McCaskill fumbles the “incredible life story” meme
posted at 2:55 pm on May 26, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
The White House has selected Senator Claire McCaskill (D-MO) to serve on Sonia Sotomayor’s “sherpa” team in the Senate, introducing the nominee to McCaskill’s colleagues and advancing her case on Capitol Hill. Barack Obama has to hope she does a better job this week than she did on Fox News this morning, after making not one but two big fumbles during her interview on Fox News this morning. First, she claimed that Sotomayor’s upbringing in poverty would provide a “unique” perspective on the current court, a fallacy the boss wasted no time in puncturing:
The Democrat senator went out to claim that the Supreme Court has no members who have grown up in poverty and overcome extreme hardships.
“That’s something new,” McCaskill argued.
No, actually, it’s not — as Justice Clarence Thomas detailed in his memoir, My Grandfather’s Son. Thomas grew up in fairly serious poverty without public housing, and also managed to make something of himself.
That wasn’t the most foolish part of the interview, however. When Fox News anchor Jane Skinner read the quote from Sotomayor about how a Latina woman would reach better legal conclusions than a white male, McCaskill showed that she hadn’t bothered to prepare at all for her new role:
MCCASKILL: I don’t think we should make this judge accountable for what other people have said. She has 400 published opinions, she has three decades in the law as a courtroom prosecutor, and –
SKINNER: Hold on [crosstalk]. I’m sorry, Senator, I just want to make this clear to our viewers. That’s what she said. I was reading a quote from her.
MCCASKILL: Oh, I [dropout] about her.
SKINNER: No, no, no. She made the statement, “I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences” — referring to herself, I assume — “would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life.” Now Megyn Kelly earlier brought up the point to one of our guests; if a white man who was a nominee had said that, he would not have been confirmed, most likely.
MCCASKILL: I, I, I, you know, I think we need to get this context of those comments.
Oops! As for context, outside of a joke, is there any context which would mitigate that quote? Not to my mind. They may not be an absolute bar to confirmation, and probably won’t be, but it’s an embarrassing reliance on both identity politics and the rule of empathy over the rule of law.
Furthermore, this quote has been floating around for almost two weeks, ever since the New York Times included it deep within a profile of Sotomayor. Shouldn’t a sherpa have been prepared to answer that? It already looks like amateur hour with this appointment.
Update: The Anchoress has a good roundup going, with lots of updates, at her new blog at First Things. It’s finally up and running, so be sure to check it out. Note: I originally worded this update poorly, and left the impression that First Things was her site.










Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
Ed, McCaskill is going to hate the spotlight.
upinak on May 26, 2009 at 2:59 PM
First, she claimed that Sotomayor’s upbringing in poverty would provide a “unique” perspective on the current court, a fallacy the boss wasted no time in puncturing:
The Democrat senator went out to claim that the Supreme Court has no members who have grown up in poverty and overcome extreme hardships.
“That’s something new,” McCaskill argued.
……..
Newspeak.
artist on May 26, 2009 at 3:00 PM
That’s because it was in English, not in, as The Precedent would put it, sherpa-ese.
McCaskill has the IQ of a small pebble.
progressoverpeace on May 26, 2009 at 3:00 PM
Par for the course with this administration.
PBoilermaker on May 26, 2009 at 3:00 PM
McCaskill is a idiot. She never makes any sensible and coherent statements. She was on FOX a lot during the campaign and I really got tired of listening to her.
Generally, she is a talking point machine who can’t get the talking points right.
davek70 on May 26, 2009 at 3:01 PM
Everybody knows that Latinas are able to make better legal decisions than dumb old white guys. And if you give typewriters to enough monkeys and wait long enough, the monkeys can write better legal opinions than either of them.
Cicero43 on May 26, 2009 at 3:01 PM
It looks just like amateur hour… because it IS amateur hour!!
Griz on May 26, 2009 at 3:01 PM
FTFY.
