Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

A Latino Backlash Against Sotomayor's Critics?

By Eva Rodriguez

We’re not that stupid. Really. At least most of us aren’t.

The full Senate on Tuesday began debating the Supreme Court nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor, and much is being made of possible Hispanic backlash against Republican senators who vote against her. In case you missed it, Sotomayor is the daughter of Puerto Ricans and would be the first Hispanic justice, if confirmed.

Top Democrats have generously warned colleagues from across the aisle that a vote against Sotomayor will be viewed by Hispanics as a vote against the entire community. Lionel Sosa, a political strategist, drove home that point in an interview with The Post: “Latinos see [Sotomayor] as a symbol of Hispanic leadership in America," he said. “If they vote against Sotomayor, it's a vote against Hispanic leadership in America. That's the way Latino voters will see it."

Oh really? All Latinos? Did I miss the memo? Good thing Sosa is himself Hispanic, otherwise he’d be vilified -- and rightfully so -- for perpetuating the most ridiculous and hurtful of stereotypes, namely that people who share a certain heritage, race or ethnicity all think alike. (I strongly disliked Sotomayor’s “wise Latina” speeches because she, too, seemed to be advancing a version of this notion.)

Sosa’s comments also suggest that we Latinos will feel personally slighted by those who give her the thumbs down. A no vote against her is a no vote against us, he seems to say. Reading even further between Sosa’s lines: We, Latinos, are ill-informed and have no idea what Sotomayor thinks about due process or preemption or disparate impact analysis under Title VII, but she’s one of us and that’s good enough!

Look, I’m under no illusions: I know that there are plenty of people out there -- Latino and non-Latino alike -- who know little or nothing of Sotomayor’s legal views yet have formed strong opinions about her. I have no doubt whatsoever that some of my Latino brethren support her solely because she is Puerto Rican, just as I have no doubt there are way too many who look askance at her nomination for the same reason. These views deserve nothing but contempt. As does the idea that all Latino voters will exact political payback against those who vote no on Sotomayor.

Luckily, most Republican senators aren’t buying this. Some 28 GOP senators -- including John McCain (Ariz.), who represents a state with a large Hispanic population -- have announced their intention to vote against Sotomayor. Some cite her vote against white firefighters in an employment discrimination case; others refer to her record on gun rights (Note: the National Rifle Association opposes Sotomayor and will factor in senators’ votes in its annual grading of lawmakers.) Some even argue that she will let her personal feelings and preferences override the dictates of the law if she’s elevated to the Supreme Court and untethered from the demands of precedent.

I happen to disagree with these critics and think the extraordinarily well-qualified Sotomayor should be confirmed -- and by a wide margin. Will I be disappointed if only a few Republicans give her their vote? Absolutely. Will I hold it against them? Absolutely not.

By Eva Rodriguez  | August 5, 2009; 3:47 PM ET
Categories:  Rodriguez  | Tags:  Eva Rodriguez  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Keep Your Tweets To Yourself, Senator
Next: How Bills Get So Bad

Comments

Eva, will you please get back in the boat?

Posted by: cintronlourdes | August 5, 2009 4:22 PM | Report abuse

You will see the results in the up coming election when Latino's don't vote Republican. Don't look for Grampa McCain to be around much longer and others who have followed the racist of Republican Leader Rush Limbaugh. I love to hear Republican Racist who attack Judge Sotomayor then ask Latinos for their vote. I guess these guys forgot about the March where millions of Latinos made their point. Looks like our President will have more of a majority then he first thought. We can thank the KKK members and the Racist Law Makers for that after election day.

Posted by: qqbDEyZW | August 5, 2009 4:24 PM | Report abuse

Eva Rodriguez...Who are you? This comment you made, "We're not that stupid. Really. At least most of us aren't." You are not making No statements on my behalf...as you say...maybe you are indeed one of the stupid ones. Habla por tus huesos, I don't believe you have the whatever it takes to speak on our behalf. Or at least mine.

Posted by: sabestu | August 5, 2009 4:32 PM | Report abuse


The very first article I read by eva rodriguez on WaPo made obvious that she was a rare commodity in the media today: a common sense, completely sane thinker.

This article reaffirms my hunch that Eva Rodriguez will climb the ranks of the Post very quickly.

Posted by: dummypants | August 5, 2009 4:38 PM | Report abuse

I don't believe you have the whatever it takes to speak on our behalf. Or at least mine.
*******

i feel like this sentence is inherently contradictory.

oh, whatever.

Posted by: dummypants | August 5, 2009 4:40 PM | Report abuse

Liberals find no problem with anger as long as it the anger of blacks and latinos. But when whites at public meetings demonstrate anger at legislators who are cramming health care reform down their throats to be paid for with money that Democrats will either find in a magician's hat or in their pockets, liberals become outraged. Why do liberals insist on that double standard?

Posted by: mhr614 | August 5, 2009 4:42 PM | Report abuse

"I strongly disliked Sotomayor’s “wise Latina” speeches because she, too, seemed to be advancing a version of this notion".

You disliked the out of context version sound bite that the Republicans repeated everyday, over and over. That you even give the statement credence speaks badly of you.

"Will I be disappointed if only a few Republicans give her their vote? Absolutely. Will I hold it against them? Absolutely not."

Even if their reason is blatant partisanship and a need to pander to their deranged, White Christian Only base? There's no assumption here that 'all' Latinos should vote one way or the other. There is the idea that a Political Party that compares La Raza to the KKK doesn't deserve the support of anyone who has ever associated themselves with a similar group.

Posted by: thebobbob | August 5, 2009 5:08 PM | Report abuse

There is no such thing as a monolithic voting bloc called Hispanics or Latinos. They are united by neither culture nor blood, only loosely by language and poverty. Guatemalans and Salvadorans hate Mexicans and each other. All of these groups hate Puerto Ricans. Let the internal battles over the spoils of multiculturalism begin.

The 40% of Hispanics who vote for Republicans have one thing in common -- they work in the private sector and are successful.

Posted by: greg3 | August 5, 2009 5:15 PM | Report abuse

What's amusing, with the Democrats in power, is to watch those on that are now on the other side of the aisle complain about the same tactics that their political bretheren have used for oh so long to gain and consolidate power.

Apparently, what's good for the goose is not good for the gander if you're a Republican in the 21st century.

Posted by: JohnDinHouston | August 5, 2009 6:04 PM | Report abuse

What's the Latino version of an "oreo" - an ice-cream taco? Well, that's what this ICT is - a self-loathing person ashamed of her ethnic heritage.

Posted by: snortz_the_cat | August 5, 2009 6:18 PM | Report abuse

What's the Latino version of an "oreo" - an ice-cream taco? Well, that's what this ICT is - a self-loathing person ashamed of her ethnic heritage.

Posted by: snortz_the_cat | August 5, 2009 6:18 PM
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
It matters not, she generalizes as do most Republicans, but oh the price they will pay in 2010; can not wait to see it, it will be delightful!!!

Posted by: pcca | August 5, 2009 6:41 PM | Report abuse

America will have to deal with the resurgence of southern style, mainly white mobs, who seek to impose their backwardness through mob rule after losing power through the democratic process.

The hatred for Sonya Sotomayor is a symptom of the resurgence of racist hate and mob rule. The mob is the regfuge of scoundrels and those who cannot accept the results of the democratic process.

The mobs should be disrupted and brought to heel. We've seen enough southern mobs to not play around with them any more. They should be broken up and brought down.

Posted by: DCSage | August 5, 2009 6:51 PM | Report abuse

The Republican response to Sotomayor has been irrational at best. The Republican response says more about Republican values and biases than it does about a highly qualified "other." Without any "empathy" and cherity of their own, Republicans are lashing out at a female and a "foreigner." People forget that the religious right as well as many conservatives hate the feminist movement in our country. In Sotomayor, one gets an accomplished "liberated" female and a minority.

Posted by: EarlC | August 5, 2009 6:57 PM | Report abuse

Never fear. The "Christian" right as the solution for Republicans.

