Oh my: Sotomayor made nearly identical “wise Latina” comment in 1994, too

posted at 4:05 pm on June 3, 2009 by Allahpundit

Leave it to Greg Sargent to conclude that the big scoop here is that no GOP senators pressed her on the earlier remark at her ’98 appellate confirmation hearing, where the scrutiny’s normally a fraction as intense as it is for a SCOTUS appointment. The real significance, of course, is that it puts the lie to the White House’s feeble spin about how Sotomayor supposedly misspoke in 2001, a position the nominee herself has been forced to adopt even though people on her own side admit it’s nonsense. Evidently, the idea that her biology makes her a superior judge has been with her for decades. The only wrinkle: In 1994 she insisted it was her gender that made her “better” and by 2001 that notion had evolved to include race as well. Nice to know that her progressivism became more “sophisticated” over time.

Here’s what she said in the 1994 speech:

“Justice O’Connor has often been cited as saying that “a wise old man and a wise old woman reach the same conclusion in dueling cases. I am not so sure Justice O’Connor is the author of that line since Professor Resnik attributes the line to Supreme Court Justice Coyle. I am not so sure that I agree with the statement. First, if Prof. Martha Minnow is correct, there can never be a universal definition of ‘wise.’ Second, I would hope that a wise woman with the richness of her experience would, more often than not, reach a better conclusion.”

Lindsey Graham met with her today and all but declared afterwards that he won’t vote for her, in full accordance with the precedent set by The One’s ideological jackassery when he voted to torpedo Roberts and Alito. As gratifying as that sort of payback is, though, the racial politics here are a lot different for Graham than they were for Obama. Prudence or principle? Exit question: Was Rush serious today when he said he’d support her if he had reason to believe she was pro-life? What possible reason aside from her faith (one that’s shared by countless of pro-choice Democrats) would we have to think that? Surely someone as invested in gender politics as our “wise woman” nominee isn’t going to disappoint NARAL.

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 3

dcwvu on June 3, 2009 at 7:44 PM

Do you also believe that hispanic women are smarter than white men.

Johan Klaus on June 4, 2009 at 2:54 AM

I think most moderates don’t get either side. Tis’ our fate.

AnninCA on June 4, 2009 at 12:10 AM

Leftist are now moderates? It is a bizaar world.

Johan Klaus on June 4, 2009 at 2:58 AM

Do you also believe that hispanic women are smarter than white men.

Johan Klaus on June 4, 2009 at 2:54 AM

I didn’t used to but now that I have found out that, contrary to recorded history, Thomas Edison, Albert Einstein, Orville and Wilbur Wright, Nikola Tesla and Wernher von Braun, and a bunch of others too, were all actually Hispanic women, I have been forced to change my mind.

MB4 on June 4, 2009 at 3:16 AM

(Rush Caller) A wise person does not boast of being wise.

maverick muse on June 3, 2009 at 10:12 PM

[A wise person should] pretend inferiority and encourage their opponents arrogance.
- Sun Tzu

MB4 on June 4, 2009 at 3:35 AM

Hooray! Consistency!

AbaddonsReign on June 4, 2009 at 6:13 AM

Was Rush serious today when he said he’d support her if he had reason to believe she was pro-life?

It’s amazing how you liberals just don’t get Rush. He said that for two reasons. 1) To show how fixated the media is on him (and they were talking about him on msnbc about 10 minutes after he said that) and 2) He said that because the liberals are trying to throw up this smoke screen that she is a “Catholic” so she must be pro-life. pelosi, kerry and kennedy are “Catholic” also.

Man, it’s amazing how liberals have coopted the word nuance yet they are incapable of recognizing it.

peacenprosperity on June 4, 2009 at 7:05 AM

You conservatives are just a bunch of La Razaphobes, especially the white males who are not as wise and Latinas.

Geochelone on June 4, 2009 at 7:46 AM

Was Rush serious today when he said he’d support her if he had reason to believe she was pro-life?

Pappas v. Giuliani is why.

She sided with a NYPD employee’s 1st Amendment right to distribute bigoted material.

AprilOrit on June 4, 2009 at 8:21 AM

Jeez, if Latinas really are smarter than whitey, I’ll take Rosie Perez over Sotomayor any day of the week.

J.J. Sefton on June 4, 2009 at 8:28 AM

Oops! I did it again…

golfer1 on June 4, 2009 at 8:28 AM

Jeez, if Latinas really are smarter than whitey, I’ll take Rosie Perez over Sotomayor any day of the week.

Salma Hayek. Maybe Vida Guerra.

moonbat monitor on June 4, 2009 at 8:44 AM

Do you also believe that hispanic women are smarter than white men.

Johan Klaus on June 4, 2009 at 2:54 AM

I believe that there is some evidence (though often disputed) that the average of the distribution of intelligence of women is marginally higher than the average of the distribution of intelligence of men, but that the spread, or deviation, for men is larger, such that men dominate the extremes at both ends (and are underrepresented in the middle).
But, then, all statistical arguments must bow to the examination of the individual.

Count to 10 on June 4, 2009 at 10:10 AM

A Latina Leopard never changes her spots just like the rest of us in this jungle out here. Stop SotoMayor.

chicagoray on June 4, 2009 at 10:53 AM

Jeez!

Weren’t the Germans the last ones to really, really emphasize race?

I guess we need more of that by putting such a racially-offended person on the Supreme Court.

Stepan on June 4, 2009 at 4:52 PM

Let’s see an update on this on why she couldn’t bring herself to say “United States” in her Thesis.

My God – Ace has this flaming skulled yet silence on the line in HotAir.

Need to tighten up the loose stuff there Allah. Put your hands off Atilla for a sec and check the laptop dude!

HondaV65 on June 4, 2009 at 5:40 PM

I know she is reportedly Catholic but there are Jesuits that promote Black Liberation Theology….just what religion was she steeped in? Because some of her early writings especially referring to natives of puerto rico of having a colonial mentality…..well it remind me of what Rev Jeremiah Wright preaches.

Dr Evil on June 4, 2009 at 9:53 PM

This was up top in the headlines on this site.

Has anyone else read this?

http://ninthjustice.nationaljournal.com/2009/06/grading-sotomayors-senior-thes.php

the last paragraph of the article, an excerpt from her thesis.

“Fourth, she asserted that Muñoz Marín’s economic program, called Operation Bootstrap, failed primarily because Puerto Ricans continued to think of themselves as colonials. This, like the reference to the US Congress as the ‘North American’ Congress, was 1970s-trendy dependency theory rhetoric, but was wholly unsupported by the evidence that she presented in the thesis (and, indeed, by virtually any evidence that has appeared since that time).”

Why does this remind me of Black Liberation Theology?

The use of North American Congress for the US Congress
the woman was born in New York she thinks that our Congress passes laws for the whole continent? She speaks as if she isn’t a citizen- separate like Rev Jeremiah Wright at Trinity Church preaching the Black Liberation Theology.

Dr Evil on June 4, 2009 at 9:58 PM

Friday morning, and Laura Ingraham is shredding Sotomayor’s literary efforts, exposing the Judge via Sotomayor’s own inadequate arguments.

Dr. Evil, your Sotomayor comments are illuminating.

maverick muse on June 5, 2009 at 9:18 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3