A younger Sotomayor on tape rather glibly rationalizing her lower college entrance test scores due to “cultural bias” in those tests is not particularly credible.

When it comes to advancement through affirmative action measures, I’m with Clarence Thomas who has no use for such artificial devices.

STOP PAYING THIS FOOL FOR ARTICLES!!!

“Sotomayor assumes that she got a break because of her ethnicity and socio-economic background.”

Ms. Sotomayor admits she was an affirmative action admittee to college.

“But what if those committees also, on occasion, overlooked the mediocre test scores of a white applicant from the suburbs?” Never going to happen. And if you have references and afadavits that this has happened I would like to see them. Buy just because you print it does not make it so.

“Maybe — with regard to a variety of applicants — committee members don’t put the emphasis on test scores that the companies that make a fortune administering the test have lead us all to believe so we’ll fork out the fees to take the tests.” Huh? Everyone knows (based on the court cases that plaintiffs pursued alleging discrimination of white students) that the mostly white female college administrators almost always overlook scores of minority applicants in order to make their quotas.

The following anecdote is delicious: “But then, one day, a few years ago, it hit me: My two college roommates freshman year at Harvard… were a pair of Italian-American kids whose high school records were just as good as mine. And somehow I wound up being saddled for life with the label “affirmative action baby” and they didn’t.”

How does Mr. Navarette know that his roomates were just as stupid as him? Did they show him their test scores? Or are we supposed to believe Mr. Navarette? We are to believe he would not embellish his story in order make a point.

“Later, in the professional world, I was hired for positions and — once I arrived on the job — I’d look around and realize I had better credentials and had accomplished more than most if not all of my colleagues.”

Well here we go. Mr. Navarette substantiates Ms. Sotomayor’s claim that white men are stupid. That is just too juicy. Both Hispanics claim something that is racist to the core, and is said about those same white males who hired and promoted them to their current position of incompetence. How sweet is that? Mr. Navarette has worked under white male, liberal editors all his professional life yet he knew he was better than them-just like Sotomayor. But each of those white male, stupid liberals put up with both Navarette and Sotomayor in order to feel good about themselves at parties for having helped a minority gain status. So everyone felt good about themselves. And that is what affirmative action is: White male/female, stupid liberals feeling good about themselves for helping a minority.

True affirmative action is more along the lines of charter schools where talented kids are given an opportunity to compete at the same level with their more advantaged peers.

My objection to Sotomayor isn’t that she benefited from affirmative action. It’s that she believes in racial quotas and the idea that one’s life experiences count more than one’s ability to apply reason and precedent to specific cases and her apparent acceptance of the idea that the judiciary is just another political branch, one that is almost impossible to overrule. Having been overruled frequently, she is sure to revel in that kind of near absolute power.

A lot of people are resentful of illegal aliens, and they’re accused of being racist for that. Let’s put that aside for a minute, because Sotomayor is a Puerto Rican. That means she was born an American citizen, and there was never any question about her right to be here, and have full access to everything that citizenship brings.

There’s a flip side to that coin. No one expects a Costa Rican or an Ecuadorian or a Mexican to have any sense of belonging or loyalty to the US. They’re here to makes some money, and usually go home after. Most don’t hate the US, but they don’t love it, either. They don’t have a dog in the fight. I understand that. That makes sense. When Americans go to work in Saudi Arabia, it’s to make money, and it’s not out of any particular feelings for the king. Sorry, Abdullah, but it’s just a job.

This is why I find her membership in La Raza so offensive. It’s not just that La Raza is (by its very name) a racialist organization, it’s that it’s a seditious organization. I get why Mexiacns might be attracted to that. But it’s outrageous for a born American citizen to be anywhere near such a seditious organization.

That would be bad enough if she were applying for a job as attorney at some firm. But for someone like that to be a judge is atrocious.

It’s not going to change anytime soon. After all, Obama is our quota President.