Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Conservatives Blast Obama’s Hispanic SCOTUS Nominee As ‘Not The Smartest’

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
marmar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 11:08 AM
Original message
Conservatives Blast Obama’s Hispanic SCOTUS Nominee As ‘Not The Smartest’
from ThinkProgress:



Conservatives Blast Obama’s Hispanic SCOTUS Nominee As ‘Not The Smartest’ And An ‘Intellectual Lightweight’

When the media began floating Circuit Court Judge Sonia Sotomayor as a possible Supreme Court nominee, one of the first comprehensive articles to come out was a piece by Jeffrey Rosen in The New Republic. In the piece, Rosen allowed unnamed sources to attack Sotomayor as “not that smart” and lacking “penetrating” questions on the bench.

Many conservatives are now making this argument one of their principal lines of attack against Sotomayor’s nomination. This morning on WTOP, Curt Levey, executive director of the right-wing Committee for Justice, compared Sotomayor to Harriet Miers:

I would point you to the Harriet Miers nomination under the second President Bush. She was also many people felt and intellectual lightweight, picked because she was a woman, people felt. And even though Republicans controlled the senate, she ultimately had to withdraw. And that could happen here. This is someone who clearly was picked because she’s a woman and Hispanic, not because she was the best qualified. I could certainly see red and purple state Democrats gawking at it and she may very well have to withdraw her nomination.


Similarly, over at the National Review, Ramesh Ponnuru calls Sotomayor “Obama’s Harriet Miers.” This morning on Fox News, Karl Rove questioned whether she was smart enough to be on the Supreme Court. “I’m not really certain how intellectually strong she would be, she has not been very strong on the second circuit,” he said. Citing Rosen, Weekly Standard executive editor Fred Barnes said that Sotomayor was “not the smartest.” Watch a compilation: http://thinkprogress.org/2009/05/26/sotomayor-lightweight/


These attacks started even before Sotomayor was named. The National Review’s Mark Hemingway earlier said that Sotomayor was “dumb and obnoxious.”

But as even Fox News’s Megyn Kelly admitted this morning, Sotomayor’s credentials are “impressive by almost any standard.” In fact, at the ceremony announcing Sotomayor this morning, Obama said that her legal and academic achievements were the most important factors in his decision to nominate her:

While there are many qualities that I admire in judges across the spectrum of judicial philosophy and that I seek in my own nominees, there are a few that stand out that I just want to mention. First and foremost is a rigorous intellect, a mastery of the law, and an ability to hone in on the key issues and provide clear answers to complex legal questions. Second is a recognition of the limits of the judicial role, and an understanding that a judge’s job is to interpret, not make law. To approach decisions without any particular ideology or agenda, but rather a commitment to impartial justice, a respect for precedent, and a determination to faithfully apply the law to the facts at hand.


Coming from a housing project in the Bronx, Sotomayor ended up graduating summa cum laude and Phi Beta Kappa from Princeton. She also was a co-recipient of the M. Taylor Pyne Prize, the highest honor Princeton awards to an undergraduate. Sotomayor then went to Yale Law School, where she served as an editor of the Yale Law Journal and managing editor of the Yale Studies in World Public Order. Rep. Jose Serrano (D-NY) said on Fox News this morning that of all the nominees, Sotomayor “brings the most in terms of judicial experience — in terms of serving on a federal court — in 100 years.”

SCOTUS Blog has pointed out that women and minority candidates for the Supreme Court are often portrayed as not being smart enough for the job. As Matt Yglesias has also written, underscoring this point, “I recall a lot of issues being raised during the Samuel Alito confirmation fight, but at that time I don’t remember anyone raising questions about the intelligence of a Princeton/Yale Law graduate who’d done time on an Appeals Court.”


http://thinkprogress.org/2009/05/26/sotomayor-lightweight/


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
texasleo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 11:10 AM
Response to Original message
1. Clarence Thomas hasn't asked a single question from the bench in 3 years.
:freak:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HopeHoops Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 11:18 AM
Response to Reply #1
8. Why would he - all he ever does is vote the way Scalia does.
He is a classic "C- student".

And I'm not sure Harriet Miers could solve a Suduko puzzle. I KNOW Bush couldn't - that involves big numbers.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 11:24 AM
Response to Reply #1
10. That was the first name that came to mind...
with those comments.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tularetom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 11:10 AM
Response to Original message
2. MY response to that - two words
Edited on Tue May-26-09 11:11 AM by tularetom
Clarence Fucking Thomas

oops that's three words.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 11:37 AM
Response to Reply #2
14. CSPAN had a program on where she sat on a moot court with Roberts
and some other guy. Her questions were every bit as good as Roberts and even more hard charging at times. It's baloney.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 11:12 AM
Response to Original message
3. That's all they've got.
And it's a cloaked racist attack. Non-white woman? What do you expect?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
csziggy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 11:12 AM
Response to Original message
4. I'll bet no one person raising Sotomayer's intelligence as an issue is as smart as she is
They were probably too stupid to look up her biography before they thought up that talking point. Or maybe they were looking for "Maria Sotomayor"!

How many more of the points detailed in this article will they raise against Judge Sotomayor?
http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/the-dynamic-of-the-nomination-of-sonia-sotomayor/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Happyhippychick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 11:13 AM
Response to Original message
5. Are they still calling her "Maria"?
:banghead:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catshrink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 11:14 AM
Response to Original message
6. How can they spin this?
"Coming from a housing project in the Bronx, Sotomayor ended up graduating summa cum laude and Phi Beta Kappa from Princeton. She also was a co-recipient of the M. Taylor Pyne Prize, the highest honor Princeton awards to an undergraduate. Sotomayor then went to Yale Law School, where she served as an editor of the Yale Law Journal and managing editor of the Yale Studies in World Public Order. Rep. Jose Serrano (D-NY) said on Fox News this morning that of all the nominees, Sotomayor “brings the most in terms of judicial experience — in terms of serving on a federal court — in 100 years.” "

It's pure racism!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TomClash Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 11:15 AM
Response to Original message
7. Harriet Miers? Are they kidding?
Sotomayor has been on a prestigious Federal Appellate bench for over a decade and was a trial judge before that.

I get it - the "dumb spic, dumb broad" approach - that will work wonders. :puke:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandyj999 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 11:23 AM
Response to Original message
9. And what would they know about "smart"?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 11:52 AM
Response to Reply #9
15. Exactly. You have to be intelligent to recognize intelligence. These people
are dolts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ljm2002 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 11:25 AM
Response to Original message
11. It would be interesting...
...to see the opinions of these same pundits when Clarence Thomas was nominated.

Summa cum laude at Princeton, Yale Law Review, extensive experience on the bench -- yeah, another Harriet Miers, you betcha.

Idiots.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftynyc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 11:25 AM
Response to Original message
12. I would be asking the
educational background of every single person making that claim. See if their resume holds a candle to hers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ismnotwasm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 11:28 AM
Response to Original message
13. Racist fucks
Excuse me, Racist, misogynist fucks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pansypoo53219 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 11:54 AM
Response to Original message
16. their flailing
is pathetic. taint it sweet.

BWAH HA HA HA. suck it. now if only CLARENCE would drop dead.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 16th 2024, 01:43 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC