pageok
pageok
pageok
Judge Sotomayor's "Unscripted" Moments:

Today's Washington Post reports:

conservatives have seized upon Sotomayor's unscripted moments to make the case that she is outside the mainstream. The two most often quoted are a statement she made about how appellate judges make policy and her observation about how being a Latina affects her role as a judge: "I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experience would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life." [emphasis added]

The initial comment that "policy is made" in the appellate courts was clearly an "unscripted," off-the-cuff remark, and one that I think was overblown. The other one, however, comes from the published version of a prepared speech. So it was hardly "unscripted" and, in all likelihood, it was not unedited either. I suppose it's possible that the text of the speech published in the Berkeley Law Raza Law Review was the raw transcript, but I highly doubt it. Much more likely, Judge Sotomayor had ample opportunity to review the text of her speech prior to publication, making corrections and clarifications where necessary. Thus, in this case, there is every reason to believe that Judge Sotomayor's words were precisely what she meant to say -- and not quite an "unscripted" moment.

Albatross (mail) (www):
As a white male, I never tire of hearing how everything I represent is less good because I haven't "lived that life." Good to know I will keep hearing it for some time now.
5.29.2009 12:13am
Ilya Somin:
For what it's worth, I agree with Jonathan on both counts. I think the "policy" remark really was unscripted and in any case largely innocuous. I don't think you can say the same thing about the other one.
5.29.2009 12:31am
A. Zarkov (mail):
It's the "unscripted moments" that give us the real insight into Sotomayor, not the polished spin that gets published. The "policy is made" statement, and the snickering laughter in the background tell us how she could behave on the court. I think we have a clear proponent of "results based jurisprudence" with Sotomayor.
5.29.2009 12:50am
D. Duke (mail):
As a white male, I hear you albatross. We are down to only 6 of 9 justices representing our interests. Dark days ahead.
5.29.2009 1:19am
BGates:
We are down to only 6 of 9 justices representing our interests

No justice on the Court has expressed an intention to favor white men in their decisions. The Chief Justice expressly opposed the kind of race-based reasoning that Sotomayor champions.
5.29.2009 1:27am
vc_site:
"I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experience would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life."

I am a white male.

How come I do not get to have richness of experience? And why is her conclusion necessarily "better" than mine? Oh yeah, it is better because of the richness of experience that I am not allowed to have, because I am a white male.

Her sentence really bothers me. One would think that after all these years of hearing comments like hers that I would be used to it ... but I'm not.
5.29.2009 1:30am
Steve:
I realize the white man's burden is difficult for some people to bear, but it's so frickin' amusing to the rest of us that it's got to be worth it on the whole. Gee, let's interpret her statements in the most absurdly overblown way we can come up with (she expressed an intention to favor a particular race/gender in her decisions? really?) and then let's all sit around and cry over it.
5.29.2009 1:38am
/:
Thus, in this case, there is every reason to believe that Judge Sotomayor's words were precisely what she meant to say -- and not quite an "unscripted" moment.


The Race will not be subject to your corner painting.
5.29.2009 4:59am
Yossarian:
How best to see into one's soul than when they make "unscripted" remarks?
5.29.2009 8:18am
Sarcastro (www):
I would also like to cry racism when a judge is talking about how minorities have insight into discrimination cases.

The key is to pretend she was making a speech about being a judge generally, not specifically about discrimination cases.

Then, once I ignore the statistical difference gender plays in such cases, I get to claim victim status, AND call the judge racist! Everyone's a winner!
5.29.2009 9:30am
LipstickPig (mail):
So u white guys is "down to" 6 out of 9 while the percent of you guys in this here US of A is far less than that. Grate work!

And every single president since the white male Founding Fathers sed black slavery good and only the grate white menfolks shuld vote has been a white male, as have 99% of USSC justices. Why change it now? Uve been doin' such a grate job as wee kin see twoday!

But hey, us dum wimmen folks be told by ur pardee that we only exists to make more menfokes and neither us nor non-whites have a right eekwill repristation no madder how much taxes us pays.

Summers wuz right: women is 2 dum to do sciance. Much less lawyering. For sum reesin we thinks the universe is older than 6000 yeers unlike the wize white men who run the Republikin pardee. We also be nervus nellies 'bout torturin'. Prolaffers for killin' is kinda odd too.

I oneder if this comment from a nonwhite women will bee worthy of being allowed to say somethin to ur lordships.


But what doo I knows? Ah'm just a wimmen like Palin and Michelle Bachman and we are all dum and useless.
5.29.2009 10:10am
Bob from Ohio (mail):
Precise use or words(like unscripted when 1 at least was a written speech)is sadly on the decline.

Latina means "Hispanic woman" or "woman of Latin descent" as compared to a Latino--a male.

So "Latina woman" is a redundant phrase.
5.29.2009 11:00am
LipstickPig (mail):
Sarcastro (www):
I would also like to cry racism when a judge is talking about how minorities have insight into discrimination cases. "

I'm sure you would even though the "Latina woman" didn't say any such thing.

How many WMD's did your very white very male party find in Iraq?? Who was it that were running the financial companies and bankrupted them? What party just left us with trillions in debt most of it borrowed from commies in China?


A "Latina woman"? Oh, yes it must have been!
5.29.2009 11:39am
LipstickPig (mail):
I love it when rightwingers tell us that they empathize with brainless frozen embryos and how they are "prolife" while dropping thousands of 1000 pound bombs on a city full of civilians, based on lies about that country. They called it Shock and Awe when it was Death and Pain.

They use the empathy for the brainless to push their legislative agenda on all the courts.

They also have a lot of empathy for those who believe that the universe it 6000 years old. Why not let them teach lies if it makes them feel holy? We wouldn't want to hurt their feelings!

And when it comes to all those megarich white men that run corporations their feelings would be hurt unless they can keep charging their customers more and more until they have so much money they could never spend it all in 10 lifetimes!
So let's tell the courts that a woman who got far less money from the white man running the company than the white men, gosh, who does she think she is? Certainly not equal with the white men no matter that she did the same job as well as any of them!

Let's empathize with the white men who got far more money!

Let's tell her to just GET LOST and stop whining.
5.29.2009 11:46am
keypusher64 (mail):
LipstickPig

Why are you posting drivel? Are you a right-wing plant trying to make women of color look bad?

If you have a point, though, by all means make it.
5.29.2009 12:00pm
Plastic:

Precise use or words(like unscripted when 1 at least was a written speech)is sadly on the decline.

Latina means "Hispanic woman" or "woman of Latin descent" as compared to a Latino--a male.

So "Latina woman" is a redundant phrase.

Not at all, "Latina" actually means a "female of Latin descent" and a woman is a separate subset of females: "adult female". So what she's saying is correct and clear English as well as completely bigoted.

To be clear, I don't think there's anything bad about saying "My experiences as a [Latina woman/other background/white man] causes me to make good choices" but claiming that people with your background generally make wiser choices than those of another without scientific evidence is simple bigotry.
5.29.2009 3:49pm
LipstickPig (mail):
Plastic: but claiming that people with your background generally make wiser choices than those of another without scientific evidence is simple bigotry.

Funny, though. That's what our Founding Fathers told us - all white men.

They said that black people weren't really people so that it's okay to enslave them. They used the Bible to "prove" it.

They told us that all us women folk were chattel, ie property of men, just like their slaves ,their dogs and their pigs.

In any case, she didn't say that. Read it again. Or are you still reading The Pet Goat?

How do you feel about all those incompetent white men who ran their financial companies into the ground telling us that they deserve however many megamillions they demand from us customers and us taxpayers and if they don't get it they'll take their balls and go home?

Perhaps you should ask Rush Limbaugh why he admitted that although black and whites commit the same number of drug "crimes" as blacks but blacks go to prison for it and whites don't. (And then he proved it.)

Your Just Us system has not only created the largest prison population in the world, it is also the most biased toward rich white men and against the rest of us.

Why aren't those CEO's of companies like AIG in prison for massive theft and fraud? Oh, they are WHITE MEN! We can't have THEM getting punished for their crimes! They're better that then rest of u! That's the Republicans view of the Golden Rule: those that have the gold, rule.
5.29.2009 9:28pm
LipstickPig (mail):
" LipstickPig

Why are you posting drivel? "

Because I've read so much drivel here from white male Republicans.


" Are you a right-wing plant trying to make women of color look bad? "

No, I'm a white woman making far right white men look as stupid, hypocritical and stoopid as we know they are.

" If you have a point, though, by all means make it."

Read my other points and maybe you can figure out what my point is. You'll find that we are on the same side.
5.29.2009 9:33pm

Post as: [Register] [Log In]

Account:
Password:
Remember info?

If you have a comment about spelling, typos, or format errors, please e-mail the poster directly rather than posting a comment.

Comment Policy: We reserve the right to edit or delete comments, and in extreme cases to ban commenters, at our discretion. Comments must be relevant and civil (and, especially, free of name-calling). We think of comment threads like dinner parties at our homes. If you make the party unpleasant for us or for others, we'd rather you went elsewhere. We're happy to see a wide range of viewpoints, but we want all of them to be expressed as politely as possible.

We realize that such a comment policy can never be evenly enforced, because we can't possibly monitor every comment equally well. Hundreds of comments are posted every day here, and we don't read them all. Those we read, we read with different degrees of attention, and in different moods. We try to be fair, but we make no promises.

And remember, it's a big Internet. If you think we were mistaken in removing your post (or, in extreme cases, in removing you) -- or if you prefer a more free-for-all approach -- there are surely plenty of ways you can still get your views out.