Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Conservatives' New Sotomayor Opposition Stategy Same as the Old One

Posted by Ryan Powers, Think Progress at 9:32 AM on June 4, 2009.


Their new and supposedly more civil opposition strategy is no different than their old strategy.
sidebarunflattened

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get PEEK in your
mailbox!

 

Republicans in Congress and conservative activists spent last week attempting to paint President Obama’s Supreme Court nominee, Judge Sonia Sotomayor as a racist. Newt Gingrich, Tom Tancredo, and Rush Limbaugh all made the charge explicitly, while Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX) and Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK) appeared to come to the same conclusion using softer language. At different points, others attacked her temperament, her intellect, and misrepresented her record on the bench.

This week, however, prominent Republicans are attempting to distance themselves from last week’s smear tactics, with Politco reporting that they have embraced “toned down rhetoric on Sonia Sotomayor.” On the Sunday talk shows, Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) urged Republicans to refrain from harshly-worded racism accusations. Sessions explained that “he would prefer fellow Republicans stop attacking Sotomayor over remarks about her background as a daughter of Puerto Rican parents.” Yesterday, Newt Gingrich wrote in Human Events that he should not have used the word “racist” to describe Sotomayor “as a person.”

But their new and supposedly more civil opposition strategy is no different than their old strategy. Republicans in Congress still appear to want the public perception of Sotomayor to be skewed by misinformation from the far right. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) told CNN’s John King on Sunday that he had “better things to do” than to denounce conservatives who called Sotomayor “racist.” And now it seems his office is encouraging the spirit of this and similar arguments. As the Hill reports today, “Senate Republicans have kept their distance from conservative attacks on Sonia Sotomayor, but behind the scenes, they have encouraged activists to keep their crosshairs trained on the Supreme Court nominee”:

Lanier Swann, an aide to Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), told a private meeting of conservative activists Wednesday to keep up their pressure on Sotomayor.

Swann told us she wanted to encourage all of us in our talking points and that we’re having traction among Republicans and unnerving Democrats,” said an attendee of Wednesday’s weekly meeting hosted by Grover Norquist, the president of Americans for Tax Reform. “The point was we should keep it up,” said the source. “She told us at this meeting to put our foot on the pedal.”

 

The Hill insists that McConnell’s office “did not encourage conservative critics to accuse Sotomayor of being a racist,” but given that a significant part of the right’s “talking points” on Sotomayor have been devoted to the charge of racism, it is hard to argue that urging conservative groups “keep it up” is anything but a tacit endorsement of the racism attacks. Indeed, the statements on which both Gingrich and Limbaugh based their charge of racism figure prominently in the right-wing Judicial Confirmation Network’s anti-Sotomayor website, AboutSoniaSotomayor.com and it is one of only two quotes of Sotomayor’s used in their anti-Sotomayor web ad.

A spokesman for Gingirch told Politico, “nothing has changed in the structure of his argument, he is just retracting the word racist.” Given that the “structure” of Gingrich’s argument is that Sotomayor would allow her race to impact her rulings on the bench, it seems that he wants to paint Sotomayor as a racist — he simply doesn’t want to be held accountable for doing so. And neither, it seems, do Republicans in Congress.

Digg!

Tagged as: gender, racism, republicans, obama, conservatives, supreme court, sotomayor, sexist attacks


Fred Phelps' Church Protesting Outside Sasha and Malia Obama's School
Scary.
Post by Tana Ganeva. November 9, 2009.
Blaming Muslims For the Fort Hood Massacre Will Only Create More Victims
Whatever was in the mind of alleged shooter Major Nidal Malik Hasan is no reason to question the loyalty of Muslim Americans.
Post by Wajahat Ali. November 9, 2009.
The Lesson in the Heath-Care Vote
Why changing the media narratives and forcing Democrats to use liberal rhetoric and reject right wing framing is as important to the process as anything else
Post by Digby. November 9, 2009.
Advertisement
Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
SPEEDY CONFIRMATION OF SOTOMAYOR WILL ASSURE THE RETURN TO IMPARTIAL ACCEESS TO COURT
Posted by: IsidoroRDL on Jun 5, 2009 4:24 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We must stop the divisiveness of politics. All citizens, irrespective of being either Liberal, Nonpartisan, Republican, or Democrat, want come the Judicial Branch to assure impartial access to the courts to protect a citizens rights and prohibitions on government confirmed by the Constitution and Bill of Rights. As a Republican, I have support President Obama's nomination of Judge Sotomayor. The Conservative wing of the Republican Party does not speak for me and other fair minded Republicans.

