She’s a bald-faced liar

Byron York writes:

Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee are convinced that Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor has not been candid with them in under-oath testimony about her speeches and legal activism. But given the assurance that majority Democrats will vote to confirm Sotomayor no matter what, the GOP effort against her is largely an attempt to convince other Republicans that Sotomayor has not earned a vote for confirmation.

York continues:

On the issue of Sotomayor’s infamous 2001 “wise Latina” speech, Republicans are more skeptical now than before Sotomayor began her attempts to explain the remarks. In response to questions from Sen. Jeff Sessions, the ranking Republican on the committee, Sotomayor said that the “wise Latina” remark was “a rhetorical flourish that fell flat…It was bad, because it left the impression that I believed that life experiences commanded a result in a case, but that’s clearly not what I do as a judge.”

Republicans pointed out that Sotomayor gave versions of the “wise Latina” speech at least six times over the years. “Fell flat?” asked one senior GOP aide. “Well, it fell flat six times. If you said this one time, and it fell flat and you stopped using it, that would be one thing, but when you’ve said it repeatedly over a ten-year stretch, it’s very hard to believe that it is anything other than what it appears to be. It’s only fallen flat now that she’s been called on it.”

But did any of the senators confront her on the obvious lie of saying that her “rhetorical flourish … fell flat”? Did they ask her what “fell flat” meant? Did they ask her WHEN she realized it had fallen flat? Did they ask her:

Judge Sotomayor, do you still believe that as a wise Latina woman you would make a better judge than a white man? If you don’t still believe that, when did you stop believing it? And why did you stop believing it?

These are the kinds of questions Republicans never ask liberals. They never pin them down and decisively demonstrate their lies as lies. Wouldn’t be nice. The rules of liberalism, which all “conservatives” follow, allow conservatives to glance off the truth, but not to wrestle it to the ground.

- end of initial entry -

A. Zarkov writes:

Of course she’s lying. The “wise Latina” remark also appeared in print in the Spring 2002 issue of Berkeley La Raza Law Journal. If she simply misspoke then why did she not correct the printed version? How come the Republicans have not brought up the printed statement? Answer: they’re cowards. They won’t really question Sotomayor because they fear losing Hispanic votes. The Republicans seem to have convinced themselves their salvation lies in making inroads into the Hispanic vote by some kind appeal to “conservative Hispanic family values.” But how can a group that has a 50 percent illegitimacy rate have family values? To have those values means you have to have a family. Impregnating women is not a family value. Getting pregnant from multiple men and living off public assistance with a hoard of children is not having family values. We can’t seem to penetrate the thick skulls of the Republican leadership who constantly reinforce the notion that they are the party of morons. A lot of them think their future lies with the airhead Palin. Palin! It just keeps getting worse.

LL writes:

Interesting, in an Orwellian sort of way, how the very deficiencies in many minorities’ experiences—lives typified by poverty and provincialism—have come to signify vibrancy, depth, and richness. Who truly brings “richness of experience” to their worldview: the hood rat (excuse me, “wise Latina”) who doesn’t emerge from the 10-block radius of her barrio, shopping exclusively for ethnic foods at the bodega and watching nothing but telenovelas on the tube, or the well-educated, well-traveled white who has been exposed to myriad cultures and whose cultural pursuits extend beyond salsa and comic books?

LA replies:

In the present, liberal lexicon, whites are “privileged,” nonwhites are “vital.”

Posted by Lawrence Auster at July 15, 2009 12:27 PM | Send

Email entry

Email this entry to:

Your email address:

Message (optional):