Pajamas Media

115 Comments

1. Steve:

Mr. Navarette, sorry pal I’m not intimidated.

Institutionalized discrimination against mostly working class and middle class white people is immoral and against the 14th amendment making it a crime.

No I don’t agree with with discriminationg against wealthy white people either but the working and middle class white population shoulder the biggest burden of the racial discrimination that you so cherish.

Sotomayor did not just make some off the cuff remark about race and I could care less about an apology. Her racialist views permeate her entire career and are the sole basis and reason for her nomination.

She is not only unfit but also unqualified. She is neither the brightest nor the best as well.

No Mr Navarette, I don’t want an apology and I don’t want a racist on the SCOTUS.

What I do want is an end to institutionalized discrimination against my family and my race. The people that you and others callously refer to as “whites”.

Try European Americans.

Jun 12, 2009 - 1:15 am 2. Snake eater:

Un racista defendiendo otro.

Jun 12, 2009 - 1:25 am 3. Blackwater:

Sounds like the author of this article is another typical moron who knows nothing about history. White males oppressed hispanic females for ages? Oh really? According to who and when? If my experiences go for anything its hispanic males who are incredibly abusive to hispanic females. They justify beating their wives as part of their hispanic heritage. And acting as if only white males have oppressed other people is absurd. Get over your hatred of white males and the white race in general. It’s just as obvious and blatant as a KKK members nigotry so don’t even try to deny it. People are starting to rebel against the all too common narrative of the evil race of white males conquering the world and oppressing all peoples. Sotomayor is clearly a racist. She joined La Raza aka the “The Race” and stayed in it for several years up until as recently as around 2004 which was founded by a racist Mexican nut who wanted to create a sovreign nation in the South Western part of the United States of America as a homeland for a “cosmic hispanic race” and for them only. It’s no different than white nationalism. The only reason why people like Sotomayor and groups like La Raza or you are allowed to get away with their openly blatant bigotry is because those evil white males you seem to hate so much are more tolerant and self-depreicating than basically any other group of people on the planet. A lot of white males actually actively try to do damage to other white males because they have sexism guilt and white guilt even if they themselves were never sexist or racist and nor were they ancestors. It’s an absurd self-destructive worldview which has no justified basis in reality but has been hammered into white males and white people in general through the education system and media for decades. And academic accomplishments don’t really impress me. Anyone can do well in school if you just nerd out and study hard. Let’s see what her IQ is then I’ll be impressed. Most of her legal decisions were overturned so her peers don’t seem to be that impressed with her. And trying to justify nominating a bigot and liberal activist to the Supreme Court just because you believe white males are or were evil is laughable. And there’s nothing wrong with opposing “affirmative action”. It’s legalzied bigotry which results in the kind of utter bullcrap we saw with those fire fighters competing for promotion in Conneticut which your bigoted hero Sotomayor tried to screw over. Oh and almost forgot. This society and country was mostly created by white males. As were almost all of the most advanced countries in the world today. And yet we let people of all backgrounds thrive and prosper here and even call us evil oppressors. Can you say the same for any other ethnicity or country? Didin’t think so. So if you hate it so much here by all means move to Columbia or whatnot where you don’t have to face “white male oppression”.

YOU ARE A RACIST

Jun 12, 2009 - 1:39 am 4. Blackwater:

That should be “bigotry” instead of “nigotry”. Honest typo and not a racial slur.

Jun 12, 2009 - 1:41 am 5. Blackwater:

