"somehow this important debate is turning into an argument about race and identity politics, and they really want it to be about Sotomayor's record."

It's a mystery, isn't it, how this debate "somehow" got turned into a race and identity discussion? Just a perlexing mystery, that's all.

Yesterday's NPR interview was notable not just for Cornyn's remarks about the racism charges, but also because he was forced to acknowledge that Samuel Alito had specifically mentioned his ethnic background, and that he always thought of his family members' experiences with discrimination.

Another very good article, Eric.

It's like a prize fight: Media v Votes!

The Republican Party has been dominated by the bomb-throwers who seize on and even manufacture controveries as a way to generate contributions. While times looked good, that was the route to power. That's what the entire political conservative movement has been based on, that and an alliance with the social conservatives who are truly issue-based.

But times are no longer good, and the bomb-throwing politicians along with the wealthy conservatives and the Wall Street bankers are directly responsible for most of the problems America currently face. The problems America faces are now swamping the power money has had to dominate our politics.

The Washington D.C. denizens (who Digby calls the Villagers) are interested only in power - who has it and who is gaining and losing it. I'd bet that the major media editors and TV producers are similarly influenced by the power games rather than the real issues, because nothing in Washington,D.C. is real. It's all rhetoric and how widely that rhetoric can be spread.

Political power comes ultimately from successfully dealing with real problems, not from manufacturing newer and more extreme rhetorical problems to fund-raise with. The conservatives are stuck in their money-raising bomb-throwing mode, and it is now clear that their rhetoric is damaging America rather than solving real problems. A pragmatic politician is one who shifts to where real power is, and that is flowing away from big money towards actual effective governance.

That's demonstrated by the clear split Eric describes above between the Limbaugh/Gingrich bomb-thrower crew and the pragmatic politicians like Crist in Florida and (to my surprise) Cornyn. Unfortunately for the Republicans a large part of their base considers their leaders to be the rhetorical bomb-throwers.

It's going to take a while for the Republican base to shake off the chimera of "conservatism" that has driven much of the fund-raising abilities to support politicians. Until the Republican base is cleaned out of rhetorical extremists and weaned off the blandishments from the bomb-throwers, the Republican Party is in for very tough times.

"What I think should be happening here with Sotomayor," Noonan said, "is that the Republicans take it as an opportunity to be serious."

Oh no! Not that!

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

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

.

Pat Buchanan's riding hard to the sound of the gunfire

He just came unglued in a face off with Bob Shrum on MSNBC

....the practical folks include the likes of Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX), RNC chairman Michael Steele, and pundit Peggy Noonan.

I am truly enjoying this show. It certainly says a lot about the state of the republican party that the likes of Cornyn, Steele, and Noonan are considered to be "practical" participants in the discussion.

I look forward to the day, probably very soon, when less than 20% of those in the USA identify themselves as republicans.

Good post Eric, thanks. For some reason I can't see Limpball, Newtty and their cast of clowns giving up the press their foul remarks garner. Limpball doesn't get paid for being factual, he gets paid for numbers of ears. Newtty thinks he is hot on the comebacktrail and won't be giving that up until someone shoves an ice pack where he'll have to notice it. The press headlines this foolishness and we get to point our fingers and snicker. Lots of fun all around.

Leave 'em alone. They don't need any more rope! They're doing the 'hang themselves' bit just fine. Rejoice America, there is a God. Her blessings come in strange ways, but they continue flowing. She may even speak Spanish as a second language (sorry about the English thing, her first language always has been Hebrew.)

We can only hope and pray the Repuglicans and their mouthpieces keep this up. Every single day they continue to spout this crap is likely losing them ten thousand Hispanic votes in any coming election. Below is the text of a letter I wrote to Stuart Taylor and many others who have misquoted, taken out of context, and twisted Sonia Sotomayor's words to pathetically try and paint her a racist:

I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume your remarks about Sonia Sotomayor's 2001 statement "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." were made without the knowledge of the full context within which her statement was made.

First, Sonia Sotomayor's statement was made within the context of speaking about judicial diversity and its impact in regard SPECIFICALLY to cases of racial and sexual discrimination. This means that she was NOT making a statement about ALL types of cases, but ONLY about those that dealt with racial and sexual discrimination. Given that, it's clear to ANYONE with a brain that there is nothing whatsoever controversial about her statement and that she was in no way saying that Latina women come to better conclusions overall than white males or would make better judges. Saying that she "...would HOPE a wise Latina women with the richness of her EXPERIENCES [as a minority woman] would MORE OFTEN THAN NOT reach a better conclusion [on racial and sexual discrimination cases] than a white male who hasn't lived that life [and has no real life experience about how minorities and women are treated to draw from]" is perfectly realistic.

Second, she also went on to qualify her remark by reiterating that white males have many times reached fabulous conclusions in cases of racial and sexual discrimination (citing the white male Supreme Court justices who reached a great conclusion in Brown v Board of Education among many other examples) and made it clear that she has no belief whatsoever that a white male can't be just as empathetic to, and understand all of the nuances of, racial and sexual discrimination cases. The fact she believes, as anyone with a brain would, that it's a much easier thing for a Latina women to be empathetic to, and understand the nuances of, racial and sexual discrimination cases because of her own real life experiences than it would be for a white male who "hasn't lived that life" is so unremarkable as to beg how anyone could possibly believe otherwise. She also demonstrated how this is absolutely factual since there have been cases where supposedly “wise” white male justices such as Oliver Wendell Holmes have reached (what nearly everyone today would agree were) wrong conclusions in such cases.

Third, if you do believe otherwise, I would only challenge you to explain how you believe such tripe. In other words, please explain to me what in a white male's real life experiences, where he's NEVER been subject to racial or sexual discrimination, would make it easier for him to empathize with, and understand the nuances of, racial and sexual discrimination cases than it would be for a wise Latina woman? Please, if you can answer that with a reasonable argument, I'd love to hear it.

I'm confident you can't, and again, I'm hopeful that you deserve the benefit of the doubt in regard to the idea that you were simply ignorant of the full context involving her statement when you remarked about it. If so, I would still hope you would publicly and in writing apologize to Sonia Sotomayor for your remarks. For, if you don't, I can only conclude that you DID know the full context, and simply didn't give a damn.

In that case, you would be, in my view, nothing but a lowlife, bigoted, racist piece of garbage yourself who knowingly used demagoguery on the issue in order to stir up racist hatreds against Latinas and blacks.

Please prove that wrong and publicly apologize to Sonia Sotomayor.

Thank you,

Daniel Barber

I received a response from Mr. Taylor whereby he attempted to defend his remarks with sheer and utter lunacy. He obviously is unrepentant, and has no qualms about going forward and calling Sonia Sotomayor a racist. Here's hoping he does and his colleagues like Sean Insanity, Bill O'Lielly, Rush Limpballs, and Michael "Weiner" Savage do so as well. If they do, the Democrats will likely control 70 Senate seats after the 2010 elections, and 80 of them after the 2012 election, not to mention about 4/5ths of the House. The Repuglican Party is headed for extinction like the Whigs. Hallelujah.

"(Really, without the hoods and nooses, what do you have left?)"

The pointy heads wot hold the hoods up? Don't forget the burning crosses too.