republican Party, though. I guess that's what happens when you don't have much of a bench. You get the call late at night for a conservative intellectual, and all you can dig up is Newt.

Bye, bye miss republican pie . . .

Posted by: nodebris | May 29, 2009 12:39 AM

i love rush limbaugh. i don't ever want him to go away.

Posted by: swatkins1 | May 28, 2009 9:52 PM

Sotomayor: "I have a dream that my children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the content of their character, but as wise LATINA women with the richness of their experiences AND empathy."

Posted by: mock1ngb1rd | May 28, 2009 9:23 PM


I guess the US is slowly making the shift to becoming a fully Mexican-American Republic. Our amigos to the South can more easily move to what they call Aztecland here in North America.

Posted by: sperrico | May 28, 2009 8:34 PM

---------------------------

How's that for racist?

Posted by: alysheba_3 | May 28, 2009 9:07 PM

sperrico:

It's Aztlan - dipstick. A term used to describe a mythical home of native Mexican tribes.

Sotomayor is of Puerto Rican descent.

And as you also didn't know - PR has been a US territory since the Spanish American War of 1898.

Posted by: JohnQuimby | May 28, 2009 9:01 PM

Wake me when this nonsense is over.

Posted by: whocares666 | May 28, 2009 9:00 PM

It was exactly that kind of thinking that led Senate Democrats to turn the Clarence Thomas Supreme Court nomination hearings into an X-rated circus in 1991.

Posted by: mock1ngb1rd | May 28, 2009 5:11 PM

Gee, I thought it was the allegations of sexual harassment against Thomas that caused the investigation.

Posted by: alysheba_3 | May 28, 2009 8:56 PM

Alito (stated during his Congressional Hearing): "My family’s immigrant experience shaped my judicial outlook."

How is this any different than “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.”, especially when you put this one sentence into context within thw whole speech.

If any Right-leaning person is actually interested in making an informed opinion, rather than following the talking points put out by the Republican party, the entire speech is here: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/15/us/politics/15judge.text.html?_r=2&pagewanted=1

Posted by: alysheba_3 | May 28, 2009 8:51 PM

The clock is running to see how long it will be before Republican Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger issues an effusive apology for offending the Dear Leader. I thought Arnold was generous when he said it was unfair to refer to Limbaugh as the 800 pound gorilla of the Republican party when, according to Arnold, Limbaugh has slimmed down to 650 pounds. The truth may be funny, but it can be dangerous. Did Arnold not learn anything from Phil Gingery and Michael Steele about offending the Dear Leader of the Republican party? Messing with the 650 pound, drug addled, draft dodging, college dropout Republican spokesmodel will have consequences.

Posted by: RetiredVeteran | May 28, 2009 8:38 PM

I guess the US is slowly making the shift to becoming a fully Mexican-American Republic. Our amigos to the South can more easily move to what they call Aztecland here in North America.

Posted by: sperrico | May 28, 2009 8:34 PM

Some say they reject her because she is too Latino.

Is Thomas too black? Is Scalia too Italian? Is Roberts too white?

I don't say that a white man can't offer a just opinion. I don't deny that the son of an immigrant can understand a unique condition. I won't argue that a black man cannot serve because he is too conservative.

But conservative objection to this nomination focuses on her ethnicity. That tells me everything I need to know about the deep denial of what I believe.

During our war of Independence, English Royalists declared that we Americans would never be able to govern ourselves out of some multi-racial rabble.

Bullsh@t! We are a nation of mutts.
We're the castoffs of every land, the losers, the opportunists the makers of history!

We believe that "Justice" is a woman who holds balancing scales and wears a blindfold so that all may come to her and seek justice under the law of our republic.

It's about time for some of you to get off your royal high horse and jump on the wagon of the winning team! We the People can and will make the laws and serve justice in this land.

Posted by: JohnQuimby | May 28, 2009 8:29 PM

I think the single most revealing thing about this whole ordeal is that it has utterly exposed Newt Gingrich as a complete and utter thoughless hack.

Why do I say that? because a day after Limbaugh attacks Sotomayor as being a racist, a charge based on a mischaracterization of her words and robbing them of the relevant context, we hear the EXACT same line of attack parroted by Gingrich!

To believe that this man was once considered the brains of the GOP! a man who is now clearly taking his cues from an inflammatory radio show host!?