And to add to my comment. I used to be one of those self-hating and self-destructive white males who had sexism and white guilt hammered into me even though I’ve never done a racist or sexist thing in my life and even actively tried to prevent it from happening. But then I started to learn more about history on my own and realized that neither of those feelings was really justified at all. While it’s certainly true that Europeans aka white males did a lot of colonialism in the last few hundred years so has every other race and nationality as well at the same time. The Turkish muslims colonized South Eastern Europe, they tried to conquer all of Europe several times, they occupied Italy and France and Greece for hundreds of years and made it as far as Austria and Germany but were miracously pushed back and defeated. They also occupied Spain and Portugal for centures. And arab muslims enslaved millions of white people in the last few hundred years including Americans. But were those major events in my liberal history books? Where is it in the Noam Chomsky’s books I bought and lectures I watched in awe? Why am I being constantly bombarded with the “evil imperialist racist” actions of my ancestors like the Crusades and slavery instead? Why does that get so much coverage and attention yet even worse actions by other people of another race and religion are essentially never mentioned and have to be researched privately on your own inniative? I came to the obvious realization like increasingly more people are that leftists are actively trying to create a “white guilt” anti-Christian anti-Western anti-American narrative of history to justify their bigotry against white people and white males. Which is one of the many reasons why I eventually left the liberal faith and became a heretic not too long ago. I was disgusted by their blatant bigotry and dubious agendas. Bigotry aimed at whites and males is just as ugly and wrong as the reverse. And now today I think I’m a more enlightened person who tries to be as color blind and gender blind as humanly possible. I support and hope for a society where people are treated as individuals and not as “victims” who need to be artifically boosted up or “oppressors” who need to be systematically discrimated against. Which is why I can’t stand people like you and your ilk like Obama and Moore and Sotomayor. I finally realized what this bashing of white males is. Racism, sexism, bigotry and hatred disguised as the opposite. Flat out. And you know it. For the longest time I bought into the politically correct leftist narrative that females aren’t capable of sexism and “brown” people aren’t really capable of racism since only white males can do that, right? Boy, was I wrong. Bigotry against whites and males is very real and is on a global scale.

Jun 12, 2009 - 2:07 am 6. Irish Alex:

So to sum up:
Opposition to discrimination based on race is racist.
Trying to ensure that only those eligible to vote actually do is racist.

Saying you believe you make better decisions because of your race is not racist.

Jun 12, 2009 - 2:14 am 7. Ed Wallis:

This article is just the latest evidence of Navarrette’s racism.

PJM, please dump this bigot.

Jun 12, 2009 - 2:22 am 8. Blackwater:

Sorry to spam but I wanted to add one last comment. What’s happened is that a lot of people have tried to justify their bigotry by accusing white males of secretly being out to get them. They try to create this false alternative world where white people secretly meet with each other to plot out how they’re going to hold everyone else down. Therefore that provides them with the justification to be bigoted themselves. They’ve tried to sickly use this crazy fake scenario to justify only caring about the advancement of their own “kind” even if it comes at the expense of others. It’s politically correct bigotry where only carining about the advancement and concerns of your own race is “enlightened” (as long as you aren’t white) and people who advocate for a society where noone is discrimated against are now the bigots. It’s madness.

Jun 12, 2009 - 2:49 am 9. PA Conservative:

Mr. Navarrette,

The bottom line on Judge Sotomayor racialist comments about “Wise Latina Women” is this: If a white male had made the same comment with Latina and white male reversed, would the white male be blasted for it? You know very well he would be crucified. And, if all things are supposed to be equal, she deserves to be crucified as well.

Jun 12, 2009 - 3:36 am 10. LeighB:

During the first few months of the Obama administration, I have heard enough talk about one race being better than another to last a lifetime. PJM, please stop giving the race baitors space here.

Jun 12, 2009 - 3:41 am 11. Bob:

I don’t necessarily think Judge Sotomayor is a racist and she will undoubtedly be confirmed and sitting on the Supreme Court in October. This does not excuse her racist comment. Do you think Samuel Alito would have gotten away with saying male Italian judges made better decisions than female non-Italian judges? That would have been just as stupid and racist/sexist as Sonia Sotomayor’s statement, and he rightly would have been called to task for saying it. Justice O’Connor had it right: a wise female judge will make the same quality decision as a wise male judge. Judge Sotomayor could also have said that her experiences as a Latina give her a perspective that no other justice has had – not better experiences or a better perspective, only different ones.

Jun 12, 2009 - 3:57 am 12. Boris:

Good article. I anticipate some furious typing from drool-soaked keyboards. Behold the cesspool of petty outrage:

Jun 12, 2009 - 4:05 am 13. Evil Pundit:

Navarette is a troll.

Do not feed the trolls.

Jun 12, 2009 - 4:43 am 14. homero:

if she isn’t a racist no one is. it is not an apology that is required but a retraction and a statement that she is or was a racsit …what is scary is not one word from a democrat senator saying he would not vote for her if she cannot explain her racist comments and behaviour. Yes she has made racist rulings. I was disappointed to see that Newt backed off hs original (and correct) statement.
the present government of the USA is going to test Darwn theory.

Jun 12, 2009 - 4:47 am 15. baluc/ka:

I wish Madame Sotomayor the best and as a future justice on the Supreme Court. Here’s to the achievers of the world: valedictorian at a Catholic High School, top honors at Princeton and Yale. All this coming from the South Bronx.