Abby Adams on May 26, 2009 at 3:01 PM
The racist idea that someone is better qualified to much a decision because of their race is just stupid and evil, regardless of whether one is white man or a woman of color or a colored woman. (I always get the last two confused.) On the other hand, as a gay person, I will say that gays are obviously better at making judicial decision. It comes with the interior decorator gene.
thuja on May 26, 2009 at 3:02 PM
Party of bigotry and incompetence on display again. Pass the popcorn.
If Sotomayor is not confirmed, does everyone know what the meme will be? You guessed it.
Dr.Cwac.Cwac on May 26, 2009 at 3:02 PM
If only Claire McCaskill and Joe Biden had gotten together and had a child… That would be priceless.
myrenovations on May 26, 2009 at 3:02 PM
I enjoy Claire’s interviews on just about anything,….. always a rich tapestry of entertainment potential.
a capella on May 26, 2009 at 3:02 PM
Sherpa…are you sure it wasn’t a “Yak”…
right2bright on May 26, 2009 at 3:02 PM
This may have been the best possible selection from a conservative standpoint. We are going to get days and days and days of identity politics from the left, which, if anything, should be good for a giggle.
I keep hoping people will wake up and realize that “groups” are being played – absolutely played – for maximum political impact by the “tolerant” left.
BardMan on May 26, 2009 at 3:03 PM
Claire isn’t doing so well. Maybe they should bring in Biden.
Laura in Maryland on May 26, 2009 at 3:03 PM
Can’t wait to see the skits on SNL that make Sotomayor look like some stupid latino hick!
Star20 on May 26, 2009 at 3:03 PM
MCCASKILL: I, I, I, you know, I think I didn’t know about… that.
D’OH!
rockbend on May 26, 2009 at 3:03 PM
McCaskill is an embarrassment in the Pelosi, Schumer, Dodd, and Reid mold. Very idiotic.
Apparently only liberals can have compelling life stories.
jencab on May 26, 2009 at 3:04 PM
Liberals are all incredible, or have I woken up in some different reality?
LibTired on May 26, 2009 at 3:04 PM
To a more basic point: what the hell does ones income level have to do with how they are supposed to interpret the law?
Normally, it shouldn’t mean a hill of beans; a Justices job is to interpret law. Of course, in this case it will harken to the amount of “empathy” Sotomayor will bring to her decisions – typical liberal pap.
catmman on May 26, 2009 at 3:05 PM
On a side note (totally irrelevant, shallow, and unkind… I’m shaking my head at myself as I type this), but did anyone else think it was even possible for Obama’s female appointee to be less attractive than Ruth Bader-Ginsburg? How is that even possible?
Abby Adams on May 26, 2009 at 3:05 PM
Leftists are always brilliant. Conservatives are either dimwits or evil. Didn’t you get the memo?
Cicero43 on May 26, 2009 at 3:05 PM
Good to see consistency out of Barry and Co.
Vashta.Nerada on May 26, 2009 at 3:05 PM
I, I, I, you know, I think you need to do a better job preparing for your role.
Joe Caps on May 26, 2009 at 3:07 PM
Because a latina’s lack of attractiveness with her richness of experience trump’s a white woman’s lack of attractiveness?
LibTired on May 26, 2009 at 3:08 PM
Obama has the repubs by the short hairs. Rail against her and what little Hispanic vote the repubs have is gone. Let her sit on the bench and a true believer in racial preferences/activist court is on the bench for perhaps 30 years.
Tell me again how stupid Obama and crew are.
patrick neid on May 26, 2009 at 3:08 PM
McCaskill
fumblesperforms her normal daily function.Enoxo on May 26, 2009 at 3:08 PM
How she tricked so many of my fellow Missourians into electing her is beyond me. The DNC needs to keep her under lock and key and avoid the sunshine as much as possible.
Spector would have been a better choice than Claire to trot out Obama’s pick at this point. At least he can string two coherent sentences together.
Mo_mac on May 26, 2009 at 3:09 PM
Valerie Jarrett just said on Fox News to Shep that she is more qualified and has better credentials than anybody that has been nominated to the SC in the past 100 years.
Joe Caps on May 26, 2009 at 3:09 PM
Valerie Jarrett just said on Fox News to Shep that she (Sotomayer, that is) is more qualified and has better credentials than anybody that has been nominated to the SC in the past 100 years.
