TPMDC
« TPMDC Morning Roundup | Home | Times: Sotomayor 'Temperament' Raises Questions We Didn't Ask About Other Justices »

Cornyn: Gingrich And Limbaugh Statements On Sotomayor Are 'Inappropriate' And 'Wrong'

As if to magnify what are already major differences between elected Republicans and conservative activists on the question of Sonia Sotomayor, check out what conservative senator (and chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee and Judiciary Comittee member and former Texas State Supreme Court Justice) had to say on NPR yesterday.

"I think it's terrible. This is not the kind of tone that any of us want to set when it comes to performing our constitutional responsibilities of advice and consent."

Republican leaders may not have as much sway over their own interest groups as Democratic leaders do over their, so don't expect the attacks to stop. But it's a bold statement. He even lashed out at Newt Gingrich and the unassailable Rush Limbaugh.

"Neither one of these men are elected Republican officials [and] I just don't think it's appropriate and I certainly don't endorse it. I think it's wrong."

You can listen to the entire interview here.

Of course, any time a Republican official says anything unflattering about Rush, it's worth asking a couple questions: Will he apologize for it? And how long will he wait?

Interestingly, on the question of Sotomayor's insistence that her background influences her thinking on the bench, host Melissa Block asked Cornyn if conservatives were holding the new nominee to a double standard. After all, at his confirmation hearings in 2005, Justice Samuel Alito said similar things about his own upbringing. Here's how Cornyn responded.

Well, that's a fair point, and I had not remembered that. I mean, we're all a product of our upbringing and who we are. And I think it is a fact that people do have different backgrounds, but I don't think those backgrounds ought to determine what the law is.

We'll have more for you on Alito later today. In the meantime, remember this if you're in front of the squawk box later today and you're wondering what all the fuss it's about. It's about a lot of things--but not Sonia Sotomayor.


33 Comments

| Leave a comment
user-pic
"Neither one of these men are elected Republican officials [and] I just don't think it's appropriate and I certainly don't endorse it. I think it's wrong."

Spoken like someone who faces a large Hispanic constituency.

user-pic

And a growing (in size and influence) one at that.

user-pic

Bingo. The man from Tejas protects himself.

user-pic

Sounds like someone who doesn't want to be Liz Dole in pants.

If Cornyn's time as head of the RSCC is marked by a disastrous loss of seats any future ambitions he has are dashed. I don't think he is worried about his own seat as such, he just is not willing to sacrifice a half dozen or more other Republican Senate seats on the alters of Newt's Presidential ambitions or Rush's ratings.

It wasn't part of Liz Dole's plans to be sitting around her fancy Watergate Apartment thinking 'what the Hell happened?'. I suspect strongly that Big John doesn't want to spend 2011 trying to figure out how he and his got run over by the truck.

user-pic

As an "elected Republican official" on the Judiciary Committee, Cornyn appears to be casting his vote in support of Sotomayor's nomination.That's one in a row so far.

user-pic

I heard this interview on NPR last night. While I find it encouraging that Block also asked Cornyn about the wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences quote, she didn't challenge him to comment on the salient parts of the October 21, 2001 speech, such as:

Personal experiences affect the facts that judges choose to see. My hope is that I will take the good from my experiences and extrapolate them further into areas with which I am unfamiliar.

and

I am reminded each day that I render decisions that affect people concretely and that I owe them constant and complete vigilance in checking my assumptions, presumptions and perspectives and ensuring that to the extent that my limited abilities and capabilities permit me, that I reevaluate them and change as circumstances and cases before me requires. I can and do aspire to be greater than the sum total of my experiences but I accept my limitations. I willingly accept that we who judge must not deny the differences resulting from experience and heritage but attempt, as the Supreme Court suggests, continuously to judge when those opinions, sympathies and prejudices are appropriate.

I guess even NPR is susceptible to the soundbite mentality.

user-pic

Thanks for the context, she clearly gets what it means to be a judge.

If they want people to remove their sense of self and their experiences from their judging, why not just write a computer program and get a printout of the decisions?

user-pic

A wise man once said, when you see a situation you cannot understand, look for the financial interest.

None of these opposition assfaces would say boo to Sotomayor if they met her at a cocktail party. It would be all nice and sweet and cordial, and I suspect none of them would walk away thinking, "She's a racist.' Nor would they feel that way about Sotomayor if they appeared before her, as I have. Yeah, I thought some of her questions to me were insipid, but none--and I mean none--of the allegations these fringenuts are leveling make any sense or have a shred of evidence in support.

look to the financial interest.

The folks at this site are correct: this is about raising money through the base, and nothing brings in the checks like a good nasty us-against-those-activist-liberal-commie-racist-socialist-womb-loving-dirty-fuckin'-hippies like a Supreme Court nomination.

user-pic

I'm going to add two dog-whistled four letter words to your litany; antifeminine and anti-Hispanic epithets that begin with C and S, respectively. That filth gets yahoos goosed up. And you don't have to be stupid to be anti-Hispanic either; the smartass commentator with the I-get-out-of-bigotry-free-cuz-my-last-name-is-Armenian card, the ninny who thinks its offensive to "us" to say SotomaYOR's name is reasonably smart, albeit an intolerant buffoon. He might send a check.

It's tough going after Latino voters when you engage in these abuses, though.

user-pic

... Big, BAD John...

user-pic

"Divide and Conquer"

Reagan and his "welfare queen in her Cadillac" was one of the ways the Republicans used race as a way to divide a class.....the working class, black and white. After they had the classes divided and many blue collar workers became the Reagan Democrats, Republicans conquered them. The working class has been losing ever since.

