Read Between the Lines Chuck; Sotomayor even more questionable

Our new SCOTUS nominee, Sotomayor, has been making her rounds on the Hill meeting with the key players. The issue that seems to have been coming up, and rightfully so, is whether or not Sotomayor is a reverse racist or not.

Does she judge with race in mind? Was the case in Connecticut with the firefighters a example of that? Can you truly be for equality and civil rights if you do not view everyone equally?

All of this erupted when a one of Sotomayor's statements hit the news cycle shortly after her nomination. In 2001 (and the WSJ is reporting that she made the same exact statement in 1994, the judge said:

"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."

(Hmmm. White people can't have rich experiences too? And since when did all of life's experiences help us reach better conclusions? If that were the case, the entire psychological medical field would fold up and close their doors. The truth is, certain life experiences make us bitter, angry, revengeful, biased and untrustworthy. I don't want any of those attributes in a judge, let alone a SCOTUS judge. But, that is not the point.)

Democrats have been defending that horrific sentence for a week now. Today,Sen. Charles Schumer, a senior Judiciary Committee member, met with Sotomayor and afterward he made himself, as always, available to the press. When the senator was asked if he had a chance to bring up the issue with her, the answer was extremely enlightening, at least for me. In fact, I think good old Chuck made it far worse for Sotomayor.

Yes, he did ask her to explain herself. Here is what he said, and read carefully:

"She said, 'Read three sentences later -- nine white males changed history with Brown v. Board of Education."

That was her defense: put it in context! That seems to be the strategy Sotomayor and supporters have taken for about a week now. Well, Chuck did. He read on quoting Judge Sotomayor's three sentences later:

"We should not be so myopic as to believe that others of different experiences or backgrounds are incapable of understanding the values and needs of people from a different group....Nine white men on the Supreme Court in the past have done so on many occasions and on many issues, including Brown.

Ok. Us, the "others of different experiences" than Sotomayor, might, we just might be capable. After all, "nine white men" got it right. In a world of biased, racist white men, nine got it right. The rest of us: grab the hoods and pitch forks.

Are you serious! That is the context they summon together to defend her!? If anything, it reinforces her earlier statement.

I would ask Ms. Sotomayor:
1. There are only nine people who got it right?
2. Any other white people on the right track since 1954? Or has it been downhill from there?
3. So, despite our "white" background, we really are capable of empathy and morality? Really? Truly!?

Way to go Chuck, you convinced me: Sotomayor's views on race must be scrutinized.