The New York Daily News says that the GOP line on Sotomayor is that she’s a racist. Newt Gingrich himself has foolishly taken this tack, they point out, in conjunction with Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter:
Never ones to shy away from a fight — even a losing one — the Holy Trinity of the GOP — Newt Gingrich, Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh — have taken to calling the Supreme Court justice nominee Sonia Sotomayor a ‘racist,’ with Gingrich even going so far as to ask her to withdraw.
The DSCC, in an e-mail headed by Robert Menendez, is itching for those terms:
Despite all of her qualifications, Republicans stand ready to obstruct. On Tuesday, de facto party spokesman Rush Limbaugh went so far as to accuse President Obama, and Judge Sotomayor, of racism. “Obama is the greatest living example of a reverse racist and now he’s appointed one … Sonia Sotomayor to the U.S. Supreme Court,” he said.
Or if that doesn’t work, call her a moron.
Pat Buchanan says that she’s just “not that intelligent.” Here’s a good roundup of how dumb she is. Karl Rove, too, implies that she’s dumb.
Americans are not going to accept the proposition that Sonia Sotomayor, top of her class at Princeton, is stupid. And the ‘racist’ claim is simply shrill — it’s an over-the-top, bombastic allegation. Re-frame the issue or grasp defeat from the jaws of victory.
Oh, and by the way, if Sotomayor’s a racist, guess who she’s oppressing? Republicans! Rush Limbaugh says that we’re now an oppressed minority.
Yeah. This is shaping up to be a wonderful fight.
PS — Join my Facebook group opposing Sotomayor.
EDIT: Bill O’Reilly, part of the solution? Wow! On his show right now, he’s discussing the idiocy of the ‘racist’ tack against Sotomayor and mentioned that such stupid rhetoric will only alienate Hispanics more. “The average Hispanic who doesn’t pay much attention,” he said, “will hear that and think ‘Oh, those conservatives are at it again, they don’t like us’…Have you seen some of these right-wing blogs? The average one does not understand that the party is shrinking and needs to expand!”
May 27th, 2009 at 6:44 pm
Is Newt still considering a run for the presidency?
May 27th, 2009 at 6:48 pm
Yeah. He is.
He’s still my first choice if the other options are Mittens, Seeruh, and Huckles the Clown.
May 27th, 2009 at 6:53 pm
What on earth did Ann Coulter do to qualify for the GOP Trinity?
May 27th, 2009 at 6:57 pm
Token woman.
May 27th, 2009 at 7:00 pm
good points, alex. When will the gop realize that it loses when it lets the Democrats annoint Rush Gasbag as their leader?
May 27th, 2009 at 7:00 pm
What gives the NY Daily News the right to appoint a token woman to the GOP Trinity? They should have aksed someone first… Cheney will be annoyed at missing out.
May 27th, 2009 at 7:04 pm
IMO Ann Coulter is more of a shock jock than even Rush Limbaugh. What she says often goes beyond “entertainment”.
Some people think she’s hot. I’m not sure what’s wrong with them (she looks like gaunt and unattractive to me), but I suspect that factors into her popularity somehow.
May 27th, 2009 at 7:04 pm
It is not over the top. It’s true. And it doesn’t matter. We’re going to lose anyway.
May 27th, 2009 at 7:21 pm
There is no solution. It was a shrew move by Obama. He has us between a rock and a hard place. Either we remain silent and the Democrats win because there is no competing narrative against this racist liberal idea of judicial activism to benefit one group over another – or – we open our mouths in protest and speak up for equal justice under law – and we bleed Hispanic support.
Either way we lose – but at least if we fight, the people already on our side are energized and pumped to convert those in the middle who are willing to listen. The finger in the breeze moderates and Independents, as it were.
If we do nothing we gain nothing. And that is not a position that is helpful since we have no power.
May 27th, 2009 at 7:22 pm
shrewd. Damnit to hell. I wish there was an edit feature on this site. I can’t type worth a damn.
May 27th, 2009 at 7:24 pm
She acted racist in her position and comments. It is what it is and I dont give a damn if some group finds that offensive.
The GOP need only look to Condi, Alberto Gonzalez, and others to see that we welcome others of other races, and this point will be made in 2010 and 2012. Until then, I say we call it as we see it and she has a ton of issues. Point them out!!!
May 27th, 2009 at 7:28 pm
The GOP need only look to Condi, Alberto Gonzalez, and others to see that we welcome others of other races
The GOP? You mean all 14 people in it?
Or are you going to try to attract some fresh blood?
May 27th, 2009 at 7:28 pm
Exactly. What do we have to lose? We’re not in power. Better to stand on principle and wait for the political winds to shift back. That way, once they do, people will know there is an alternative.
May 27th, 2009 at 7:29 pm
Attract ‘fresh blood’ by letting a racist on the Supreme Court without making a peep about it?
What the hell is the point in having a Republican Party if we are going to run around like little cuckolds to the Democrats?
May 27th, 2009 at 7:31 pm
Adam, do you understand the concept of choosing one’s battles?
May 27th, 2009 at 7:32 pm
Does it matter if a Supreme Court nominee is a fanatic and a racist?
If it doesn’t we ought to just give up and not vote anymore. If America is that screwed up it’s a waste of time to worry about politics. You don’t argue which course is set on a sinking ship. You just look for a life raft.
May 27th, 2009 at 7:34 pm
Sure do. That’s why I rolled my eyes over the birth certificate drivel.
But a lifetime appointment of an activist judge – and a racist one at that? Yeah. That’s a battle worth waging.
May 27th, 2009 at 7:36 pm
Wow. Look at that. I’m with Doug Forrester. Good stuff.
May 27th, 2009 at 7:41 pm
Does it matter if a Supreme Court nominee is a fanatic
Sure.
and a racist?
Do we have any way of explaining this to the average voter other than a sound byte of a statement she made? If so, use that. Otherwise, it’s a dead end and if you want to challenge the judge, find another issue. Surely a “fanatic” will have all sorts of material to bring to light, right?
May 27th, 2009 at 7:44 pm
Speaker Gingrich, who is relatively popular in the Hispanic community, has come out swinging and is taking the lead in the opposition to this nomination. This is very good politically for him, just as it was for him to be the most vocal opponent of Obama’s visit to Notre Dame on moral grounds. Speaker Gingrich helped himself politically today and likely moved the debate in the Senate, making SS’s nomination to the Supreme Court a lot less likely.
May 27th, 2009 at 7:49 pm
Gingrich had zero effect on Democrat senators set to vote for this woman.
May 27th, 2009 at 7:51 pm
Adam,
Keep an eye on Ben Nelson and Lieberman – they may be open to joining the GOP in a filibuster.
May 27th, 2009 at 7:55 pm
Nelson I’ll give you. But the political realities of NE have a hell of a lot more to do with that than Gingrich.
Lieberman won’t jump ship.
May 27th, 2009 at 7:57 pm
But while we watch Nelson we better watch Snowe and Collins. And I wouldn’t count on someone like a Lugar to not jump ship either.
May 27th, 2009 at 7:58 pm
It might be difficult for the nomination to get out of committee with no Republican support.
FILIBUSTER NOW!!!!
May 27th, 2009 at 8:06 pm
Pruce,
We’re not going to derail this. What we should do is loudly and clearly make a point.
May 27th, 2009 at 8:32 pm
The NRO column complaining about how she pronounces her name was about the funniest thing I have read in a while.
Yay, team!
May 27th, 2009 at 9:01 pm
I pronounce her name:
Sadam – Ayer
May 27th, 2009 at 9:15 pm
I think it is:
So. Toe. My. Oar.
May 27th, 2009 at 9:44 pm
I don’t give a flying f#&% what liberals think about us and we should not base our policy and talking points based on how they attack us.
Let’s stop rolling over and taking it Larry Craig style, and fight back.
May 27th, 2009 at 9:45 pm
Hear hear!
May 27th, 2009 at 9:48 pm
Lorelli,
Is it just me or has the O-ministration moved both of us to the right over the past few months?
May 27th, 2009 at 9:57 pm
I think so Adam.
May 27th, 2009 at 10:00 pm
Then why are you backing Crist then Kristofer?
May 27th, 2009 at 10:01 pm
It just seems like an electability determination on your part if you are indeed moving to the right thanks to the actions and words of Barack Obama.
May 27th, 2009 at 10:38 pm
The best you guys have is this hackneyed reverse racism argument? It’s shopworn and absurd. The notion of Sonia Sotomayor stewing in her chambers trying figure out ways to stick it to whitey is beyond ridiculous.
Here’s a thought: President Obama has nominated someone who falls well within the mainstream conservative-to-liberal continuum. She issues rulings based on her reading of the law. She has not espoused novel and dangerous legal principles such as, say, the validity of presidential signing statements. You congratulate President Obama for choosing someone from within the mainstream of moderate-to-liberal legal thought and move on. Who knows? Conservatives might get some actual respect from outside the echo chamber if they did that.