Now, it does my heart good to see this same Republican party being divided.

As Yogi Berra would say; "Its deja vu all over again."

user-pic

HOLD THE BUS! Here's what EVERYONE on both sides, the middle, the top and the bottom of this debate almost pathologically is missing:

The United States Supreme Court has fundamentally ONE job: To decide matters of the U.S. Constitution.

Trial judges of all types and stripes -- county court systems, Federal District Courts, the Court of Federal Claims, Bankruptcy Court, Patent Court, etc. etc. etc. decide what the true FACTS are based on the evidence presented, then apply the law to those facts.

In the tiny sliver of cases that are tried and appealed, appellate courts at every level, including state supreme courts, make sure that the trial judges applied the law CORRECTLY.

The U.S. Supreme Court, in the sliver of the sliver of cases tried and appealed that make it that far, decides if laws were applied CONSTITUTIONALLY.

While the societal impact is broad (Dredd Scott, Brown v Bd of Ed, Gideon v Wainwright, State v Miranda, Roe v Wade, Bush v Gore), the legal playing field could not be more constricted.

NONE of the criticisms being launched by the right or rebutted by the left have a particle of relevance to the job Judge Sotomayor has been asked to do. There will never, ever, ever be an actual plaintiff or defendant in front of her, she will never, ever, ever hear witness testimony, she will never, ever, ever have to decide between competing presentations of facts, and she will never, ever, ever hear a case without Constitutional implications.

What really matters is her history and view of the U.S. Constitution. Anyone heard anything along those lines? No?? Me neither.

user-pic

Well, no, the job of the Supreme Court is to be the highest appellate court. Admittedly many of their cases will deal -- or will be seen as dealing -- with constitutional issues.

user-pic

Well, I'm not so sure. The Supremes not only interpret the Constitution, they also interpret statutes and judicial rules. Just two weeks ago, the Court held that a Pakistani who had been rounded up (literally) right after 9/11 and who wanted to sue Ashcroft and FBI Director Mueller personally had failed to be specific enough in his court complaint to go forward.

Plus, while they don't hear evidence, they frequently weigh evidence to determine whether there's enough to satisfy one requirement or another.

While we haven't yet heard anything from Sotomayor about her constitutional views, I'm sure this will be front and center at her hearings, if we can get past whether her Latin cooking skills are disqualifying.

user-pic

Nobody is more of a right wing crazy than John Cornyn. Hispanics are poised to become a major political force in Texas and the retarded redneck racists who run Texas are worried. I'm surprised that Cornyn can even speak. His face must be very numb from having it pressed so firmly into Bush's butt for the past eight years.

user-pic

35.6% of Texas population.

user-pic

35.6 % of the Texas poipulation is what?
Puerto Rican? I don't thinkl so. You Latino and Hispanic voting bloc buffs (that is short for buffoons) have no idea what you are talking about. There is neither great affection or disdain among groups whose ancestors lived in lands wants conquered and possed by Spaniards.

user-pic

Sorry about the lack of editing.

user-pic

Wrong again. Sotomayor is seen as a Latina by the Hispanic community at large.

user-pic

Sorry my friend. There is no such thing as The Hispanic community at large except in the minds of those wedded to labels. And by that token, Cardozo was a Latino, as are Brazilians.

user-pic

One party is trashing the first Hispanic nominated to the Supreme Court; the other party appointed her. One party is belittling her pride in her ethnicity, the other party is welcoming the perspective that comes with her ethnicity. One party will attack her, the other will defend her. I'm not Hispanic but I can't imagine what the motivation is for Latinos y Latinas to be in the party that's shitting all over their pride, joy and patriotism.

I guess the Republicans figure if they can't throw Latinos out of the country they may as well force them out of the party.

user-pic

Is racial identity for a judge a value added quality or a form of racism?

http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=5386


.

user-pic

wrong.

there is NO difference between any of these racists, elected or not.

they just want to have it both ways.

the dems need to go on the offensive and buy up every second of radio time they can.

and the message should be very simple, "the republican party racially attacks the first hispanic women nominee to the s.court".

t o let this redneck cornyn pretend like this is foolish.

user-pic

Organizing for America is bombarding me with emails...contributions, petition, Sen phone calls, letters to the editor and this spiffy new icon!

user-pic

Where's my new user icon?

user-pic

"Big John" simply realizes he can't get elected wtihout the Hispanic vote in Texas. This is simply looking out for himself. He is still a creep.

user-pic

"Big John just crushed an "Hispanic" to win re-election last November.

user-pic

Has anyone started taking bets yet on how soon Cornyn will lick Rush's boots to make amends? I've got 5 bucks I can play with here.

user-pic

I've gotten several e-mails from Organizing for America as well. Hey, as soon as I know with some certainy that she's pro-choice, I'm there...she's a great pick in all other regards.

Anybody happen to hear what El Rushbo's had to say so far today?

user-pic

For the past two days, Rush has been repeating Newt's slur that Sotomayor is a racist bigot. Other than that, he's been fairly middle of the road.

user-pic

If Cornyn sould reasonable It must be Bizzaro world...


Whats Next Michelle Bachmann completes a sentence without blatant factual errors?....

user-pic

....sounds reasonable it must be....

user-pic

Does this strike anyone else as a case of good cop, bad cop, with unelected arch-conservatives (ye of shrinking influence) teeing it up for the congressional GOP?

I'm only sayin ...

Leave a comment

Advertisement
Please disable your adblocker!
Ads are how we pay the bills!

Subscribe

Josh
Marshall

Bio

Matt
Cooper

Bio

Eric
Kleefeld

Bio

Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address