Do Republicans really have a dilemma in opposing Sotomayer?

That is the premise of this post by Adam Nagourney at the NY Times Caucus Blog. He quotes Republicans on both sides of the issue, but they have a problem only if the Democrats make a blatant appeal to racism.

As long as Republicans stand on principal and question her about her own racist views they should not have any repercussions because Hispanics should be for fairness for everyone too, right? Her statements about the superiority of Hispanic women to white males in decision making in some circumstances is clearly racist regardless of what context Democrats try to slip it into. When you put that with her decision to deny civil rights to a white firefighter in a recent case, it becomes just more evidence that she has a problem being fair with white men.

I would think that fair mined Democrats should have a problem with that too, if there are any out there.

One thing should be clear. It is not racist to question a judge about her decisions and her statements to the public. If the Democrats try to make that case they will be going back to the politics of fraud that has characterized many of their campaigns in recent years.

Comments

  1. Liberal Counterpart:8:49 AM

    I don't think that is the issue... the issue is women and Latino voters in 2010 and 2012 and the 7 Republicans who voted for her in 1998 and would have to vote her down now, even though she will still easily get the votes she needs unless the GOP can filibusterer... which seems to be a a difficult task when you break the numbers down especially with the defection of Sen Arlen Spector who also voted for her in 1998.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Should Republicans go ahead and add Supreme Court Justices to head off Democrats

Washington Post: Some Democrats eye adding more justices to the Supreme Court to change its ideological bent The once-remote idea has gained the attention of liberals angered by the GOP push to remake the federal courts. Probably the easy way to defeat this court-packing scheme is for Trump to propose doing the same thing now.  It would lead to Democrat denunciations and claims that it would be wrong, thereby blowing up any attempt by them in the unfortunate event of Democrats winning a presidential election.
Read more

29 % of companies say they are unlikely to keep insurance after Obamacare

Conn Carroll: A new survey of 368 midsize to large companies found that 29% of them are considering terminating their active employee health care plans when Obamacare is full implemented in 2014. Only 71% of employers surveyed said they did not expect to drop their health coverage, while 20% said they did not know and 9% said they were planning to exit. The latest survey, conducted by Towers Watson, echoes an ealier survey by McKinsey & Co. finding that 30% of private-sector employers were planning to drop their employee health insurance coverage by 2014. When the Congressional Budget Office crunched Obamacare's spending numbers, they estimated that only 7% of employees currently covered by employer-sponsored plans would lose their plans. ... This means the cost of the health care fiasco will be hundreds of billions more than estimated by the CBO and Congressional Democrat. It is also clear that Obama's pledge that you could keep your health care plan if you wanted t...
Read more

Is the F-35 obsolete?

Headline USA: Pentagon Fires Back after Musk Calls Its Most Expensive Project ‘Obsolete’ 'Yeah, as I'm sure you can appreciate, Mr. Musk is, currently, a private citizen, I'm not going to make any comments about what a private citizen may have to say about the F-35....'   ... ... Drones appear to be replacing jets for many operations.  The Russia-Ukraine war is an example of that.  Drones are often hard to detect and can be used for intelligence operations as well as for attacking enemy targets.  It would not surprise me to see drones engaging other drones in combat.  They also cost much less than manned fighters.  
Read more