Was it something Sotomayor said?

Washington Times Editorial:

After two days of hearings for Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor, it appears that her strategy for confirmation is to contradict herself at every turn. She spent much of yesterday claiming not to have meant the things she actually said or not to have ruled the way she actually ruled. For the first time, therefore, it is not just her judgment but also her integrity that is in question.

Consider this exchange from very early in the Senate Judiciary Committee's questioning. Speaking of her infamous line, repeated in seven speeches, that a "wise Latina" would be more likely to rule correctly than a "white male," Judge Sotomayor said this: "The words I used, I used agreeing with the sentiment Justice Sandra Day O'Connor was attempting to convey."

The record is the direct opposite, as a matter of incontrovertible fact. Here's what she actually said in her multiple speeches: "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 [Yale Law] Professor [Judith] Resnik attributes that line to [Minnesota] Supreme Court Justice [Mary Jeanne Coyne]. I am also not so sure that I agree with the statement. First, as [Harvard Law] Professor Martha Minow 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."

Judge Sotomayor could not have been "agreeing with ... Justice Sandra Day O'Connor" -- as she claimed yesterday -- while being true to her previous position that, "I am also not so sure that I agree with the statement" attributed to Justice O'Connor.

...

One of my former law partners used to call witness preparation "woodshedding the witness." The process involves getting witnesses prepared with plausible responses to anticipated hostile questions. It appears to me that Sotomayor has been over prepared and is losing credibility as a result. It appears that the Democrats on the committee want her to deny the obvious, because the obvious makes her look like someone not seeking impartial justice under the law.

Maybe this is progress in that it shows that liberals are capable of being embarrassed by their rhetoric.