Inhofe worries that Sotomayor may allow ‘undue influence from her own personal race, gender.’
Inhofe worries that Sotomayor may allow ‘undue influence from her own personal race, gender.’
Republican members of Congress have been trying to subtly raise questions about Sonia Sotomayor’s objectivity — simply because of her non-traditional race, gender, and upbringing. Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX) said today that he is concerned Sotomayor has shown “personal bias based on ethnicity and gender.” Similarly, Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK) said in a statement today that Sotomayor may be subject to the “undue influence” of her race and gender:
Of primary concern to me is whether or not Judge Sotomayor follows the proper role of judges and refrains from legislating from the bench. Some of her recent comments on this matter have given me cause for great concern. In the months ahead, it will be important for those of us in the U.S. Senate to weigh her qualifications and character as well as her ability to rule fairly without undue influence from her own personal race, gender, or political preferences.
Responding to Inhofe, The American Prospect’s Dana Goldstein writes, “Yes. Because the worldviews of John Roberts, Sam Alito, John Paul Stevens, Anthony Kennedy, Stephen Breyer, and Antonin Scalia are not impacted at all by their white male identities. White men are raceless and genderless, haven’t you heard?”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Boy, that’s pretty fcking racist no matter how you splice it. I wonder if the MSM is going to create one of their “media storms” about this or just ignore it. Nowadays there’s no way to tell…
May 26th, 2009 at 6:30 pmResponding to Inhofe, The American Prospect’s Dana Goldstein writes, “Yes. Because the worldviews of John Roberts, Sam Alito, John Paul Stevens, Anthony Kennedy, Stephen Breyer, and Antonin Scalia are not impacted at all by their white male identities. White men are raceless and genderless, haven’t you heard?”
I couldn’t had said it better. Can we say racist?
HYPOCRITES!
May 26th, 2009 at 6:31 pmOf primary concern to me is whether or not Judge Sotomayor follows the proper role of judges and refrains from legislating from the bench. Some of her recent comments on this matter have given me cause for great concern. In the months ahead, it will be important for those of us in the U.S. Senate to weigh her qualifications and character as well as her ability to rule fairly without undue influence from her own personal race, gender, or political preferences. And that she defers to us the White Man as all have done before her.
There I fixed it.
Change, it is coming and the good ol boys (and girls) cannot take it.
RIP
May 26th, 2009 at 6:31 pmSGT Stephen R. Sherman
C CO 1-5 IN (STRYKER)
KIA 3 Feb 2005
Mosul, Iraq
Inhofe worries that Sotomayor may allow ‘undue influence from her own personal race, gender.’
i’ll take it.
the undue influence of the mostly white males is getting old…
May 26th, 2009 at 6:32 pmConsidering we don’t know how many SCOTUS decisions have been influenced by Cheney lately, could we say that we’re worried about them being influenced by the big white Dick?
May 26th, 2009 at 6:33 pmCheck these out while you’re at it:
Notice how they all sound like they were cribbed off the same talking points memo? That would be because they were. Inhofe’s just another voice in one big, ugly choir. But I think he fcuked it up a bit by explicitly mentioning race and gender. Oopsie!
May 26th, 2009 at 6:34 pmhidflect Says:
——————————————————————————–
Boy, that’s pretty fcking racist no matter how you splice it. I wonder if the MSM is going to create one of their “media storms” about this or just ignore it. Nowadays there’s no way to tell…
There is no so such thing as “the media” unless its about standing up to Dems, Independents, and especially Pres. Obama and his staff, as far as the “storm” it blew out as fast as it blew ouot of this idiots mouth.
Media: nothing more to see here, now about her radical views, Mr. Rove what do you think?
Mr. Rove: she’s a threat, a radical.
So called media: there you have it.
RIP
May 26th, 2009 at 6:35 pmSGT Stephen R. Sherman
C CO 1-5 IN (STRYKER)
KIA 3 Feb 2005
Mosul, Iraq
God forbid a woman speaking out against angry old white men who are afraid of their shadows.
May 26th, 2009 at 6:35 pmSamuel Alito
Chief Justice John Roberts
Justices Anthony M. Kennedy, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas
give the nine-member court five Catholics. Trade Kennedy for Sotomayor and Catholics still have a majority.
May 26th, 2009 at 6:36 pmI hope that Sotomayor does a good job on the Supreme Court if the nomination goes through. The challenges that face the current government are enormous, so everyone must do their job. One of the biggest challenges that the Obama administration faces is doing more to address global poverty. The Borgen Project has good info on the estimated cost of ending global poverty:
$30 billion: Annual shortfall to end world hunger.
$550 billion: U.S. Defense budget.