As an independent federal civil litigation sole practitioner who for the past three decades has litigated against the negligence and malfeasance of the government employees (See Martinez v. Lamagno and DEA, 515 U.S. 417 (1995), a Nam Vet who in 1964 swore to defend and protect the Constitution from all enemies “foreign and domestic, and former White House appointee in both the Carter and Reagan Administrations I support Sotomayor’s confirmation based on her decision in John Malesko v. Correctional Services Corporation, 229 F.3rd. 374 (2000), rev’d 534 U.S. 61 (2001), to provide impartial access to the courts for Constitutional violation by government employees and contractors acting as government instrumentality.

In Malesko, Sotomayor, writing for the court, supported the right of an individual to sue a private corporation working as an instrumentality of federal government for violations of constitutional rights. She found that a "Bivens" action permits suits against individuals working for the federal government for constitutional rights violations. Her position is consistent with the holding in United States v. Lee, 106 U.S. 196, 220 (1882), which states that, "[n]o man in this country is so high that he is above the law."

However, the Supreme Court reversed her ruling in a 5-4 decision, saying that the Bivens doctrine could not be expanded to cover private entities working on behalf of the federal government. Justices Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg, and Breyer dissented, siding with Sotomayor's original ruling. This holding increases the limitation on the people to have access to an impartial court and jury trial to challenge malfeasance, negligence and criminal acts of the government, its employees, and agents.

In this context my past litigation confirms an on gong criminal conspiracy of present and former attorneys in DOJ and judges in the Judicial Branch to intentionally violate Congress’ delegations under the Rules Enabling Act and the Judicial Conference Act to deny access to an impartial court. The evidence is that have conspired declare themselves absolutely immune from suit for tortious and criminal acts in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 241, 242, 1204, and 1523, by government attorneys and judges to cover-up and deny me access to an impartial jury trial under RICO for the criminal obstruction of my statutory rights as a father and for issuing and enforcing a void order to deprive me of my right of employment in retaliation seeking to enforce my federal statutory rights, Isidoro Rodriguez, Esq. v. Ed.-in-Chief, Legal Times, et al., DC Ct. Of App. No. 07-5234 (Feldman, J.), and, Isidoro Rodriguez, Esq. and Isidoro Rodriguez-Hazbun v. NCMEC, et al., D.C. No. 03-0120 (Roberts, J.)(http://www.liamsdad.org/others/isidoro.shtml).


Isidoro Rodriguez, Esq., Member of the Bar of the U.S. Supreme Court

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Who's Racist?
Posted by: ScoobyDoobyDoo on Jun 5, 2009 10:00 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Having had a more diverse life experience, Sotomayor is likely to be more evenhanded in her views, and that is exactly what the racist-right calls "racist." Ironic, isn't it?

When it comes down to it, what the racist right is afraid of is that Sotomayor won't have their biased, racist and classist views of the world.

As for their other ridiculos and self-incriminating charge here's evolumental.com's post:
'Judicial Activism' Acording to Republicans

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Sotomayor should not be the end
Posted by: willymack on Jun 5, 2009 12:53 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Of the process of cleaning up the Supreme Court. Alito, scalia, and roberts should be encouraged to retire, as should Thomas. Ruth Ginsberg is not in the best of health, and a liberal replacement for her should be in the works. This is a golden opportunity to see that the disgrace that was the 2000 "election" will not happen again.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Rightist Hypocrites on Race and Racism
Posted by: SkeeterVT1 on Jun 5, 2009 4:43 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Rush Limbaugh -- whom I now refer to as Blush Limberger, because his rants and raves smell like rotting cheese -- needs to take a good long look at himself in the mirror befor he calls ANYONE a "racist."

This is the same right-wing blowhard who insisted that President Obama was not an African American, but an Arab -- spreading the bald-faced lie that Obama is not a native-born American citizen, not to mention Arabophobia.

So who's the REAL racist?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Yep, Just Like When A Black Man Spoke Up
Posted by: Razional Thinker on Jun 6, 2009 8:28 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
years ago and every old white man that felt threathened dug for any and everything to disclaim him....

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The only surprise..
Posted by: zipper696 on Jun 6, 2009 10:43 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
..is that she hasn't been described as "uppity"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]