Not only that but he has the sheer audacity to call for Sotomayer to step down when every reasonable political commentator sees that as being an impossibility at this point. Also wasn't he calling for Pelosi to step down like a week ago? and what came of that? Absolutely nothing, that issue is already fading from the public's memory and she didn't receive so much as a slap on the wrist! I predict that Newt's condemnation of Sotomayor will prove to be as equally impotent.

So here is a question for the media in general/ since Newt is no longer an elected official or a high ranking party official, since he doesn't even have a radio show (another measure of GOP influence), and seemingly has no orignal thoughts of his own that haven't already been uttered by scores of pundits why is he still relevant?! Seriously, why should anyone care about what Gingrich has to say about anything?

Posted by: cjpotter19 | May 28, 2009 8:15 PM

Keep making up stuff, Republicans. Don't bother troubling yourself with pesky reality. And never mind your shrinking share of every demographic outside of angry white evangelical racists. Standing by your "principles" (whatever those are) is what matters now. Party purity. Palin/Jindal '012 and all that.

Posted by: PutDownTheKoolaid | May 28, 2009 8:06 PM

The first Latina Supreme Court pick is hailed as a political home run, but Judge Sonia Sotomayor is vulnerable. Americans simply don't want justices making law.

Posted by: mock1ngb1rd | May 28, 2009 8:04 PM

"Actually, the Nazis were Socialists."

Posted by: g2008p | May 28, 2009 7:36 PM

Tell me, why is it that right wingers are invariably ignorant of history? The Nazis were not "socialists". The Nazis called themselves the National Socialist Party, but were not at all socialists by practice or ideology. The first thing they did when they gained power was lock up their primary political opposition, who were the Communists, and who really were socialists.

Posted by: PutDownTheKoolaid | May 28, 2009 8:02 PM

'At the same time I defecate on conservative "pundits," whom I consider crypto-nazis, and sometimes not even so crypto.'

Actually, the Nazis were Socialists.

'I support any person who will inject a healthy dose of socialism in America, bringing us closer to the Western European model.'

Then perhaps you will find it easier to relocate to where this model already exists, instead of trying to impose an unwanted way of life on others in this nation who not want it.

Posted by: g2008p | May 28, 2009 7:36 PM

Someone posted: "A spirited effort against Judge Sotomayor would be in spite of her being Hispanic, not because of it, as was the case with the Democrats' assault on Estrada — the first-ever filibuster of a Court of Appeals nominee.

The National Journal's Stuart Taylor hit the nail on the head over the weekend in an article asking what the reaction would have been had then-Judge Samuel Alito been found to have said the reverse of Sotomayor's claim of Latina judgmental superiority: "I would hope that a white male with the richness of his traditional American values would reach a bitter conclusion than a Latina woman who hasn't lived that life."

Obviously, he would have been condemned as a white supremacist."
_________
HuffPo has already debunked this idiotic, dishonest line of attack. Alito has said pretty much the same thing as SS did: that his immigrant background improves his judgment in some cases before him, especially immigration cases. And citing Stewart Taylor? That's like citing Imus. It seems he only has "problems" with nominees when they are minorities. Move on...
____

Viva Sonia!!! Viva BHO!!!!

Posted by: broadwayjoe | May 28, 2009 7:00 PM

How does Pat Roberts actually know enough after less than 24 hours to say he would vote no? Is a demonstration of his intellectual limitations. Luckily he is not relevant.

Posted by: lancepcope | May 28, 2009 6:41 PM

Democratic Senators opposed the nomination, noting Estrada's lack of any prior judicial experience at the local, state, or federal level. So he had NEVER even been a judge and Bush wanted him to start at the 2nd higest level for a judge?

Posted by: Schweg | May 28, 2009 6:07 PM

Judge Sotomayor is clearly a liberal judicial activist. Speaking to Duke Law School in 2005, she contended that "the Court of Appeals is where policy is made."

She then added jovially that "I know this is on tape and I should never say that because 'we don't make law,' " as she made quotation marks with her hands. "I'm not promoting it and I'm not advocating it. You know . . . ," she added with a grin as the audience laughed.