May 26th, 2009 at 6:36 pmSen. James Inhofe (R-OK) said in a statement today that Sotomayor may be subject to the “undue influence” of her race and gender:
And the down side of that is?
May 26th, 2009 at 6:37 pmRep. Lamar Smith (R-TX) said today that he is concerned Sotomayor has shown “personal bias based on ethnicity and gender.”
This statement is ridiculous: Everyone has personal bias based on ethnicity, gender, income, and age.
What Smith is saying is that the only acceptable bias is that of a well-to-do, middle-aged, Caucasian male. This is the standard he wants Sotomayor to adhere to.
To hell with all that, I say.
May 26th, 2009 at 6:39 pmRemarks such as these are harmful distractions. They reveal a bigoted, biased and chauvinistic attitude that smacks of mental shortcomings and simple ugliness. These men, as elected representatives, are an emabarrassment to their constituents.
May 26th, 2009 at 6:40 pmGee, what a surprise: The right-wing talking points on Sotomayor are misleading distortions
http://crooksandliars.com/david-neiwert/gee-what-surprise-right-wing-talking
May 26th, 2009 at 6:42 pmI had it wrong on the Catholic numbers. Sotomayor makes six of nine:
http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles_of_faith/2009/05/sotomayor_would.html
May 26th, 2009 at 6:44 pmThe silence from the “lynched” Clarence Thomas was predictable. But if Sandra Day O’Connor doesn’t jump all over this mysoginist statement, it’s only because she puts party before country.
May 26th, 2009 at 6:44 pmThe Borgen Project has good info on the estimated cost of ending global poverty:
$30 billion: Annual shortfall to end world hunger.
May 26th, 2009 at 6:45 pm$550 billion: U.S. Defense budget.
This is about a White guy who’s comfortable with a system that’s run by White guys, primarily benefits White guys and makes White guys rich…threatened by people who are neither White nor guys.
We’re not allowed in the club unless we operate from the perspective of White guys. Cute.
May 26th, 2009 at 6:45 pmdavidwaters/Tenisci:
Quit spamming us.
May 26th, 2009 at 6:47 pmThe GOP is obviously going to attack Obama’s choice for SC justice, no matter WHO he selected. It’s the nature of the game both sides play. It’s what they do.
Unfortunately, with respect to the Republican Party, lately it is ALL that they do.
May 26th, 2009 at 6:49 pmIt’s a foregone conclusion that Inhofe will among those pushing for a filibuster…because she was picked by Obama. Because she’s not a rigid originalist. Because she’s not a white man. Take your pick. A GOP filibuster threat will get the support of maybe 15-20 GOP senators. The majority actually have a sense of decorum (hell, Rick “Man-on-Dog Action” Santorum voted for Sotomayor’s confirmation in 98). Senators like Hatch and Coburn may be diametrically opposed to Sotomayor’s stance, but they won’t block the nomination.
May 26th, 2009 at 6:52 pmGosh does this mean that Republicans are tired of waterboarding and torture? Now they have something new to complain about.
May 26th, 2009 at 6:56 pmSo tell us again how white your ass is, Mr. Inhofe.
Methinks it ought to be tarred and feathered, then you run out of town on a garbage truck.
May 26th, 2009 at 7:01 pmIt just shows that the republicani don’t recognise their own stupidity.
May 26th, 2009 at 7:01 pmtom tancredo just said that sotomayor is a “racist”.
i can’t believe ed is letting him spew that crap…
oh, ‘the panel’ is disagreeing, but it was WEAK.
he should be able to give the accurate instance that is being twisted…
tom tancredo!
May 26th, 2009 at 7:01 pmJebus. These bigoted assklowns piss me off.
May 26th, 2009 at 7:03 pmhidflect Says:
Boy, that’s pretty fcking racist no matter how you splice it. I wonder if the MSM is going to create one of their “media storms” about this or just ignore it. Nowadays there’s no way to tell…
They’ll probably ask Newt Gingrich to see what he has to say, than Karl rove and maybe roll out Tom Delay so he can get some teevee time.
The corporate media is very interested in keeping the out of office, 2002 variety right wing repubs on your tv 24/7 even if they left office in disgrace.
May 26th, 2009 at 7:04 pmIt’s almost as if the last 7 years have never happened and eff the American electorate and what they want and voted for.
When white guys say that they fear the thought process of a hispanic woman, afraid she is tainted by her background, they fail to realize that their own “white guy” background is a taint too. It is a different taint but a taint nevertheless. The white guy doesn’t seem to recognize and he is putting a higher value on his culture than another. It really is a deep seated racism.
May 26th, 2009 at 7:04 pmShorter Inhofe:
If they don’t look my me and mine, then I am scared…..