If she’s not qualified. I don’t know who is.

Viva Sonia! Tu eres la mujer!

Jun 12, 2009 - 4:51 am 16. baluc/ka:

As a minority (half Filipino-half Italian), I cannot fully speak as a Latino although the Philippines was a Spanish colony and Italians are the original Latins (the southern half of Italy was once a colony of Spain too).

I read posts by Blackwater and I understand the concerns.

Don’t worry too much about Mexicans sneaking into our borders. Or amnesty. I’d be worried for Mexico.

You see we took half their land. And we made it more productive than the Mexicans. We’ve got 38 million people alone living in Alta California (the California we took)

How many live in Baja California (the one still in Mexico) 3.3 million.

I live here in San Diego, and there has not been much of a rallying cry for “la reconquista” (the reconquest – basically getting back what was lost to the US)

But if there is, you can bet I will jump right in the rally and shout “MAS CONQUISTA!” (more conquest!).

My argument is : why stop at 50 states?

Can you imagine if it is Sotomayor writes the briefs that basically says: all systems go!

Hey, you never know. Puerto Rico might become a state. If that happens, anything is possible.

Viva America!

Jun 12, 2009 - 5:13 am 17. Doug:

Gee, Ruben, I never realized “White Males” all had similar views, opinions, and prejudices.
Should have guessed, since all Blacks do. (which is why Justice Thomas isn’t really black, just an Uncle Tom with heavy pigmentation.)

And all Hispanics do too, which is why Miguel Estrada isn’t an authentic or worthy Hispanic:
“Born in Honduras, Estrada came to the United States at 17, not knowing a word of English. He learned the language almost instantly, and within a few years was graduating with honors from Columbia University and heading off to Harvard Law School. He clerked for Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, was a prosecutor in New York, and worked at the Justice Department in Washington before entering private practice.

Estrada’s nomination for a federal judgeship set off alarm bells among Democrats. There is a group of left-leaning organizations — People for the American Way, NARAL, the Alliance for Justice, the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, the NAACP, and others — that work closely with Senate Democrats to promote Democratic judicial nominations and kill Republican ones. They were particularly concerned about Estrada.

In November, 2001, representatives of those groups met with Democratic Senate staff. One of those staffers then wrote a memo to Democratic Sen. Richard Durbin, informing Durbin that the groups wanted to stall Bush nominees, particularly three they had identified as good targets. “They also identified Miguel Estrada as especially dangerous,” the staffer added, “because he has a minimal paper trail, he is Latino, and the White House seems to be grooming him for a Supreme Court appointment. They want to hold Estrada off as long as possible.”
-
When Democrats derailed a GOP Latino nominee.

It was precisely the fact that Estrada was Hispanic that made Democrats and their activist allies want to kill his nomination. They were determined to deny a Republican White House credit, political and otherwise, for putting a first-rate Hispanic nominee on the bench.”
-
So, Reuben concerns himself with flotsam like that,
…without ever addressing Sotomayor’s sorry record as a judge, or the several rulings of Judge Sonia Sotomayor which have been reversed by the same Supreme Court Obama insists she is qualified for.-
So, Reuben concerns himself with flotsam like that,
…without ever addressing Sotomayor’s sorry record as a judge, or the several rulings of Judge Sonia Sotomayor which have been reversed by the same Supreme Court Obama insists she is qualified for.-
So, Reuben concerns himself with flotsam like that,
…without ever addressing Sotomayor’s sorry record as a judge, or the several rulings of Judge Sonia Sotomayor which have been reversed by the same Supreme Court Obama insists she is qualified for.

Jun 12, 2009 - 5:26 am 18. Gary Ogletree:

Ruben, you should know. You play the victim continuously.

Jun 12, 2009 - 6:02 am 19. tanstaafl:

The wise Latina woman v. white male comment was silly. Stupid, even.

Sotomayor has (publically) expressed that sentiment more than once.

I know some very un-wise Latina women, some relatively wise Latina women & some wise and un-wise males of all color and cultural persuasions, Latino, Indian, Caucasian, you name it.

In other words, wisdom isn’t a function of skin color, not even (necessarily) upbringing, although if I had to vote, I’d give background & upbringing the most weight.

The (above) Alito, Roberts, Rhenquist attempts at parallel indictment seem contrived.

