Some urging Sotomayor to concede she made a gaffe

Laugh if you will at Newt Gingrich’s European tweets, but they’re having an effect.

This just posted on Politico:

Some political and communications experts are urging the White House to shift course and concede that Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor made an error when she suggested in 2001 that Hispanic women would make better judges than white men.

“She misspoke,” said Lanny Davis, a White House lawyer and spokesman for President Bill Clinton. “Every day that goes by that they don’t say she misspoke and she used the wrong words…..they just feed it and give it life and give Rush [Limbaugh] and [Sean] Hannity more airtime unnecessarily.”

The piece also quotes University of Virginia politics professor Larry Sabato:

“Explain that she simply meant to say that we are all a product of our unique backgrounds and experiences, and that those backgrounds and experiences inform our decisions. But no one’s gender or ethnic background inherently leads to superior decisions. It would be refreshing to hear a Supreme Court nominee say, ‘I’m not perfect. I made a mistake here.’”

CNN is now out there with a similar line of thought:

For all her experience and accomplishments, the Senate confirmation of Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor could hinge on one sentence she uttered more than seven years ago.

Sonia Sotomayor’s opponents are attacking a 2001 remark she made at the University of California, Berkeley.

The sentence constitutes 32 words of the almost 4,000 she delivered during a speech at the University of California, Berkeley. Read by itself, it seems to imply that Latina women make better judges than white men.

“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,” she said….

Also, the New York Times now reports that Sotomayor has picked up her first “nay” vote, from Republican Pat Roberts of Kansas.

For instant updates, follow me on Twitter.

15 comments Add your comment

Turd Fergusen

May 28th, 2009
3:48 pm

So begins the back peddling and double talking for which the democrats hold the gold medal…the undisputed champs of talking out of both sides of their mouths…

retiredds

May 28th, 2009
3:57 pm

Turd, and the beloved Republicans have never, ever, backpeddled. Get real fella.

Curly Girly-man

May 28th, 2009
4:08 pm

WE GOPers love to backpedal, especially in public toilets. (Call me, Turd ;> )

RGB

May 28th, 2009
5:00 pm

Some things aren’t acceptable except when performed by Democrats. And they’ll not only do it, they’ll codify it.

These include bigotry, same-sex marriage, and same-sex sex.

Raising the bar on decent behavior once again, those Democrats.

Matilda

May 28th, 2009
5:32 pm

Context, anyone? Sotomayor should stick with what she said which was a valid point in the context from which it was ripped by a–wipes like Gingrich, Limbaugh, and the still-suprisingly-not-dead-from anorexia Mr/Ms Coulter, none of whom hold records for “decent behavior.” Yes, please raise your hand if you actually bothered to read the context in which that sentence was delivered before screeching your outrage. (*crickets chirping*) Didn’t think so.

If your tiny partisan brains can’t follow more than one sentence at a time, and you’re completely LOST by a group of sentences and paragraphs that together comprise a meaningful, if somewhat complex conclusion, then you need to stick to trashing American Idol contestants around the water cooler. Should you actually yearn to improve your mental abilities, try asking your doctor for some Ritalin. Paragraphs matter.

Jerry

May 28th, 2009
6:02 pm

Judge Sotomayor is a member of La Raza. Apparently she feels right at home with all the racists and bigots in that group. A group that flounts its support of illegal aliens who break US immigration law.

Why do want a Supreme Court justice that doesn’t support the “rule of law” that President Obama so often talks about?

Why do we want a Supreme Court justice that doesn’t award promotions to New Haven, CT fireman who passed a test to be promoted to the rank of captain? The test was designed to be racially neutral, but the city of New Haven didn’t like the race of those who passed this test.

If you had worked hard, studied long hours, and sacrificed personal time with your family to take and excel on this test…and because of racial criteria, you were denied a promotion…is that what America has come to champion?

If so, then why does Obama bring up the background of Sotomayor, how she was poor, but worked hard and won a scholarship to Yale…that stuff doesn’t really matter anyway…Sotomayor doesn’t think so!

Hispanic racists and bigots are no better than any other racists and bigots!

Owl Gore

May 28th, 2009
7:03 pm

She misspoke just like BJ Clinton when he said “I had no sexual relations with that woman.” Or like when Axlerod (The man pulling Obama’s strings) said that Obama did dicuss his open senate seat with Blogo be fore he didn’t. What is the issue Democrat hacks and even Veeps misspeak all the time. It is just in good fun!

RaceCop

May 28th, 2009
7:08 pm

Sotomajor should salsa on down to the nearest Gaffers Anonymous meeting. VP Joe “Plugs, the Gaffeman” Biden could be her sponsor!

S Palin

May 28th, 2009
9:09 pm

Hey Jim, you lard arse, I do not laugh at Newt. Instead I like to laugh at the fat, ruddy picture of you on the top of the page. Are you ever going to cover that liying sack of liberal garbage, The Speakerette of the House, and her scandal?

Copyleft is obama's main sucker

May 28th, 2009
9:37 pm

I guess it was a gaffe when she said judges make policy also.
God help this country as it goes the way of the Roman Empire as the the
leftist frolic at barney franks orgy.

Copyleft

May 29th, 2009
7:33 am

Why should she apologize for either statement, when they’re both absolutely true?

Of COURSE a Latina woman who’s experienced discrimination firsthand would be in a better position to rule fairly on discrimination cases than a white male who’s never been through such things.

And OF COURSE judiciary rulings make policy. Why should she apologize for either statement, when they’re both obviously true and correct?

There was no “misstatement” or “gaffe” here; the Party of Ignorance is simply looking for something to manufacture some outrage about, and exploiting the ignorance of their base is a tactic where they’ve had plenty of practice.

Oh, and I note that the name-changing Maniac is still obsessed with gays and sex for some reason. Hmm, why is that?

Turd Fergusen

May 29th, 2009
7:59 am

She should withdraw and give all the collected funds to the local Taco Bell.

CopyRight

May 29th, 2009
12:12 pm

According to Copyleft, it is fine for lib hacks to be racist and insensitive.

Copyleft is clearly an uneducated idiot.

May 29th, 2009
12:31 pm

A Latina woman or man who has experienced discrimination is more likely to be
BIASED. Of course you are too blind and uneducated to know that!

Copyleft

May 29th, 2009
12:48 pm

Couldn’t say, CR, because the only racist hacks I know are right-wingers. (grin)