From Mat Staver, Dean of the "prestigious" Democrats-are Satan Liberty University Law School in Lynchburg (what an appropriate name), VA, offers"

"Hispanic and African Americans support traditional marriage even more than White Evangelical according to recent surveys. This is the opening the Republicans need to engage the minority communities. The faith based value system that flows within these communities is undeniable. For example, as it pertains to America's largest minority group, Hispanics, the Republicans lost many as a result of the immigration reform debate. Same Sex marriage may very well bring them back"

The only problem is the Republicans use a similar tactic of wedge politics to demonize Mexicans over immigrations but, in their delusional white superiority, believe the Latinos are too stupid to notice or remember that.

Posted by: coloradodog | August 5, 2009 7:04 PM | Report abuse

You've got 7 Republicans already voting yes, with probably more to come. Kyl is not in 1980 Arizona and a no vote will lose the next election. Play the race card in VA and you lose elections. Our country is changing and good ol boy TX will have a minority majority in a decade. The backlash against illegal aliens has hispanic Americans getting attacked by these hateful nuts. Sessions is OK in AL, but elsewhere the GOP is foolish to vote no considering her vast judicial record of centrist left. The fireman's case is one where she agreed with the precedent and opinion. By a 5-4 vote, thinking you avoid possible damages to proving it has raised the bar.

Posted by: jameschirico | August 5, 2009 7:15 PM | Report abuse

"Why do liberals insist on that double standard?

Posted by: mhr614 |"
---
We don't, choosing who to vote for is one thing, shouting down a public discourse is completely different. You are comparing doorknobs to dinosaurs.

Posted by: JRM2 | August 5, 2009 7:31 PM | Report abuse

Of course it is a vote against "differentness". Her first difference is that she's a Democrat, so that's almost enough right there. Then she's Hispanic - well, we all know we cannot be trusted. The NRA has nothing on her - this is simply fear itself.

In the 1950's, urban renewal was done across the country by building roads through minority communities. There was an attempt to build one through our little Mexican village in a midwest state and my mom and two friends (one African-American one Hispanic) went to DC the day the Federal Highway Commission was meeting about this road. The commissioners asked our town mayor if he could say who lived here. He answered that it was hard to get a census because we were a bunch of Mexicans and we kept coming and going. My mother and her friends pointed out who lived in every house and that most of us had been there for 40 years, had jobs, and that we didn't want to move.

Now I know this is a long response, but this situation seems a bit the same - Sotomayer is being thought of as shifty, a hot Latina, and, of course, more left than Che. You can't see what she thinks because she is constantly "migrating". Was there one Hispanic Senator asking questions? I am proud we have come a long way - but we aren't quite there yet.


We need to have sufficient representation at every level - especially in Congress and in the courts. When that happens, a person like Sotomayer will actually be able to have a personality during a hearing. We have to participate in numbers great enough that allow us to succeed and fail and be seen as real people - people of substance.

I think it is very important to hold this against the people who vote "no" on Sotomayer. That is how our Democracy works. We need great candidates in every one of these districts so everyone has a chance to make their most important statement about this, their vote, either way.

There have been something like 112 Supreme Court Justices since the country started - of these 2 have been women and 2 have been African-American men. Doesn't that speak for itself?

Posted by: maggieww | August 5, 2009 7:33 PM | Report abuse

"[H]er vote against white firefighters" -- er... what? Are you trying to make into a vote _against white firefighters_? That is so intellectually lazy that I wouldn't be surprised if you simply bought the right-wing meme about her "wise latina" speech without bothering to actually look at what she said, and in context.

...And it turns out you did.

Well, I have to agree with the poster who predicted that you'll rise quickly at the Post. You're exactly the type of editorial writer Mr. Hiatt seems to favor.

Posted by: sembtex | August 5, 2009 7:38 PM | Report abuse

Sonia Sotomayor represents a serious threat to the culture war fomented by Republican conservatives. A wise latina Puertorrican woman sitting on the Supreme Court, one of the last bastions of white supremacy, send shivers up their spine. The United States have become a rich and complex multicultural society not a society of mixed blood mongrels as some "dixieland" republicans believe. America must embrace any and all qualified and accomplished individuals who wish to contribute to this extraordinary country.

Posted by: jrguzman | August 5, 2009 7:43 PM | Report abuse

I agree with your sentiment that identity politics should not play a role in the Sotomayor confirmation votes. However, I don't understand why, if Republicans vote against her, you won't hold this against them. They are voting against her for a wide range of political reasons, none of them having anything to do with her qualifications. If they were upholding their oath of office, they would be voting on the merits instead. I would certainly hold it against them if they vote on such an important appointment for petty partisan reasons.

Posted by: tgd123 | August 5, 2009 8:22 PM | Report abuse

Perhaps, when Latinos/hispanics become more assimilated into American society. they will lose their third-world herd mentality of "what's best for us" and think about what's best for America as a whole.

Posted by: fedup32 | August 5, 2009 9:39 PM | Report abuse

Perhaps, when Latinos/hispanics become more assimilated into American society. they will lose their third-world herd mentality of "what's best for us" and think about what's best for America as a whole.

Posted by: fedup32 | August 5, 2009 9:45 PM | Report abuse

Eva, these rednecks are anti-Hispanic. Face it! No excuses, please......

An Independent

Posted by: aeaustin | August 5, 2009 10:08 PM | Report abuse

I wouldn't vote for her because statements before and after her nominations regarding her views did not coincide. That makes me feel uncomfortable. Also, I am becoming weary of Americans identifying themselves as hybrid Americans. To me, a Latina is a woman from a Latin country. Judge Sotomayor is an American (of Peurto Rican heritage.) This hybridization is an affectation that has developed in the last 20 years and I think is detrimental to the cohesiveness of this nation.

Posted by: MizTex | August 5, 2009 10:50 PM | Report abuse

Thebobbob, LaRaza and Acorn are like the KKK. They are all racists. I thought Eva wrote a good piece and showed she is not a racist. She showed common sense - something lacking in alot of people these days. Both educated and uneducated.

Posted by: annnort | August 5, 2009 11:03 PM | Report abuse

I am a Latina, who is quite insulted by the remarks made by Sosa and the Democrats, in Washington. A "wise Latina," should have realized the former comment was unwise. I have no intention of getting on any boat, whose members require numbers by association of ethnicity instead of intelligence. Sotomayor should be subjected to the same scrutiny that other "minority or non-minority" justices have experienced. Scrutinizing, her judgeship, to determine if she can uphold the constitution, constitutional law, and federal law, has nothing to do with race. If any sitting justice or nominees said, "wise Black Man.., or wise Jew.., or wise Italian, ..or wise redneck, every race, or ethnic related organization would be all over them. The fact of the matter is that "Latinas" o "Latinos", unless they are of mixed race happen to be Caucasian.

"We the people," preamble of the constitution, is inclusive of everyone. The constitution outlines responsibilities, rights and freedoms, of those governing as well as those governed. Amendments, made to the constitution, were added to strengthen it, so extreme interpretations would not subvert it as happened in the past. Ignorance, pride and self-appointed supremacy subverted it once, and subjugated others, and even an unwise proud Latina nominee is guilty of that same ignorance. Uphold the law equally for all without punishing those who are innocent of circumstances beyond their control. I may not know everyone of your ruling, nor how many of those were overturned, but the most glaring reversal I hear about would make me think twice before I voted yes.

Posted by: hoosierlatina | August 5, 2009 11:15 PM | Report abuse

Republicans like John McCain are going to vote against a well qualified candidate for the Court and Ms Rodriguez is NOT going to hold it against them? Well here we have an example of an unwise Latina.

Posted by: nyrunner101 | August 5, 2009 11:23 PM | Report abuse

Gee, I thought the point was that virtually every Republican who announced his vote against Sotomayor explained that in one sense or another he believed her to be biased based on her ethnicity. Most especially folks like McCain.

I consider that insulting, and I would hope that you would call it out. A highly qualified and experienced jurist is dimissed on the grounds that she, unlike, say, Judge Alito, couldn't distinguish the law from her personal prejudices?

And even when those guys could vote for Alito who brays his empathy for Italian immigrants, they can't vote for a woman with a distinguished and moderate record because she admits to being Latina?

Posted by: thmas | August 5, 2009 11:23 PM | Report abuse

And even when those guys could vote for Alito who brays his empathy for Italian immigrants, they can't vote for a woman with a distinguished and moderate record because she admits to being Latina?

