August 6, 2009: a black day for America
In today’s New York Times, this appears:
The Senate on Thursday confirmed Judge Sonia Sotomayor as the nation’s first Hispanic Supreme Court justice, concluding a 10-week battle with a resounding victory for the White House.First, the Times writer, Charlie Savage, calls the vote “largely party line.” Not true. It was only a party line vote for the Democrats: no Democrat voted against the Ugly Un-American. But nine Republicans, almost a quarter of the Republican caucus, voted for her. That’s not a party line vote, and it’s not almost a party line vote. “Almost” a party line vote would be if one or two senators departed from the party line. If he weren’t a liberal propagandist like the rest of his fellow Timesians, Savage would have described the vote as “a vote in which Democrats hewed without exception to the party line, but one quarter of the Republican caucus departed from their colleagues.” But he’s not, so he didn’t.
Second, isn’t that phrase, “completing an extraordinary narrative arc,” just too much? It’s as though we are supposed to faint away at the sheer wonder of it.
Third, what did this “extraordinary narrative arc” consist of? Sonia So-so-minor was admitted by affirmative action to Princeton. At Princeton she largely distinguished herself as a Hispanic activist relentlessly harassing the administration to hire more Hispanic professors and admit more Hispanic students. She got top academic honors at Princeton, obviously (given the mediocre quality of her writings) through affirmative action. By affirmative action she was admitted to Yale Law School. Then she worked for the Manhattan District Attorney’s office for a few years. Then she had a job in private practice for a few years. Then, at age 37, as part of an ethnic log-rolling political deal, President Bush the elder appointed her to the U.S. District Court. Then, six years later, President Clinton appointed her to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. So, as a Hispanic she got a life-time sinecure at age 37 and held onto it, and this is an extraordinary narrative arc?
What the liberals and Hispanics are really saying is: when lesser qualified, resentful outsiders are given what they manifestly do not deserve, solely on the basis of their race, this is a WONDERFUL ACHIEVEMENT, A HISTORY MAKING EVENT.
Indeed, the Wise Latina, a.k.a. the Intellectually Mediocre Bronze Broad, has boasted of the fact that she is an “affirmative action baby.” Meaning that, because of her Hispanic ethnicity, she was selected for positions for which she had lesser abilities than others who were not selected.
Is this something to be proud of? Well, she is proud of it, because, in her universe, being selected for a position for which you lack the qualifications—solely because you’re not a European American—represents a higher justice which is the model for the ways things ought to be.
But does that mean that WE should be proud, and regard this as something extraordinary? Should we not rather regard it as something disgusting and shameful, as a victory of the anti-life, socialist mindset that raises up the less deserving and less able because they’re less deserving and less able?
But what does Savage say?
Democrats portrayed Judge Sotomayor as a qualified judge whose biography—rising from humble beginnings to excel at two Ivy League universities, serve stints as a prosecutor and corporate lawyer, and then 17 years as a district and appeals court judge—is a classic American success story. Her judicial record, they said, is moderate and mainstreamSo, being admitted to top universities, because of your race, and then being given life-time sinecures on the federal bench, because of your race, and then being raised to the U.S. Supreme Court, because of your race, is the classic American success story. Is there anyone who doubts, after reading this, that liberals hate America, hate true achievement, hate the normal human sense of right and wrong, and rejoice at perverting all three into their respective opposites?
August 6, 2009 was a bad day for America. But, as I said last August 28:
… McCain being elected means death. Obama being elected means horror—but also life.The left is rejoicing at its unholy victory over America. But 31 Republican senators stood against the Wise Latina, despite numerous outrageous threats that they would anger Hispanics if they did so. Because of the principled and articulate opposition to her appointment, a significant part of the country knows what So-so-minor really is. In one way or another (we can’t know exactly how) this realization will ultimately bite the backside of the left.
Jim C. writes:
You hit it out of the ballpark:Stephen Hopewell writes:
Great piece on the sordid, shameful story of the Sotomayor confirmation. I do think some Americans are going to start wondering (a couple of decades too late) just when it became mandatory to appoint “Hispanics” to the highest positions in our society. We are used to the idea that we owe something to blacks, but this is an entirely different phenomenon, and the sheer foreignness of Sotomayor may prove to be a “teachable moment” for some.August 8
Bill Carpenter writes:
This is how a liberal celebrates, dancing a victory jig and singing about the racism of the Republicans. I happened to watch Gangs of New York last night, which depicts the “natives” as having no reason but bigotry and hate to oppose the take-over of their country by aliens. I guess we should stop heaping praise on that bigoted nativist Camus for opposing German immigration, and we should deplore Stalingrad as a nativist massacre. Thank God those filthy English nativists were crushed at Hastings by William the Immigrant. And that nativist Alfred the Great who brutally attacked the Scandinavian immigrants is justly forgotten, along with that lowest of nativist scum, Charles the Hammer, who slaughtered Arab immigrants at Poitiers. After all, doesn’t every people have the right to Lebensraum? Though I can’t understand the leftists’ sympathy for those Arab nativists who murder innocent immigrants in Israel, or for the Vietnamese nativists whose bigotry extended to the French, the Japanese, and the Americans. Such haters! “Justice” Sotomayor is just one more in the army of ethnic politicals that have been demanding positions in return for votes since the time of Boss Tweed. Scorsese is explicit about it. Young Vallon will deliver the Irish vote if the machine will back an Irishman for sheriff. Tweed throughout the film energetically panders to the new immigrants to enhance his political power and has no qualms about open and obvious voter fraud, nor does Vallon. Rather like the present.David Levin writes:
A wonderful piece by you on So-so-minor!! I’m not familiar with Savage, not that one anyway.Terry Morris writes:
31 Republicans voted against her? Wow! I’m pretty impressed.Robert Weissberg writes:
Absolutely right on Sonia. But I’m reminded of Roman Hruska’s (R-Neb.) famous quip during the (failed) confirmation of Carswell, a rather intellectually mediocre nominee picked by President Nixon. He said something on the order of “There are a lot of intellectually average people in America, and they, too, need representation.” This has come down as the Hruska principle.LA replies:
That’s another reply to make when a neocon utters the brainless neocon slogan that the Hispanic immigrants of today are just like the Italian immigrants of the past, one of the most insulting comments ever made.Paul Mulshine writes:
The one really funny thing about this for the left is that they assumed because of her ethnic credentials that she’s pro-choice. As I wrote in this column a while ago, there’s no good evidence of her views on abortion one way or the other. In the one case where she could have made a pro-choice ruling, she actually wrote an excellent opinion dissecting a claim by a pro-choice activist group that the Constitution bans the so-called “Mexico City Rule” which prohibited federal funding for abortion overseas.LA replies:
That would be a nice silver lining for this black day in America.August 8
Dan K. writes:
I sent your article to a friend of mine, who is a retired Judge from a Court of Common Pleas (in a county with circa 2,000,000 people), who served both as a Juvenile Court Judge and a County Judge over 30 years. He is a liberal Democrat and his father was a liberal lawyer who was a Democrat activist. We grew up together living a few blocks apart and attended the same schools in the same grades from Kindergarten through College. We know each other as well as one can know a friend. We remain friendly even though we a politically miles apart.LA replies:
For further insights into the quality of Sotomayor’s intellect, see my discussion of her appalling 2001 “Wise Latina” speech. And be sure to see Heather Mac Donald’s dissection of Sotomayor’s writing style and English usage. She looks at a passage from the 2001 speech that I did not read as carefully as she did. It is, as Mac Donald suggests, almost on a Harriet Miers level of linguistic incompetence and muddy thinking: a person who writes this badly and unclearly ipso facto does not think clearly.LA continues:
In a long entry Mencius Moldbug considers more deeply the problematic nature of Sotomayor’s supposedly top level academic record. I have abridged it.
Posted by Lawrence Auster at August 07, 2009 06:57 PM | Send