May 27th, 2009 at 10:49 pm
For Republicans, Court Fight Risks Losing Hispanics to Win Conservatives
Republicans Debate Risks of Supreme Court Battle
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/28/us/politics/28repubs.html?pagewanted=print
Sotomayor Choice is Delicate Matter for the GOP
By David Broder
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/printpage/?url=http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/05/28/sotomayor_choice_is_delicate_matter_for_the_gop_96699.html
Identity Justice
By George Will
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/printpage/?url=http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/05/27/identity_politics_on_the_supreme_court_96676.html
On Sotomayor, Some Abortion Rights Backers Show Unease
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/28/us/politics/28abortion.html?_r=1&pagewanted=print
Abortion-rights groups concerned about Sotomayor’s stance
Obama’s Supreme Court nominee has little record on issues related to Roe vs. Wade.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-sotomayor-abortion28-2009may28,0,2261706,print.story
Sonia Sotomayor on Gun Rights and Racial Preferences
Why libertarians—and everyone who believes in limited government—should worry about Barack Obama’s Supreme Court nominee
http://reason.com/news/printer/133722.html
Sotomayor is No Leftist
By E.J. Dionne
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/printpage/?url=http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/05/28/sotomayor_is_no_leftist_96696.html
President Obama Tries To Play “Rope-the-Dopes” With Judge Sotomayor
by Hugh Hewitt
http://hughhewitt.townhall.com/blog/g/8761f3dd-5195-41da-9335-67f121b43495
Roundtable on Sotomayor’s Nomination
w/Fred Barnes, Mara Liasson, and Charles Krauthammer
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/printpage/?url=http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/05/26/roundtable_on_sotomayors_nomination_96695.html
Abu Ghraib abuse photos ‘show rape’
Photographs of alleged prisoner abuse which Barack Obama is attempting to censor include images of apparent rape and sexual abuse, it has emerged.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/5395830/Abu-Ghraib-abuse-photos-show-rape.html
May 27th, 2009 at 11:05 pm
The vast majority of Sotomayer’s rulings have been overturned. She’s way outside of the norm for appellate judges.
May 27th, 2009 at 11:13 pm
Alex,
You’re a real genius. How did you ever predict that Democrats would seize upon Rush’s criticism of Sotomayer?
One more quick question, how do you define racism?
May 27th, 2009 at 11:56 pm
“The vast majority of Sotomayer’s rulings have been overturned. She’s way outside of the norm for appellate judges.”
She has written 380 opinions as an Appeals Court justice. The conservative Supreme Court has heard five and reversed three. In other words, 0.8% of her opinions have been reversed. Next time, try a argument that at least holds a drop of water.
May 28th, 2009 at 12:28 am
#40, Of those ruling the liberal Supreme Court has heard they’ve overturned the majority obviously, my liberal friend.
That is besides her racist statements.
Obama only nominated the Sotomayor because of her complexion and genitalia. We all know that. There are dozens of better qualified liberal judges.
May 28th, 2009 at 12:32 am
Ricci v. DeStefano is an indication Sotomayor takes litigant’s race into consideration in her rulings. She is not impartial.
Her rulings have even misstated the law. You could find a better qualified judge easily if you weren’t picking a justice based on complexion and genitalia.
May 28th, 2009 at 9:30 am
#41,
Why do you think the Supreme Court hears a ruling? It is because they are debatable. Naturally most will be overturned.
But, yes, she is way outside the norm, normally around 75% of circuit court decisions the Supreme Court decides to hear get turned around as opposed to the 60% of those of her that have been heard of her, there’s a great attack ad in there somewhere, I’m just not seeing it.
May 28th, 2009 at 11:25 am
The Supreme Court is conservative, not liberal. And five opinions out of 380 is hardly a significant sample anyway.
Re Ricci v. DeStefano, Sotomayor based her opinion on civil rights law, not race:
http://www.slate.com/id/2219062?wpisrc=newsletter
The argument that Obama specifically Sotomayor based on race and gender is pretty weak because it assumes that she is the only Hispanic female legal figure out there. 15% of the country is Hispanic and 50% of the country is female. What’s wrong with that being represented on the Supreme Court?
May 28th, 2009 at 3:25 pm
Where is the famous “up or down vote” that the GOP demanded when Bush was in office? Now you’re screaming for a filibuster? See, that’s what drives me crazy about politics. Not just the GOP, honestly, but the hypocrisy on both sides just makes my friggin’ head swim.