When did he bray about it, before or after his nomination, and did he use it in conjunction with the mafia or la raza?

Posted by: hoosierlatina | August 5, 2009 11:28 PM | Report abuse

LATINO POWER!!!

Don't try to stop it -- we have won -- no one can dare question anything any Latino does.

This is OUR land -- don't you know what the greatest race on Earth is?! How dare anybody question anything about a Latino.

YOU WILL ACCEPT LATINOS COMING ACROSS THE BORDER, GETTING ANY PUBLIC SERVICES THEY WISH, CEO POSITIONS, UNIVERSITY POSITIONS, CONGRESSIONAL POSITIONS, AND EVENTUALLY THE PRESIDENCY, AND YOU WILL LIKE IT!!!

We don't care if Asians, Europeans, Africans or anyone else has to wait in line to immigrate to the US -- we don't care if we have the lowest educational achievement, lowest language skills, highest teen birthrates, and under perform -- WE DON'T CARE -- WE ARE LATINOS!! -- if you don't accept that fact that this nation is meant to be Latino, than you are a RACIST!!

Remember, if anyone questions the right to speak Spanish, an open border for Mexico only and not Africa, Asia or anyone else, questions our RIGHT to be on TV, Universities, companies, politics etc, then we will simply destroy you and your family by labeling you racist and xenophobic.

This is it -- you are done -- we have won -- the entire world celebrates 'Latino Accomplishments' -- our Liberals will destroy any one who dare question bias policies which benefits Hispanics, whether it be open borders, amnesty, affirmative action, or making Spanish the official language, not English (HA!! HA!!)

We are forever indebted to the Liberals of America who know how to shut anyone down that dare question us -- Latino gangs, Latino criminals, Latino illegal immigrants -- YOU RACIST!! Be thankful that the greatest race has come to save YOU Americans!!

And thank you to our black brothers -- we love getting credit for your struggles, your slavery, your Jim Crow, HA HA!! -- we chose to come here as immigrants, not slaves, but everyone treats as also "OPPRESSED" !! Thank you liberals -- and sorry our black friends, we'll say we're brown around you, put don't be surprised, we are white when you're not around. HA HA!!!

RECONQUISTA!! This was always our land, and now we take it back -- don't question it, don't try to fight it, we and our liberals will destroy you and your family by calling you racist.

Sit back and relax, what's done is done -- remember, there is no such thing as America, only LATIN AMERICA.

LATINO POWER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: vipermd | August 5, 2009 11:48 PM | Report abuse

Wait a minute! I thought it went without saying that anytime a minority was nominated for something everyone had to support it, otherwise they were "racist."

Is that not the case?

Posted by: silencedogoodreturns | August 6, 2009 12:21 AM | Report abuse

With you almost to the end, but by your own logic you could oppose those who vote against her just as a thinking person, as an American, as someone who prefers effort to acknowledge a president's perogatives, as ....

well, take your pick or add another!

Posted by: esthermiriam | August 6, 2009 12:22 AM | Report abuse

It remains to be seen whether a no vote on judge Sotomayor will be held against the republican senators. However, those republicans from border states with significant hispanic populations are going to have some "explaining" to do.

Posted by: edhenson | August 6, 2009 12:25 AM | Report abuse

I think the Republican senators looked ridiculous when they repeatedly tried to get her on her "wise Latina" comment. There they were, a bunch of older white guys...as if gender and race had nothing to do with their grasp on power all these years.

Hey, things...they are a changin'....and, based on Republican positions and comments, that won't be of any help to them or their party! "Wise Native American Woman."

Posted by: tbenn1021 | August 6, 2009 12:42 AM | Report abuse

The key is that Hispanics will get the clout they deserve when they vote in the same percentages that whites do. If they don't, they will suffer. If the do, they will get the needed respect. It's all about the voting.

And let's be honest. Conservative Republican jurists do not follow a strict interpretation of the Constitution. If they did, "no law" abridging the freedom of speech would mean "no law," and it obviously, does not. It is "interpreted" to not allow certain speech, such as, speech they think is pornography.

Finally, what about the requirement that Congress must file a Declaration of War for this country to go to war? It wasn't done in Iraq or Afghanistan, and they are surely "wars", so again, the conservative jurists do not follow the Constitution.

What a bunch of hyppocrites.

Posted by: santafe2 | August 6, 2009 12:43 AM | Report abuse

I think that Judge Sottomayor and her LaRaza ( THE RACE) credentials speaks for itself on the matter of how justice will not be blind under her. This may frustrate many Latino Americans, but enthrall American Latinos. It is a sad day that we have come to this, but her ewe are

Posted by: jgdonahue | August 6, 2009 12:46 AM | Report abuse

Eva ... you are the mean sister. Anyway, I believe that Hispanics should save their anger for Obama and the Democrats for not moving forward on Immigration Reform that helps the struggling Hispanic workers in this country who need someone to speak up for them. Looks like Obama and the Dems don't do anything unless the polls give them a green light for safety. No leadership will be this President's legacy.

Posted by: paris1969 | August 6, 2009 1:16 AM | Report abuse

Well, the Democrats don't seem to worry much themselves about filibustering an eminently qualified Latino jurist, like they did with Miguel Estrada in 2001, with the support of the leaders of La Raza and the entire Hispanic Caucus. The fact is that La Raza and other Latino groups are nothing else than Democratic redoubts that will never approve anything GOP leaders do. But many Latino voters have minds of their own, as Ms Rodriguez said.

Posted by: JAPuertasSr | August 6, 2009 1:31 AM | Report abuse

....everyone had to support it, otherwise they were "racist."

To be any person nominated to a high ranking position in government should be a great honor. Any person nominated, thus, should be nominated based on their knowledge, ability to perform, and character. It is hardly honorable to be nominated solely because, I have a racially aggressive demeanor and I am going to be used to defame anyone who disagrees with my politics.

Now to me, politicians that use my commonality with any group, as wedge, to bully, and accuse others of racism, are the true racists. This scrupulous behavior for that purpose is wrong. Those who would subject their own nominee to this sort of scheme don't mind if their nominee gets labeled as a "token." Why should they mind, they only want someone who will advance their politics, and not do what is right, humane, just, or follow the rule of law. Expressio unius est exclusio alterius y excusatio non petita accusatio manifesta.

Posted by: hoosierlatina | August 6, 2009 2:07 AM | Report abuse

...What a bunch of hyppocrites....

By your own reasoning that would make Democrats hypocrites, too.

...Then she's Hispanic - well, we all know we cannot be trusted. ...

When was the last time you trusted anyone or anything? Nowadays you would be lucky if you found two people the same living room who trusted each other. I saw first had in many Hispanic EEOC or Civil Rights meetings, how distrustful they were of each other. It is not like every Hispanic has bleeding palms. Maybe everyone should work on their own shortcomings and quit looking for someone to blame.

Posted by: hoosierlatina | August 6, 2009 2:29 AM | Report abuse

...as if gender and race had nothing to do with their grasp on power all these years.

Those white faces were elected, not appointed, for life, and certainly don't claim in every excuse speech to have inherited the problems he is still perpetuating.

Posted by: hoosierlatina | August 6, 2009 2:33 AM | Report abuse

Ms. Rodriguez makes a valid point and one that needs more air, print and blogospace.

Posted by: youngj1 | August 6, 2009 2:50 AM | Report abuse

I think we would all agree that I would be a "bad person" to lobby for a candidate because he is a white male. Why is it acceptable to lobby for someone because of being Hispanic or females? Isn't that equally racism and sexism?

Posted by: potaboc | August 6, 2009 4:42 AM | Report abuse

Yonkers, New York
06 August 2009

The author of this essay, Eva Rodriguez, who claims to be a Hispanic, discounts the possibility of a backlash against those Senators who will vote against the confirmation of Sonia Sotomayor as the first Hispanic justice of the U.S. Supreme Court.

It happens that 28 Republican senators have already made it clear that they are going to vote "No."

Ms Rodriguez could be right in that not ALL Latinos will take it against any Senator who will vote against confirmation.

What is certain, in my opinion, is that a MAJORITY of Latinos will not take too kindly to those Senators who will vote "No" to Sonia Sotomayor's confirmation.

This majority will note down the names of those naysayer Senators and recall what they did to Sonia Sotomayor the next time they are up for reelection in their states.

There is bound to be a big backlash, no matter what Eva Rodriguez says.

Mariano Patalinjug

Posted by: MPatalinjug | August 6, 2009 5:01 AM | Report abuse

Did Eva watch Sotomayor's treatment by the Republicans during the Senate hearings? There's more than a vote involved in shaping Hispanic opinion. And why do Republicans find the defining issue for our country to be what the NRA says it is? Where in the Constitution does it say we have the right to carry concealed weapons?

Posted by: brucemgr | August 6, 2009 5:06 AM | Report abuse

latinos want our representatives to vote honestly about sotomayor...
there will be no backlash...
nothing to worry about...

Posted by: DwightCollins | August 6, 2009 6:49 AM | Report abuse

I find it curious that Rodriguez conveniently forgot to mention the Republican attacks against Sotomayor. They've been screaming from the rooftops that she's racist, and her support of La Raza is equivalent to supporting the KKK. Add to that the G.O.P.'s tradition of fueling hate and stupidity towards people of color (I'm sure the next presidential election will include inflammatory attacks on immigration), and I'm pretty sure you can take it to the bank that Hispanics will once again thumb their noses at Republican candidates. It's a logical response to a party which offers little more than demagoguery.

Posted by: DonnaMariaInChicago | August 6, 2009 7:03 AM | Report abuse

Good for you, Eva. You're a wonderful person. I guess I'm not, because I'll certainly hold it against Republicans. It's not merely Sotomayor. It's that a majority of the Party, and apparently most of their supporters, will deliberately twist words, misunderstand comments, and frankly outright lie to prevent a Hispanic woman from getting to a position she has proven worthy of holding. What does that tell me about them? That they'd do the EXACT same thing to me if given half a chance.

Posted by: gasmonkey | August 6, 2009 7:19 AM | Report abuse

Just great. Now it's really gotten racial, qualifications are meaningless anymore. Way to go America. Look what this influx of Hispanics has done to the black community, they have been pushed aside. Look out white America, you're next. Make no doubt about it.

Posted by: TooManyPeople | August 6, 2009 8:34 AM | Report abuse

This argument doesn't much add up. Ms. Rodriguez states plainly that she thinks Ms. Sotomayor is "extraordinarily well-qualified" and should be confirmed. She then apparently thinks that Republicans shouldn't be called to account if they vote against her because (this is where things get muddy)... a) all Latinos don't think the same way, or b) the Democrats are wrong when they predict a Latino backlash, or c) those Republicans hold views on Sotomayor's record they disagree with (even if the historical record doesn't support their position).

If she were being intellectually honest, Ms. Rodriguez would caution the Republicans to think more critically about whether Ms. Sotomayor is qualified or not. If they are voting against her because they would vote against any candidate put forth by a Democrat, they should be prepared to defend that action. But if they are voting against Sotomayor on the basis of specious arguments, there's no reason why they shouldn't be prepared to take it on the chin from Latinos... and whites, and blacks, and asians, and native Americans. If Ms. Sotomayor were intellectually or experientially unqualified, or had actually shown a pattern of biased behavior, you can be sure we'd be reading a very different column.

Dressing up Precambrian thinking as a principled stand based on falsehoods is par for the course with most of what's left of the GOP. It's a shame that it has to be par for the course for Ms. Rodriguez, as well.

What an odd spot to put yourself in at such a historic moment.

Posted by: cellmaker | August 6, 2009 8:34 AM | Report abuse

Of late, Republicans appear bound and determined to cut their own throats. They are not only plannng largely to vote against Judge Sotomayor, they set about savaging her during the hearings. Yes, the majority of Hispanics will, rightly, hold it against Jeff Sessions and his cohorts during coming elections, and so will many other people who were apalled by the racism-tinged questioning.

Posted by: gsross | August 6, 2009 8:36 AM | Report abuse

Ms. Rodriguez must be the most tolerant person in the country. So many of us non-Latinos WILL hold it against the Republicans who follow their leader (whoever that is these days) in taking one out-of-context remark and attempting to turn it into something much worse than it was. AND, she distanced herself from it with confident aplomb. The truth is, of course, that, if she weren't Hispanic, NONE of the Republicans in the Senate would support her nomination. It has become the nature of the game. Only those with significant Hispanic constituencies or Hispanic blood know they HAVE TO VOTE for her. Otherwise, in spite of what Ms. Rodriguez would have us believe, those Republicans, would pay for their ethnic betrayal, as they no doubt should.

Posted by: wleldred | August 6, 2009 8:49 AM | Report abuse

The lady from Indiana stayed up all night to post that drivel??? Amazing. And I thought Ms. Rodriguez was the only one who totally missed the boat during the Sotomayor hearings, and the pro- and post-logue of rude, racist Republican ramblings. Thank Goodness, not all Hoosiers, as well as not all Hispanics, are capable of stringing together so many reasonable words without any meaning. Most at least ATTEMPT to say something.

Posted by: wleldred | August 6, 2009 9:11 AM | Report abuse

"Reading even further between Sosa’s lines: We, Latinos, are ill-informed and have no idea what Sotomayor thinks about due process or preemption or disparate impact analysis under Title VII, but she’s one of us and that’s good enough!"

Now wait a minute...I can't claim to know what was in Sosa's mind, but that's going too far. To me, Sosa seemed to be saying that it's reasonable to suspect that the GOP senators were prejudiced against uppity Latinas. I'm not saying that the senators were indeed prejudiced. Sosa also seemed to be saying that it's reasonable to be offended by white men lecturing a Latina about prejudice. They haven't experienced systemic anti-white discrimination of the sort that blacks and Latinos have endured for decades.

Posted by: Carstonio | August 6, 2009 9:24 AM | Report abuse

Perfect example of this writer's continuing "Republicans are-always-right" attitude. I'm sure neither your minimizing of the importance of Sotomayor's success, nor the acceptance of this neocon-led, Republican implemented reverse-racist backlash is shared by many, least of all those trying to make a better life for themselves in the face of slyly contrived prejudice, regardless of their ethnicity.

Posted by: joebanks | August 6, 2009 9:26 AM | Report abuse

about uppity latinas, didn't the sanchez sister in congress hold a fundraiser at the playboy mansion in l.a....
a nice example for our daughters...

Posted by: DwightCollins | August 6, 2009 9:29 AM | Report abuse

It's hard to believe that many of the posters are Americans....or at least Americans who have the slightest inkling of what the Constitution means.

What we have now are a lot of people who think that a Puerto Rican flag tattoo actually constitutes a rationale for supporting s/he. If we could sneak a peek I bet many of you have a Che Guevara picture on your refrigerators.

Stop emoting and join the American community. In any event the Republicans have nothing to lose by casting a "nay" vote. Enough ethnic butt kissing already.

Posted by: SUBLIMEWOODY | August 6, 2009 9:51 AM | Report abuse

Ms. Rodriguez is to be applauded for her focus on issues rather than ethnicity, and she would have a good point if this were ONLY a question of some Republican senators voting against Judge Sotomayor. Unfortunately, there is also a broader context to be considered, and it's not pretty. Republican Senators who vote against Judge Sotomayor will add one more straw to the back of a camel already straining under the weight of anti-immigrant hysteria, sponsorship of "English only" legislation and inexplicable, insulting Ricky Ricardo impersonations during Judge Sotomayor's confirmation hearings.

No, Latinos are not stupid. They understand that today's Republican Party, dominated as it is by narrow-minded Southern white religious conservatives, offers no place for them. The votes against Judge Sotomayor will be only small brushstrokes on this larger picture.

Posted by: PaulF2 | August 6, 2009 9:52 AM | Report abuse

I am not Hispanic but I think the line of questioning of Sotomayor by some Republican senators was offensive. The "wise Latina" comment made by Sotomayor years ago was beat to death. Do the Senators (Southern ones in particular) have a comprehension problem? Some of the questioners were blatantly patronizing to her like Lindsey Graham was when he asked Ms. Mayor if she had an anger mangagment problem and she quietly told him, "no, sir." At least Graham is going to vote for her. I think her confirmation hearings told us more about Republican senators than it did about Sonia Sotomayor. And even if her treatment and the upcoming "no" votes on her confirmation doesn't bother you, Ms. Rodriquez, it will bother many and I hope there will be a backlash against the likes of Conyers, McCain, Ensign (who says he will vote no "to protect the sanctity of the Constitution." What a load of horse-S)Sessions and the rest of the good old boys, white men's club.