Joe Caps on May 26, 2009 at 3:09 PM
Joe Caps on May 26, 2009 at 3:10 PM
This is gonna be grrreat!
/too vague?
SilverStar830 on May 26, 2009 at 3:10 PM
Senator Claire McCaskill needs an emergency TOTUS transplant.
And Judge Sonia Sotomayor needs an emergency nuance injection.
Loxodonta on May 26, 2009 at 3:11 PM
I think Claire was looking for the word “nuance”. It covers all points of hypocrisy, bigotry, intolerance and prejudice when voiced from the left. Because….because….”it’s DIFFERENT”. Yeah, that’s it, it’s DIFFERENT.
GarandFan on May 26, 2009 at 3:12 PM
McCaskill has the IQ of a small pebble.
progressoverpeace
As a duly appointed representative of small pebbles, I demand a retraction. We are prepared to submit SAT’s, MENSA membership rolls and college transcripts to show that small pebbles are, on average, much more intelligent than Ms. McCaskill.
SKYFOX on May 26, 2009 at 3:12 PM
This is already the longest hour of my life. How much time left on that hour anyway?
DrAllecon on May 26, 2009 at 3:12 PM
This judge is such an uber-commie that when she is not confirmed the next pick will look conservative in comparison.
There is a technique in selling called “selling down”.
You show the high end model with all it’s features and benefits and then if your customer doesn’t bite, you sell them a lesser unit but you still make the sell.
You really want them to buy the expensive one but, if you started with the cheaper one it is hard to sell up.
TheSitRep on May 26, 2009 at 3:12 PM
They love their hyperbole on the left.
progressoverpeace on May 26, 2009 at 3:12 PM
At least he didn’t pick a liberal activist white person! Then if the Repubs fought the nomination we would have lost the white vote! Oh dear!
/s
Joe Caps on May 26, 2009 at 3:13 PM
Valerie Jarrett just said on Fox News to Shep that she is more qualified and has better credentials than anybody that has been nominated to the SC in the past 100 years.
Joe Caps on May 26, 2009 at 3:09 PM
This Administration KNOWS it can say or claim ANYTHING, without challenge.
There simply will be no requirement of proof or supporting evidence.
artist on May 26, 2009 at 3:13 PM
I was raised poor, family of 10 kids, did drugs, practiced unsafe sex, had a child out of wedlock at 18… My experiences are varied… I await my nomination and easy confirmation to the SCOTUS.
2Tru2Tru on May 26, 2009 at 3:13 PM
How much time left on that hour anyway?
DrAllecon on May 26, 2009 at 3:12 PM
Roughly 7 years and 8 months.
artist on May 26, 2009 at 3:14 PM
Sotomajor has lived a long life and had many troubles, most of which never happened.
- “Mark Twain”
MB4 on May 26, 2009 at 3:14 PM
davek70 on May 26, 2009 at 3:15 PM
You are correct. McCaskill’s intellect comes in closer to the level of a grain of clay. I was trying to be nice to her, though.
progressoverpeace on May 26, 2009 at 3:15 PM
Sotomajor is like the mirror image of David Duke.
MB4 on May 26, 2009 at 3:17 PM
+++++
LibTired on May 26, 2009 at 3:18 PM
Why would Team Obama pick McCaskill for this job? McCaskill is really one of the stupidest people that I’ve ever heard. She is perplexed by dressing herself in the morning, so it should be interesting to see her bumble through this task.
Illinidiva on May 26, 2009 at 3:18 PM
My God, Claire McCaskill is a blithering idiot. She continues to give women in politics a bad name. I can’t believe the Democrats keep trotting her out as a spokesperson. She has to be the dumbest member of the Senate, and perhaps the dumbest of the last generation.
rockmom on May 26, 2009 at 3:19 PM
EVERYTHING this TOTUS does is about race or Marxism–or both
Latinos voted for him because he wasn’t White; ditto for other non-Whites. Stupid Leftoid White People voted for him because he wasn’t White, and / or his Marxist proposals
Everything he does is meant to increase the size and scope and power of government, and his often-proclaimed ‘background speech’ is all about how he’s qualified to be POTUS because he isn’t White
So, big surprise here: he nominates a stupid unqualified White-hating Marxist Latina lawyer to the SCOTUS.
