In yesterday’s entry, we took some time to go over a comment made by Sonya Sotomayor back in 2001 that smacks of racism. While we were and are not yet ready to say that she is a racist (because we all make unartful statements we honestly believe do not reflect our real views), we are willing to give her a chance to explain herself. Actually, we insist that she be made to explain this comment before the Senate confirms her to the position of Supreme Court Justice.
In her view, is justice blind, or do ad-hoc characteristics like race, the religion into which one is born, one’s ethnicity, etc. – do these matter as much or even more? Her statement – let’s repeat it here so we have it on the table in front of us.
“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.”
Again – we know without a doubt – that had a Caucasian man said the same thing in reverse, he’d be skewered. He certainly would not be given a shot at the Supreme Court judgeship. Let’s say it in reverse just to see how jarring it sounds to today’s modern, Orwellian, ear:
“I would hope that a wise Caucasian man with the richness of his experience would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a Latina female who hasn’t lived that life.”
Doesn’t sound nearly as acceptable, does it. That alone speaks volumes of what the Left has done to (not for) this society.
So a news article comes out today, where the President is saying, “”I’m sure she would have restated it,” Obama flatly told NBC News, without indicating how he knew that.”
But that’s not the point! The point isn’t what words she chose. The point is what does she believe?
This reminds us of when Joe Biden was asked about traveling in closed areas with concerns about the swine flu. Here’s what Mr. Biden said – in full.
The part that’s gotten all the attention is at about 2:20 minutes into the video. Matt Lauer asks him this: “If a member of your family came to you and said, ‘Look, I want to go on a commercial airliner to Mexico and back within the next week,’ would you think it’s a good idea?”
Great question, especially coming from one of the alphabet letter news stations.
Here’s what the Vice President says, word for word: “I would tell members of my family – and I have – I wouldn’t go anywhere in confined places now. It’s not just going to Mexico. It’s your in a confined aircraft; if someone sneezes it goes all the way through the aircraft. That’s me. I would not be, at this point, if they had another means of transportation, that they ride the subway.”
Later, in an effort to control the “damage” caused by Mr. Biden’s candid remarks, here’s what Robert Gibbs said.
Notice that at about 20 seconds into the video, Gibbs says, “What the Vice President meant to say was the same thing – again – that many members have said in the last few days – that is, if you feel sick, if you are exhibiting symptoms, flu-like symptoms, coughing, sneezing, runny nose, that you should take precautions, that you should limit your travel, and I think he just ahhh – that is what he said and what he meant to say.”
This sparked incredulity on the part of ABC’s Jack Tapper, who said that what Biden said and what Gibbs just said were completely different, and he gave Gibbs an opportunity to come clean. Gibbs not only declined – he reitertated that this is what Biden said, and but that this wasn’t what Biden meant to say.
How hard would it have been to simply say, “Look, each of us has our own personal opinions. Joe was expressing his. We believe his view is out of step with the best scientific advice we are receiving. And as you all know, the Vice President is famous for making utterly strange off-the-cuff remarks. The official policy of this Administration is ….” and just tell us.
But don’t try to tell us that a grown man, a guy who CREATES legislation, a guy who is second in line to the Presidency, and who is known for candor, doesn’t mean what he clearly said. Does the Administration really believe we are that stupid?
So back to Ms. Sotomayor.
The President, yesterday, said, “”I’m sure she would have restated it.”
Well – yes, Mr. President. Now that she’s in the national eye, we’re sure she’d love to restate it. And Timothy Geithner, Tom Daschelle and so many other of your picks wish they’d paid their taxes once they found themselves in the national eye.
But that’s not the point! The point is what did Ms. Sotomayor mean? On the face of it, it looks patently racist. This is why we need a full, bold, uncowardly (despite Mr. Gibbs warning and especially in light of Eric Holder’s pronouncement) examination of her views. And we’d hope for a few “gotcha question.”
Listen – some companies ask questions before they hire you. They ask scenario questions, like, “What would you do in situation X?” Sometimes these are “gotcha” questions. If it’s good for a lowly programmer or project manager or chief cook to get gotcha questions, certainly a legal eagle like Ms. Sotomayor, the supposedly most qualified person for the Supreme Court seat, can handle a little bit of a verbal tustle with unbowed, unbent and yes, “white” Republican senators. Or what did Mr. Holder mean when he called us a nation of cowards on matters of race?
What did you mean, Mr. Holder? We’d really like to know.