“Judge Sotomayor, would you say that a wise black woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a Latina woman? How about a wise black man? Where might he fall in your spectrum of ‘good conclusions’? How about a wise Latino man? And I guess I’m also curious as to how you think an Asian woman might stack up.

“Also, among wise Latina women, is there a distinction between the wisdom of a Latina from Puerto Rico and one from Mexico? Or Cuba? And what about Guatemala?

“We assume, Judge Sotomayor, that white males would come in dead last, but I’m just wondering if perhaps, for future appointments to the bench, you could share with us some of your Latina wisdom and help us rank the full spectrum of color and gender combinations. That way we could ensure that all subsequent appointments will go only to those that are capable of reaching the wisest conclusions.”

Is not rick our heartland barometer?

she might replace Souter. And how was he? A disaster?

You will live to eat your words. How many times can you shoot your wad at your age?

I’m trying to understand how this will be a “disaster”. If Justice Souter was seen as generally leaning left, how will Justice Sotomayor change that?

Tell ya what, c3… Soromayor managed to slip off my radar after the bout of nomination-itis we had with her back in 1998. I’ve gotten to look at her record since, and I’ll tell you true; Sotomayor manages to do something I’d often thought impossible. She comes down to the left of Souter.

Boy, the Bork nomination sure has changed everything. I can’t remember a nomination that did not lead to emotional, “this is horrible…” reactions from the other party.

It is certainly appropriate for Republicans to raise issues of concern and principle in the hearings. A filibuster would be a disaster in my estimation. As I see it the President has the perogative to nominate who he/she sees fits. The Senate must do its due diligence but ultimately it comes down to the votes. If principles are so much at stake in this nomination then its shame on the Republicans for not “selling” those principles well enough to the electorate. Yes, I see principles involved in this nomination but I see far more politics.

Finally, I grew up with the Warren court and all of its sweeping decisions. My hunch would be that the majority of Americans have sympathy with the Sotomayor “make policy” statement.

1. What statement.

2. Why trot out the Democratic talking point? No brains of your own, huh?

ed.

In other words, are the principles involved in this nomination fight so important that a Republican senator should be prepared to go down to defeat rather than act pragmatically and tone down their opposition and perhaps even vote to confirm?

You’d better hope so, Rick. Republicans have felt themselves needing to be pragmatists for so long that the majority of them have forgotten what principles are, and so are going to find themselves ill equipped to fight for them. I don’t wanna hit this one too hard, but frankly, such is the cost of leaving principles behind.

There’s no question in my mind that she’ll be confirmed. That said, however, there is much more at stake than knocking down this nomination. The entire identity politics meme, for one thing. there’s no way to stop this nomination from becoming confirmed. As disasterous as that will be for this country, at least we can kneecap the identity politic as the racist nonsense it is, thereby saving us this exposure in the future.

See my comment to Jojo below. The fact that both of you repeat the same talking point pegs you both as brainless, Democratic twits.

ed.

Holy Jesus! Who the fuck cares what her grades were in college! How can that possibly qualify her to be a SCOTUS? That is moronic.

As for the partisan hackery, if you don’t know by now that I call em as I see em, then you never will. Given the way I’ve trashed the GOP over the last couple of years (with people like you cheering me on) your idea of partisan hackery is strange indeed. Evidently, if I disagree with you, I am a partisan hack. If we agree, I am a “serious conservative.” That too, is moronic.

ed.