big, big surprise…………
Janos Hunyadi on May 26, 2009 at 3:19 PM
I don’t know if *this* is the context in which she made that statement, but I will say that the one context in which it makes sense to me is the sense that the legal profession – and the places where most SCOTUS justices study and spend their time – is a white male dominated field. So if you have a “stereotypically white male” upbringing – speaking purely in terms of demographics, your experience is going to be limited in a way that a Justice who has a more diverse background (for lack of a better term) will not. That can and, I think, does lead to better opinions.
Example: Justice Thomas’s dissent in Chicago v. Morales was brilliant, and if you read the other opinions – even the other dissents, they are just ultra-technical readings of the statutes, and they ignore the broader context of the law. I bet Thomas might disagree with me but I think his background does make him a better judge. Hopefully the same is true of Sotomayor.
If you’re interested: http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/97-1121.ZD1.html
Proud Rino on May 26, 2009 at 3:20 PM
Sotomajor to sit on the highest court, parley-voo?
Sotomajor to sit on the highest court, parley-voo?
Her colleagues she would chagrin, her aides she would knock
And all her nagging could stop a cuckoo clock
Hinky, dinky, parley-voo
InkyBinkyBarleyBoo on May 26, 2009 at 3:21 PM
This might be the stupidest thing ever written on the Internet.
Proud Rino on May 26, 2009 at 3:21 PM
Ugh, I was afraid of that. I hope someone in the GOP would get out of their own way, stop shooting themselves in the foot, find their “testicular fortitude,” etc and maybe shave 4 years off that sentance.
DrAllecon on May 26, 2009 at 3:21 PM
I’m wondering with the Prop 8 court decision and Californians voting anti-tax if a raging liberal SC Justice at this time is as easy a slam-dunk as everyone (I mean you, Rahm) thinks.
Marcus on May 26, 2009 at 3:22 PM
Oh, fer Chrissakes. Can we please avoid the hyperbole? She is very well qualified and has a compelling life story. Is Jarrett suggesting she is even better qualified than Thurgood Marshall???
rockmom on May 26, 2009 at 3:22 PM
It’s okay – really. The adults are in charge now.
johnnybgood on May 26, 2009 at 3:22 PM
Sounds like McCaskill needs a teleprompter bailout.
rbj on May 26, 2009 at 3:23 PM
No, I think your next post will take that prize.
rockmom on May 26, 2009 at 3:23 PM
Ha!
Maybe this will help Claire out.
Buy Danish on May 26, 2009 at 3:23 PM
I bet Thomas might disagree with me but I think his background does make him a better judge
……..
That explains why the Dems backed Thomas.
Oh, wait.
artist on May 26, 2009 at 3:24 PM
rockmom is the smartest poster on Hot Air.
Proud Rino on May 26, 2009 at 3:24 PM
The constitution was written by white men seeking freedom. It will be “interpreted” (destroyed) by a latina seeking socialism.
johnnybgood on May 26, 2009 at 3:24 PM
McCaskill to be Sotomajor’s spokeswoman, parley-voo?
McCaskill to be Sotomajor’s spokeswoman, parley-voo?
With her IQ of a small pebble
One would be better represented by the Devil
Hinky, dinky, parley-voo
InkyBinkyBarleyBoo on May 26, 2009 at 3:24 PM
McCaskill has been, is, and will always be a fool. She been walking around with her head up her arse for many years.
For a long time, those that lived in Missouri only knew it.
jack herman on May 26, 2009 at 3:26 PM
So in essence, this woman frowns on every judgement ever made within any decision in any court, any white man has made?
Sounds to me like she has an ego, that ranks right up there with “the one”.
Geeze louise lady. Crawl down off your cross. I admire your journey, but not your attitude. Now I clearly see the big chip on your shoulder.
capejasmine on May 26, 2009 at 3:28 PM
Of all the moronic ignorant troll-posts you’ve made here, this one sets a new standard for stupid
“demographically speaking” ? Most ‘white males’ spend their entire lives WITHOUT ‘privilege’ or dominance or any of the other buzz-words that idiots like you like to toss around.