May 26th, 2009 at 7:04 pmSomeones going to have to help me here. What does that even mean???
He’s concerned her “race” and “sex” may influence her on the bench????
He’s saying that “white men” are the only race and sex they should tolerate on the bench???
What the F#$K?
May 26th, 2009 at 7:04 pmTom Tancretin is a d0uchebag
May 26th, 2009 at 7:06 pmNow I see why Inhofe is such a strong global warming denier. He can’t possibly be objective about the matter…
He suffers from “undue influence” from his own personal position as a massive source of hot air.
May 26th, 2009 at 7:06 pmInhofe worries that Sotomayor may allow ‘undue influence from her own personal race, gender.’
As opposed to the white , Christian(only) skid marks you support , jackass ?
May 26th, 2009 at 7:07 pm“Sotomayor may be subject to the “undue influence” of her race and gender”
funny, i would think that’s EXACTLY why she should be nominated, especially since her demographic is either underrepresented (female) or not represented at all (hispanic).
May 26th, 2009 at 7:11 pmThe men on the SCOTUS were fine with a 13 year old being strip searched by school officials (who weren’t trained to do so) looking for drugs (which was ibuprofen)….
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/judicial/2009-05-05-ruthginsburg_N.htm
This is why the SCOTUS needs more women and liberals on it! They have empathy, whereas, their right wing neck drooling knuckle dragging counterparts DO NOT.
May 26th, 2009 at 7:12 pmMethinks Inhofe just took himself right out of this discussion. If the GOP had any coordination right now whatsoever, they’d tell him to hit the showers and let somebody else carry the water for a while. Every time he opens his mouth after this, that quote is going to be the first thing he’ll be expected to respond to, and of far more interest to everyone than anything else he might have had to say.
May 26th, 2009 at 7:16 pmWhat Exactly are Conservatives trying to Conserve??
It Can’t be the Planet…or its resources.
Oh yeah…they are trying to conserve the Wealth and Power of White Men.
May 26th, 2009 at 7:16 pmIs her race and gender personal like those small pan pizzas you see in airport departure cafes?
Or is Sotomeyer’s race and gender personal like a shaver that, um, y’know, is in the personal care products section of Target?
That is to say, “Ummm, WHAT, Inhofe-Asshat?”
May 26th, 2009 at 7:17 pmSen. James Inhofe (R-OK) said in a statement today that Sotomayor may be subject to the “undue influence” of her race and gender:
Oh, you mean as opposed to Scalia voting against issues of choice because he is a Catholic or Roberts voting with the corporations because he’s bought and paid for by them? Oh, THAT undue influence!
May 26th, 2009 at 7:18 pmIn the months ahead, it will be important for those of us in the U.S. Senate to weigh her qualifications and character as well as her ability to rule fairly without undue influence from her own personal race, gender, or political preferences.
Cuz no wrinkly old white guy has EVER been influenced by his race, gender or political preference.
Sotomayor will be on the SCOTUS. Deal with it, ya f ucking cracka.
May 26th, 2009 at 7:19 pmWhat he is saying is that we have a black family in the White House and the angry old men are scared to death of the people the black man is appointing to the Supreme Court because she may not side with their corporate fascism.
May 26th, 2009 at 7:21 pmSo many Supreme Court rulings have been 5-4. She doesn’t have to be radical to have quite an impact.
May 26th, 2009 at 7:27 pmWhy is Inhofe allowed to even insinuate that Sotomayor may have a questionable “character” , when no Republicans questioned Thomas over the same trait , and after he was (rightfully) sued for sexual harrassment ?
May 26th, 2009 at 7:29 pmSeriously, WHAT THE F$#K????????
I’d try to say something poignant or profound here but all I can say is WHAT THE F$#K?????
Is it even legal for a Senator to say such stuff???
Is the country flooding his office with calls?
Is the media freaking out over this???
He just said her race and gender were an issue for a Supreme Court nominee!!!!
In AMERICA!!!!
What the F#%K?????
:\
Seriously, what the F#$K????
May 26th, 2009 at 7:33 pmCan’t they censure him or something for that???
May 26th, 2009 at 7:34 pmWith 4 Solid Conservative Justices that are relatively young, Ms. Sotomayor will not Swing the court in a more progressive direction.
I think she will have more of an effect on Hispanic and Female Voters, especially if Republicans keep up their tone deaf criticism.
May 26th, 2009 at 7:36 pmInhofe worries that Sotomayor may allow ‘undue influence from her own personal race, gender.’
I’ll listen to this crapola from Inhofe when he can show the first instance of the Republicans asking whether a white male might “allow ‘undue influence from her own personal race, gender.’”