She confirmed that activism last year in ruling against New Haven firemen victimized by reverse discrimination. Sotomayor was accused by a fellow 2nd District judge — Clinton appointee Jose Cabranes — of issuing a one-paragraph "opinion that lacks a clear statement of either the claims raised by the plaintiffs or the issues on appeal" plus "no reference whatsoever to the constitutional claims at the core of this case."

The Supreme Court is widely expected to reverse her weak decision next month.

Posted by: mock1ngb1rd | May 28, 2009 5:51 PM

I support any person who will inject a healthy dose of socialism in America, bringing us closer to the Western European model. At the same time I defecate on conservative "pundits," whom I consider crypto-nazis, and sometimes not even so crypto. In my opinion, Sotomayor is far too centrist, and Obama is far too "bipartisan." I would like nothing better than to damage and destroy the fascist republicans for the sh!tty things they did over the last 8 years. Every moment of republican dominance increases the misery of Americans, except for the rich of course, who walk around with the republicans' noses firmly embedded in their posteriors. The republicans: mother-gopulators, liars, skinflints, murderers, and general swine. I have never voted for any such animal, and never will.

Posted by: RichardKefalos | May 28, 2009 5:51 PM

A spirited effort against Judge Sotomayor would be in spite of her being Hispanic, not because of it, as was the case with the Democrats' assault on Estrada — the first-ever filibuster of a Court of Appeals nominee.

The National Journal's Stuart Taylor hit the nail on the head over the weekend in an article asking what the reaction would have been had then-Judge Samuel Alito been found to have said the reverse of Sotomayor's claim of Latina judgmental superiority: "I would hope that a white male with the richness of his traditional American values would reach a better conclusion than a Latina woman who hasn't lived that life."

Obviously, he would have been condemned as a white supremacist.

Posted by: mock1ngb1rd | May 28, 2009 5:22 PM

It never takes very long for some conservative to march forward and say "What if a White Male said that!". White males, who ruled the roost in this country for 300 years cry "racism" and expect women and minorities who we all know have been discriminated against to somehow pretend that that inequality did not exist and that it dis not influence who she is and how she thinks. How convenient. It is an argument that appeals to slow thinkers, but few others.

Posted by: tradeczar | May 28, 2009 5:17 PM

Hispanic ethnicity didn't stop Senate Democrats, then in the minority, from spending 28 months successfully blocking Honduran-born Miguel Estrada's 2001 nomination to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit by President Bush.

Estrada's life story was inspiring too. Knowing little English, he immigrated to America at 17 to join his mother after his parents' divorce. A few years later, he was graduating with honors from both Columbia and Harvard Law.

A November 2001 internal memo from the staff of current Senate Majority Whip Richard Durbin, D-Ill., explained that Estrada was "dangerous" owing to his "minimal paper trail, he is Latino and the White House seems to be grooming him for a Supreme Court appointment."

Consider the blatantly racist analysis — "he is Latino." In other words, conservative plus nonwhite equals "dangerous." It was exactly that kind of thinking that led Senate Democrats to turn the Clarence Thomas Supreme Court nomination hearings into an X-rated circus in 1991.

Posted by: mock1ngb1rd | May 28, 2009 5:11 PM

Some on here say that she could end up being one ofthe most Liberal members to ever sit on the Court. I doubt that but, SO WHAT? Liberals are the soul of this country. They believe in equal rights and liberty. They are compassionate. After seating two the most conservative Supreme Court Justices of the last Century, Roberts and Alito, who believe in TORTURE for God's sake, as well have never taken a stand in favor of the individual over business and are likely to go down as two of the worst appointees in history I find this conservative complaining an insult to all Americans. You conservatives have virtually destroyed this country. It is time for you to do the patriotic thing and JUST SHUT UP.

Posted by: nyrunner101 | May 28, 2009 5:04 PM

2012 Republican presidential ticket: Palin / Limbaugh! Secretary of state: Dick Cheney. Energy Secretary: Dick Cheney. Attorney General: Dick Cheney.

Posted by: pcc7407 | May 28, 2009 4:57 PM

I would suggest the following:

Let's everyone forget for a moment that this is an hispanic woman speaking. Imagine instead it's a white man and modify her statement to reflect the gender and race change. Are the comments still acceptable to you? If so, then I'd say we have no problem. My guess is, most libs would have a major problem with similar statements from a white man's mouth. Why is it any different when the same words come out of an Hispanic woman's mouth? You libs say you're not racist? Here's a good way to prove it. Be honest with yourselves and remember, treating someone differently, good or bad, due to the color of their skin, is racism, period.

Posted by: flintston | May 28, 2009 4:54 PM

She could easily end up being the single most liberal justice ever to have sat on the nation's top court — forever seeking opportunities to apply "the richness of her experiences" to "make law," rather than judge.

Lawmakers are not supposed to get lifetime appointments in America; only judges and justices are, because it is presumed they are guided solely by legitimately enacted law — not their biography, ethnic background or raw politics.

That bedrock constitutional principle should guide the fight to stop what may be the most politicized Supreme Court nomination in history.

Posted by: mock1ngb1rd | May 28, 2009 4:49 PM

Is it any wonder that Republicants are shrinking in number when morons, traitors, and hypocrits like Crazy Cheney, Trash Limpbaugh, Spawn Hannity, and Newt keep showing their lack of character, morals, and patriotism. Keep following those jerks and the Republicants will be the new Whig party. Obsolete.

Posted by: COLEBRACKETT | May 28, 2009 4:49 PM

Another pathetic trend: White conservatives who pretend to be hispanic on the internet by using nicknames like "Antonio", hoping that it somehow gives them license to spew their racist bile against Sotomayor.

We saw it happen during the presidential election, with white neocons posing as "Jamal" or "Lakisha" before trashing Obama... LOL

Posted by: sgtpepper23 | May 28, 2009 4:49 PM

The comments by Limbaugh and the likes are very funny, really. It is like the Devil saying somebody else is evil.

Posted by: RIVASF1@WESTAT.COM | May 28, 2009 4:48 PM

As a Hispanic, I ask both Democrats and Republicans to reject Sotomayor because she is biased, sexist and racist.

Antonio...You might need to give Steele a call. He has some openings in the Irrational Self-Haters Club.

Posted by: willandjansdad1 | May 28, 2009 4:44 PM

Would the last Republican to leave the party turn out the light and leave Boss Limbaugh alone in the dark...

Posted by: willandjansdad1 | May 28, 2009 4:41 PM

I would hope that a wise white man with the richness of his experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a Latina female who hasn’t lived that life.

Posted by: mock1ngb1rd | May 28, 2009 4:37 PM

"By ginning up controversy where none exists, these activists get free press and free money and a micro-movement with which to corral fellow travelers into common cause."

Shazam...

Posted by: willandjansdad1 | May 28, 2009 4:34 PM

To answer AntonioSosa: What would you call an organization dedicated to improving the lives of whites in the U.S.?

ANSWER: Our whole system of government for the past 230+ years!!

Posted by: sbmerk | May 28, 2009 4:33 PM

Keep barking like a mad dog Rush! - keep whimpering like a scab-infested mongrel Newt! The more you bark and whimper, the more you run down the GOP and make it the laughing stock of the world. The more drop red herrings you drop, the more fun it becomes for normal people to call you out and see you for what you are - jackasses! Go ahead! - keep announcing shamelessly your rabid disease to all the world! We can't get enough of it!

Posted by: bachman737 | May 28, 2009 4:32 PM

The political activists are up in arms already over the Sotomayor nomination for the Supreme Court.What we are witnessing is the merry-go-around of political bitterness.This happen almost everytime when someone is nominated to the court. There is only one time that I remember that the activists had a impact on a nominee for the supreme court, that was Bork. The hard liners of the republican party know that the republican senators will not stop Sotomayor.So knowing this, they will do everything to deminish her as humane being, as a judge, as an american.Their plan is to do as much damage to her and Obama as possible so they can feel better from their loss in the election. The hardcore part of republicans party does not care if she is qualified or not, she was appointed/nominated by President Obama, a liberal{Radical}as they call him. So if they can damage her or him in anyway, its a victory for them.The republicans do not understand that these radical mouth pieces do more damage than they do good.They drive people away from their own party and they do not care because these radicals want to solidify their power. What these radicals do not get, which is great, is that they lost the election by 9 1/2 million votes. So all their base put together will not help them win a election without moderates, latinos, and people with just common sense. Americans do not like radicals parties because we are centrists as a nation and as a people.
Some may agree with Rush that Obama is a reverse racist. Obamas cabinet shows otherwise and he has not done anything to be called that. The president and the office he holds deserves respect but respect is not something that hardcore part of the republican party knows anything about.