Janos Hunyadi on May 26, 2009 at 3:28 PM
Yet… a majority of the MO residents are even stupider as they actually voted for her.
Illinidiva on May 26, 2009 at 3:29 PM
blatantblue on May 26, 2009 at 3:30 PM
Quick – someone explain to me why it’s such a great thing for a SC justice – who serves for life – to have the common touch, to have struggled to get ahead, to have a compelling life story BUT those same qualitites were a deathknell in a VP candidate – who serves 4 years?
katiejane on May 26, 2009 at 3:30 PM
She has been reprimanded for her overt racism against a white firefighter by a liberal Clinton appointed judge. Sorry Ed, I disagree, racism is a serious impediment to confirmation.
Play that quote like a broken record and the quoted formal written reprimand. If she were a white male, she would be withdrawing the nomination already….
We must fight the assailants on our freedoms tooth and nail.
dogsoldier on May 26, 2009 at 3:31 PM
David Duke: ‘Hope that a wise Anglo-Saxon man with the richness of his experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a non-white female”.
There are three classes of intellects: one which comprehends by itself; another which appreciates what others comprehend; and a third (that would be yours) which neither comprehends by itself nor by the showing of others; the first is the most excellent, the second is good, and the third is useless.
- Niccolo Machiavelli
MB4 on May 26, 2009 at 3:31 PM
Seriously it doesn’t matter what this woman said or did in her past, she is a female and a minority who has been tapped by “the one”. She gets a pass on everything.
milwife88 on May 26, 2009 at 3:32 PM
One’s a liberal and one’s conservative. Oh, you were being rhetorical.
LibTired on May 26, 2009 at 3:34 PM
It’s no use. Everyone knows that the white males who built this nation into the greatest ever to have existed on Earth were just lucky. If those white men had really been smart, as the multi-culturalists keep telling us, the US would have been a much better country and developed more like the third world. What a shame that we became a superpower in just about every area of human endeavor, instead. Bad white men. They really screwed us over. The libs will fix this. Their life experience tells them that the Spanish ex-colonies developed so much better than the British ones.
progressoverpeace on May 26, 2009 at 3:35 PM
The last 100 years?
:)
Bob's Kid on May 26, 2009 at 3:37 PM
Where’s Matt Damon to call this some Disney story from hell?
Oh. I see.
emailnuevo on May 26, 2009 at 3:38 PM
How long do you think it takes before the United States collapses, again?
Proud Rino on May 26, 2009 at 3:40 PM
Sotomajor to sit on the highest court, parley-voo?
Sotomajor to sit on the highest court, parley-voo?
She never could get the vote of a non racist woman or man
Cause the firefighters with the most merit but of the wrong color she wants to ban
Hinky, dinky, parley-voo
InkyBinkyBarleyBoo on May 26, 2009 at 3:40 PM
It’s sad to think that racism will be ignored, just because it comes from a liberal and it’s against Whites.
Phoenician on May 26, 2009 at 3:40 PM
With this junta? Two years, at the outside.
Creating order is incredibly difficult. Creating chaos is easy.
What’s your point?
progressoverpeace on May 26, 2009 at 3:41 PM
Ok, she has a strong personal story, but the blatant racism here, is not a good thing, at all.
Exactly, if anyone else worded things, the way this woman does, they’d be tanked, before they even got started.
She needs to be called to the mat on this, and as a judge in any court, she needs to remember….she represents EVERYONE…not just minorities.
capejasmine on May 26, 2009 at 3:44 PM
Matt knows Princeton summa cum laude and Yale Law School (law review editor, natch) can’t possibly compare with “five no-name colleges in seven years.”
benny shakar on May 26, 2009 at 3:46 PM
AP will probably help you out on this, Ed. I’m sure there’s a nuance somewhere we just haven’t thought of.
As for the O’Bozo Amateur Hour, two thoughts:
- Obama’s particular nothingness is always best on display, imo, when he is discussing the only thing in life that he can possibly claim qualification for: the law. Just as his radical leftism was perfectly framed by his vote against the confirmation of John Roberts as Chief Justice, his complete ignorance of the constitution is Red Flagged by his comments on SCOTUS judges and “empathy”.
- Resistance against this unqualified candidate will be futile once it is discovered that she has delinquent taxes.
Jaibones on May 26, 2009 at 3:47 PM
So you think white males (apparently without the help of millions of black slaves) built the United States into the greatest country that ever existed, and then we elect a black guy to be president and you think the greatest nation in the history of the world will cease to exist.
No point, really. I just think that’s kind of interesting.
Proud Rino on May 26, 2009 at 3:48 PM
She wasn’t selected because she’s a woman and a Latina, but because she’s not a white male. Can’t you wingnuts read?
/every lib on Earth
Jim Treacher on May 26, 2009 at 3:49 PM
You might as well expect rivers to run backwards.
Hinmahtooyahlatkek on May 26, 2009 at 3:49 PM
There were never that many slaves in the most industrially developed parts of the country. That is one of the reasons that the North won the Civil War.
HalJordan on May 26, 2009 at 3:53 PM
Remember this one thing, Ed. Any Latino/a, African-American, etc. who happens to be a Conservative is a “subhuman” in the Liberal definition of the word.
That means Clarence Thomas is not “one of them”, incredible life-story or not. Pero Sonia… Ea rayo!
newton on May 26, 2009 at 3:53 PM
Slaves usually did things like picking cotton, not science and engineering. Having slaves retarded the South’s development.
HalJordan on May 26, 2009 at 3:56 PM
Phoenician on May 26, 2009 at 3:40 PM
Why? We now have a POTUS who attended church with a racist pastor. It’s not the first time it’s been ignored and it won’t be the last.
Vera71 on May 26, 2009 at 3:56 PM
I’m not sure what point you are trying to get through, here, but labor did not build the US any more than factory workers built the factory. And they were white Protestant males, for the most part. I know you don’t like it, but that’s how it happened.
The fact that The Precedent is black has nothing to do with his dismantling of the US. The fact that he is a wild-eyed, un-American marxist who hates the US and the West are the pertinent points.
Can he bring down the greatest nation on Earth in a few short years (with the help of the traitorous morons controlling Congress)? Yes. Why is that so surprising to you. As I tried to explain, creating order is very difficult and very expensive and requires eternal vigilance and constant maintenance. The slide into chaos is never far away for any complex system, which is the threat that civilization always lives with. The fact that you seem perplexed by this doesn’t surprise me.
You should find it obvious, instead of interesting, but that would take a little more knowledge on your part, and an understanding of the nature of complex systems and the costs of maintaining them.
progressoverpeace on May 26, 2009 at 3:58 PM
You sound anxious; like a small child who can’t wait, asking “are we there yet?”
massrighty on May 26, 2009 at 4:00 PM
MB4 on May 26, 2009 at 4:00 PM
What is interesting, and very telling, is that out of all the commenting going on, you choose a person’s skin color to comment about.
Nice job Mr. Powell.
PappaMac on May 26, 2009 at 4:03 PM
What I find interesting is that you think white males built this country by themselves into the greatest country that ever existed (apparently not a minority (ha) view around here), and then we elect one black President, and by May 2011 at the latest you believe the United States will cease to exist.
Huh.
Proud Rino on May 26, 2009 at 4:03 PM
I just think that’s a remarkable worldview. I mean, I’m going to feel pretty stupid in April of 2011 when we’re all in the Thunderdome or whatever, but…wow.
Proud Rino on May 26, 2009 at 4:07 PM
So all this is reparations. Thanks for admitting it.
Jim Treacher on May 26, 2009 at 4:08 PM
Not necessarily “by themselves;” but you would do well to remember that it was capitalism, combined with a tightly constrained federal government that built this country to greatness.
The further we move from proper respect for capitalism, and the closer we get to an all-controlling central government, the closer we are to either collapse or some kind of revolution.
massrighty on May 26, 2009 at 4:08 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »