Comments on: OBAMA OUTFLANKS GOP WITH SOTOMAYOR PICK

By: Obama & Conservatives Back GOP Into Corner | The Pink Flamingo

Obama & Conservatives Back GOP Into Corner | The Pink Flamingo — Wed, 27 May 2009 23:11:43 +0000

[...] really doesn’t matter what Republicans in the Senate do over Obama’s newest chess move, for that is what it is. They’re basically damned if they do and damned if they [...]

By: mike farmer

mike farmer — Wed, 27 May 2009 18:00:43 +0000

Michael Reynolds,

Excellent regurgitation of a meaningless cliche.

By: EBJ

EBJ — Wed, 27 May 2009 16:53:41 +0000

So, Michael Reynolds, you’ve called out two people with different POVs as forwarding “talking points”. One says the Repubs should attack on the line that it’s an obvious PC pick (the public is sick of the PC stuff so this line of attack works per anon. in #5). The other says attack on her abilities and positions. These are 180, or close to 180 approaches - race is either in the talking points or not. It can’t be both.

So which is it? I’m, seriously, just trying to find out what the left is calling the Repub. talking points? Because if there are two diametrically opposed sets, as MR seems to say, then there are no talking points at all since the purpose of talking points is to have a single focused script vs a muddled, multiple message approach.

By: Michael Reynolds

Michael Reynolds — Wed, 27 May 2009 14:09:35 +0000

Mike:
Excellent regurgitation of GOP talking points.

By: Mike Farmer

Mike Farmer — Wed, 27 May 2009 12:26:58 +0000

I’m not sure why the Republicans shouldn’t fight the nomination since she is obviously not the best choice for the Supreme Court. She doesn’t have the wisdom or temperament, and she’s too activist for that position — this would be just as true if she was a right-wing zealot.

By: busboy33

busboy33 — Wed, 27 May 2009 06:27:32 +0000

Regarding the “Firemen” decision . . .
I think the Reds are falling onto a trap with this case. To be clear, I disagree with the decision and with her rationale, but the case is not going to win the Red talking heads any points. If the “plan” with her is to put the Reds in a position to look like racist old white southern men by attacking her, this case is goingto be pouring gasoline on the fire.
The simplistic rationale behind the decision is that any test that only comes up with top scores for Caucasian Men must be inherently a poorly-designed test. It is excrutiatingly difficult to defend the test without drifting onto the asumption that the Blues will push the Reds onto — minorities are simply not as qualified, intelligent, or skillfull as the Good Ole Boys. Obviously, this isn’t what the Reds are meaning to say, but given the limits of the talking heads format in the media today being able to distinguish the two points is almost impossible. Already I’ve heard Red voices decrying the ruling as basically hurting the poor oppressed white men . . . and that’s going to cause just about every minority in the Country to go ballistic.
Again, I want to make clear, it doesn’t matter whether any of this is true or not. Attacking the decision without becoming extremely detailed and involved is almost guaranteed to sound bigoted. And that’s a pit the Reds can’t afford to sink into.
Like I said before, I disagre with the decision. I don’t like it, and I don’t like her reasoning. But the “bigoted racist redneck” accusations are going to come flying over this (especially as the more incindary Reds take this case up as a drum to beat), and personally I think its going to be a PR disaster far beyond just attacking a Hispanic female.

By: busboy33

busboy33 — Wed, 27 May 2009 04:02:37 +0000

@ Bill Arnold:

. . . and now I’ve learned something new today. Thank you.

By: michael reynolds

michael reynolds — Wed, 27 May 2009 02:54:32 +0000

Funnyman:

They have their talking points and they’re going to deliver them. Again and again and again until they’ve squeezed contributions out of every sucker, er, Republican in the country.

Then and only then will Sotomayor be confirmed.

By: funny man

funny man — Wed, 27 May 2009 01:21:13 +0000

Anon,
although she is too liberal for our taste she is not totally unqualified as you suggest: Obama chose the Hispanic chick because she’s…Hispanic. Orin Hatch supported her the last time around. That is exactly the language that does alienate Hispanic voters. Talk about firemen, whatever, that she is too liberal etc but not that she is not qualified.

By: Bill Arnold

Bill Arnold — Tue, 26 May 2009 22:08:06 +0000

What about Cardozo? Wasnt he Portugese? I would have thought that qualified as Hispanic.
Interesting question - according to a Wikipedia article the answer appears to be … ambiguous.
For instance, Portuguese Americans are not considered “Hispanic” by the United States Census Bureau.
and
The U.S. Office of Management and Budget currently defines “Hispanic or Latino” as “a person of Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban, South or Central American, or other Spanish culture or origin, regardless of race”.[14] This definition excludes people of Portuguese origins, such as Portuguese Americans and Brazilian Americans. However, they are included in some government agencies’ definitions. For example, the U.S. Department of Transportation defines Hispanic to include, “persons of Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban, Dominican, Central or South American, or others Spanish or Portuguese culture or origin, regardless of race.”[15] This definition has been adopted by the Small Business Administration as well as many federal, state, and municipal agencies for the purposes of awarding government contracts to minority owned businesses. Still other government agencies adopt definitions that exclude people from Spain. Some others include people from Brazil, but not Spain or Portugal.