Cheers,
May 26th, 2009 at 7:37 pm“her” should be “his” in my last sentence.
May 26th, 2009 at 7:38 pmWAYNEBRO Says:
Is the country flooding his office with calls?
Probably not. More than likely all those FauxNews watchers & assorted Bible-thumpers are nodding in agreement.
Republicans: In favor of gender & race discrimination in the workplace.
May 26th, 2009 at 7:38 pmWAYNEBRO Says:
In AMERIKKKA!!!!
Fixed that for ya.
May 26th, 2009 at 7:39 pmRather than just having the de rigeur white, Anglo-Saxon, Protestant, male perspective, eh? Confirmed as a prejudiced, hate-mongering, ass right out of his own mouth.
May 26th, 2009 at 7:40 pmInhofe better start “worrying” about things he has a bit more control over ; like perhaps a solid bowel movement for himself , in the very near future……….
May 26th, 2009 at 7:43 pmThis just in: WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court has overturned a long-standing ruling that stops police from initiating questions unless a defendant’s lawyer is present, a move that will make it easier for prosecutors to interrogate suspects.
May 26th, 2009 at 7:44 pmWell, this is just great….another one of the rights of Americans taken away by the “non-activist” judges (read, Scalia, Alito, Thomas, Roberts and the swing vote…….). I was just thinking the other day, “Gee, we’ve sure got too many rights in this country….I think we need to eliminate that right to have a lawyer advise us when we get in a jam.”
Sometimes there are issues that come along that require sheer outrage and this is one of them. This isn’t one to just sweep under the rug. Here we have a US Senator coming out in his official capacity openly stating that a Supreme Court Nominee’s “race and sex” present an issue for him.
He should be censured for this and be stripped of all committee chairs. He should NOT be allowed to say something like that in the official capacity of his office.
As a private citizen, sure.
But as a US Senator representing his office??? HELL NO.
May 26th, 2009 at 7:45 pmI am embarrassed for Oklahoma, and I am from Illinois.
May 26th, 2009 at 7:49 pm#55, glogrrl: Woops!! this comment was intended for another website, C&L–don’t know how it ended up here…………Sorry!
May 26th, 2009 at 7:49 pmWAYNEBRO Says:
He should be censured for this and be stripped of all committee chairs. He should NOT be allowed to say something like that in the official capacity of his office.
Senators and Congresspersons are pretty much sovereign. The people of their state/district vote for them and nobody else gets to undo that vote. It’s their job to deliver opinions, even if those opinions are knuckle-dragging crap that would have been controversial to say even fifty years ago.
Personally, I think the GOP should put Inhofe in charge of taking point for them on this subject…
May 26th, 2009 at 7:49 pm“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,”
Judging by this obviously racist statement, it looks like she will have a hard time ruling fairly without undue influence from her own personal race, gender, or political preferences.
May 26th, 2009 at 7:50 pmSen. ImAHoof,
You are a racist, lily-white, old-phuck, backwards-a$$, cave-dwelling, hateful piece-of-shit, peckerwood sucking-on-a-soda-cracker in a sh|t storm of RePugniScum stupidity.
I hope I’ve been clear here.
You are unqualified to even speak about race you ignorant bastard!
May 26th, 2009 at 7:50 pmSen ImAHoof,
Bring on that “race” card a$$hole!!
You’ve got Jeff Sessions to defend. An A$$HOLE direct from the KKK to the Fed Bench to the Senate!
BRING IT ON MORON!!!!! I GOT YOUR RACE CARD RIGHT HERE!!!
May 26th, 2009 at 7:53 pmNo but I believe they can be censured.
And I know they can be stripped of their committee chairmanships if there’s pressure from the media, the public, the White House, etc.
This is one of those times when someone needs to say “WHOA, We’ll have none of that”.
May 26th, 2009 at 7:57 pmLet me see. The angry white men are accusing the minority woman of racism. Guess what wingnuts, the acorn doesn’t fall very far from the tree. You are the kettle calling the pot black. What a bunch of hypocritical morons. You think we are as crazy as you are. Get lives.
May 26th, 2009 at 7:58 pmHe’s not the only racist out there on their side, he just screwed up his delivery. The code words they were given to say thsi morning were: “personal politics, feelings or preferences.” Inhofe just accidentally gave part of the translation when he said “personal race, gender, or political preferences.” But it means the same thing when they say it, they just said it more clever-like.
I bet some intern is getting fired right now…
May 26th, 2009 at 7:59 pm$30 billion: Annual shortfall to end world hunger.
That’s just the up-front price.
all those people we ’saved’ would then go out and have babies, and more babies. And pretty soon, there’d be another billion or so poor sould struggling for a dollar a day, and starving.
Read Malthus…
May 26th, 2009 at 7:59 pmThe bus is overflowing with bozos already so this one needs to be thrown under it and driven over several times. He’s from the Sooner state so the sooner the better. What a bleeping jerk!!!
May 26th, 2009 at 7:59 pmIn a time when the Republican party is shrinking and losing base,these Republican leaders should be smarter than to lose the Hispanic base left in their party and angering women too.
One day the Republican party will handle its last note to religious zeolots like Hagee,Dobson or the 700 club Pat Roberston, for party’s ownership,and close doors.
The Republican party should be now looking forward,and looking for party’s appeal that it is diminshing fast among many constituencies
But it seems leaders like Inhofe and others are looking backward instead.
May 26th, 2009 at 8:05 pmRacist AND Sexist in one phrase. There’s a Texan Republican for ya.
May 26th, 2009 at 8:07 pmJohnM Says:
——————————————————————————–
“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,”
Judging by this obviously racist statement, it looks like she will have a hard time ruling fairly without undue influence from her own personal race, gender, or political preferences.
May 26th, 2009 at 7:50 pm
As opposed to white Christian , GOP male tools ?
Way to be observant there , Sherlock ………..
May 26th, 2009 at 8:09 pmDid any of y’all see the hecklers at Obama’s address at UCLA? They were all fat, 50-year old white guys up in the nosebleed seats. One after the other.
May 26th, 2009 at 8:17 pmVP Dick Cheney fishing with Justice Scalia was NOT…I repeat!….NOT UNDUE DILIGENCE!
May 26th, 2009 at 8:31 pmCrap, meant to type “influence” instead of “diligence” in comment #72! Darn sleep deprivation!
May 26th, 2009 at 8:31 pmI vote that Coburn and Inhofe are the worst senators from any one state in the Union. Together, they drag the whole Senate’s IQ down.
I don’t want to see banter like Inhofe’s at all, but if the GOP wants to step in it by playing the race and gender cards, especially against the very demographics that are abandoning them, then they deserve what they get. As I’ve said, the GOP tent must be a pesticide tent because something must be cutting off oxygen to the brain!
May 26th, 2009 at 8:42 pmApparently, it doesn’t matter how intelligent, knowledgeable,
or experienced Sotomayor is, she’s obviously not qualified because of the most important criterion.
Improper DNA
May 26th, 2009 at 8:42 pmthe “undue influence” of her race and gender:
Both Smith & Inhofe are blatant, pathetic racists & sexists. These idiots deserve to first be ignored, then turfed out.
May 26th, 2009 at 8:55 pmJohnM Says:
Judging by this obviously racist statement, it looks like she will have a hard time ruling fairly without undue influence from her own personal race, gender, or political preferences.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
There is nothing racist about this statement. You divorced it from its context. Or you are just repeating what you were TOLD to think and dont KNOW the context. She was specifically discussing the courts decisions on race and gender issues. My GOD you are a brainwashed moron.
May 26th, 2009 at 9:01 pmJohnM Says:
“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,”
Judging by this obviously racist statement, it looks like she will have a hard time ruling fairly…
First of all, you can’t judge the opinions of a SCOTUS nominee based on the opinions of a TP commenter… unless she was secretly that commenter. Duh.
Either we grant that everybody on the SCOTUS is affected by their “life experiences,” in which case, middle-aged white males are already amply represented, or nobody is. If she can’t rule fairly, then there are already a bunch of white guys there who can’t either. If they can, then so can she. Heads I win, tails you lose.
May 26th, 2009 at 9:08 pmCan someone hire a little old lady to slap the stupid out of Inhofe?
May 26th, 2009 at 9:10 pmElBruce Says:
If she can’t rule fairly, then there are already a bunch of white guys there who can’t either. If they can, then so can she.
The only exception that would get you out of this logic trap is if you maintain that white dudes are capable of excluding their demographic situation from their legal opinions, whereas female Hispanics are incapable of doing so. In which case you’re just being racist and/or sexist.
May 26th, 2009 at 9:11 pmStunning racist thing to say.
He’s saying only white males need apply.
May 26th, 2009 at 9:22 pmFrom the comments here, I can say that I am happy to here opinions of others that agree with mine. And the ability to express those opinions is appreciated. And the intelligent responses to “talking points”.
Thanks TP and TP posters. Including the “talking point” posters who help to bring out good strong logical arguments.
Times ARE changing. Different voices are slowly being heard. This is a very good sign. Thank you President Obama.
