June 1st, 2009
05:00 PM ET

Sotomayor's comments enough to derail nomination?

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

Republican senators are voicing skepticism when it comes to President Obama's Supreme Court nominee... although they are, thankfully, staying away from the hateful language of Rush Limbaugh and Newt Gingrich.

If approved, Sonia Sotomayor will be the first Hispanic and the thrid woman ever to serve on the Supreme Court.

Republicans point to Sonia Sotomayor's strong legal background... yet say they're concerned about speeches she's made about a judge's decisions being affected by life experiences. The one comment that's getting the most attention is when Sotomayor said in 2001 that "a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male."

The top Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, Jeff Sessions, says: "It goes against the heart of the great American heritage of an independent judge." And Senator Lindsey Graham calls the remarks troubling and inappropriate, and says Sotomayor should apologize.

Well - it seems the White House has gotten the message that the judge's remarks could be a pretty big deal. The president himself came out to say he's sure Sotomayor would restate that comment - without indicating how he knows that. Mr. Obama says if you look at the judge's full comments, she was saying that her life experiences will help her understand peoples' struggles and will make her a good judge.

Sotomayor appears headed for confirmation, but the White House wants more than a slim majority; they're hoping for a smooth confirmation and a strong win - something that may be complicated by the judge's remarks.

Here’s my question to you: Will Sonia Sotomayor's comment about "a Latina woman vs. a white man" be enough to derail her Supreme Court nomination?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

Diana writes:
Of course Republican senators are "voicing" concerns. They've got the right-wing hate machine clawing at their backs and are facing extinction if they vote against the nomination of this absolutely qualified and distinguished Latina. Ms. Sotomayor has nothing to apologize for, especially to a group of ethically challenged professional gasbags in the U.S. Senate.

Ben from Maryland writes:
Absolutely not. There was nothing in the comment that should be interpreted as racist. For 233 years, the Court was led by rich white men. They made some very poor decisions (remember Dred Scott?). Many of their decisions favored the rich and privileged over the poor and middle class. So when someone comes out of the projects and becomes a judge, he or she, Latin or white or black or Asian, will see both sides better than a privileged white guy.

Ken writes:
Once said, you can't take it back. That is a racist/sexist comment, and if the sex and genders were flip-flopped, the man would be crucified. Of course, she's what Obama wants and Obama gets what he wants when he wants it now.

Joan writes:
I suggest everyone take a few minutes and read the entire speech/lecture that Judge Sotomayor presented at Berkley - I did. I missed the "controversial" comment the first time through because it made sense when taken in context. Everyone makes decisions based on their backgrounds, experiences, moral compass and the laws of the land. Don't see what the big deal is!

Joe writes:
If she isn’t confirmed because of her comment about a Latina woman having more life experience than a white male, then that would be a very sad day for the U.S. I’m a white male and there are a helluva lot of stupid white males whose only qualification for the bench was being in the right frat house and playing at the right golf courses. Look at what was in the Oval Office for eight years.

Greg writes:
Maybe the Supreme Court should be filled with candidates straight out of law school. That would cut down on the life experience drawback.

Filed under: Sonia Sotomayor • Supreme Court
soundoff (300 Responses)
  1. Bernie from Tarpon Springs, FL


    Absolutely not. Anyone who thinks that a priviledged white man thinks the same as a black man, hispanic woman, whatever is kidding themselves. We all bring bias into out decisions based on our experience. This diversity of thought and background is what makes this country great.

    June 1, 2009 at 12:01 pm |
  2. Rich

    Absolutely not! If every word that anyone ever said was analyzed in this way, we would have no Elected Officials or Judges or CEO's, etc.

    Once again the Party of "NO" (GOP) is demonstrating it's total irrelavance to today's world. Rush, get a life, and make it somewhere else!

    June 1, 2009 at 12:07 pm |
  3. don (in naples, florida)

    It sounds like you are trying to nit pick anything you can in order to find fault with her. We have all said some things in the past that at times was impulsive, off the cuff, or driven by an emotion that we may have been feeling at the time. Ultimately you have to look at her rulings. Let's be fair.

    June 1, 2009 at 12:13 pm |
  4. Doug - Dallas, TX

    Only if the members of the Senate are idiots! That being said, I doubt it. When you read the entire statement, the intention is very different. My question to you is why aren't you discussing the entire statement in the context it was given instead of the few words that the Republicans are trying to use against the nomination?

    June 1, 2009 at 12:30 pm |
  5. John from Alabama

    Jack: No!! The statement is taken out of context, and being blow up by the Republican Party leadership of Limbaugh and Newt. I wonder what the Chairman of the RNC thinks, you know the guy, Michael Steele. The Republicans in the Senate are allowing Rush and Newt to be their spokesman on the issue. Rush and Newt the new Republican brain trust.

    June 1, 2009 at 12:30 pm |
  6. Wayne

    Why should it? comments like that never seem to derail anyone from the Republican side of the spectrum. The real question should be, why do comments take a racial tone whenever someone of non-caucasian ethnicity says them.

    June 1, 2009 at 12:35 pm |
  7. J.D.

    This is, without a doubt, one of the most mindless arguments against a nominee I've ever heard. It is one sentence out of decades of hard work and achievement and it was taken out of context to boot. She also ruled against some people of color in a case involving an airline, but I guess that will never be reported. That would make her sound even handed and that's never good for tabloid-style reporting.

    June 1, 2009 at 12:39 pm |
  8. Tom in Desoto, Tx

    She no doubt should have phrased it differently but this should not derail her confirmation. It's nothing compared to Justice Hugo Black, from Alabama, being a one time member of the KKK.

    June 1, 2009 at 12:41 pm |
  9. Debbie/Kansas City

    No. If you read the entire statement you will see that she is making perfect sense. She expressed disagreement that an elder man and an elder woman will make the same decision. She is honest, as other nominees have been, that her back ground and experiences, as a woman and as a latino, give her different perspective on some issues, that a white man, would not have. Common sense that has been blown into hysteria by the rabid right. When you have no answers, as they don't, all you can do is sling mud and hope that something sticks.

    June 1, 2009 at 12:44 pm |
  10. Michael, Kansas City, Missouri

    By the way, the media has it all wrong: Judge Sotomayor, if she is confirmed, will not be the first Hispanic on the Court. Justice Benjamin Cardozo was not only of Sephardic Jewish descent, but his family immigrated to the colonies before the Revolutionary War from Portugal. Now if Sotomayor is Hispanic due to modern definitions that opens up a whole new politically correct kettle of fish.

    Her gender and origin should not have been the reason why she was nominated in the first place - it should have been because she was the best qualified PERIOD. To nominate someone to the highest tribunal in the land for those reasons is no different than placing someone on the bench due to their ideological credentials, like Roberts, Alito or Thomas. Everybody involved with this nomination blew chunks on it!

    June 1, 2009 at 12:48 pm |
  11. David and Sharon Rucker

    Hell No.

    June 1, 2009 at 12:52 pm |
  12. Bob

    More than enough for Rush Limbaugh ...all he needed to do was look at the color of the skin of the guy who nominated her!!! But for me ...her words have absolutely no bearing. Who cares what a person says ...isn't it all about what they actually do?

    Bob, from Kane, PA

    June 1, 2009 at 12:54 pm |
  13. Ron from Ohio

    Only in the mind of deparate conservatives.

    June 1, 2009 at 12:55 pm |
  14. Venia PA

    No and it shouldn't be. If we allowed gwb and cheyney, who are criminals to run this country then she can certainly offer her view point. Besides, what she said was true.

    June 1, 2009 at 12:55 pm |
  15. Ron from Ohio

    Only in the minds of deparate conservatives.

    June 1, 2009 at 12:55 pm |
  16. JOY

    I think it hurts her chances. The worst thing is her belonging to the racist group, LA RAZA. The name is racist. It suggest SUPERIORTY.

    June 1, 2009 at 12:59 pm |
  17. dan in Tucson AZ

    Jack, I don't think so. She is only pointing out the obvious. Speeches are only words. Her actions as a judge have been exemplary.
    The Republicans are really upset about someone on the Supreme court who may actually side with the little guy. If the highest court is to represent the people, it should have equal representation of the people. End of story!

    June 1, 2009 at 1:01 pm |
  18. Alan Jay

    More provocative nonsense. Talk about something real! We already know the woman is a shoe in as long as she hasn't paid a housekeeper off the books.

    Alan Jay

    June 1, 2009 at 1:01 pm |
  19. Charlie in Belen, New Mexico

    No, it shouldn't derail her nomination. It does prove that "a wise Latina" can stick her foot in her mouth just as well as any "white male".

    June 1, 2009 at 1:02 pm |
  20. Lene' from Il

    I hope so...She sounds biased towards her own race and gender. Is he saying that only "latino women" have good judgement? It looks like she can only see people from her side of the fence. That is NOT good enough!

    June 1, 2009 at 1:04 pm |
  21. Rick Medina,OH


    The opposition had to dig deep to find (and make) a controversy. I would like to read the entirety of her remarks that day. It is my guess that it was within the confines of a legitimate legal debate about how to interpret law and the U. S. Constitution ... a debate that is continuing in law schools today. Do we look for jurists who get inside the minds and souls of those who wrote them, or those they are applied to?

    Rick, OH

    June 1, 2009 at 1:04 pm |
  22. Gary of El Centro, Ca

    Nope. She's a "slam dunk" for confirmation. The GOP is already taking a lot of hits for their attacks against her and are in serious "moon walk" mode trying to back off.

    June 1, 2009 at 1:17 pm |
  23. Lynn

    Jack, I am surprised and disappointed that you would join the "take a quote out of context and start the character assassination" crowd.

    Alito said basically the same thing. Is Sen. Graham asking for an apology from him? Have you read the whole article? If so, why haven't you quoted from other sections of the article?

    June 1, 2009 at 1:19 pm |
  24. Jen B

    Ms "mouthy" will be confirmed in all her ethnicity "self".
    I have a much more difficult background and have done well as a busines owner for 32 yeras, however never mention the terrible treatment of my ancestors...why? I'm grown up and an adult.
    Jen B

    June 1, 2009 at 1:19 pm |
  25. dave

    In the New Haven firefighter case, the elected officials of the city of New Haven decided they would not certifiy the results of the test because they thought it might be biased and/or exposed the city to discrimination claims. The elected officals of the city made policy.

    Judge S as part of a three judge panel declined to change that policy.

    Now Repub's are attacking her for not being activist and changing the policyof New Haven

    June 1, 2009 at 1:24 pm |
  26. Bizz, Quarryville, Pennsylvania

    If I were the republicans and that is all they can find to complain about, one speech that she made in her entire career, I'd definitely would drop it. If they can vote for Clarence Thomas to be on the Supreme Court than they should not have any problems voting for Sonia Sotomayor.

    June 1, 2009 at 1:25 pm |
  27. Katiec Pekin, IL

    It most certainly should not be. We have a qualified, honorable person nominated and, as usual, the republicans and their "spokespeople" will do their best to destroy her.
    The American people are so sick of them and their unAmerician

    June 1, 2009 at 1:25 pm |
  28. bob z.from pa.

    i don't know if that will but her being a member of la raza should.

    June 1, 2009 at 1:30 pm |
  29. dave

    There is nothing there, The GOP just playing games.

    June 1, 2009 at 1:30 pm |
  30. dave

    Lindsey Graham of SC said taht if he made similar comments about white males making better decisions, then he could never get on the supreme court

    The difference Senator Graham is that Puerto Rico has not history of enslaving, murdering, lynching, raping, cheating, beating, or segregating blacks or seceding from the Union like your state

    June 1, 2009 at 1:32 pm |
  31. Mark, Bradenton,FL

    This woman is scary. White firefighters sued in order to get promotions they had earned and because minorities could not pass the exams they were not promoted. Sotomayor upheld the decision so white firefighters have to wait in line until a minority passes.

    June 1, 2009 at 1:38 pm |
  32. Diane/Allentown PA

    No, I don't think so Jack.

    I don't see anything wrong with her comment. Think about it, if you came before a judge with life experience, which would you prefer, someone like Sonia Sotomayor, who fought for what she has accomplished or Lindsay Graham?

    Enough said on that one!

    June 1, 2009 at 1:39 pm |
  33. john pryor

    HELL NO!!! the party that made the comments should be "derailed"!!!

    June 1, 2009 at 1:39 pm |
  34. Margo

    Jack, If this comment is enough to derail her nomination, we have bigger problems than I thought. Jeeze, give it a rest folks.

    June 1, 2009 at 1:41 pm |
  35. erinmontague

    My God. How can anyone remember exactly what they said eight years ago. And then to have it taken out of context by the uber right media, ridiculous. I think she would make a fine supreme court judge. Just confirm her and lets move on.

    Erin in Healdsburg CA

    June 1, 2009 at 1:42 pm |
  36. Ryan, Galeburg, IL

    No, but this discussion derails my hopes for a sensible confirmation process.

    June 1, 2009 at 1:43 pm |
  37. David in San Diego

    Whom are you kidding? She is "in like Flynn," after the GOPhers come out of their holes in the ground to posture and protest. This is a non-issue provoked by the fat drug addict and the passe cancer-wife divorcer.

    June 1, 2009 at 1:43 pm |
  38. Tom, Avon, Me, The Heart of Democracy

    Not a chance. When the judge's philosophy and statements are not taken out of context, they show that she believes in the Constitution and rule of law. After the Bush regime's eight year betrayal Justice the Senate is just as starved for legal orthodoxy as the rest of us. Sonia Sotomayor is a judge's judge; she has only had about 1% of her cases looked at a second time. Who is that good?!

    June 1, 2009 at 1:44 pm |
  39. Mike in Albuquerque,NM

    When does the statute of limitations pass on off the cuff remarks?
    This remark was made way back in 2001. Let it go!

    June 1, 2009 at 1:46 pm |
  40. Michelle in Pennsylvania

    No, Sotomayor will be confirmed. I'll bet some of the Republican senators won't be able to stop themselves from dragging her through the mud by the hair first though. What do you expect from cavemen?

    June 1, 2009 at 1:46 pm |
  41. Mareike Kuypers

    Los Angeles, CA
    She'll be confirmed. The Republicans can bury themselves further by fighting the confirmation. She was being honest just as she was when she said that policy is made at the judicial level.

    June 1, 2009 at 1:47 pm |
  42. Dave, Brooklyn, NY

    I’m not as concerned with what she said – it’s probably true. I’m more concerned with the way she said it. But more to the point, if you thought it was tough to get Bush to secure our southern border, we may as well start to fly the Mexican flag over the United States of Mexico if she gets in and a border security case comes before her. Obama will have to nominate Lou Dobbs to balance this out.

    June 1, 2009 at 1:48 pm |
  43. William Joseph Miller, Los Angeles

    Go to any Republican fund raiser. Don't pay any attention to who's sitting at the front table. Instead notice who's serving the meal, who's carrying of the dirty dishes, who's washing those dishes in the back kitchen, and who's cleaning up afterwards.
    Who are these people? If we're talking Republicans, they are neither unionized workers or working at union wages. If you live in Los Angeles, you don't even have to ask where they're from.
    What sort of wages do these people earn? What sort of place can these people afford to rent (forget about buying)? What sort of health care or retirement benefits do these people receive?
    And does it occur to any of the Greedy Old Privileged white guys sitting at the front table that they are paying far more for their position of bribery (sorry, I mean "honor") than the kitchen help sees in a year – and that means 6 days a week, 10-12 hours a day of back breaking labor.

    Do any of the Greedy Old Privileged white guys ask those questions? Do any of the Greedy Old Privileged white guys really care?

    If you answer these questions, you will understand the reason for Sotomayor's remark about privileged white people. As far as I am concerned never was the truth more told.

    The old white guys in the media and the GOP (Greedy Old Privileged white guys) are once again "acting their color."(To borrow a phrase from The Piano Lesson by August Wilson) The GOP once again shows its stupidity and insensitivity. Sonia Sotomayor raised a truth that none of the Greedy Old Privileged white guys want to face. That's the reason she has earned the right to sit on the Supreme Court.

    Once again, the GOP has confirmed the obvious – that the greedy, racist, sexist GOP is unfit to govern this country.

    June 1, 2009 at 1:48 pm |
  44. Justin

    My greatest disappointment with President Obama is his willingness to make concessions. He shouldn't have said Judge Sotomayor would rephrase her comment. He should have said that if Samuel Alito – a white, privileged male – can say that his experiences and family history shape his judicial philosophy and approach to cases, and make him a better judge (he did say this), then so can Judge Sotomayor. And when you read Judge Sotomayor's entire speech, that's exactly what she was saying. Rush, Newt, Sen Kyl, and the rest of the Republican party's implicit suggestion – that only white men's experiences are of any value on the bench – says all I and any other real American will ever need to know about the GOP.

    June 1, 2009 at 1:50 pm |
  45. Marilyn in Raleigh

    No! Everyone seems to be interpreting this to mean than the Latina woman is better than the white male – and ignoring the "I would hope" and "more often than not." This is such a non-issue that the Republican shouters have decided to label as racist. And Newt Gingrich in particular should be ashamed of himself.

    June 1, 2009 at 1:50 pm |
  46. Ray in Nashville

    I don't think so, Jack. The only reason it is an issue now is that the GOP needs something to oppose her on. They have to tread carefully because they are trying to woo Hispanic voters, but this issue reverses the "race" issue that they generally have to battle. Isn't it ironic though, that the party of the deep, white south, the party that still practices racism whenever it can, has found a candidate that they can oppose for her "racist" statement?

    June 1, 2009 at 1:53 pm |
  47. Diane Dagenais Turbide

    No, But republicans are wasting time on this since they are talking as if republicans life experiences never had any effects on legal decisions...please!

    June 1, 2009 at 1:53 pm |
  48. Lady Lou from Fayetteville, NC

    I listened to that whole thing over C-Span yesterday. Those people at Duke were simply discussing how things work, and how you apply for a job, and how you put together your opinions sometimes impacted by where you came from and how it helps to be a judicial assistant in the Appellate or Supreme Court. It was obvious that a person from her background has a lot more to draw from than the usual white male attorney who never had a money problem, grew up with a father in the house, was never sick in his life, and on and on AND it could just as well have been a white woman. Those people were simply "jawing" about how things come about in the District Courts, the Superior Court, the Appellate Courts and the finally the Supreme Court. It was a learning experience to listen to them and they weren't setting policy. They were talking to law students at Duke. Anyone who objects to her appointment NEEDS TO GET A LIFE.

    June 1, 2009 at 1:53 pm |
  49. Tina Tx

    White men can't think like men of color and vice versa and white women can't think like women of color and vice versa. Get over it. If she is the best for the job suck it up and endorse her. If not then continue your ranting and raving. I feel we need more women on the bench to offset the good old boy society and we need a woman's logic on some of the cases.

    June 1, 2009 at 1:57 pm |
  50. Joe CE

    No but it is one strike. Remains to be seen if anything else turns up..

    June 1, 2009 at 1:57 pm |
  51. Ray Lawson from Danville, VA

    No, it should when added to other things she has said along with court decisions she has written, but the democratic controlled Congress loves her.

    June 1, 2009 at 1:58 pm |
  52. Scott - San Diego

    She can and is a racist as she wants to be. She has a free pass to confirmation with the Democrats in control of everything. Democrats are free to hire whomever they want and spend whatever they want and they are doing just that................destroying and bankrupting this country.

    June 1, 2009 at 1:59 pm |
  53. Peter

    may i ask, what she said, is it wrong? why is it that when ever a minority achieves something people always say they got there because of quota system but if a white person does the same thing, they are brilliant? it is so sad because i experience this constantly too, so much for equality.


    June 1, 2009 at 2:00 pm |
  54. Scott in Canada

    The moderates aren't going to see it as big enough of a problem to vote against her so....it won't be a completely bad issue.

    June 1, 2009 at 2:00 pm |
  55. Stacy from Leesburg, VA

    Jack, you are an older man than me. Certainly, we are going to look at a situation differently. Does that make me guilty of age discrimination? No. It is a statement of the obvious. Judge Sotomayor should be judged on her education, experience on the bench and her rulings. If the GOP makes her remarks the centerpiece of their debate, then they are going to continue their march towards obscurity.

    June 1, 2009 at 2:01 pm |
  56. sharon kitchen


    Have you ever heard the thoughts that some Native Americans think about what has been done to "our " land? By the people who are here now?

    Have you ever thought about what Native peoples feel?

    Usualy all the talk is always :white or black and now Latino.............

    Well.................there are a growing large number of Native Americans that also vote,and have a say in the every day affairs of "Turtle Island".
    What everyone else calls, U.S.A.

    There are many races.
    There are many ways to look at any given issue.
    There are many thoughts.
    There are many people.

    White is NOT the only color.

    June 1, 2009 at 2:01 pm |
  57. Denny from Tacoma, WA

    It is too bad that she did not say a white male Republican. If Clarence Thomas can pass with the Anita Hill scandal, then I think that Sotomayor's comment would pale in comparison.

    June 1, 2009 at 2:04 pm |
  58. Rob of Brooklyn

    the statement is probably true. those old white men can't think. Look at what they've done to this country anyway.

    June 1, 2009 at 2:14 pm |
  59. Tom

    No. In the 50 cases she presided over that dealt with "racial discrimination" issues, Judge Sotomayor sided AGAINST the plaintiff 45 times. That means she did not base her ruling on race or "predisposed" attitudes.

    June 1, 2009 at 2:14 pm |
  60. Jeff in E. Lyme, CT

    No Jack, they only provide fuel for someone who already had decided to vote against anyone Obama nominated. You know who they are........the brain-dead Limbaugh listeners. Truth is, Policy is often tested, refined & brought into practice in the Appeals Court or the Supreme Court. Believe it or not, Congress doesn't always think things through 100%.

    June 1, 2009 at 2:14 pm |
  61. JS

    If anyone can read and do the research, they were all taken out of context, people should read the whole speech re diversity in the court, and her comments were entirely appropriate for the subject she was asked to speak on. I don't feel that she should apologize.
    Joan Greensboro NC

    June 1, 2009 at 2:20 pm |
  62. Ronnie, CA

    Not at all. She is being picked on by the right wing because she is another person of color in a high position in the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA! I'm almost ashamed to write my own countries name in big bold letters like that!

    June 1, 2009 at 2:21 pm |
  63. Jim


    Don't be ridiculous. Her comment was simply pointing out that success and advancement should be predicated on hard work and dedication, for everyone. Nobody should be artificially held back because of ethnicity or gender. She's going to be confirmed and she's going to make a great Supreme Court justice.

    Reno, Nevada

    June 1, 2009 at 2:21 pm |
  64. Eddie in Chicago

    I think it might not look so great to splurge in light of the economic difficulty – it could make him look detached. However with regard to spending taxpayer dollars, that really shouldnt be a huge deal. Anywhere the president wants to go, whether that be on vacation or on business he always requires secret service and official secure vehicles, this is no different. Its not like he can just hail a cab. Saying he cant use tax payer dollars for his personal off-time (which has been much less than his predecessors) within reason, is to say that he cant have any off-time.

    Besides, how much did Bush put into the Bank bailouts, and how much was Obama's recovery plan? Theres bigger things for us taxpayers to whine about – what next? Will we quibble about them not using generic brand toilet paper in the White House?

    June 1, 2009 at 2:27 pm |
  65. Kevin, Florida

    Jack , sadly , the reality is ...they won't be. If you are African American, Latino, or of any other ethnicity you are allowed these days to say whatever derogatory comments you like....we saw that during the election. If you are of Anglo decent however , even factual criticism is labled "racist" or "hateful". Sotomayor will get the Judicial appointment , Like Mr. Obama got the vote, and slowly people like me will have their Rights stripped away, money given to Illegals , and be pushed out of America.

    June 1, 2009 at 2:29 pm |
  66. gerry In Toronto

    No, it won't because in spite of the fact some talking heads refuse to read the entire speech and instead spin to create confusion and controversy to improve ratings, the American people are paying attention to the issue.

    Even the GOP are pulling in their horns as you noticed over the weekend trying to minimize the damage they already caused themselves from their senseless misguided and lying attacks on this fine nominee.

    She will get approved with a landslide.

    June 1, 2009 at 2:32 pm |
  67. Pete - Boulder, Colorado

    The nonsensical part of this non-issue is that if one actually examined the 90 plus discrimmination cases Sotomayor heard during her career, you would find that she sided AGAINST the plaintiff claiming discrimmination the majority of the time. When it comes to the Ricci case, Sotomayor (and many other judges), while empathizing with Ricci's situation, still voted to UPHOLD the law of the land, Title VII. There's simply no evidence or paper trail that Sotomayor has made decisions based exclusively on race.

    June 1, 2009 at 2:34 pm |
  68. Ellie

    Not only should she not be derailed but we should recognize that what she says is true. I am a white person whose parents paid for my education. I cannot imagine what it is like to be a person of color, to grow up in the projects, suffer from diabetes and put myself through college. She is a wonderful, intelligent woman and role model for all of us. She will be a fair and objective judge. The attacks on her are totally illogical.

    June 1, 2009 at 2:38 pm |
  69. Tom Mytoocents Fort Lauderdale Florida


    I would like to hear an extensive apology followed by an even better explanation. I would not approve anyone who feels they are better qualified due to race or gender...

    June 1, 2009 at 2:42 pm |
  70. Steve of Hohenwald TN.

    No! Give me a break. If that`s all they have on her, then she is clean as a whistle. Besides, I being a white male, have to agree with that statment. Anyone that has real life backgrounds, would be much less judgmental, than a stuffy rich white man that`s never worked a day in his life.

    June 1, 2009 at 2:42 pm |
  71. Fred May Sr Spanaway WA.

    Lets look at the remark Judge Sotomayer made in reference to race.
    First the white male she is talking about did not grow up in the same surroundings as a female Latino. Most white males in government had a silver spoon life. Most Latina females had a hard life where they had to work hard to make ends meet. From what has been reported about Judge Sotomayer she earned every bit of success due to her own determination to succeed. It has been reported that many years have passed since there has been any one of her quality suggested for the Supreme Court.

    June 1, 2009 at 2:45 pm |
  72. Rick McKinney, Texas

    I don't think in and of itself she will be derailed but when you combine that statement with others she has made it will put doubt on her being non-bias in her rulings on the Supreme Court bench. It looks as though the New Haven Firefighters case she heard and ruled on is about to be overturned by the Supreme Court which was a discrimination case filed on behalf of white firefighters. That will put even more doubt in the eyes of the Senators on capitol hill.

    June 1, 2009 at 2:45 pm |
  73. Fred R Deleon

    Conservatives can't do any harm to Sotomayor. She will be crowned Justice. Who is the boss any way? We better learn.

    June 1, 2009 at 2:46 pm |
  74. Bob

    This comment should not be a disqualifier.

    Her academic achievements, her excellent performance as a trial lawyer, prosecutor, Federal trial and Appellate Judge are conclusive evidence that she is highly qualified.

    She shouldn't be disaualified for making some inocuous off the cuff remark.

    June 1, 2009 at 2:47 pm |
  75. Angela, Kentucky

    It shouldn't derail her nomination. There is plenty of public record on her and the decisions she has made as judge that show she is fairly mainstream. I find the hypocrisy of Sotomayor's critics very annoying. I believe this nomination is just one more way the Republicans are trying attack President Obama and if they have to bring down Sotomayor to do so they will.

    June 1, 2009 at 2:54 pm |
  76. Jeff, Cape Coral,FL.

    Her comments, and the fact that she is a card caryying member of La Raza prove she a racist. She has no business being on the Supreme Court. What's next? A Klansman?

    June 1, 2009 at 2:54 pm |
  77. Chris D., NYC

    Not at all.

    June 1, 2009 at 2:54 pm |
  78. Bob Parma, OH

    Probably not. I don't think the Republicans have the will or the where-with-all to stop it. But , lets face it if a white male made this statement
    “A wise white male with the richness of his experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a Latina woman.”
    He would be labeled racist and sexist in a heartbeat. What's fair is fair. She should not be confirmed.

    June 1, 2009 at 2:56 pm |
  79. Jenna

    Will Sonia Sotomayor’s comment about “a Latina woman vs. a white man” be enough to derail her Supreme Court nomination?

    Oh that comment taken out of context from a conference to encourage Latino participation in the judicary?


    This is just another failed ploy by those in the Grand Obstructionist Party to make Democrats look bad.

    Just wait until we install a REAL LIBERAL on the Supreme Court.

    They won't know what hit them.

    Roseville CA

    June 1, 2009 at 2:56 pm |
  80. Doraine Gordon

    Absolutely not. The people who are griping about her remarks are the Republicans and nobody is listening to them anymore anway. The Judge will be easily confirmed.

    June 1, 2009 at 2:56 pm |
  81. Randy from Salt Lake City, UT

    Well, if the MSM continues to take what she said out of context, then they'll have plenty of other non-existant stories to over exaggerate.

    June 1, 2009 at 3:01 pm |
  82. Susan Frost

    So, Judge Sotomayor thinks she might be smarter than a white guy, and look who disputes that – those two intellectual giants, Newt Gingrich and Rush Limbaugh! Not much of a bar to meet now, is it?
    Does anyone have anything REAL to criticize the woman for?

    Tuscaloosa, AL

    June 1, 2009 at 3:01 pm |
  83. Richard - Knoxville TN

    Nope -

    And I think the Dems are missing the boat if they do not ensure all the anti-hispanic and anti-woman comments and demeaning inuendos being spread by the neo-cons are broadcast to target audiences of the same - How would an 80% majority in the Senate feel

    Maybe when the number of people who self identify themselves as republicans gets down to aroung nine or ten percent nation wide, the Republican leadership will get the mesage. But they continue to think that it needs to consist of only Good-Ol Southern White-Boys who think they need to get back to the "basics" like, maybe a few nationally telivised cross burnings on DC's "Mall" would be a teachable moment to show everyone what the New Republican party's message has REALLY evolved into -

    RB Knoxville -

    June 1, 2009 at 3:05 pm |
  84. Larry from Georgetown, Texas

    I'm not a Latina or whatever. I'm a white American and actually I agree with her comment about experience and how it affects our decisions, legal or not. The white male's ego got pounced on this one and they don't like it because the ego is very fragile.

    June 1, 2009 at 3:08 pm |
  85. Larry

    Anyone with half a brain knows what Ms Sotomayor was trying to say. I'm a white male and I know she has experiences I don't have. I'm OK with that.

    She's obviously a very qualified candidate for the Court.

    The Republicans, as they have been, are grasping for straws. And they're making themselves look like fools. Very stupid fools.

    Cincinnati, OH

    June 1, 2009 at 3:10 pm |
  86. Terry, Chandler AZ

    The sentence was taken out of a much more complex statement. It may, perhaps thave been taken to the extreme. If the republicans opt use this to derail the nomination they will alienate the Lation vote in future elections. I suggest they wait to attempt stop the next nominee.

    June 1, 2009 at 3:11 pm |
  87. Larry, Ohio

    Jack,I don't think the comment is enough to derail her nomination,but she certainly has some "splainin' to do!!!!!

    June 1, 2009 at 3:14 pm |
  88. Sherri--Illinois

    Absolutely not! She's well qualified for the Supreme Court and she will be the first Hispanic woman. Kudos to her!

    June 1, 2009 at 3:16 pm |
  89. Proud Alabama Democrat

    SOTOMAYOR is not racist!!!! She is being bashed by the REPUBLICANS for the sole reason of the appointee being a Hispanic Female!! Don’t let the UNELECTED Republican idiots give the American Process of Appointing a very Respectable and Expericenced Associate Justice Sotomayor. THE Democrats did NOT do this to Chief Justice Rogers due to RESPECT … They need to shut up the Repubican NON elected pundants and also sanction the Senators and House members who DO disrespect not only Associate Justice Sotomayor but ALL AMERICANS!!! GOD BLESS AMERICA!!! There is a reason that NEWT and RUSH are not in office they COULD NOT BE ELECTED!!

    June 1, 2009 at 3:17 pm |
  90. Phil, georgia

    Its a tragedy when Limbaugh, Newt are allowed to just take out of context a paragraph and put a strong lable on Sotomayor as a racist and not be strongly repudiated by other republicans and not given the full pretext by the media; This only gives credence to the fear that minorities have that no matter how qualified, they will be unfairly stereotyped and not given opportunities. its many steps taken back. Those that make such deep statements need to be able to withoutADoubt make sure those statements can be proved.

    June 1, 2009 at 3:18 pm |
  91. Dr. Sam

    By no means! What about almost similar comments by justice Alito and two others at the Supreme Court? And while Chief Justice Roberts has made no such comments, he follows a path dictated by his conservative ideology–a world view largely influenced by his association with the Republican Party.

    June 1, 2009 at 3:18 pm |
  92. Anna, Missouri

    It won't derail her nomination, and personally, I, as an older white woman married to an older white man, happen to agree with her. Knowledge and understanding of the world comes from experiences in life, and I am sure that anyone of color has experienced many things that we, as white people, have not. Where were these white guys concern when Alito, as a nominee, said that he would remember his own ancestors history when he was dealing with immigration cases? We had an election in November, and that election overwhelmingly showed that we are sick and tired of these games they play in Washington. She has an outstanding record of service and is more moderate that these idiots will admit. They should be careful what they wish for. If they do not confirm her, my bet is the next nominee will be much more liberal.

    June 1, 2009 at 3:19 pm |
  93. Deb (New York)

    Absolutely not. Her remarks when read in the full context make sense to me. Maybe her choice of words could have been better but as a latina woman I totally understand what she was trying to say and more importantly, totally agree with her.

    June 1, 2009 at 3:20 pm |
  94. Brian G, Sugar Land, TX

    No, they are not. Nor should they be. She spoke honestly.

    For 200 plus years white men have held Supreme Court Justice positions. Each with his own experieince, bias and agenda.

    I do not believe for one instant those men did not exploit their power to fashion American jurisprudence.

    Statements made and deals cut in closed chambers would have troubled the founding fathers.

    June 1, 2009 at 3:21 pm |
  95. john, oregon

    Derail, no. It might have been a bigger problem if not for the disgusting and xenophobic howling from the Republicans. Increasingly When I think of the GOP I don't think of an elephant, I think of Limbaugh, Tancredo, and Liddy.

    June 1, 2009 at 3:22 pm |
  96. Gigi

    It shouldn't. When you are right, and she was right, you are right. I just wish she had left out Latina but they would have cried about that too.


    June 1, 2009 at 3:22 pm |
  97. Eric Bracke

    It would only matter if she was white and male. There's a different standard for minorities.

    June 1, 2009 at 3:23 pm |
  98. Mike from Dallas

    Now way. No how.

    Might as well go ahead and call for an up-or-down vote.

    The country is watching.

    June 1, 2009 at 3:23 pm |
  99. Nancy, Tennessee

    The statement was too blunt to be ignored. "Out of context" doesn't cut it. Impartial and fair judgement doesn't come to mind when you think about being biased against white males. Judge Sotomayor may have passed down her own judgement when she made this statement. And an additional charge is still pending, "she thinks judges make policy."

    June 1, 2009 at 3:25 pm |
  100. Simpliticus

    There never was any problem with respect to her comments. The GOP merely wanted to see if something stuck to the wall and it didn't! Game set and match!

    June 1, 2009 at 3:27 pm |
  101. chris

    It probably won't, but if the role was reversed, it certainly would be trouble.

    June 1, 2009 at 3:30 pm |
  102. Sherri--Illinois

    Of course not! Rush Limbaugh guaranteed her nomination when he called her a Racist & a Bigot, which made HIS Republican party further alienate themselves from mainstream America AND made them look more like the Keystone Cops, then a political party.

    June 1, 2009 at 3:33 pm |
  103. Agnes from Scottsdale, AZ

    Jack: No, if Sona Sotomayor's comments from 8 years is all the opposition can dig up on her, wow, we've hit a home run on this canididacay. It just shows how distorted the GOP thinking is if this is all they can call her on. I'd estimate she'll get 70 favorable votes. End of story!

    June 1, 2009 at 3:34 pm |
  104. Marie Ontario

    The only person who knows the answer to this question is Rush Limbaugh as he is the one pulling all the strings for the Republican Party.

    June 1, 2009 at 3:35 pm |
  105. D.Williams

    No, this comment will not be enough to derail her supreme court nomination because we do have people of intellect who can interpret fact from fiction. If there were no traits of racism found in both Gingrich and Limbaugh they would have first addressed her "reason" behind making such a statement before concluding without careful scrutiny that she was racist.

    June 1, 2009 at 3:36 pm |
  106. Jim/NC

    Are you kidding me? Democrats can say and do anything...the latina woman vs. a white man would only serve to disqualify conservatives. By the way, what about the hateful language regarding Allito and Roberts, Jack...do you remember that discourse? I did not think so!

    June 1, 2009 at 3:36 pm |
  107. Frank from Peterborough

    Considering America has been going backwards into the future they might as well continue on the same destructive past and keep up their image as a secular country dominated by old white men and the American Taliban.

    June 1, 2009 at 3:40 pm |
  108. Pete (St. Louis, MO)

    No. They were taken out of contect to begin with. She is as qualified as anyone to be the next Supreme Court Judge.

    June 1, 2009 at 3:41 pm |
  109. pat in lexington

    No. If anybody stops to think for a minute, person's life experiences are what make the person who he/she is. That's true of everyone, even Rush and Newt. Kiinda makes me wish they could go back and start over again.

    June 1, 2009 at 3:43 pm |
  110. Diana NJ

    Jack I know you read the whole thing in its whole... why are you biting.. what the gop is putting out... I had it read to me is whole... and she was saying what they try to make it appear she did.

    June 1, 2009 at 3:45 pm |
  111. Remo .............. Austin, Texas

    Jack, it very possibly could. If a white person said the reverse of that statement they'd be called a racist. But since this is a Obama peeps we'll just get her shoved on us no matter how questions her, her past, and her statement.

    June 1, 2009 at 3:45 pm |
  112. allen

    Talk about a racist comment......What I would like to know is.......is this person even a legal US citizen?

    June 1, 2009 at 3:45 pm |
  113. John in LA

    The key word wasn't "Latina" or "woman". Or "man" or "white".

    It was "wise". She was describing herself compared to a white man who was NOT wise.

    For examples of that, we have only to look at Limbaugh, Gingrich and all the other non-wise white men trying to make political capital out of something so obviously not controversial.

    And, by the way, Samuel Alito said much the same about his own background and experience.

    June 1, 2009 at 3:46 pm |
  114. Jim, Naples Florida

    Since when did anyone seeking an office within the "Inner Belt" of Washington DC have to be PERFECT?

    It seems we expect our leaders and jurist to be so over-the-top politically correct that we have forgotten one thing, we are human and simply incapable of being PERFECT. Get over it America and simply vote or pick the best qualified candidate for the position..... POLITICALLY CORRECT HAS GOTTEN US NO WHERE!

    June 1, 2009 at 3:47 pm |
  115. B. Carter

    No! no! no!

    June 1, 2009 at 3:47 pm |
  116. Melissa

    No, but they seem to be enough to make us all subjected to more Republican whining.

    June 1, 2009 at 3:49 pm |
  117. K

    Her comments about a Latina woman vs a man were upsetting and give me cause for concern. But, face it, the opinion of we little taxpayers and concerns over her comments mean nothing in comparison to the political tactics going on.

    June 1, 2009 at 3:51 pm |
  118. Michael "C" Lorton, Virginia

    Jack: I don't think so--there are a lot of things we say in life that we would like to take back--she will be confirmed.

    June 1, 2009 at 3:51 pm |
  119. Paul S. Columbia, SC

    Justice may be blind; but she can still hear.

    June 1, 2009 at 3:51 pm |
  120. Sylvia from California

    No... Her competancy should be the deciding factor.... I refer you to the fact that the majority of her opinions that went to the Supreme Court were overturned..... In other words, is she competant to hold this very important role??? This comment comes from a Puerto Rican Woman (NewYorkRican) with a very simular background as her and no agenda other than my love for the Constitution and my hope that the most qualified person gets the job no matter the sex, race or political orientation......

    June 1, 2009 at 3:54 pm |
  121. Mark in OKC

    No, she will be confirmed. Now, If we could only find out that Sotomayor is a Lesbian, she would be the "perfect" nominee.

    June 1, 2009 at 3:54 pm |
  122. Lance Schumacher

    You GOTTA be kidding! This was a done deal the minute Obama made the nomination. Her comments bother me, however, not nearly as much as the number of times her rulings have been overturned by the Supreme Court with comments such as "her ruling flies in the face of the statutory laws". This trend of being overturned by the sitting Justices indicates a clear tendency to make incorrect rulings based on something other than the existing statutory laws, and that makes her confirmation a mistake. Be assured that the Democrats will turn a blind eye to all this and she will be the next Justice.
    Lance, Ridgecrest, Ca

    June 1, 2009 at 3:54 pm |
  123. wanda B.

    Why should her comment be any worse than Limbaugh's consistent
    racial comments? we still have to hear his stupidity unbridled. besides as a woman i agree with her, white men have put this country in the toilet and it is truly time for a REAL change.


    June 1, 2009 at 3:54 pm |
  124. happy girl

    We all know that when one race/gender is pointed out as having superior skills over another race/gender – it's racist. Doesn't matter who's saying it or why. Men and women of all races are equal – the argument over that was settled long ago. Will it derail her nomination? Probably not. Most democrats seem to be onboard with getting Sotomayor on the bench, so she's as good as in.

    June 1, 2009 at 3:56 pm |
  125. David Bebeau,Springfield Missouri

    For heavens sake,she hasn't said a thing that we all have said at one time or another.And as far as her comment about a person making a decision based on lifes experiences and culture.Well that is a true statement.I think she is a good pick and I think real diversity is good for America.

    June 1, 2009 at 3:56 pm |
  126. Darren

    Of course not, it's a couple comments taken out of context and she didn't say anything more than a number of other Supreme Court Justices' have said.

    June 1, 2009 at 3:59 pm |
  127. Alex (CT)

    I'm sure we all wish we had sparkling clean pasts but honestly I can name about 20 different things that I've done that would get weighed heavily if I were to ever be nominated for the Supreme Court. President Obama not only had to balance political views in his decision to nominate Mrs. Sotomayor but he also had to balance what would come up in their pasts as well and she apparently was the best choice when those 2 primary topics were considered.

    June 1, 2009 at 4:00 pm |
  128. Don (Ottawa)

    Why should it? What she said is true. Life experiences count when it comes to making judgements that will potentially effect millions of people. This appointment is crutial to the Republicans in that a liberal judge will make it harder for the Republicans to overthrow previous rulings they don't agree with. It never ceases to amaze me that appointments for the Supreme Court, for judges who are supposed to be neutral, have become partisan when it comes to how they are supposed to think. This Latina woman is the most qualified nominee I've seen in a long time.

    June 1, 2009 at 4:01 pm |
  129. Lou

    It won't derail her if anyone with a vote decides to read the whole text. Makes perfect sense in context.

    June 1, 2009 at 4:01 pm |
  130. Tony from Torrignton

    No. That comment was taken out of context. But her ruling on the New Haven firefighters bothers me. Why should any test for a promotion have to be made easier to pass, just so a monority group can get the promotiopn? Are we working towards less qualified people to put in charge?

    June 1, 2009 at 4:03 pm |
  131. Liz, Windsor, Ontario, Canada

    I think that comment should be read in its entirety AND her entire speech read before one comes to a conclusion on what she is saying. I don't believe it should derail her chances at all to becoming the next Supreme Court justice. Her skills and experience as a judge over the years should be carefully considered when making this very important decision instead.

    June 1, 2009 at 4:03 pm |
  132. Henry David on waldon pond

    the party built upon Schizophrenia will hear from
    a whole lot of voices on this subject.
    the party built upon Paranoia will make an
    Enemy because of it.
    and the party built upon Grandiose Delusions will
    be so caught up in their delusions they will not care.

    June 1, 2009 at 4:04 pm |
  133. Leo

    Simple but obvious question: what happens if a white man makes a parallel comment about a Latina?

    June 1, 2009 at 4:05 pm |
  134. Donald in CA

    I agree with her comment. I'm more concerned about the the ugly comments that the right wingers who run the republican party are making. Those are the scary folks America should be worried about, not the Judge.

    June 1, 2009 at 4:06 pm |
  135. Gabriel from Hartford, CT

    It's sad this is even an issue.

    June 1, 2009 at 4:06 pm |
  136. Linda in Arizona

    I don't think so, but what I think it proves is she needs to be very careful with her remarks in the future. With every rethug in the country out to get her, I hope she doesn't have more injudicious statements lurking in corners.

    June 1, 2009 at 4:07 pm |
  137. Winnie

    I say that Sotomayor speaks for those of us that have experienced similiar lives, be it Latina, Black, or Native American. Those crying the loudest are the representives of those who have made the lives of many miserable because, we are the ones keeping the rich rich and they have no idea as to how the justice system has empacted many minorities. Take a good look at those who are incarcerated. Many are minorities, who had they lived the lives of the rich white folks, would not be judged so harshly. The republican senates and represenatives do not know what Sotomayor is talking about so, of course, they are going to cry RACIST. THEY ARE THE ONES WHO HAVE BEEN RACIST FOR THE PAST 200 SOME YEARS. RIDICULES.

    June 1, 2009 at 4:09 pm |

    No. Get over it. Why do we expend so much energy on discrediting someone over so little.
    Here we are a nation who tolerates gross racism and hatred such as the KKK and the like but we cannot tolerate a few words that were taken out of context. If you look hard enough you will always find fault in people no matter how insignificant it is.
    Get a job will ya! Especially you Limbaugh and Gingrich.
    What a bunch of cry babies.

    June 1, 2009 at 4:10 pm |
  139. Susan from Twin Falls Idaho

    After what went on with Clarence Thomas prior to his placement this pales in comparison. Why is it men can get by with alleged harassment and women have to be perfect. Anita Hill had no reason to disparage Thomas so her assertions seemed to be valid. There is something inherently wrong when the double standard is still alive and well.

    June 1, 2009 at 4:10 pm |
  140. Jerry Jacksonville, Fl.

    No Jack, stupid people need to read the entire text of what she said rather than just a few words. It amazes me that we have so many stupid people that listen to idiots like Limbaugh, Newt and Coulter and think what they say is the gospel.

    June 1, 2009 at 4:10 pm |
  141. TJ

    First, I will agree that I am pleased that other Republican Senators are avoiding Limbaugh and Gingrich, those two are what's wrong with the Republican party. To answer the question, no I do not believe that these comments will harm Sotomayors chances. Though the Republicans are not using the same language and Limbaugh, they are still going to try to get in the way and do anything they can to stop any sort of policy President Obama wishes to implement. The sooner everybody can reach across the aisle with a handshake instead of sticking their tongues out at each other, we can start really getting some things done.

    June 1, 2009 at 4:10 pm |
  142. Pete Desrochers

    Rush Limbaugh, despite his red, white and blue banner waving is certainly no patriot. In what other country could someone go on national media and publivcly state he hopes a Sureme Court Justice member fails...and that its President fails?? In most countries that would be considered treason. Limbaugh and others like Newt Gingrich should be glad the U.S. It isn't patriotic to hope the country's leaders fail so they can have their own party agendas back.

    As for Sotomayer, of course her perspective will likely be better on the Supreme Court than a white man...we've got lots of white men there already. To call her racist is absurd. And by the way, I'm white and male, with a bit of a bent to the right wing myself.

    June 1, 2009 at 4:11 pm |
  143. Frances, Alabama

    If it disqualifies her, then Judge Alito should be impeached and removed from the court since he made basically the same statement about how his heritage would make him a better judge. Oh, yeah, and George H. W. Bush said Judge Thomas would be empathetic, so I guess he should go too.

    Why doesn't the 'news' media play the full statement in context and not just keep repeating only the part the GOPers selected to be mouth-foaming irate about.

    June 1, 2009 at 4:12 pm |
  144. Geri - Mead, OK

    I'm a white woman and I agree with Ms. Sotomayor. I hope her life experiences do help her to make better decisions than a white male in the same position. Our unique personal experiences are suppose to help each of us make betted decisions regardless of gender and nationality. Hey you white males who are suppose to be all knowing and wise, financially you recently not only broke the United States but you've broken the world and, you really don't know what to do about it. You were so indoctrinated into archaic economic principles and policies you didin't even see the eonomic meltdown occurring before your own eyes so filled they were by your hubris and greed. Regarding everything else it's apparent you have pretty much fallen on your faces as well, education and outsourcing the wealth of a nation are two areas as an example. You should hang your heads in shame. Now the future of this country is anybody's guess. Give Sotomayor a chance.

    June 1, 2009 at 4:12 pm |
  145. S Tan

    Sotomayor compared a "wise Latino woman" with a "white man without the same kind of experience" - not a "wise white man". I don't think for a moment that she was saying that all Latinas were wise and white men were not. Let's read the saying in context, and with proper grammatical understanding!

    June 1, 2009 at 4:12 pm |
  146. Anna

    I do not think so. Repubolicans would object to any nomination even if Obama would name Jesus to the supreme court.

    June 1, 2009 at 4:13 pm |
  147. Rebecca in SC

    Only if the media continue pushing the talking point and ignoring the context of the remark.

    June 1, 2009 at 4:16 pm |
  148. Sly, Alpena, Mi

    I feel as an African American, her comment or statement was right on target. How can a white male make any judgments on anything if they never lived the experience she lived?

    June 1, 2009 at 4:16 pm |
  149. larry florida

    NO, only because she qualified it with "who hadn't lived that life"

    If Alito had stated "I don't think a minority from the South Bronx would understand life in the Hamptons as well as a white male who grew up on Long Island" would we have the same hoopla?

    June 1, 2009 at 4:17 pm |
  150. KarenB, centralFlorida

    It should be enough, but it probably won't. We know how "the wind blows"...

    June 1, 2009 at 4:17 pm |
  151. andyz Lynn, MA

    The good judge was, of course, comparing Latina women with the male, NeoCon, far right (standing to the right of Atilla the Hun) Republican "Uber Alles" Party. Comparing Latina women with the two-headed, Republican, attack beast, Cheney/Rush a.k.a. "white male"; I do agree wholeheartedly with the Supreme Court Nominee.

    June 1, 2009 at 4:18 pm |
  152. Martin in Shoreline, WA

    Probably not, but it certainly should be. If a white man had said he could make better decisions than a Puerto Rican woman, you can rest assured his career would be over. La Raza and NOW would be all over it. We have a black President now. It is time to end the double standard.

    Racism is not limited to white people, and sexism is not limited to men. Both heinous thought processes are about feeling you are superior to others. Replacing discrimination against blacks and women with discrimination against whites and men; is surely not the result the good Dr. King was aiming for.

    June 1, 2009 at 4:18 pm |
  153. Mike of Hot Springs.

    Of course not but what about the comments she has not made. Nobody is noting that she will be the sixth Catholic on the court. Appears to me that Obama has doomed Roe V. Wade.

    June 1, 2009 at 4:19 pm |
  154. nelson

    Jack, I doubt it.. although if a white male said it, it would! double
    std here...

    June 1, 2009 at 4:19 pm |
  155. Meg from Troy, Ohio

    There's nothing wrong with what she said. Any high school graduate, who can read on the 12th grade level, should be able to understand her point–that her background, and in fact everyone's background, gives us a specific viewpoint to use in making our decisions. This is a bunch of desperate white men trying to make a mountain out of a molehill.

    June 1, 2009 at 4:19 pm |
  156. Pablo in Tejas

    Yes, if continually taken out of context by CNN, ABC, CBS, and Fox- as they have been for the past 10 days.
    Why can't you guys take the time to give the complete context of the remarks as they do on NBC and MSNBC? What? It's not sensational enough for you?
    If CNN did not waste so much time on "cutsie" news stories that aren't worth the time it takes to run them, maybe you could do some serious tele-journalism. What with newspapers dying left and right we could use more substance and less cute.

    Arlington Texas

    June 1, 2009 at 4:20 pm |
  157. Theresa from MO

    No "wise" woman, Latino or otherwise, should make a blanket comment like she made! That would be like saying " an orange female horse would more often than not be able to run faster than a purple male horse". But, in answer to your question, Jack, I don't believe it will hurt her chances for nomination. After all, this nation elected a president who condones killing babies- that fact tells us that this nation is willing to accept anything.

    June 1, 2009 at 4:21 pm |
  158. j/NJ

    Will Sonia Sotomayor’s comment about “a Latina woman vs. a white man” be enough to derail her Supreme Court nomination?

    This question would not be relevant were it not for a highly bureaucratized, puritanical society...the dogged scrutiny that accompanies every word and phrase not to mention a myriad of distorted conclusions, are indicative of a dysfunctional political system in arguable decline...while Obama could have appointed a more reliably progressive judge, Sonia Sotomayor will be confirmed despite the raucous fallout by moralists and federalists on the right...on the other hand if republicans search long enough they might uncover a past sexual indiscretion (the content or context doesn't matter) which of course will put this nominee's confirmation in serious jeopardy like no other impropriety or indiscretion can...

    June 1, 2009 at 4:21 pm |
  159. george

    Guess the first question that I would ask is: Has anyone proved that she was wrong yet? My second question would be: Should we maybe opt for Ann Coulter, Rush Linbaugh, or "The Newt" who always seem to be saying things that are really "off the wall", and in most cases have always been proven wrong even before they say them. Parsing words about who says what doesn't mean anything other than to bring us to more questions like this.

    June 1, 2009 at 4:22 pm |
  160. Whittier

    This another of the scores of red herring issues the RNC nattering nabobs of negativism throw out to see if the Press will pay attention. The kindest thing CNN can do is ignore them ... maybe they'll go home.

    June 1, 2009 at 4:23 pm |
  161. James in TN

    Since when was honesty a bad thing?

    June 1, 2009 at 4:23 pm |
  162. bob from Cleveland

    The GOP(Get Out of POlitics) are grasping at straws with this. They have to go back to 2001 a\to find a hiccup in Sotomayor's career she must be the strongest candidate for Justice in the last twenty years.

    Get over yourselves and muzzle the old dog Rush. YOu need to rethink your DINOSAUR planks and enbrace the USA of this generation. If not like the Dinosaur you will be only mentioned in history books as an ancient philosphy.

    June 1, 2009 at 4:25 pm |
  163. Ed Tant in Athens, GA

    Her comment should not and will not derail her nomination, but the comments of such GOP stalwarts as Rush Limbaugh and Newt Gingrich will definitely show that the Republican Party already is a derailed trainwreck.

    June 1, 2009 at 4:26 pm |
  164. Nancy-Lincoln, NE

    It will not be enough to derail her nomination nor should it be. Nobody seems to be focusing on the first part of her statement which was that she "hoped" the wise Latina would reach a better conclusion. There was no need for anyone to apologize for what she said. If this is the worst thing anyone has on her, the confirmation should be easy sailing.

    June 1, 2009 at 4:27 pm |
  165. Carol Zucker

    They are not. The Judge did not say how she would rule in a case. The background of all Judges in some fashion affects their view of life not to mention their approach to the issues they encounter on the bench. If not, there would be no need for a confirmation fight and no need for dissents from majority opinions in the appellate or supreme courts. Judge Sotomayor has ruled on both sides, to the extent they exist.

    Carol Zucker
    Las Vegas, Nevada

    June 1, 2009 at 4:27 pm |
  166. Will C., New Orleans

    It's enough for Republicans to derail the nomination. They're platform is to derail anything the Democrats do. The real question is, is it enough for the Senate to not confirm her? I believe there's a process called "confirmation hearings" where snippets of past quotes can be fully addressed before congress instead of being pre-judged by the Limbaugh Party.

    June 1, 2009 at 4:28 pm |
  167. BJ, Columbus, GA

    I hope not. If each of us were held accountable for mispoken words, we would all be fired from our jobs. If those words were part of our resumes, we would never get a job. Bygones are bygones. Let it go. She's a good woman.

    June 1, 2009 at 4:29 pm |
  168. Susan Avery

    Yes, I think her comments will (or should) derail her nomination. Any judge on the Supreme Court should not let any life experience effect his/her decisions. This is law. A Supreme Court Judge should rule to the exact letter of the law, not on their life experiences. If it's not in the Constitution then vote against it, if it is in the Constitution then the judge has to support it no matter if their "life experiences" agree or not with the law.

    June 1, 2009 at 4:30 pm |
  169. Carl D.

    If it was up to me, it would be enough to derail her nomination. How does it sound to most of the American people to have that statement coming out of a White mans mouth, if that happened, i"am sure Latinos everywhere would be upset.
    Carl in Illinois

    June 1, 2009 at 4:30 pm |
  170. Teri K. in North Florida

    No, it should not and will not. If Republicans keep this smear campaign up, they will find themselves losing even more seats in the next election. They are turning from the party of NO into the party of 'divided we fail', and hate is the lowest common denominator (least useful, least advanced and most basic, least sophisticated level of taste, sensibility, or opinion).

    June 1, 2009 at 4:31 pm |
  171. oz Gig Harbor WA

    If Judge Sotomayor were a radio talk show host her comments would be typical of an "easy-listening" program. When comments such as those made by Imus and Limbaugh still allow them access to public voice, the words used by Sotomayor seem almost too tame. Come-on girl, let us know how you really feel!

    June 1, 2009 at 4:31 pm |
  172. Jay in Texas

    No, speaking her honest beliefs should not derail her confirmation and I don't think it will. I belief it would have been much better, however, if President Obama had nominated one of the two gay female judges on his list to fill this vacancy. I'd have loved to hear Limbaugh and the Republicans rant and rave about that !
    Brownwood, Texas

    June 1, 2009 at 4:32 pm |
  173. Pugas-AZ

    Let's leave the "Latina" out of it. How about American women pehaps making better choices based on their experience. I don't believe it's a show stopper but it has turned many heads. She will probably make it but will be highly monitored on her decision making.

    June 1, 2009 at 4:32 pm |
  174. carla

    No, are these people children all I here is they did it to us. Are the republicans for real? Is this the people we trust with our country. I won't trust them with my children he did it first. Yeah right!!! These are leaders?

    June 1, 2009 at 4:32 pm |
  175. Michael Sullivan from Lafayette, California

    Jack - I agree with Sonia Sotomayor's comment - and that being said, I
    don't think this comment nor any of her other comments will derail her Supreme Court nomination - I would imagine Bush's recent nominees to
    the Supreme Court had their verbal peccadillos as well, but they were
    confirmed - oh, that's right, the Republicans are the ones who try to dig up dirt on worthy people, if they're nominated by the other party.

    June 1, 2009 at 4:33 pm |
  176. Jane - WI

    Ms. Sotomayor' comment was very insensitive and not very politically correct. She will be confirmed because Democrats rule Washington and won't vote against one of their own. However, Republicans should give her a tough grilliing. Republicans should treat Ms. Sotomayor the same way that Democrats and Barack Obama treated the highly qualified Supreme Court nominees of George Bush. As I recall, Barack Obama voted against both of them simply because he did not agree with them politically. I also recall that Democrats filibustered Miguel Estrada (a highly qualified Hispanic with a "compelling life story") for 2 years until he finally withdrew his name for confirmation to the DC Circuit. Why weren't Democrats concerned then about how Hispanics would react to their shameful treatment of a fellow Hispanic?

    June 1, 2009 at 4:33 pm |
  177. Scott Stodden

    Jack I beleive the Republicans will do whatever they can to rake this woman's name and character through the mud, this is what Republican's do over one little comment. I do not beleive at all when Ms Sotomayor said that her "as a wise Latina woman with her experience could come to a better conclusion than a white male" is racist. Jack what if its true? What if she could come to a better conclusion with her experience and as a Latina woman than a white man? Maybe its true, maybe not but its not a racist comment, its just her opinion. I think if the Republicans vote against her confirmation they would for sure be in jeopordy of losing the Hispanic vote for good. Republicans will make her look bad over one comment but she will be confirmed as Supreme Court Justice, which she should be and thats not only my opinion.

    Scott Stodden (Freeport, IL)

    June 1, 2009 at 4:34 pm |
  178. Alexandra Thayer

    Good grief! Of course our life experiences affect how we view things. In fact, Justice Alito said this at great length in his confirmation hearings before the Senate in January 2006, see below. Anyone who reads the whole of what Judge Sotomayor said realizes what she said isn't any different than what Justice Alito testified to which was: "...when a case comes before me involving, let's say, someone who is an immigrant - and we get an awful lot of immigration cases and naturalization cases - I can't help but think of my own ancestors, because it wasn't that long ago when they were in that position.
    "And so it's my job to apply the law. It's not my job to change the law or to bend the law to achieve any result.
    "But when I look at those cases, I have to say to myself, and I do say to myself, "You know, this could be your grandfather, this could be your grandmother. They were not citizens at one time, and they were people who came to this country."
    "When I have cases involving children, I can't help but think of my own children and think about my children being treated in the way that children may be treated in the case that's before me.
    "And that goes down the line. When I get a case about discrimination, I have to think about people in my own family who suffered discrimination because of their ethnic background or because of religion or because of gender. And I do take that into account. When I have a case involving someone who's been subjected to discrimination because of disability, I have to think of people who I've known and admire very greatly who've had disabilities, and I've watched them struggle to overcome the barriers that society puts up often just because it doesn't think of what it's doing - the barriers that it puts up to them.
    "So those are some of the experiences that have shaped me as a person." These sentiments didn't raise any negative response from Gingrich, Limbaugh, OR Jack Cafferty when Samuel Alito was the nominee!

    June 1, 2009 at 4:35 pm |
  179. Ronald Holst

    Jack If that is enough to derail her nomination there every Republican that demanded that a fence to be built on our southern border or and every senator that insists that marriage is just between a man and woman , Why Political crap I am so sick of it On both sides .
    First I guess The GOP Is so full Of crap it is no difference than any one who will sit in a church and come out and preach about the Evil On anything but then support torture that this government has partaken in .
    Because They are scared Rabbits like out Last VP.

    Ron Holst
    San Antonio. TX

    June 1, 2009 at 4:36 pm |
  180. Thom Richer

    With this Congress' mentality it would take much less to do so.

    Thom Richer
    Negaunee, MI

    June 1, 2009 at 4:36 pm |
  181. Dennis North Carolina


    June 1, 2009 at 4:37 pm |
  182. A W Garland Sr

    Judges don't get a re-take.

    As for Republicans objecting, they appear to be perfect gentleman, compared to the verbage used by Democratson Alito and Roberts.

    Oh! How soon yea forget.

    June 1, 2009 at 4:38 pm |
  183. Mary

    NO, Obama could have nominated Jesus and they still would have complaint...

    Don't buy it America..

    June 1, 2009 at 4:39 pm |
  184. Mark

    No. Her record should derail her nomination if it isn't what it appears to be, not her comments. However, unlike what many in the media and the left are saying, her comments shouldn't be dismissed so quickly. In a country where equality was fought for she should face the same scrutiny over her comments as a (wait for it) white male would. A white male would quickly be labeled a racist or bigot without so much of a thought to the context of the quote. Lets not go to the other extreme and dismiss her quote simply because she's a minority. She should be forced to explain as we would force a white male to explain.

    June 1, 2009 at 4:39 pm |
  185. Christine from Edmeston, New York

    If that statement typifies other opinions that Sotomayor has expressed throughout her career, then it most certainly should be enough to derail her nomination to the Court. But should any of us be so harshly judged on account of one isolated remark, especially one not typical of our opinions? Our oversensitivity to out-of-context hot-button remarks has gotten completely out of control. Just ask Don Imus. Even the sincerest of apologies couldn't save his job. Please, let's find out what Sotomayor is really all about.

    June 1, 2009 at 4:40 pm |
  186. Mark

    No. Her record should derail her nomination if it isn’t what it appears to be, not her comments. However, unlike what many in the media and the left are saying, her comments shouldn’t be dismissed so quickly. In a country where equality was fought for she should face the same scrutiny over her comments as a (wait for it) white male would. A white male would quickly be labeled a racist or bigot without so much of a thought to the context of the quote. Lets not go to the other extreme and dismiss her quote simply because she’s a minority. She should be forced to explain as we would force a white male to explain.

    Cape Coral, Florida

    June 1, 2009 at 4:40 pm |
  187. katybs

    thats racist and any ricist should not be aloud to touch the gov with a ten foot pole

    June 1, 2009 at 4:41 pm |
  188. Ron from Pennsylvania

    The GOP and the media, including CNN, are making much ado about nothing. One sentence, taken out of context, versus the hundreds of cases she has ruled on sure isn't balanced reporting and certainly isn't a smart objection by the 'loyal opposition'. Most of the race-baiting pundits and talk show hosts haven't even read the entire speech the line was lifted from let alone look at her actual record. Typical right wing blather and, unfortunately, too typical of the controversy seeking media as well.

    June 1, 2009 at 4:41 pm |
  189. Elisha

    You know as a woman of color, I am so sick and tired of people (the media) sustaining an atmosphere of intolerance and hate. The media loves to take statements out of context and fostering hate. LAY OFF SHE'S HUMAN!!! She said what she said because it's true, a white man will NEVER know what it is like to be a poor minority in this country! What she didn't say is that being a poor minority would give a free ride in her court.

    June 1, 2009 at 4:43 pm |
  190. Leslie in Seattle, WA

    I hope she is derailed. I'm a third generation Japanese-American woman. I now formally reject my hyphenated-American status. This is much a condemnation of Sotomayor, as it is a public apology to my white boyfriend. Technically he isn't white. He is a mutt. He has substantial Native American blood in his veins, but not enough for free money.

    My boyfriend complained about how he was discriminated against when he applied for Pell grants. I assumed there was another reason he was denied. He told me of men with six years experience passed over for promotion at work, in favor of women with six and nine months experience. I dismissed it as so much whining from a "privileged" white man. There were times I thought of leaving him, due to things he said that I found offensive.

    I now see that he was absolutely correct. Sotomayor clearly thinks she is superior to white men as both a woman and a Latina. Having a superiority complex is what sexism and racism is all about. She is clearly guilty of feeling superior to others. If Sotomayor is appointed, America takes a step backwards. We are telling the world that discrimination against minorities and women is criminal; but discrimination against whites and men is perfectly acceptable.

    June 1, 2009 at 4:43 pm |
  191. Roland(St George,UT)

    I don't know if that one comment is enough. A Supreme Court nomination is very serious business. The Republicans have made a bad name for themselves lately but they are still our elected officials and they need to stand up and be heard, now more than ever. This, especially, is not the time for them to cave in to media pressure or public opinion (which is skewed) and waffle suddenly from the Party of No to the Party of Yes just to try and win votes or appease a voter demographic . Yes, Ms. Sotomayer does appear to be a highly qualified jurist, but she still needs to be fully vetted in her confirmation hearing just like any other candidate, including explaining this statement (which, by the way, was made some 8 yrs ago). As I would expect with reviewing any Supreme Court Nominee, I hope we will be allowed to see Ms Sotomayer's life and history revealed as an open book. If there is anything there that seems questionable then we need to call our elected Representatives and let them know how we feel. This is nothing racist, chauvinist or personally prejudiced against Ms Sotomayer. It's how our government works.
    (Roland/St George, UT)

    June 1, 2009 at 4:46 pm |
  192. Brian Riback - Waldwick, NJ

    I think Republicans should keep their mouths shut if they know what's good for them. Honestly, enough already! They sound like little children complaining. Her comments were NOT racist!

    June 1, 2009 at 4:48 pm |
  193. Jim from Chicago

    If everybody who made an unfortunate comment or one that was misconstrued, as this one was, were disqualified from holding a position or authority, 99% of us would be out of work. See you at the unemployment office, Jack.

    June 1, 2009 at 4:48 pm |
  194. Mike in NYC

    An apology to White men would help smooth things over, considering that the institutions that made her education possible were established by said relics of racist patriarchy.

    Think about it, Smiley.

    June 1, 2009 at 4:49 pm |
  195. Jack - Lancaster, OH


    It is the duty of the system to evaluate Sotomayer. It is also fine and fair that the candidate be moderated, even highly moderated in order to ascertain the nature, disposition, attitude etc. I have been highly moderated and it is okay, it is making me a better participant in public and pollitical issues. Jack, I await the process and outcome of this appointment.

    June 1, 2009 at 4:49 pm |
  196. Manny From Canton Ohio.


    I know that she is going to be confirmed. The nice thing about Sotomayor's debate and name calling by the GOP is that the GOP is giving Democratic candidates in Hispanic areas excellent commercial sound bites for the 2010 and 2012 election campaign commercials. They are really going to look stupid when those commercials loop on youtube.

    June 1, 2009 at 4:49 pm |
  197. Dennis in Orlando, FL

    Rush Limbaugh and other conservative mouthpieces on the radio and FOX say remarks that are troubling and inappropriate all the time, yet they never get called out by Republicans. After all of the crap and insults minorites have put up with, this little piece of comment will not harm her in any way. McCain lost the Hispanic vote to President Obama 67% to 31%. Hispanics are one of the fasting growing demographic groups in the country. You mean to tell me that the Republicans are going to try not to seat a HIGHLY QUALIFIED Hispanic Woman to the highest court in the land because of what Limbaugh, Tancredo, Gingrich and a host of other conservative mouth pieces say?? Are you serious? I guess they like losin'.

    June 1, 2009 at 4:50 pm |
  198. Horn Lake, MS

    She is a liberal democrat. Even though the libs filibustered another hispanic appointment to a federal judgeship 7 times because of racism, the libs (racist as they are, trying to keep black and hispanic on the public dole) will not eat one of their own and republicans are too responsible to upholding the spirit of the constitution and the law to filibuster this horrid appointment.

    June 1, 2009 at 4:50 pm |
  199. Ed

    They should derail it!! Anyone who has heard what came out of her mouth in the past can only come to the conclusion that she (this does not apply to Liberals)obviously made some statements that border on racism!

    June 1, 2009 at 4:51 pm |
  200. boxer girl in iowa

    She should have left out the words Latina, and white. I thought only white people were considered racist. I think that she'll be o.k. though. She seems qualified and intelligent enough for the Supreme Court.

    June 1, 2009 at 4:52 pm |
  201. Karen, Nashville

    I doubt it will be, but much as I would like to see a more diverse Supreme Court, I think it should be. This was more than careless wording. If she is confirmed, it will be evidence that Hispanic women (or at least this one) are held to lower standards than other jurists.

    June 1, 2009 at 4:54 pm |
  202. rose ann mahnke

    Yes, I do.

    June 1, 2009 at 4:56 pm |
  203. Fred A. Brechbiel Jr.

    She'll be fine as long as she thinks at least a little before she speaks. If not, she'll be disgraced into pulling herself out of the consideration assuming she has the empathy about the country that everyone claims she has (supporters and non-supporters)

    June 1, 2009 at 4:57 pm |
  204. Adam Thousand Oaks, CA

    No chance. She will be confirmed. The Republicans know this was a political appointment that they cannot really oppose without alienating 2 important classes of people. It was a brilliant political move by the President.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:00 pm |
  205. Ben in Maryland

    Absolutely not. There was nothing in the comment that should be interpreted as racist. For 233 years, the Court was led by rich white men. They made some very poor decisions (remember Dred Scott?). Many of their decisions favored the rich and priveleged over the poor and middle class. So when someone comes out of the projects and becomes a judge, he or she, Latin or white or black or Asian, will see both sides better than a priveleged rich guy. Remember George HW Bush's questio: what's take home pay?

    June 1, 2009 at 5:00 pm |
  206. Carol in Durham Maine

    What a crock. Even Alito recognized that his personal history comes into play in weighing decisions.

    Seventeen years experience, with a reputation of being balanced and fair ( unlike Fox news) and a single ole comment and the media nation comes unglued.

    If a white male said this, no one would blink an eye. Once again a double standard. And the media enable the negative hype because apparrantely they can't find anything constructive to say.

    Ridiculos. Who hasn't said something they regretted. How about you Cafferty?

    June 1, 2009 at 5:02 pm |
  207. frankie

    I just heard a guest on your own show (around 4:50) say that there is a split between Obama and Sotomayer because he felt the need to defend her comment and she didn't. Doesn't this prove how silly the whole thing is? She is brilliant and very experienced for the job ahead, enough said.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:02 pm |
  208. Diana

    Of course Republican senators are "voicing" concerns. They've got the right-wing hate machine clawing at their backs and are facing extinction if they vote against the nomination of this absolutely qualified and distinguished Latina. Ms. Sotomayor has nothing to apologize for, especially to a group of ethically challenged professional gasbags in the U.S. Senate. This whole issue is a brouhaha created by the anti-everything-Obama crowd of fundraisers. I predict that the compelling Ms. Sotomayor will score a knockout in less than three rounds in the arena of the confirmation hearings. She is definitely the crowd favorite. And the loser is: the GOP

    June 1, 2009 at 5:03 pm |
  209. Jason, Koloa, HI

    No, not if this is the only questionable comment. One comment, taken out of context and pounded repeatedly over and over by a dead political party should not be more important than a person's life's work. There needs to be some legitimate, concrete reason to stop this nomination and if there was don't you think it would have surfaced by now?

    June 1, 2009 at 5:03 pm |
  210. Janice from Collingswood NJ

    Did Bush's comments derail his nomination.......twice? Give me a break. If you take everybody's comments out of context, we'd all be better off deaf and dumb. Judge her on the totality of her character and work.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:03 pm |
  211. vern-anaheim,ca

    she will be confirmed and i think some republicans will vote for her.senator sessions and others have said the extreem right religous wing of the republican party tone down their racists remarks as they know those remarks will hurt the party in future elections especialy among hispanics

    June 1, 2009 at 5:04 pm |
  212. JB

    Jack – This is a prime example of people needing to do their homework and reading the text of her comments before opening their mouth. The republicans remind me of Barney Fife- there was a reason Andy had him keep the bullet in his pocket.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:04 pm |
  213. Matt-Los Angeles

    No, it will not derail her. Everyone knows that liberals are allowed to make any statement they want about race. If she were a republican appointee, her nomination would have been withdrawn about a week ago.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:06 pm |
  214. A. Bickle

    Our Supreme court needs to be as diverse as our country, not filled with old white males, the world has changed a lot since the 50's thru the new millenium and is still changing today. Older white citizens are some of the most prejudice people out there, maybe we need to restructure our court system, god knows we need to do it with our criminal justice system.
    Arlington, Texas

    June 1, 2009 at 5:06 pm |
  215. Mari, Salt Lake City, Utah

    No, Jack, she is merely telling the truth. Its fact that each of us has experiences, an ethnicity, heritage, etc., that makes us who we are. She is saying "my experience & ethnicity makes me a good judge." So? That's like saying "my education, my travels makes me a better person." Fine. How is that elitist or worse..... racist?!

    My experience as a Cuban refugee, arriving here at age 8 alone with only my little sister of 6, made me far more mature than my class mates in parochial school who had never been away from the comfort of home. That experience in 1962, has formed who I am today as a woman of 55.

    Having been made fun of because of my accent, made me stronger and more compassionate. Having to learn a new language, English, fast, has taught me that I can do anything! Having to withstand taunts that I was a "n" because of my dark Caribbean tan, has made me to grow into a very empathetic, caring adult. An adult that works hard to treat everyone with respect and dignity. So IF all of this, makes me a racist, because my experience is far richer, more diverse than a white woman who grew up in the suburbs never having to be without her family or her roots...... then so be it.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:07 pm |
  216. Thomas

    Speaking before thinking hasn't seemed to have been a problem in the past, just look at Joe Biden and his current position of employment.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:07 pm |
  217. Brian -Va Beach, VA

    Unless the truth hurts.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:07 pm |
  218. LDR in Central Texas

    No. And they shouldn't. Kinda hard when she simply states a truth via an EIGHT PAGE speech. And alotta white men should feel so deeply.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:08 pm |
  219. Arrant

    How many years will it take before we look back at this period in history with the same disbelief as the Salem Witch Trials, The Red Scare, Civil Rights Movement etc. When will we collectivly come to our senses and realize how divided a country we have become with little true facts to point at? This is news? Is this what passes for journalism? No and no, its yet another act in a seemingly endless stream of trite BS perpetrated by the media (both liberal and conservative) to sell ads, air time and personalities. Obama's date...I wonder if Lincoln would have caught this much crap if Booth never ruined his night a Ford's Theatre. Sotomayor’s comments..ill advised but not the vitriol it's been labeled as. What are all the media outlets going to do once people stop drinking this derisive kool aid and end this petty bickering and start being rational citizens again. BTW, I am a Republican and embarrassed by both sides of the aisle.

    Minneapolis MN

    June 1, 2009 at 5:08 pm |
  220. jc smoots in tulsa

    Why in the world should such a simple statement of fact be a major impediment to this woman job application? Yes, it's the supreme court. Yes, it sets the tone for much of the country's judicial policies. Is it bad to have someone with an experience zone larger than a bunch of old rich white guys? Of course not. The supreme court's level of connection to the people has been worse than any other leadership group, outside of congress anyway. Having a real person in there could only be good.

    from an old fat white guy

    June 1, 2009 at 5:09 pm |
  221. G. Moore

    So, how do you know they used the taxpayers money?? Didn't the Obama's have money before being elected by the people?

    Aren't we suppose to be putting money back into the economy?

    Don't we have other things to worry about?

    Aren't the Obama's helping to doing their part to keep the economy going by spending some of (probably their own) money?? Not to mention spending some quality time with each other and re leaving some of the stress that WE THE PEOPLE have put on him and the rest of the country???

    Would you like the job of serving them on that date night....might have gotten a good tip and paid some bills.......
    Geezzz...get a Life!!

    June 1, 2009 at 5:10 pm |
  222. John, Fort Collins,CO

    I think Sonia Sotomayor just made a small slip of the tongue in her 2001 remarks. She probably meant to say " a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white mule" - thinking of guys like Rush Limbaugh and Newt Gingrich. She should be a slam dunk for the Supreme Court.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:10 pm |
  223. Marian Martell

    That would be ridiculous! A brilliant and qualified candidate refused because of one comment made more than 10 years ago? Obviously that means that she virtually never says or does anything wrong! IMO it makes her all the more qualified!

    June 1, 2009 at 5:10 pm |
  224. Al from SoCal

    no it's not enough to be derailed her nomination Republicans can't do anything anyway. the only thing it's going to derail is the call for Nancy Pelosi's to step down as speaker. this brilliant political move by Obama to redirect the media's attention from Nancy Pelosi and the torture memos to Sonia Sotomayor’s nomination so far appears to be a cure all.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:11 pm |

    No, Sotomayor seems to be a credit to Clarence Thomas, watching his porn movies etc. I can't believe the religious right Republicans would have anything to do with Thomas. Also, what about Scalia and his smart mouth. He shouldn't be on the Court, he is so far to the right.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:11 pm |
  226. Ken

    Once said, you can't take it back. That is a racist/sexist comment as statement, and if the sex and genders were flip-flopped, the man would be crucified. Of course, she's what Obama wants and Obama gets what he wants when he wants it now.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:11 pm |
  227. anderson n carolina

    Jack; As a whole the American people know what she meant by this remark...see we seem to be alot smarter than given credit for. However since the Senate will be voting on her and they consist of mostly old white men who haven't a clue, they will no doubt make a big deal out of this.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:11 pm |
  228. Diane from Intervale NH

    The right-wing and its willing stenographers decided – even before Judge Sotomayor's name was put into play – to object to any nominee President Obama put forward.

    The comment about a Latina's superiority to a white male is a mere bagatelle. The Limbaugh/Gingrich faction is following a pre-written script: they'd find an objection to any nominee – Latina or otherwise.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:11 pm |
  229. Ann from Charleston, S.C.

    What makes white men think that their life experiences and values don’t influence their conclusions? Do white men think that their point of view is universal?

    I expect Judge Sotomayor will have an opportunity to enlighten the public on the meaning of her statement during her confirmation hearing. I only hope that our senators will use the richness of their experience to make a wise decision.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:11 pm |
  230. Barb from Hazel Crest, IL

    No, the comments are not enough. If you read the whole speech and look at the forum she was using it in. It is not racist.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:11 pm |
  231. Ken in NC

    NO it isn't enough to derail her nomination but it is enough for “Not So Bright” people to go SUPER STUPID on.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:12 pm |
  232. Carolyn

    I sorely wish that when the President Obama's choice for Supreme Court Justice is discussed in the media, that they put her comments in context. Judge for yourself what she meant in her comments

    Judge Sotomayor stated in her speech in 2001:

    "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."

    She also sated in the same speech:

    "Each day on the bench I learn something new about the judicial process and about being a professional Latina woman in a world that sometimes looks at me with suspicion. 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."

    June 1, 2009 at 5:12 pm |
  233. John

    This Women should be no where near Politics! we must learn from our past and not allow people like this in power. Any one remember the name HITLER ?

    June 1, 2009 at 5:12 pm |
  234. Chad from Los Angeles, CA

    No. But what would an apology accomplish? She is still going to believe what she said, whether she says sorry or not. She has racial pride, like most people have, which does not make her a racist.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:12 pm |
  235. TomG NE Pa.

    Jack, If O'Bama nominated Jesus Christ the republicans would call him a Left Wing Extremist.. He should ignore the floundering, failing political party.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:13 pm |
  236. Kenny G

    I think rush limbo s coments toward the nominie will let her in

    June 1, 2009 at 5:13 pm |
  237. Suzanne, Cripple Creek

    Only with old white men, Jack!
    I'm already sick of hearing Sotomayor misquoted, even by you, Jack. She did not say "Brown woman better than white man."
    She SAID "I would HOPE...... "
    Well, I would also hope that an experienced brown woman would or could make better decisions affecting many people than some stupid old white guy whose only struggle has been where to spend his money!
    So there!
    Signed: Old White Woman

    June 1, 2009 at 5:13 pm |
  238. Pat , Florida

    There goes the GOP lifting their leg again..

    They need to get over it the GOP would have a problem with whoever President Obama nominates it's not about the person being nominated it's about who's doing the nominating..

    June 1, 2009 at 5:13 pm |
  239. Carolyn

    I sorely wish that when the President Obama's choice for Supreme Court Justice is discussed in the media, that they put her comments in context. Judge for yourself what she meant in her comments

    Judge Sotomayor stated in her speech in 2001:
    "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."

    She also sated in the same speech:

    "Each day on the bench I learn something new about the judicial process and about being a professional Latina woman in a world that sometimes looks at me with suspicion. 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."

    June 1, 2009 at 5:13 pm |
  240. Scott Fulrath

    The record of her activist, anti-american, racist judicial decisions alone should keep her off of the bench.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:13 pm |
  241. Winston Legacy

    There is absolutely nothing wrong with her comment...I'm a republican and I am extremely disappointed in my party. We are finding fault with idiotic subject matter and need to be focused on winning back the American public...We are so lost!

    June 1, 2009 at 5:13 pm |
  242. Chris in San Francisco

    No way, but the ridiculous comments from Gingrich and Limbaugh will further derail the Republican party - if there's even one wheel still on the track now.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:13 pm |
  243. Sam from Chicago


    The problem is that people are taking what she says out of context (just as you did on your show). "...a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male.” is what you said, but you failed to include "a white male who hasn't lived a life". If people look at what was actually said, they would see that Judge Sotomayor was simply saying that she can gain from her experiences...

    -Sam, Chicago, Illinois

    June 1, 2009 at 5:13 pm |
  244. Hans Bosman

    She said:."....."WISE" Latina woman......" and she never mentioned the state of mind of the white men......That to me says it all.....WISE

    June 1, 2009 at 5:13 pm |
  245. Fred Conklin

    To believe that anyone is not influenced by their life experience is naive and disingenous at best.
    BTW does anyone remember Sen. Evan Bayh's remarks about what – different word – black males wanted back in the 60's? That didn't keep him from being a Senator. I'm sure Sen. Graham's attitude is not that far off from Bayh's.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:13 pm |
  246. Jess

    It shouldn't make a difference. That is her perspective and she is free to express her mind. Coming from a different background of the one a white male comes from it is a big difference and that's OK.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:13 pm |
  247. MiMi

    No. All those old white men know damn well what she said is true. They need to just shut up and move over.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:13 pm |
  248. Shawn

    Obama is so popular that he has been able to get pretty much everything he wants so now that republicans have the chance to make some noise about one of his choices, they jumped right on it. Personally i don't think it matters but it will hurt any republican that votes against her since their popularity among woman and Hispanics is so low already. Still wanting to see the NEW republican party, old white man don't change easily.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:13 pm |
  249. Dianne in Athens GA

    The RNC is rapidly becoming extinct...one stupid comment at a time! More power to them!

    June 1, 2009 at 5:13 pm |
  250. Adam

    The simple answer: No.

    The republicans are latching on to this particular statement, pulled out of context, because they know they simply do not have 'a leg to stand on' when it comes to opposing her for other reasons. She is the most experienced candidate for the Supreme Court in decades and they know it.

    Thankfully the republicans in the senate realize that pushing the issue has the possibility of reducing the number of Hispanics that vote republican, an already dramatically shrinking demographic.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:13 pm |
  251. Ben Marshall

    Have we finally come to the point where a factual and historically relevant comment invalidates a prospective appointment to any public office or judicial appointment? What bubkus! It's about time we leave this goofy stuff where it belongs: In the junk heap of ideas currently occupied by the GOP "thinkers".

    June 1, 2009 at 5:14 pm |
  252. Capt Fred

    I guess we'll see if she's as empathetic as everyone seems to think. If there is going to be even the remote possibility of upsetting THAT many white guys, she should pull herself out of the running.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:14 pm |
  253. sue, Morris Plains, NJ

    People need to focus more attention on figuring out what they can actually do for themselves, their communities and their families during this time of serious economic hardship and less attention on disecting every word or nuance made that attempts to make our President and the Democrats look inane!

    June 1, 2009 at 5:14 pm |
  254. Mark

    It is clear that Sonia Sotomeyer was nominated based not on qualifications, rather based on the fact that she is a Hispanic woman. So this comment will not derail her from being confirmed. However, if the tables were turned, and a white man were to say that a Hispanic woman doesn't understand something, well that would certainly be the end of him.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:14 pm |
  255. Michelle Van Dyke

    Hello Jack,
    What ever happened to :" Action speaks louder than words:" It is the reason she is being attacked because they have nothing else on her. Get real people!

    Michelle Van Dyke

    June 1, 2009 at 5:14 pm |
  256. Bryan

    I think there should be another appointee. Someone that is clearly emotionally attached to her opinion cannot be expected to logically and rationally interpret the laws of this country. These must be based on facts and situations, not on a personal feelings, opinions, or agenda.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:14 pm |
  257. sheilamills2182

    Since I have not seen the full text of her comments I cannot answer. Stuff is usually edited down to what is most titillating. However, if we can tolerate Joe Biden's many gaffes surely we can accept one from Ms. Sotomayor.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:14 pm |
  258. JohnBoy111

    The psychotic Republicans want "Justices" with no conscience, Judges like the one in Les Miserables who sentenced a poor man to 10 years in prison for stealing a loaf of bread. The whackos of the right are not loyal Americans.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:14 pm |
  259. Frederick Jones

    Jack, she started out saying "I would like to think" and later added "more often than not" in the actual quote. To me, this also allows for the fact that she might not come to a better conclusion. The statement is not racist at all.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:14 pm |
  260. Zoe

    This is nuts. A comment taken out of context and it has nothing to do with the years of rulings she has done on the bench. This is another example of the GOP beating the drum on some obscure issue that you news people pick up and continue the beat for days. Stop and let the senate do their job of interviewing her and deciding.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:14 pm |
  261. Karen

    Sotomayor's past comment should not make a difference in her confirmation. If legislators have a question about it, ask her in the confirmation hearings. Republicans would be silly to make a mountain out of a mole hill.

    Clare, MI

    June 1, 2009 at 5:14 pm |
  262. John in Los Angeles

    This Women should be nowhere near Politics! we must learn from our past and not allow people like this in power. Any one remember the name HITLER ?

    June 1, 2009 at 5:14 pm |
  263. Joan Berger

    I suggest everyone take a few minutes and read the entire speech/lecture that Judge Sotomayor presented at Berkley- I did. I missed the "controvershel" comment the first time through because it made sense when taken in context. Everyone makes decisions based on their backgrounds, experiences, moral compass and the laws of the land. Don't see what the big deal is!

    June 1, 2009 at 5:14 pm |
  264. david

    Jack, be serious, how can any nominee be turned down with the current situation in Washington? It's just another way for both parties and their supporters to vent their frustrations.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:14 pm |
  265. Roland(St George,UT)

    If the Republicans slam her through confirmation without an adequate vetting just because they want to win the Hispanic vote, I will have less respect for them than I do now. The Republicans have made a bad name for themselves lately but a Supreme Court nomination is very serious business and this is not the time for them to cave in to media pressure or public opinion and waffle suddenly from the Party of No to the Party of Yes just to try and win votes or appease a voter demographic. I personally like Ms Sotomayer but I expect her to be fully vetted during her confirmation hearing just like any other nominee would, including a full examination of her statements of 8 years ago and an explanation from her about how she might interpret the law differently than a white male.
    (Roland/St George, UT)

    June 1, 2009 at 5:14 pm |
  266. Mandy

    This is absurd! I truly hope such a statement would not prevent Ms. Sotomayor from receiving her rightful place in court. First off, the fact that Republicans are bringing up statements said by Sotomayor NINE YEARS AGO show how desperate they are to bring down Democratic rule. If they had brains, they'd shut their mouths so they won't look racist come election time next year and in 2012. Also, reverse racism does not exist! The Latinos, Asians, Blacks, etc. have been living under a White dominated society for centuries. Put some more diverse people in government, and then we'll talk.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:14 pm |
  267. Bob - Rosenberg, TX

    I hope not. Whom among us has not made a comment that could be looked at in more than one way. The difference is I'm not in the public eye and she is.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:14 pm |
  268. matt.benzor san bernardino,ca

    "Hey" jack what about judge Alito who protested against hispanic's at princeton."Why" would a supreme court justice protest against hispanic's when most likely he will have a case with a hispanic. nobody seem's to want to ask Mr.Alito why he would do such a thing.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:15 pm |
  269. Carl from San Diego

    No, but in an unpopular view, it was a racist statement. If she had left off "white", then it would not have been debated. However, she did single out and stipulate another race. If she had used any other race, like "black" or "asian" , would it have set off even more of a firestorm? You know that Al or Jesse would be all over her. Why is it when "white" is used in a disparaging way is it not considered racist? I hope she gets the job, but she should be taken to task for what she says, just as anyone else would.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:15 pm |
  270. Andy (Spokane, WA)

    Apparently the GOP has a short memory since they all seem to forget that Samuel Alito said just about the same thing, word for word during his nomination process. About the only thing Sotomayor said that Alito did not say was that she used the phrase "white man" which we all know terrifies the GOP – the party of fat, old, rich white men but nobody else.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:15 pm |
  271. Gary Brown

    No, the Republican pundits are clutching at straws. Following too many failed policies of the Bush administration and few ideas to contribute to the national dialogue, the angry white men are venting their fury on a Latina, cloaking it in accusatory racist terms. We don't see many women or Latinos standing up to object, do we?

    June 1, 2009 at 5:15 pm |
  272. MariaElena

    Sotamayor has no apologies to make but some such will be forthcoming during confirmation hearings as she tries to sooth hurt feelings of the white males who are deciding her fate.

    I like another question better. When was our Supreme Court made up of independents? And is Sotamayor correct in her statement??


    June 1, 2009 at 5:15 pm |
  273. Dee M.

    I don't know for sure but I believe that CNN last week was comparing what Judge S. Sotomayor actually said (the whold sentence) and what has been reported she said (omitting part of the sentence). IF REPORTERS JUST REPORT THE WHOLE TRUTH AND NOT JUST PART, the judge shouldn't have any problem.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:15 pm |
  274. Buster

    Hell no. But Congress will waste a lot of time and money to get there TV time back home. In the end she will get confirmed and we will go on to the next wild crises confronting our brilliant leaders. You will have something to report. Our leaders will have yet another earth shattering problem to solve and the little guy will end up getting screwed. Ain't it wonderful.

    Plymouth MA.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:15 pm |
  275. Johnny Johnson

    Probably not enough to derail her but remember that the voters are mostly white males whom she referred to. Remember how long white males keep the vote from white females .... Remember that the third word in equality is "U".

    June 1, 2009 at 5:15 pm |
  276. Luke from Yonkers NY

    First of all, the right wing hypocrites who happily subscribed to and benefitted from Lee Atwater’s “Southern strategy” of using racist code words and euphemisms to win elections for the past quarter century are the least qualified people on earth to lecture us on racism.

    Secondly, Sotomayor is 100% correct that where you come from does make a difference in the way you judge matters. 150 years of rulings from white male justices supporting slavery, Jim Crow laws and disenfranchisement of women prove the point. If you call them racists, their apologists today will remind you to judge them in the context of their time and place — in other words, their background.

    Finally, those who say that if what she said had been uttered by a white male, it would have evoked outrage on the left, are correct, but they’re still wrong about Sotomayor. White males have an actual history of oppressing other races in this country; Latina females do not. White males who assert their superiority have the baggage of that history to contend with, a history of brutally denying human rights to people based on racist ideology. Sotomayor’s assertion, on the other hand, is simply that her background makes her better informed about the actual impact of decisions on many of the people who must live with their consequences.

    We can have an honest debate about whether that is true, but to equate her statement with racism, in the sense that she would, if given the chance, do to white men what they have done to others, is not only ridiculous (just look at her rulings), but dishonest.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:15 pm |
  277. Stephen

    YES, her words and her opinions, and her past rulings, are enough to derail her nomination.

    Aside from the racial-related comments, and even the videotaped comments shown on CNN where she said the appeals court is where policy is made (however true the practice may be, it seemed she actually believed it SHOULD be made there), there is the case about free speech and the teenage blogger that riles me more, and causes me to believe she is unfit to be a U.S. Supreme Court Justice.

    Sotomayor had ruled against the teen blogger, who (from what I have read in articles about the matter) called school officials 'douchebags' in her online blog. Sotomayor apparently felt the instance would be repeated in the future and wanted to prevent further "disturbance".

    We have FREE SPEECH in America, unfettered and uncut by any law. It is a protected Constitutional right. The Constitution recognizes this *inalienable* right. And Sotomayor rules in such a way that would prohibit or limit speech? I say, "No. She does not need to be a Supreme Court Judge."

    The free speech thing is far bigger than the other two controversies currently attached to her in the news.

    I don't think she'll be confirmed by Congress.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:15 pm |
  278. Paulette,Dallas,PA

    The only correction I would make in Judge Sotomayer's remarks is that she should have said ANY woman rather than just restricting it to Latino.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:15 pm |
  279. John

    Sotomayor's comment–along with her history of bias on the bench–SHOULD derail her appointment to the Supreme Court. A justice should at least PRETEND to be impartial and fair. I doubt any of this will block her confirmation, though. President Obama has presented his choice as the "right thing to do", meaning any opposition is a moral wrong. Comments made by Limbaugh and Gingrich have only made things worse.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:15 pm |
  280. Parrish Jones

    From St. Augustine, FL
    Republicans and others are caught in a fundamentalist trap. Like biblical literalists, they assume the words are obvious and explicit. The constitution is written in language. As soon as one begins talking about it, they may be able to agree more or less what it says, but the question is, "What does it mean today?"

    An independent judge is not a purely objective judge of which there are none. An independent judge is one who is not swayed by special interests or hopefully their own class interest. As Sotomayor suggests in her controversial essay, one's past may very well be a useful grounding for wisdom. Oh, that's what wisdom is—a well ground ed past.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:15 pm |
  281. Nancy in North Bay, Ontario

    During his own confirmation hearing, Clarence Thomas said, "I can walk in the shoes of the people who are affected by what the Court does." So tell me, how is that different from what Sotomayor said?

    June 1, 2009 at 5:15 pm |
  282. Wayne

    The only people I here complaining about this comment are old White Males. Are they worried that" old White Males" will not be in control of the courts.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:15 pm |
  283. Mel Downey from NC

    It sounds to me like there's too many white mails on the court. Sotomayor appears to be a fair and just pick. The opposition, however small, needs something to boost thier image. I just don't think this is where they'll get it.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:15 pm |
  284. Ed

    Absolutely not. Just another chance for a lame Republican circus, with no hope of success.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:15 pm |
  285. ken

    Her comment will not keep her off the bench... but i should! It is extremely racist to assume that because someone is white that they have had an easy life & don't know hard times or haven't experienced prejudice themselves. Not everyone leads a life of privilege, regardless of heritage or color. Obama's legacy is apparantly going to be one of racism from Rev. Wright to Sotomayor.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:16 pm |
  286. Jim

    The confirmation process will tell the tale – are they 'just words' without their immediate context being considered or are they evidence of a deeper philosophical and cultural predisposition that will override her highly acclaimed academic and professional qualifications? Let the process work.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:16 pm |
  287. Abe Doe

    If Rush Limbaugh and pals were on the Senate Judiciary Committe then perhaps. At a time like this a Republical fillibuster would not only be bad PR for the the party, but Latino-Americans would guarantee the end of the Grand Old Party for sure

    June 1, 2009 at 5:16 pm |
  288. JC

    Jack, you didn't read the last part of the quote by Sotomayor. It goes “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.<<<” . Everyone seems intent on ignoring that part because it makes it easier to take what she said out of context and is more inflammatory.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:16 pm |
  289. Patricia - Minnesota

    Talk about taking a snippet out of context. What about her follow up pertaining to equal justice for all races? The Republicans are really grasping at straws which is about all they can do to make their presence known. We know you're out there – stop being ridiculous!

    June 1, 2009 at 5:16 pm |
  290. Alan Peters

    Jack – don't you think the inclusion of the word "wise" when referrring to her Hispanic background and its non-inclusion when referrring to white men makes her statement true? I think any wise person is more likely to make an intelligent person than any person lacking wisdom.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:16 pm |
  291. Dylan from Andover, KS

    Do the Republicans really believe that an elite white male judge could actually be considered unbiased and independent? The crusty white judges that the Republicans seem to want on the Court are so far out of touch with reality that they cannot be seen as anything other than biased because they have never eaten with anything other than a silver spoon.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:16 pm |
  292. Eve - AZ

    It might if CNN does not bother to report on the rest of her speech. Republicans seem content to focus on 1 sentence of that speech rather than try to understand her entire thought process. You too, Jack. Shame on you...

    Eve – AZ

    June 1, 2009 at 5:16 pm |
  293. Dennis, Columbus, Ohio

    If it is then I would love to see the remaining justices resign in protest.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:16 pm |
  294. Bala


    If X-rated accusations laden confirmation hearings of Judge Clarence Thomas did not derail his nomination, I don't see why the current ones should derail Judge Sotomayor's nomination.


    June 1, 2009 at 5:16 pm |
  295. Ed Fisher

    If I said, "a wise white man with the richness of his experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a black female.", would you consider that a racist comment? Would that sound offensive?

    June 1, 2009 at 5:16 pm |
  296. Howard Pennel

    Absolutely not! As usual the unfavorable comments are taken out of context, for statements made many years ago. She should be questioned about anything, however, as required for any Supreme Court Justice; but in my opinion she is a super candidate!

    June 1, 2009 at 5:16 pm |
  297. Mr Dean n Seattle

    the republicans would complain if Obama had selected Jesus to the court.
    can't you just hear them say hes too liberal, he favors the poor..He'd be a poor judge of character,favors the jews...
    No matter what Obama does you can't satisfy the ill informed.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:16 pm |
  298. Marlene

    Shame on CNN for repeating that Sotomayer comment on Latino women hundreds of times a day. CNN, the media, and Republicans, are reducing her career to one solitary soundbite. How unfair! Its like you have to find something to criticize about her, even if its only one statement made several years ago. John King on his Sunday show repeated it several times to most of his guests, like CNN was determined to make a big deal about it. I am sick of it and had to turn off CNN. Give us a break, please and quit beating this statement to the ground.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:16 pm |
  299. Rick

    Hey Jack,

    Nope! Sotomayor has the right to make any comment she wants. That's the great thing about The U.S. It has a amendment which protects people's Freedom of Speech by giving them the right to, through an Amendment, state anything they wish. Also, with many divergent perspective within America from all ethnic/cultural groups, a perspective from an individual with a varied background rather than that already present within the U.S. Supreme Court could only helps to prove that America is a diverse country with many points of view. Your awesome Jack!

    June 1, 2009 at 5:16 pm |
  300. Josh in Georgia

    Her position on thet firefighter case that may well be overturned by the Supreme Court is more troubling. She chose to totally ignore several key issues brought up by the attorneys in her opinon. She has some explaining to do on that and a couple of other things but she's likely to get through.

    June 1, 2009 at 5:16 pm |