Posted by: Realistic2 | May 28, 2009 4:30 PM

It's no coincidence that none of the leading right wing voices are in office anymore. I hope the right wing, unholy trinity of Cheney, Gingrich, & Limbaugh keep talking. Every time they open their mouths they give normal Americans more reason to reject their odious and already discredited points of view.

Posted by: sonny2 | May 28, 2009 4:13 PM

would the double x ranking of meanness actually be a diabolical plot to make the GOP look mean when in fact it is the demoncrats who are mean. I am sure it will be a scientific study.

Posted by: Rvf0509 | May 28, 2009 4:12 PM

FactChecker1, yes, Sotomayor was/is a member of La Raza and La Raza is one of the most racist organizations in the U.S. You say that La Raza is not racist because it is “dedicated to improving the lives of Latinos in the U.S.” What would you call an organization dedicated to improving the lives of whites in the U.S.? That would be a racist organization! Additionally, La Raza “helps” Latinos by brainwashing them with racism and hate to the point that they don’t even know when they discriminate against others, particularly if the others are not “women or men of color.”

Posted by: AntonioSosa | May 28, 2009 4:10 PM

You know what the wingnuts remind me of? Those idiots who get their car or truck stuck in the mud and then keeping gunning the engine thinking they'll get themselves out, of course all they're doing is spinning their wheels and digging in deeper.

Posted by: ACD-pa | May 28, 2009 4:03 PM

A white male who does not examine his own race privilege cannot possibly understand the multi-generational effects of racism, let alone the role it plays in the American justice system. Newt, Rush, and the boys are standing on the shoulders of their White Privilege and with blind cluelessness. They have no legitimacy in discussions of race.

I pity the enlightened and traveled members of the GOP who share the label "Republican", for they suffer the prejudice of all the rest of us who think of the GOP today as a dangerous bunch of xenophobes, afraid of every color and gender but their own.

Posted by: rowens1 | May 28, 2009 3:55 PM

so roberts will vote against her without ever having a hearing. just what we need in this country .i see he supports the constitution.how long has this guy been in the senate anyway?

Posted by: donaldtucker | May 28, 2009 3:51 PM

Mr. Limbaugh is on the verge of sedition when it comes to his attacks.

He needs waterboarding!

Posted by: bs2004 | May 28, 2009 3:44 PM

LoonyLeft: Interesting that you did not point out that Joe Kovacs is the Executive News Editor of WorldNet Daily, one of the biggest jokes of an online 'news' site. He's also written such tidbits as this:

Hundreds of citizens are urging a media watchdog to classify the Bible as "indecent" due to the high amount of sex and violence throughout the Scriptures, and could force the Good Book to be sealed in plastic with a warning label.

So we KNOW he's in his right mind.

Posted by: FactChecker1 | May 28, 2009 3:41 PM

How can conservative commentators and politicians asking Sotomayor to explain her judicial philosphy be labeled 'racist' when they are the same conservatives who embraced Clarence Thomas, Alberto Gonzalez, Condi Rice, Colin Powell, etc, etc, etc. It's fairly obvious there are plenty of idiots on this board who don't even know what 'racism' means.

Disagreeing on political views with liberal Democrats who happen to be of a minority race is apparantly all that is required now to have the word "racism" screamed at you by left-wing nuts. Liberals have so watered down the meaning of the word that they have done a real disservice to all those who came before who had to suffer real racism.

Posted by: dbw1 | May 28, 2009 3:29 PM

I believe you just need to review her past statements and she clearly comes across as a bigoted sexist.

Of course that won't matter to the trolls drunk on Obozo's Kool Aid since they couldn't care less that he attended an overtly racist church for 20+ years.

Oh don't you love the double standards, rationalization, and situational ethics libs need to be able to function in this world.

But at least Obysmal is producing results. I noticed today that foreclosures are an all time high - way to go OBUMMER!!!

Posted by: Bcamp55 | May 28, 2009 3:22 PM

Oh my goodness, Antonio, La Raza is "one of the most racist organizations in the country." Pray tell...give us the details! An organization that is dedicated to improving the lives of Latinos in the U.S. is racist? I guess you believe that every community-based organization that promotes the welfare of its members is somehow racist, sexist, ageist (ARRP), etc.?

You really need to turn off Fox News and Rush Limbaugh and start thinking for yourself. You folks have become self-parodies and it is difficult to decide whether to laugh at you or pity you.

Posted by: FactChecker1 | May 28, 2009 3:18 PM

Posted: May 27, 2009
11:20 pm Eastern

By Joe Kovacs

President Obama Announces Sonia Sotomayor As His Supreme Court Nominee

As President Obama's Supreme Court nominee comes under heavy fire for allegedly being a "racist," Judge Sonia Sotomayor is listed as a member of the National Council of La Raza, a group that's promoted driver's licenses for illegal aliens, amnesty programs, and no immigration law enforcement by local and state police.

According the American Bar Association, Sotomayor is a member of the NCLR, which bills itself as the largest national Hispanic civil rights and advocacy organization in the U.S.

Meaning "the Race," La Raza also has connections to groups that advocate the separation of several southwestern states from the rest of America.

Posted by: LoonyLeft | May 28, 2009 3:15 PM

Limbaugh is not being put on the Supreme Court-big big difference between a supreme court judge and a political entertainer and the affect either can have on actual lives.

Posted by: thebink | May 28, 2009 3:12 PM

Top Rush Limabaugh Quotes, and he calls ms Sotomayer racist

1. I mean, let’s face it, we didn’t have slavery in this country for over 100 years because it was a bad thing. Quite the opposite: slavery built the South. I’m not saying we should bring it back; I’m just saying it had its merits. For one thing, the streets were safer after dark.
2. You know who deserves a posthumous Medal of Honor? James Earl Ray [the confessed assassin of Martin Luther King]. We miss you, James. Godspeed.
3. Have you ever noticed how all composite pictures of wanted criminals resemble Jesse Jackson?
4. Right. So you go into Darfur and you go into South Africa, you get rid of the white government there. You put sanctions on them. You stand behind Nelson Mandela — who was bankrolled by communists for a time, had the support of certain communist leaders. You go to Ethiopia. You do the same thing.
5. Look, let me put it to you this way: the NFL all too often looks like a game between the Bloods and the Crips without any weapons. There, I said it.
6. The NAACP should have riot rehearsal. They should get a liquor store and practice robberies.
7. They’re 12 percent of the population. Who the hell cares?
8. Take that bone out of your nose and call me back(to an African American female caller).
9. I think the media has been very desirous that a black quarterback do well. They’re interested in black coaches and black quarterbacks doing well. I think there’s a little hope invested in McNabb and he got a lot of credit for the performance of his team that he really didn’t deserve.

Posted by: chet_brewer | May 28, 2009 3:02 PM

What a joke. She was put on the bench by Bush 41. Now Bush 41 is not a conservative?
LMAO.
Republicans need to get a clue.

Posted by: lasker1895 | May 28, 2009 3:02 PM

I wonder if the Conservative groups actually think that people of Hispanic descent are going to separate their opinions from the GOP. Let's be honest here, most people believe that Rush speaks for the party anyway. And you have others who are trying to take the leadership of the party (Gingrich) who have already offered their opinion.

Sorry GOP, just because others say the words doesn't mean that the words aren't yours. Remember the leaked talking points?

Posted by: alysheba_3 | May 28, 2009 3:01 PM

alkuth, so what if the people you mention are white males?! do you believe white males have no right to comment? Only "women and men of color" have that right? We ALL -- whites, blacks, browns, yellows, men and women -- have the right to express ourselves.

Posted by: AntonioSosa | May 28, 2009 2:41 PM

She will have to be better on individual freedom and indvidual rights then scalia or roberts.

Posted by: chet_brewer | May 28, 2009 2:38 PM

nwflyfisher01, what does Hugo Chavez have to do with Sotomayor?! Isn't it obvious? By injecting “empathy” (pretending to help the poor) in the Venezuelan constitution, Hugo Chavez became a dictator, and is destroying Venezuela and enslaving Venezuelans. The last person we need in the Supreme Court is someone ready to apply "empathy" on us and to "inspire" us to accept the socialism/communism Obama wants to impose on us.

Posted by: AntonioSosa | May 28, 2009 2:37 PM

No,AntonioSosa, expat2mex was not being racist in pointing out that most of the conservitive commentators who are attacking her happen to be white. Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, Karl Rove are all leading voices who have attacked her. My favorite is Rush calling her a "reverse racist," which is pretty funny coming from a man who's basically just a regular racist.

Posted by: alkuth | May 28, 2009 2:32 PM

Rush Limbaugh and Newt Gingrich using the "racist" label.

Wow. That's rich.

Posted by: nwflyfisher01 | May 28, 2009 2:30 PM

It's far from clear that expat2mex is Hispanic, Antonio, but one thing is clear: you don't speak for anyone but yourself so don't go waving your ethnicity around like it is some kind of support for your unhinged ranting. What does Hugo Chavez have to do with anything? Oh well, I'm sure it all makes perfect sense in your fevered imagination.

Posted by: benjaminanderson | May 28, 2009 2:28 PM

Thank you, expat2MEX, for showing the backward, racist mentality of Hispanics like you and Sotomayor, who seem to be proud of their racism. Racism is racism -- whether you are black, white, brown, yellow or purple. We should not appoint a racist for any position, much less for the position of Supreme Court judge!

Posted by: AntonioSosa | May 28, 2009 2:19 PM

The individuals who work as conservative commentators include unendicted criminals like Rove, and convicted criminals like Chuck Coleson, and Rush Limbaugh.

These people are self-serving, from a previous century of thought, and are irrellevant to real life. This is why they have a party in the deep south and nowhere else.

Conservative commentators are speaking for 20% of the nation. Why are they even listened to when they complain?

Because FOX gives them a bull horn.

Don't pay attention to the hypocrites on TV.

Posted by: onestring | May 28, 2009 2:17 PM

It turns out that Sotomayor was/is a member of La Raza (Race), one of the most racist organizations in the country. Speaking at a La Raza meeting, Sotomayor said, “I wonder whether by ignoring our differences as women or men of color we do a disservice both to the law and society.” I guess she wants to focus on our differences, on race, and believes that she has the right to show “empathy,” to favor women or men of color and to punish white males and females for the “crime” of being white. As honest Americans – Democrats and Republicans – we have the duty to fight the nomination of Sotomayor as a Supreme Court judge.

Posted by: AntonioSosa | May 28, 2009 2:11 PM

Most of the so-called conservative commentators are white and have never left the 1950s, Joseph McCarthy mentality. America has passed them up, passed them by. They are on a continual rant, tilting against windmills, and still living off the power of their own illusions. It's OK. This too, will pass.

Posted by: expat2MEX | May 28, 2009 2:11 PM

As a Hispanic, I ask both Democrats and Republicans to reject Sotomayor because she is biased, sexist and racist. What’s worst, she does not seem to have much regard for the U.S. Constitution and the principle of separation of powers. She said that judges make policy. Doesn’t she know that it’s the Legislative branch that sets policy? Is she going to advocate changing the Constitution? By changing their constitutions, Hugo Chavez, Morales, Rafael Correa and the rest of the “socialists of the XXI century” in Latin America have become dictators and are destroying their countries and enslaving their people. We in the U.S. believe in Government of laws, not in Government of men! Governments of men are dictatorships! We deserve a knowledgeable, honest, non-partisan American – of whatever color or gender -- as Supreme Court judge! Sotomayor is NOT such an American.

Posted by: AntonioSosa | May 28, 2009 2:09 PM

No problem with her poor choice of words in her speech. I'm certain she'll disqualify herself from any cases where the outcome will affect non-Latina caucasians or blacks since she hasn't walked a mile in their shoes.

Posted by: thinking1962 | May 28, 2009 1:56 PM

The right wing attacks on Sotomayor are futile. The fundamentalist movement in religion and politics is in decline. ..........


http://thefiresidepost.com/2009/05/28/the-rise-and-fall-of-20th-century-fundamentalism/

Posted by: glclark4750 | May 28, 2009 1:23 PM

So which GOP Senator will be the first to voice alarm over the favored line of attack against Sotomayor from the conservative grass roots, that she has an "un-English" pronunciation of her last name and that her diet is "un-American"?

http://www.political-buzz.com/

Posted by: parkerfl1 | May 28, 2009 1:19 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 

© 2009 The Washington Post Company