May 26th, 2009 at 9:33 pm“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,”
Seeing as this is a quote from Sotomayor herself I think that his concerns are valid and not racist at all. Isn’t it her job to judge strictly the lawn without political, ethnic, or racial influence?
May 26th, 2009 at 9:42 pmStagoculus Says:
“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,”
Seeing as this is a quote from Sotomayor herself I think that his concerns are valid and not racist at all. Isn’t it her job to judge strictly the lawn without political, ethnic, or racial influence?
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
No his concerns are NOT valid. You just dont know what you are talking about.
There is nothing racist about this statement. You divorced it from its context. Or you are just repeating what you were TOLD to think and dont KNOW the context. She was specifically discussing the courts decisions on race and gender issues
So unless you are saying that having EXPERIENCE in race and gender discrimination issues would not HELP making decisions on race and gender discrimination issues then I would say this quote gives NO ONE a valid reason to say the astonishingly stupid thing the astonishingly stupid Inhofe said
May 26th, 2009 at 9:53 pmIt’s interesting to me that a lot of white men (not all as obvious by the comments here) choose not to see their own racial and gender biases. They say these things, and believe these things from their own very limited world view – and they choose not to recognize their limitations. But if we, the others, should mention or judge those limitations – it is we who are the racists and sexists. Very interesting…
May 26th, 2009 at 10:10 pmWell, the women of America can kiss Pro-Choice goodbye if Sotomayor is confirmed.
What?!?!
My guess is that Sotomayor, being hispanic, is Catholic.
Therefore, she might just side with the four Catholics on the Supreme Court, Roberts, Alito, Scalia and Thomas, the arch-arch-conservatives who are definitely anti-Choice and would like to overturn Roe v. Wade, returning the pregnant women of America to the horror that existed before Roe v. Wade, taking matters into their own hands if they didn’t want to carry the fetus to term.
But why did President Obama select her, especially if my prediction comes true?
Because of Rahm Emanuel, the guy who once headed the Democratic Leadership Council, a “Democratic” Party bloc that was founded by a bunch of conservative “Democrats,” with one actually haven’t participated in the founding of the Christian Coalition.
So, the real question concerning Sotomayor is simple…how do you feel about James Dodson’s Catholic view? And do you agree or disagree with Cardinal Justice Scalia’s blatantly arch-conservative Opus Dei Catholic stances?
I was raised Catholic, but I got over Pope worship a long, long time ago. The women of America, especially those who are pregnant, have the right, in my view, to decide for themselves whether to abort or not to abort, whether to take birth control or not. They are Americans. They are free. They are not vassals of any Pope or any other religious fundamentalist fanatic.
I just have the suspicion that Judge Sotomayor is a “stealth” anti-abortion nominee…which is all that matters to the arch-conservative anti-abortion Republicans and Blue Dog Democrats.
So, my prediction about what the vote will be in the U.S. Senate?
Forget all the rhetoric coming from the right about Sotomayor being “liberal.” Once her nomination comes up for a vote, she will be confirmed with all the Republicans and Blue Dog Democrats voting for her, with the remaining Democrats split, with a majority going along with the conservative majority, because they back President Obama’s pick, while a much smaller number of actual liberal progressive Democrats (the few that are left in the Senate) will vote against her being nominated…although this probably won’t even happen either. It probably will be unanimous, with no liberal progressive hold-outs.
A “victory” for President Obama, but I foresee a disaster for the right of American women to choose over matters involving their own health, mental and physical, with no conservative being allowed to interject themselves into the equation, especially anyone trying to terrorize an American woman who is pregnant, pulling an al Qaeda or Taliban-like (or Vatican-like) stunt on them.
May 26th, 2009 at 10:27 pmInhofe is a court jester, and his antics amusing. He’s such an idiot, he should never be taken seriously. We need to laugh at him.
May 26th, 2009 at 10:28 pmInhofe is right because he speaks from experience. He lets his own stupidity and idiocy unduly influence his legislating.
May 26th, 2009 at 10:28 pmStagoculus Says:
“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,”
Seeing as this is a quote from Sotomayor herself I think that his concerns are valid and not racist at all. Isn’t it her job to judge strictly the lawn without political, ethnic, or racial influence?
Cite your quote, please. Also, the fact remains: either everybody’s demographic status affects their perspective on legal issues, or nobody’s does. If everybody, then there are way too many white dudes already and we need some balance; if nobody, then case closed. But most folks admit that everybody’s personal perspective tends to “color” their judicial decisions no matter whether they admit it or not.
Are you saying that only the old white dudes are capable of somehow factoring out teh fact that they’re old, white and dudes from any ruling they give, but a Puerto Ricana is somehow incapable of doing the same thing? If so, then you’re being racist.
.
wizard2000 Says:
I was raised Catholic, but I got over Pope worship a long, long time ago. The women of America, especially those who are pregnant, have the right, in my view, to decide for themselves whether to abort or not to abort, whether to take birth control or not.
Sure, she’s Catholic. But she’s also a woman. I figure it averages out. Remember, Roe vs. Wade is actually only about whether abortion is a private matter that shouldn’t be criminalized. All of the other options available to reduce the number of abortions – aw hell, I’ll just kick it over to Obama’s Notre Dame speech, where he lays it all out. Clearly, he’s got the right idea. Obama has no intention of criminalizing abortion.
May 26th, 2009 at 11:12 pmElBruce Says:
Here is the quote and context.
http://mediamatters.org/research/200905260050
In our private conversations, Judge Cedarbaum has pointed out to me that seminal decisions in race and sex discrimination cases have come from Supreme Courts composed exclusively of white males. I agree that this is significant but I also choose to emphasize that the people who argued those cases before the Supreme Court which changed the legal landscape ultimately were largely people of color and women. I recall that Justice Thurgood Marshall, Judge Connie Baker Motley, the first black woman appointed to the federal bench, and others of the NAACP argued Brown v. Board of Education. Similarly, Justice Ginsburg, with other women attorneys, was instrumental in advocating and convincing the Court that equality of work required equality in terms and conditions of employment.
Whether born from experience or inherent physiological or cultural differences, a possibility I abhor less or discount less than my colleague Judge Cedarbaum, our gender and national origins may and will make a difference in our judging. Justice O’Connor has often been cited as saying that a wise old man and wise old woman will reach the same conclusion in deciding cases. I am not so sure Justice O’Connor is the author of that line since Professor Resnik attributes that line to Supreme Court Justice Coyle. I am also not so sure that I agree with the statement. First, as Professor Martha Minnow has noted, there can never be a universal definition of wise. Second, 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.
Let us not forget that wise men like Oliver Wendell Holmes and Justice Cardozo voted on cases which upheld both sex and race discrimination in our society. Until 1972, no Supreme Court case ever upheld the claim of a woman in a gender discrimination case. I, like Professor Carter, believe that we should not be so myopic as to believe that others of different experiences or backgrounds are incapable of understanding the values and needs of people from a different group. Many are so capable. As Judge Cedarbaum pointed out to me, nine white men on the Supreme Court in the past have done so on many occasions and on many issues including Brown.
May 26th, 2009 at 11:26 pmEugene Debs Says:
Let us not forget that wise men like Oliver Wendell Holmes and Justice Cardozo voted on cases which upheld both sex and race discrimination in our society. Until 1972, no Supreme Court case ever upheld the claim of a woman in a gender discrimination case. I, like Professor Carter, believe that we should not be so myopic as to believe that others of different experiences or backgrounds are incapable of understanding the values and needs of people from a different group. Many are so capable. As Judge Cedarbaum pointed out to me, nine white men on the Supreme Court in the past have done so on many occasions and on many issues including Brown.
Hey, I’m a white male past middle-age myself. I’d like to think that I could judge such cases fairly, in the tradition of Oliver W. Holmes and Justice Cardozo. And I probably could. But that’s besides the point. Given a wide variety of qualified folks that Obama could/not choose from, there’s no reason why he should not select someone who brings the demographics of the SCOTUS more in line with the demographics of the nation. The degree to which personal experience “colors” judicial rulings is arguable: if a qualified jurist can completely exclude their own experience from their ruling, then fine, Sotomayor fits as she’s a qualified jurist. However, if they can’t, then she fits just fine anwyas since her experience would bring the SCOTUS more in line with the mass of people over which it rules. Either way, she’s the right person for the job.
May 27th, 2009 at 12:03 amImagine how different the laws in this country would be if we could apply this standard to Congress.
May 27th, 2009 at 12:06 amakindependent Says:
Imagine how different the laws in this country would be if we could apply this standard to Congress.
You mean if we were actually able to get rid of Gerrymandering in every state, as it has been ruled illegal by numerous courts? Yeah, that would go a long way towards fixing democracy. Let’s start with Texas…
May 27th, 2009 at 12:20 amMeanwhile Senator In-hoax is unduly influenced by his ignorance and unwillingness to learn.
May 27th, 2009 at 12:33 amInhofe is a pig as is Hannity Limbaugh etc… those people get paid millions to spout bigotry and hate.
May 27th, 2009 at 4:00 amI pray all will get enlightened and stop letting these unsrupulous white bigoted greedy ba-tards pull the wool over their eyes before this country is whacked with Karma; bad karma.
One thing we know for sure: There are a lot of spineless white men. It takes exceptional men and women to make the difference, not average white morons, Supreme Court judges not withstanding.
I like the idea of having different races, sexes, and ethic groups represented in a democracy. They all have their own special talents and points of view. “Humanistic ideas” that rich white men can’t fathom or want to contemplate. More people with a greater sense of morality(?). Not just money guys? Maybe we’ll have some judges who look out for the little guy because they know what it’s like to be trampled.
But the criminal rich don’t like it because it means giving up more of their power. So they want more rich white guys.
I hope someday we will get a Native American on the Supreme Court. There’s a lot to be said about common sense, whether lawyers like it or not.
May 27th, 2009 at 4:14 amMeanwhile Senator In-hoax is unduly influenced by his ignorance and unwillingness to learn. web tasarımı l Tabldot Yemek l yüz estetiği
May 27th, 2009 at 5:19 amThere’s only one simple solution to all this:
KILL WHITEY.
May 27th, 2009 at 7:19 amguzide Says:
Meanwhile Senator In-hoax is unduly influenced by his ignorance and unwillingness to learn. web tasar?m? l Tabldot Yemek l yüz esteti?i
Now, if you could just make comments of your own, we wouldn’t slam you so much for spamming us.
May 27th, 2009 at 7:22 amSo (us) white men have been allowing our race and gender to define decisions more or less unfettered since the founding of the nation,
But a Hispanic woman is to be denied the same privilege,
and everybody is ok with this?
May 27th, 2009 at 7:50 amSorry if it’s already been posted, but Media Matters has dug up a Bush senior quote that explodes the “empathy” meme:
After graduation from Yale Law School, he worked for then Missouri attorney general John Danforth, and spent 2 1/2 years litigating cases of all descriptions. In 1977, Judge Thomas practiced law in the private sector, and in 1979, he rejoined Senator Danforth as a legislative assistant in the U.S. Senate. In 1981, President Reagan appointed him Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights in the Department of Education. From 1982 to 1990, he served as President Reagan’s Chairman of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. And I appointed him to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia in 1990.
I have followed this man’s career for some time, and he has excelled in everything that he has attempted. He is a delightful and warm, intelligent person who has great empathy and a wonderful sense of humor. He’s also a fiercely independent thinker with an excellent legal mind, who believes passionately in equal opportunity for all Americans. He will approach the cases that come before the Court with a commitment to deciding them fairly, as the facts and the law require.
Judge Thomas’ life is a model for all Americans, and he’s earned the right to sit on this nation’s highest Court. And I am very proud, indeed, to nominate him for this position, and I trust that the Senate will confirm this able man promptly.
Heh.
May 27th, 2009 at 8:02 amUm…Malthus was wrong. He failed utterly to consider the effects of industrialization and the demographic shift on population growth. The doom-and-gloom scenarios he predicted have not come to pass. His analysis – like yours – was oversimplified and based on a rather significant lack of real-world data or knowledge of economics. Might try a better model next time you want to make a point…
May 27th, 2009 at 9:58 amI’m convinced that Ihhofe is paid by the right to say really provocative, stupid things. Look at his face. He’s a menace to a mirror.
May 27th, 2009 at 10:19 amLike the right-wing conservatives don’t do the same thing.
May 27th, 2009 at 11:09 amThere are very few people anywhere that could judge without being influenced by their own beliefs, sex or political following.
Good for Inhofe. The more the right says things like this the more they will be alienating women and Hispanics.
It’s not like the right wingers on the court don’t make decisions that favor white men.
May 27th, 2009 at 11:47 amI am so sick and tired of ignorance regardless of what color it presents itself in.
How dare the same idiots who supported Sarah Palin for the second highest office in the nation, talk about Sotomayor not having the intellectual abilities to be on the Supreme Court.
How dare the same white, racist, idiots talk about the fear that her race and gender might influence here decisions! I hope to God they do! We have seen how the influence of white, mediocre, males decisions have impacted our nation – ENOUGH IS ENOUGH! The people need to be called out for their ignorance and their disgusting ways.
May 27th, 2009 at 11:50 amEarth to Jim Inhofe–I would have thought by now that rehab could have done you some good. You really should not have had that last drink.
May 27th, 2009 at 2:22 pmCan anyone say “breathalyzer”? Do they drug test these guys?
May 27th, 2009 at 2:25 pmGreat thanks..
seslisohbet seslichat sesli sohbet sesli chat
May 27th, 2009 at 9:39 pmDNFP Says:
There’s only one simple solution to all this:
KILL WHITEY.
That would in fact solve everything, and therefore must be considered as a viable option.
May 27th, 2009 at 10:12 pm