Posted by: creatia52 | August 6, 2009 9:58 AM | Report abuse

National Hispanic Evangelical Women's President, that seems to sum up who you are and ever since the Republican nomination convention you've been their "wise Latina Shill"
Hispanics weren't disparaged by democrats, it was the Republicans who slighted and tried to indict Ms. Sotomayor, but in the ever constant republican technique you try and put your biases and bigotry on the Democrats. Sessions is your champion????
Your a sad excuse for a Latina

Posted by: rosenfan1 | August 6, 2009 10:08 AM | Report abuse

i cannot recall if there was a latino(what, latina's don't count? and aren't "they" hispanics?)outcry when the first hispanic, a republican male (wrong demographic?) was NOT placed on the high bench.

Posted by: jrzshor | August 6, 2009 10:29 AM | Report abuse

You don't mind that so many Republicans have called Sotomeyor a racist? Do you think she is? If you don't, why wouldn't that bother you, if they are making a false charge against her?

And what if they are voting against her for this false reason, simply to appease their racist base? That doesn't bother you either?

I feel sorry for you.

Posted by: drindl | August 6, 2009 10:57 AM | Report abuse

You don't mind that so many Republicans have called Sotomeyor a racist? Do you think she is? If you don't, why wouldn't that bother you, if they are making a false charge against her?

And what if they are voting against her for this false reason, simply to appease their racist base? That doesn't bother you either?

I feel sorry for you.

Posted by: drindl | August 6, 2009 10:58 AM | Report abuse

latinos will vote the way they want to...
the idea of a backlash is a myth created by dems to control the simple minded...
so go out and vote for those that serve your interest and remember...
sotomayor voted against a latino that passed that test...
she didn't have a problem doing that...

Posted by: DwightCollins | August 6, 2009 11:01 AM | Report abuse

If Sonia Sotomayor were a WASP no one would question her qualifications, in fact her Ivy League education and her experience as a prosecutor and as a federal trial and appeals judge would guarantee confirmation by both parties. A careful review of her extensive judicial record shows no bias in favor of Hispanics or other minorities.

Republican senators oppose her because she is not one of them and because they are pandering to their base. The message that I receive as a successful college educated Latino is that no amount of achievement will overcome Republicans prejudice toward minorities. That is the reason I will oppose Republicans in the future and I believe that many other Latinos and other minorities feel likewise.

Posted by: fjchavesb | August 6, 2009 11:11 AM | Report abuse

Remember all those articles and news stories that the Wash Post and other MSM outlets ran during Clarence Thomas's confirmation, warning about how Democrats voting against his confirmation would risk losing the black vote for decades to come? Remember all those articles?

Yeah, me either....

Posted by: dbw1 | August 6, 2009 11:21 AM | Report abuse

As of this writing only one commenter has wisely pointed out that the "magnanimously tolerant, inclusive" Dems refused to allow a single vote on Miguel Estrada's nomination for the DC Court of Appeals (holding tank for future Supreme Ct. nominees), and I haven't seen any responses trying to explain away this glaring hypocracy.

The point of this is, as far as the ethnic activists (and self-anointed leaders) are concerned, your "race" isn't determinitive of whether you get their support; it's your views (ask Justice Thomas). If you're an ethnic minority nominee who fails to look at legal/political issues through their preferred ethno-centric, liberal political lens, then you're a "sell-out" and worthy of scorn, not support. You get called an "oreo" or "coconut" etc.

I suppose that under this ridiculous standard, the cuban population in south Florida that identify themselves as conservatives or republicans aren't "latino," and are sell-outs.

As a "latino/hispanic/post-columbian-south-american/whatever-you're-labeling-me-these-days" person, I find these self-anointed "leaders" of my ethnic group abhorrent. Further, they foster and exploit that which they claim to be fighting against--discrimination--for their own personal gain.

I oppose Sotomayor because she clearly seeks to manipulate the law to impose her political views--in this case liberal ones--rather than let the law determine what her opinion should be. Legislators make law, agencies make rules, and precedent points the way to clearing up conflicts in application (even though not ultimately determinative). I would oppose a similar effort to impose "conservative political views" for that matter; we all should be supporting nominees who interpret the law, not make it from the bench.

Ms. Rodriguez deserves credit for airing her "contrarian" view--I hope she takes heart in knowing that at least some of us latinos agree with her view of ethnic propagandists and demagogues, even if we might disagree on whether Sotomayor should be appointed to the bench.

Posted by: Screwtape | August 6, 2009 11:28 AM | Report abuse

rosefan1:
"Your a sad excuse for a Latina."

Left-wingers unite. You know the drill. If someone within a racial/gender identity doesn't fit the template Democrats have created for them, then immediately commence attacking, pillaging, and otherwise belittling them.

When leftists have no rationale way to argue with the opinion of someone who doesn't bend to their ideology, they must resort to attacking the person. It's what they do best.

Posted by: dbw1 | August 6, 2009 11:28 AM | Report abuse

Criticism of Sotomayor had nothing to do with race at all and the only racists are the liberals who mad such a baseless claim.

Posted by: bobmoses | August 6, 2009 11:46 AM | Report abuse

Cellmaker, you wrote:

This argument doesn't much add up. Ms. Rodriguez states plainly that she thinks Ms. Sotomayor is "extraordinarily well-qualified" and should be confirmed. She then apparently thinks that Republicans shouldn't be called to account if they vote against her because (this is where things get muddy)... a) all Latinos don't think the same way, or b) the Democrats are wrong when they predict a Latino backlash, or c) those Republicans hold views on Sotomayor's record they disagree with (even if the historical record doesn't support their position).

****

The point of her article is to take umbrage with LIONEL SOSA's view that (all, or a majority of) latinos will hold any republican's "no" votes against them. His comment implies that latinos are incapable of seeing the merits of Sotomayor's nomination in any sort of nuance or context beyond her ethnicity. Taken to its logical conclusion, Sosa's view basically implies that we latinos are too stupid/ignorant to judge for ourselves whether she is qualified or not, and will simply resort to seeing her as a latina and, by extension, the success or failure of her nomination as a referendum on us as a group.

Ms. Rodriguez and/or other latinos may very well hold their Senator's "no" vote against them if they feel Sotomayor is qualified; her point is that such a stand will not be based on the insultingly stupid calculus that "she is latina, so a no vote means the senator and/or party is anti-latino."

Posted by: Screwtape | August 6, 2009 12:03 PM | Report abuse

...et al ...of your ignoramus posts ... Most at least ATTEMPT to say something....

I did say that most Latinos are Caucasian in one of my other posts. On the other hand Puerto Ricans are combined with , Taino Indian and African American or Taino Indian and White. Lantinos are a polyglot of races and ethnic origins whose only common charastic is language. Are Hatians Latinos as well? No, because they speak French. Latinos had their own devisions: Mestizos, Mulattoes, Castellanos, Zambos. Talk about labeling,because gringos did not make those up Latinos did. Racism is not exclusive to whites alone, and has no boundaries. White looking Americans only commonality is also language. It is a misnomer to call them swede,german,dutch, etcetera based on looks. Many blue eyed looking white people can be part black, and speak English. And many blued eyed white looking people are Latino, because they speak Spanish.

The Taino indians were indigenous people of Puerto Rico, who met Christopher Columbus. They were conquered by Spain. Spaniards speak Spanish, can be European and African mixed. Oh by the way Spain is also having immigration riots.

What say ye does all this mean? Most immigrants want to suckle the tit of the American welfare system. They have been taught, since their low life governments can't and won't provide them with decent living they need to come here. I have known many immigrants and I have in-laws who are Puerto Rican. Even the black Puerto Ricans in my family claim the be Latino, and have had prejudicial comments against blacks. I find them rather two faced and stupid. They don't even realize the are the liberals lackey tokens. What a shame most will never assimilate, because they are too busy using the race defense.

Sorry I digress. I think Sosa's racial name calling is only about advancing Libtards.

Posted by: hoosierlatina | August 6, 2009 12:10 PM | Report abuse

Whenever I see someone write "a vote against Sotomayor is a vote against US ", as I did in this column, I know the person writing is NOT a real American, but a foreigner whose allegiance is to another country--whoever the "us" is. Also, Blackmail scares me--"if you don't vote for Sotomayor, we'll get you in the next election" Call it backlash if it makes you feel good--it is blackmail and it is alien to our nation's core beliefs. We think that people have a right to vote for whomever they please here. I think it is time some Hispanics realized they are not here to CHANGE our system. Those who feel they must must, should leave.

Posted by: drzimmern1 | August 6, 2009 12:36 PM | Report abuse

Okay Latino, Latina, Blacks, all ethnic groups you know what to do: Petitions please, March, Raise holy hell. GOP just reek!!!!!!!!!!!11

Full of it!! Let your voices be heard loudly and clearly.

Do not take this crap!!!

Posted by: Scar1 | August 6, 2009 1:03 PM | Report abuse

Good piece, too bad you will be vilified because you stated that if people do not vote for her, that is ok.

What the h@ll is wrong with this country - everyone has a right to their say, and a right to vote they want to vote. Both parties, Dems and Repubs need to remember they are not here for the vocal minority but the silent majority who works their as@es off everyday to put food on the table.

Personally, I think the haters and whiners in both parties deserve a frontal lobotomy with a nail gun.

Posted by: zendrell | August 6, 2009 2:14 PM | Report abuse

Liberals find no problem with anger as long as it the anger of blacks and latinos. But when whites at public meetings demonstrate anger at legislators who are cramming health care reform down their throats to be paid for with money that Democrats will either find in a magician's hat or in their pockets, liberals become outraged. Why do liberals insist on that double standard?

Posted by: mhr614 | August 5, 2009 4:42 PM
___________________________________________

Conservatives find no problem with anger as long as it is whites at public meetings demonstrating anger over health care reform. But when liberals hold demonstrations and express anger at a president cramming pointless and unprovoked foreign wars down their throats to be paid for with money that Republicans will either find in a magician's hat or in their pockets, conservatives become outraged. Why do conservatives insist on that double standard?

See what I did there?

Posted by: crblaisd | August 6, 2009 3:00 PM | Report abuse

See what I did there?

Yes, except that you forgot to put Obama money from our empty pockets into the same empty hat. So why are the Demonrats still in Iraq, Afghanistan, or Pakistan, and talking about sending more troops?

Posted by: hoosierlatina | August 6, 2009 3:17 PM | Report abuse

Ms. Rodriguez is 180 degrees out on this. Her rationale may suit her, but I doubt that the majority of Latinos go along with her. Anyone who can't see the Republicans' motives for voting against her don't understand how the white power structure operates. It's about power and who controls it. Putting a Latino on the Court is, to them, the first crack in the wall of exclusivity put up over the years.
What these privileged white men can't accept is the inevitability of a changing electorate and the eventual need to share places at the top. Think of the dodo bird!

Posted by: Diogenes | August 6, 2009 3:31 PM | Report abuse

As one of the very few sane, non racist, posters, and also happens to be 1000% all American of the real kind.....

I find Sotomayors support of Affirmative Action, as a judge, disturbing. It clearly violates the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, and discriminates against whites, males especially. The time for this is long past.

As we all know, the modern, liberal, egalitarian world we all love so much is the result of the efforts of these people, these white men & their ladies... They unified us all, ended the world wide slave trade of the Muslim and other ancient aristocratic empires, and created the institutions, schools, and civilisation we are enjoying today.

Posted by: WilliamBlake | August 6, 2009 3:33 PM | Report abuse

Blake,

I guess that we can agree that, at times, sanity and racism are in the eye of the beholder. Some might consider your comment racist and irrational. How do you get to be "1000% all American of the real kind"? Are you ten people? Are you saying that some kinds of Americans are inherently better than others?

Posted by: nita3 | August 6, 2009 3:45 PM | Report abuse

Where were the race hating, hypocrites, when Clarence Thomas was being nominated?

Posted by: hoosierlatina | August 6, 2009 3:58 PM | Report abuse

As a life long Republican, Sonia needs to go. We don't want a Hispanic on the Supreme Court!

Soon she would be ruling that we have to take down our border fences and give more money to all the Hispanics on welfare.

Posted by: Cupito | August 6, 2009 3:59 PM | Report abuse

Well one of my posts just got stolen by the blog god, it must have had too many reverse discrimination references in it.

Posted by: hoosierlatina | August 6, 2009 4:16 PM | Report abuse

Eva Rodriguez, I know nothing about your background, except that you are, apparently, a Latina. However, it is very troubling to me that you have no problem with the fact that 31 senators, all (I say, all) Republicans, voted against (now) Supreme Court Justice Sonia Satomayor. Why is that you have no problem with that? Why is it that I can clearly see that there is 'something wrong' with this, and you can't see it? I hope you are not the 'Linda Chavez' type of Latina--the one who boasted (there can be no other word for it) that she does not speak Spanish. Also, for your sake, I sincerely hope that you do not consider yourself a Republican. If so, and you're standing next to the 31 Republican senators who voted against Judge Satomayor, you're going to feel a chill rather quickly--and it won't be your imagination. It's lonely and it gets cold when you're standing around with people with whom you have absolutely nothing in common.

Posted by: cgray7daone | August 6, 2009 4:22 PM | Report abuse

Eva, YES. Latinos will and are already taking their stance against the Republican Party... Because the 'Repugs' have pitted themselves against the idea of having a Latina serve in the highest court of the land!!

Just as they hate Pres. Obama being a 'Black Man' in The 'White House'. Ever think of why it's called the White House?

Listening to Sen. sessions makes me want to regurgitate. Now this squirt comes from the most racist state in the USA, where for centuries whites have based their decisions on race. Even inciting mobs to kill innocent people before giving them a fair trial. Not to mention how in Alabama whites could have thought about a black person and go out to hunt one to lynch.

To hear him in these hearings and senate briefings you would think he was genuinely caring and unbias. I believe otherwise. He seems evil to me.

Posted by: dianejonesindo | August 6, 2009 4:45 PM | Report abuse

Instead of immigration reform the Latinos have been given a Peurto Rican from Harvard. The Obama administration is now building concentration camps for "illegals."

Cherish this victory for Latinos while you still can. It won't last very long.

Posted by: alance | August 6, 2009 4:53 PM | Report abuse

This is interesting. Isn't the whole reason the republicans backed Sarah Palin was just because she was a republican? Everyone knows she was no where near ready to be the Vice President of the United States, and yet one step from being the President of the United States. I think we're letting our feelings, childishness and hatred get in the way of logic.

Posted by: accoustic22 | August 6, 2009 4:54 PM | Report abuse

However, it is very troubling to me that you have no problem with the fact that 31 senators, all (I say, all) Republicans, voted against (now) Supreme Court Justice Sonia Satomayor. Why is that you have no problem with that? Why is it that I can clearly see that there is 'something wrong' with this, and you can't see it? I hope you are not the 'Linda Chavez' type of Latina--the one who boasted (there can be no other word for it) that she does not speak Spanish. Also, for your sake, I sincerely hope that you do not consider yourself a Republican. If so, and you're standing next to the 31 Republican senators who voted against Judge Satomayor, you're going to feel a chill rather quickly--and it won't be your imagination. It's lonely and it gets cold when you're standing around with people with whom you have absolutely nothing in common.

What a rude thing to say to someone who has the right to voice her opinion. And what does speaking Spanish have to do with fairness. There are a lot of Latino immigrant children who either don't speak Spanish at all or very limited Spanish. You sound like you are threatening Ms. Rodriguez. What are you the Puerto Rican Mafia? You horrible ugly brujo o bruja.

Posted by: hoosierlatina | August 6, 2009 4:56 PM | Report abuse

More race cards from the Dems... How come a vote against Judge Thomas wasn't a vote against the black vote?... Oh cause Thomas didn't fit with the dems way of thinking... Yet if you vote against their candidate who is not white its all about race...

Posted by: mavric1919 | August 6, 2009 5:11 PM | Report abuse

Not to mention how in Alabama whites could have thought about a black person and go out to hunt one to lynch. \\

That made no sense at all. Read your history books. The Republicans party before, during, and after the war were not against blacks being citizens or members of the House or Senate. In fact they wanted complete freedom for blacks. Blacks even held office back then. Yes even Lincoln was a Republican. Minorities have been given every type social program designed to improve their lives in the US. If they were in other countries they would not spit on them to give them water.

If after all the help any minority receives in this country, can still claim he is a victim of prejudice, he will only prove he is victim his own ignorance.

Posted by: hoosierlatina | August 6, 2009 5:17 PM | Report abuse

Blake,

I guess that we can agree that, at times, sanity and racism are in the eye of the beholder. Some might consider your comment racist and irrational. How do you get to be "1000% all American of the real kind"? Are you ten people? Are you saying that some kinds of Americans are inherently better than others?
//////////////////////////////////
just old folksy American humour, you always grandly exaggerate... my buddy James, he was 1000% American too. His multi great grand dad fought in the 1st Rhode Island, he was proud of that. Our common sin is nationalism.
http://revolution.h-net.msu.edu/essays/adams2.html

Why is what I said racist and irrational? What I said is historically true, I think. Sorta. As true as anything.

History- its as huge as the world and all the people in it. Which thread do you chose to highlight, this time?

A simple summary-
As European civilisation was developing from the Dark Ages the entire world was already bound up in a world wide trade economy founded on human slavery. In the middle ages massive black slave plantations stretched across the middle east from Syria to Persia, dwarfing anything seen later in the Americas. From at least the 900's forward tremendous ships sailed from east african ports to China, carrying slaves to trade for silk and other manufactured goods. Europe's history from the 800's on is attempting to fend off repeated plundering and slaving raids by Moorish, Turkish, Viking, Mongols, Tartars, Corsairs and others, as it slowly built itself up and grew in power, the naval raids only halting when Europe's naval power began to dominate the sea's. India's history of being pillaged and plundered and enslaved is every bit as pitiful as Africa's, if briefer in duration. As bad as the English were to some, they did rescue and liberate the Hindu's & India from brutal exploitation.
All the evil in the world already was existing, before european, before western civilisation. Horrors were being done in India, Africa, China, all over the world, too much to mention too horrible to detail...so yes some parts of western civilisation joined in for a while in this pre existing world, as bad as any, until that ancient economy was brought down.
Western civ., it's no saint, but better than any other -that has survived for more than two or three generations anyway- including the people that compose it's population.
imo.


Posted by: WilliamBlake | August 6, 2009 6:05 PM | Report abuse

What nobody seems to be saying is that even though she may be Latino, she's of Puerto Rican descent. And of course, PR is part of the United States (just like Hawaii for that matter). So there should be no doubt about her loyalties to this country because she and her family have been American citizens for generations already.

Posted by: ysunshine | August 6, 2009 6:54 PM | Report abuse

Hmmmm.

Posted by: SarahBB | August 6, 2009 7:39 PM | Report abuse

99% of blacks voted for Obama. Sosa is assigning the same political sophistication, or lack thereof to Hispanics. It is very demeaning, but is it also accurate?

Posted by: alstl | August 6, 2009 7:43 PM | Report abuse

Screwtape, just to refresh my recollection, I looked up Miguel Estrada. He is a lawyer who was born in Honduras, did very well in college and law school, entered private practice and worked as a prosecutor and in the Bush Justice Department. He was nominated for an appellate court judgeship, despite his never having had prior experience as a judge. He was not confirmed.

I fail to see how this history bears any reasonable relation to a woman with 17 years' experience as a district court and appellate judge who is nominated for the Supreme Court. They are both Latin and did well in school. Why do you think that is sufficient to claim that Estrada should have been approved and Sotomayor should not have been?

Or are you suggesting that Estrada actually thinks that a wise Latino would think better than, say, Senator Sessions, and so he should have been confirmed?

Posted by: thmas | August 6, 2009 11:19 PM | Report abuse

Sotomayor is an affirmative action hire. That's a fact. It's just too bad that affirmative action is applied to the high court. That should be reserved for the best and brightest.

Sotomayor is also a twofer. She's a bone thrown to Hispanics. Her presence on the S.C. will not make any difference because she replaces another liberal.

But Hispanics will roll over in droves to vote for the socialists because of it. This is raw partisan politics at its Chicagoland worst.

Al Capone couldn't have done better.

Posted by: battleground51 | August 7, 2009 7:07 AM | Report abuse

That made no sense at all. Read your history books.....???

hoosierlatina------------

Like I said...Not to mention how in Alabama whites could have thought about a black person and go out to hunt one to lynch. \\

That's fact! I don't need a history lesson... I am one. I'm over a half a century old and have witness myself the cruelty of Alabama whites. Has nothing to do with what the Repugs used to represent. This is about the here and NOW. I know what they represent.

hoosierlatina too bad you are not a wiselatina. Get to know your own history. Latinos weren't dragged to this country. Most have come in illegally. Blacks got here against there own will. I know the 'Grand Ole' Party'GOP represented for blacks. Now they are the 'Great Opposition People'. opposing anyone and anything that does not look like them Sarah Palin was on the verge of inciting race riots across this land and they did nothing to stop it. If you watched the rallies she had, you should have noted that every where she went there were racial outbursts.

The Repugs kept saying she was great! She is exciting the 'base'!! whoopee!! Sarah PA[l]IN was inciting racial tension in this country. She was about to set this country back 200 years!! Graduate from elementary, hoosierlatina.

Posted by: dianejonesindo | August 7, 2009 10:35 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: fedup32|
Perhaps, when Latinos/hispanics become more assimilated into American society. they will lose their third-world herd mentality of "what's best for us" and think about what's best for America as a whole.
xoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxox
And when Republicans lose their superiority mentality of what is best for "The Party" they will vote for what is best for the American citizens they represent!

Posted by: tinkabell1 | August 7, 2009 12:15 PM | Report abuse

To repeat myself, minus any attempted humour...
My motivation is not racism.

My objection to Sotomayor is 2 parts.
(1)her disregard for the 14th Amendment, and willingness to see people unfairly oppressed, because of her 'issues' in racial, ethnic, and sexual matters.
In sum, her support for Affirmative Action.

(2) She is from the Bronx.

Pat lays out a reasonable case, Rachel Maddow gives a weak response.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_mGoA3vqyA4

LA is NOTHING like the Bronx. Issues from the Bronx do not translate here.

Why is it so wonderful a woman from the Bronx is on the Supreme Court Rachel?
Lets all give Rachel a Bronx cheer.

Sotomayor may be ok, despite being from the Bronx (grin)...but I would be happier with someone with attitudes more like Richard Marin.



Posted by: WilliamBlake | August 7, 2009 2:36 PM | Report abuse

I would suggest that people take a closer look at the "wise Latina" quote.

The operative word is actually "wise" - a wise person would naturally make a better decision that one who is not wise. Had she compared the wise Latina to a wise white guy, we would have a problem

There is an acknowledgement of ethnicity in Justice Sotomayor's comment, but there is no racism at all.

Posted by: ReasonAndResolve | August 8, 2009 12:06 AM | Report abuse

It's not the idea that some Senators voted against her. That's the way the system is supposed to work. No problem there.
The problem is the almost solid Republican Party line vote against her that screams out REPUBLICANS HATE LATINOS!

Posted by: JoeNTx | August 8, 2009 1:21 AM | Report abuse

The peculiar thing about the Republican furor over the wise Latina woman is that she is no liberal; she is a very conservative Catholic woman who will move the center of the Court even more to the right.

We are still waiting for Republicans to offer evidence for her presumed liberal leanings.

Carl Sagan said, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."

At least the alien abductees claim to have been present at their probings and, in that case, at least are witnesses, which makes them marginally more credible.

Posted by: matthewjblack | August 8, 2009 9:37 AM | Report abuse

The hearings became comical with repeated duplicative questions from the GOP trying to anger/rattle her and she becoming more calm and focused with her repeated answers. They could not find one case in over 3000 where she was not justified, including Ricci which changed when thinking you may suffer damages was not enough to proving it by a 5-4 vote of the court. Her gun position is quite clear constitutionally, the states have the right to regulate militias without federal interference. A right to privacy inherent in the fifth, eighth, twelfth and fourteenth amendments is believed by her. P.S. Chief Justice Roberts also believes in a right to privacy while Alito danced away from the question. Alito was qualified but not recognizing privacy is a no vote from this American. It could lead to Reagan's laughable medicare rant about the government controlling your life.

Posted by: jameschirico | August 8, 2009 10:04 AM | Report abuse

Judge Sonia Sotomayor hearings revealed, once again, the Republicans have anything else to say except "No"! As a nation, we are fortunate to have someone with her experience to serve on the U.S. Supreme Court, wish her the best! Republicans are beside themselves, a black man in the White House and now a Latino on the U.S. Supreme Court, oh the sky must be falling! Republicans can all go to "The Family" and have prayer session!

Posted by: kemcb | August 8, 2009 10:15 AM | Report abuse

It's a well known fact that Republicans do not support "affirmative action" as a cure for any social ill.

Why, then, are they expected to give the A-OK to an "affirmative action", Supreme Court nominee like Sotomayor?? One that does nothing but secure Hispanic votes for Democrats??

They are merely sticking to their principles and that's a mark of conviction.

Only Democrats are so crass as to buy a voting bloc with an appointment like this. That's exactly what B.O. has done here.

Obama has thrown Hispanics a bone and he expects them to stand and deliver the votes. Many will.

Posted by: battleground51 | August 8, 2009 10:35 AM | Report abuse

It is all tribal. Always has been, always will be.

Posted by: gfhoward258 | August 8, 2009 10:39 AM | Report abuse

She did not vote against white firefighters. She voted that the city had a right to do what it did. (She was not in the minoirty on that opnion.)
Anyone the NRA dislikes is almost certainly an upright honest cleareyed individual. I have yet to take note that the NRA leadership fits such previously stated criteria.

Barring other important differences, most latinos will vote against any politician who is willing to hurt latinos whithout a clearcut explanation of why it is necessary. (Being in opposition to a dark skinned president is not such a necessity.)

Posted by: palnicki | August 8, 2009 2:32 PM | Report abuse

I find it hypocritical that Democrats would warn republicans that those who don't automatically vote for her are facing the ire of a segment of the population strictly because of her race. So, do democrats feel that choosing her they picked her only because of her race and to garner political clout with the Hispanic community? I didn't see democrats worry about what they did to a Hispanic named Miguel Estrada when Bush put his name up for a lower court position. Democrats filibustered him and secret memos were leaked they were worried he was a Hispanic too close to perhaps one day reaching the SC, but then again he was put forth by a republican. So is it only terrible to vote against a Hispanic when you are a republican but absolutely fine and dandy when Dems wouldn't even allow a vote for Estrada? It seems to me democrats here seem to be playing games with a person's race or heritage only when it suits them for their political benefit. That is shameful.

Posted by: justmyvoice | August 8, 2009 7:23 PM | Report abuse

It's not the idea that some Senators voted against her. That's the way the system is supposed to work. No problem there.
The problem is the almost solid Republican Party line vote against her that screams out REPUBLICANS HATE LATINOS!

Posted by: JoeNTx
//////////////////////////////////////////
Your such racists, sigh.
REPUBLICANS LOVE AMERICANS.
and resent immigrants that their dictatorial out of control government has foisted on top of them.
Look, we thought it was our country, that we had a place where we could live and develop our dreams, "where everybody could be happy all the time". We had a home, you had a home, everybody was happy.

So it was a fantasy, I'm sorry. We are powerless here, like they are in Mexico. Just a little less poor. Look, lets join together and bring down this ever so haughty 'Establishment' that treats us as pawns, with such contempt.
Together we can create a new nation that is a goverment of the people, by the people, for the people, since ours seems to have perished on this earth.

Posted by: WilliamBlake | August 8, 2009 8:57 PM | Report abuse

A Racist? Interesting. Why did the Republicans even bother attending the hearings if they were just going to vote the straight party line against her?
I resent immigrants? No, not quite. This country was built on the backs of immigrant labor including that of my ancestors. As far the current illeagal Hispanic immigrants, I do in fact admire a person that will travel 100's of miles in search of a better life. I have no respect at all for the 2nd and 3rd generation welfare folks we have in this country.
Am I ready to jump ship with you? Nope, not even close on that one. You can go join up with Evil Sarah. I'm quite happy with the open government we now have.
My profile? 58, white, male, EX Republican, and now a card carrying Democrat. You can keep buying into all the Republican fear tactics. I'm quite happy on my side of the fence. It is getting a bit more crowded thou with all the new LATINO voters the REPUBLICAN FOOLS sent our way.
Here's a question for you. Why did my REPUBLICAN Congressman (Ted Poe) ask our President to show his birth certificate, and then flat out refuse to show his own when asked to do so?

Posted by: JoeNTx | August 9, 2009 1:50 AM | Report abuse

I applaud the people that went against Estrada and Thomas. I feel the same for Janice Rodgers Brown or Bruce Wright types. When a Roberts or a Sotomayor gets a nay, I will hold it against people that put politics ahead of country. Both were highly qualified with a belief in the right to privacy.

Posted by: jameschirico | August 10, 2009 6:16 AM | Report abuse

Sure, there are Latinos/as who won't care. And the Sotomayor thing in isolation won't mean all that much. The problem is it's just one of a substantial list of big-time grievances between Latinos and the GOP. Illegal immigration is much more meaningful to people who have friends who would be deported if the Right gets its way. In the states where Latinos are most numerous, the GOP is associated with "english-only" activism of all stripes. And here's one that'll surprise you: a lot of Latinos and especially Latinas HATE the right-to-life thing in spite of being Catholics, because they get contraceptives and other stuff like primary gyn-care at the places most likely to be disruptively protested, like Planned Parenthood.

Opposition to Justice Sotomayor is a drop in the proverbial bucket.

Posted by: theoshul | August 10, 2009 6:22 AM | Report abuse

A vote for Sotomayer was a vote for continuing to penalise white males for something they didn't do. The New Haven firefighters' case is the case in point. The Gates-Crawley brouhaha in Cambridge shows how much white resentment of black privilege exists. One way to end that is to believe and implement equal opportunity. Instead we added Sotomayer to Ginsburg's voice in continuing to hammer white males for ... being white males.

Posted by: sailhardy | August 10, 2009 8:52 AM | Report abuse

If Sotomayer were the only instance of Republican anti-Latino sentiment it wouldn't matter very much.

Posted by: glynnjp1 | August 10, 2009 11:28 AM | Report abuse

JoeNTX...'As far the current illeagal Hispanic immigrants, I do in fact admire a person that will travel 100's of miles in search of a better life. I have no respect at all for the 2nd and 3rd generation welfare folks we have in this country.'

You are absolutely right, Joe. People that have taken the advantage of the system from 2-3 generations should not have respect. The gov. can stop this sick system if they want to. But no... If they did not keep the Poor 'poor', they would have only 2 classes. The middle class and the rich. The mid-class will continue to climb and the rich don't want to give room at the top because it is their power place.

The welfare system has become a crutch for many abled-bodied people. And let me tell you, the demographs of who receives welfare has been hidden. More whites receive food stamps and subsidy than blacks. (the blacks get the exposure because they live in urban areas where there is high crime and drugs) I worked for HUD and discovered more whites received low income housing in areas that were what they called 'best keep secret' properties.

And illegals get everything from these programs. And guess what? the are ILLEGAL! Can you imagine that.

Posted by: dianejonesindo | August 10, 2009 12:20 PM | Report abuse

How lower class does a white guy have to be, before it's possible for that person to envy "Black privilege"? You Klansmen keep embarrassing real white people. Have you ever seen any of America outside your trailer park?

Posted by: matthewjblack | August 10, 2009 4:27 PM | Report abuse

Too bad, Hispanics !

Many in the crowd laughed uproariously when Sen. Benjamin Cardin (DEMOCRUD – MD) said illegal immigrants would not be entitled to coverage under the Democratic plan.

And they jumped to their feet in one of the longest, loudest ovations of the night after an audience member asked why tort reform wasn't a feature of the health care overhaul.

Posted by: hclark1 | August 11, 2009 1:17 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company