Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor made the rounds on Capitol Hill today, meeting with Senators of both parties. According to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Pat Leahy (D-VT), Sotomayor addressed her controversial “wise Latina” remarks from 2001 during their meeting. Leahy would not say whether the nominee acknowledged that she misspoke when she made the comments, but her attempt to explain them only adds more confusion.
Here is what Sotomayor said in a prepared speech to a University of California Berkeley audience:
“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.”
Last week, the White House said that Sotomayor chose her words poorly when making the speech, adding that the judge was, “making the point that personal experiences are relevant to the process of judging.” President Obama endorsed that line, saying that the controversy over the remarks was “nonsense.” Still, the nominee spouted a completely different explanation in her meetings with Senators today.
“Sotomayor told Leahy that what she meant is that people have different backgrounds but ‘there is only one law,’ and ‘ultimately and completely’ she would follow the law.
Leahy didn’t clarify whether Sotomayor acknowledged misspeaking, as even President Barack Obama has. Leahy said Sotomayor talked about her judicial philosophy, which can be guided by experiences but at the end of the day it comes down to rule of law.” [emphasis added]
To clarify, Sotomayor now says that when she said life experiences matter to the process of judging, she was really saying that life experiences don’t matter to the process of judging.
The “ultimately and completely” formulation came up again in a meeting with Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL), the ranking Republican on the Judiciary Committee, in what is clearly a White House supplied line to try and put the “nonsense” controversy behind the nominee. But rather than clear things up, Sotomayor’s and the Administration’s denial of the clear meaning of her words only creates more questions about what she meant when she made the speech.
How wise of her!
Big Apple Infidel Tuesday, June 2nd at 9:33PM EDT (link)Is this like a non-denial denial?
Greetings from occupied territory!
I think you meant to say how "wise-ina" of her!
SoFiMil Wednesday, June 3rd at 12:19AM EDT (link)n/t
http://www.suvstrategery.blogspot.com
Standard liberal/Democrat line:
Tbone Tuesday, June 2nd at 10:46PM EDT (link)“I didn’t say what I said.”
What’s sad is that the idiots can rely on the press to agree with them.
Envisioning when all that is Left is the Right.
Poor choice of nominee, not words -nt
molybdanthan Tuesday, June 2nd at 10:55PM EDT (link)The context of Sotomayor's entire Berkeley speech...
rbdwiggins Tuesday, June 2nd at 11:06PM EDT (link)and President Obama’s stated qualifications for his Supreme Court nominee will soon overshadow whether, or not, one specific line in her speech might be construed as racist.
Apparently, the Obama Administration was ill-prepared for the public response to Sotomayor’s nomination, because the TalkingPoints™ simply aren’t working, and since they won’t openly address the constitutional issues in question, they instinctively reacted with personal attacks and demagoguery.
“Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant, but that they know so much that isn’t so.” – Ronald Reagan
She is a racist: and now a liar
E Pluribus Unum Tuesday, June 2nd at 11:21PM EDT (link)She will say whatever it takes to get a seat on the Court. Which follows consistently the ethics of the Left.
This flimsy walkback was required because WE (the online right) made her an embarrassment. But she does not mean it. She’s had 8 years to retract that.
Carthago delenda est
Right
OccamsRazor Wednesday, June 3rd at 1:10AM EDT (link)She’ll say anything to obtain the nomination. Once in, One’s in for life.
Even in her Obama endorsed retort, she essentially reiterates her original statement-not decries it. That a Latina’s “personal experiences are relevant to the process of judging” more than a white Male’s “personal experiences are relevant to the process of judging” . She can no longer separate her experiences of being a Latina, than a white man can of being a white man.
The difference is here that there is video tape of her declaring superiority. Imagine these comments in reverse-it’s unfathomable.
55555...nt
Aaron Gardner Wednesday, June 3rd at 10:45AM EDT (link)Aaron’s Archive
conform and celebrate diversity….or else!!!
Meh....
Mark D Tuesday, June 2nd at 11:53PM EDT (link)I read this last month, only I think her name was Nancy Pel-something then.
You know you’ve reached rock bottom when you’re told you have character flaws by a man who hanged his predecessor in a military coup.
Bill Clinton/ Leftie logic
louisiana Wednesday, June 3rd at 12:15AM EDT (link)I did not have sex with that woman, or it depends of what your
definition of is is.
Should SoSo be confirmed Poll
JLenardDetroit Wednesday, June 3rd at 12:55AM EDT (link)for anyone interested @ PollingPoint.com
(RS:Help) (JLD) (Hollyweird) (Brain-deads) (SPIN-cycle) (Obamaocare) (Party of kNOw) (Conservatism) (TEApeats) (respectful) (Reco) (Quotes) (removeRINOs.com) (RSmas)
+ 0bama Lies & your Bank acct will Die! (4/15 Truthers)
+ Heil “O” Hell No Obamao is NOT MY PRESIDENT! “No U won’t”
+ I want “O” to FAIL (here, here, & whole Diary (Ofail) here, is why)
“The first Liberal was Satan” - a Rush caller (other Quotes)
An Affirmative Action Nomination
MojoMan Wednesday, June 3rd at 1:43PM EDT (link)I don’t care if the term racist is used or not to describe her comments. But if a white man had made this statement in his own defense, he would be cast out on his backside. His nomination would have concluded effective almost immediately. Not so with Judge Sotomayor.
Obviously the primary reasons that she was nominated by President Obama were her race and her sex. Apparently there is a special, easier standard being used for vetting this Hispanic female than there has been for other Supreme Court nominees. It appears that the discriminatory practices associated with affirmative action hiring are now being openly used to confirm Supreme Court nominees.
Unfortunately for her, this is a part of the legacy that she will carry with her from day one as a Supreme Court Justice that she may soon want to be forgotten. Sonia Sotomayor, the Supreme Court Justice that was given affirmative action type preferential treatment during her confirmation process. Not only will this diminish her personal stature as a Justice, it will also diminish the stature of the Supreme Court as a whole.
NOT Random- She said it before...
RborisT Wednesday, June 3rd at 10:00PM EDT (link)Hat tip to Hot Air:
http://hotair.com/archives/2009/06/03/oh-my-sotomayor-made-nearly-identical-wise-latina-comment-in-1994-too/