…a perfectly harmless comment about how different people with different life experiences might apply a different lens.

Most everybody truly guilty in the judicial system knows when they’ve screwed up, unless they’re sociopathic or completely crazy. Awareness of having done wrong usually cuts across skin melanin and cultural background.

Imagine that.

While judges are hired to engage with blindfolded Justice (to the best of their ability) not to bring their own slant and “empathy” to their decisions.

Jun 12, 2009 - 6:30 am 20. Randall:

After all is said and done, and after all the smoke has cleared (if it ever does…), most of us, definitely including Mr. Navarette, reflexively support “our people.”

Whites tried to give up the habbit, but are discovering that the game is rigged.

White people (or..”White Men” to add a nice layer of sexism to this deteriorating national psuedo-discussion) tried to move beyond race, only to discover that they are the only ones expected to do it…everyone else is expected to ACCELERATE their own racial/gender/sexual-orientation self-identification.

This is an untenable situation, and Mr. Naverette’s way too self-consciously angry and dismissive-of-the-concerns-of-white-males pseudopunditry is not doing anything to convince me that my concerns about the way race and sex are manipulated are exagerrated.

Jun 12, 2009 - 6:32 am 21. Morton Doodslag:

Ruben Navarette: race baiting white bashing illegal alien apologizing victim pimp.

Jun 12, 2009 - 7:14 am 22. blotto:

Okay so riddle me this: How can Ms. Sotomayor possibly deign to allow white men to question her on her fitness to be on the SCOTUS? And how can those white senators possibly dredge up the intellectural acumen to put together questions that could possibly test Ms. Sotomayor?

Also assuming Ms.Sotomayor is correct and I bet Ms. Maxine Waters believes black women are superior to white males, how come all the white liberal males in Congress and Senate don’t resign and ask that Latinas and black women be named as their replacements. State governors could name replacements for Senators, but we would have to wait for 2010 for Congress, but you get my drift. I mean wouldn’t we as a nation be much better off?

White male progressives are the only group of people so desparate for their political power that they prostrate and prostitute themselves in this manner.

Jun 12, 2009 - 7:18 am 23. Meryl:

I think all the white males should just start using the Latina’s logic (just because they admire it, if anyone should ask)…

“I think I, as a white male, will make better decisions with the wisdom of my rich experience, than anyone else.”

I would guess the best way we can honor her amazing uniques is to emulate her methods. No?

Jun 12, 2009 - 7:42 am 24. Tony R:

Yes, yes, yes…. we get it;

Everyone can jump aboard the “victim” gravy train except the white man. Fair enough – someone has to pay for all that gravy.

Blah blah blah blah

Jun 12, 2009 - 7:43 am 25. pedro:

Mr Navarette sorry if you have hatred for GRINGOS but that does not mean you should be acting all twisted(EMOTIONALLY) over SOTOMAYOR ITZ JUST COMMON SENSE U CRYBABY BIT**

Jun 12, 2009 - 7:45 am 26. Meryl:

I still remember the mocking comments (re clothing) that were directed toward the children of Supreme Court Justice John Roberts. So will we hear anything about her slovenly appearance?

Maybe Letterman just hasn’t gotten around to it yet.

Actually, I suppose comments about her unprofessional appearance will be considered off limits, unlike that of Mrs. Palin, who is always well dressed and whose hair looks like it has actually seen a comb.

Jun 12, 2009 - 7:48 am 27. Frank:

Typical Ruben: Racism is ok if it’s from one of your own.

I don’t know why this Supremacist scumbag still posts here.

Jun 12, 2009 - 7:49 am 28. Free Hat:

Mr. Navarrette, really, why are you even bothering to post an article here?

This place is the last refuge of angry, racist white Americans who have no other public forum to air their bigotry – the very same white “victims” you are a calling out in your article.

For crimminy sake, you may as well go down to Port Authority Bus Terminal and read your article out loud to the dirty-bearded schizos living under the 41st Street Overpass. You’ll get essentially the same reaction. And I guarantee it won’t be the one you were looking for.

Jun 12, 2009 - 7:54 am 29. davimcg:

Judge Sotomayor has stated on numerous occasions that she does not know if it is possible for a judge to overcome his or her bias nor does she think it important that a judge do so. So much for the concept of the “detached and disinterested judge”. Regardless of Sotomayor’s achievements, I have a real concern that she can be a fair justice. She certainly was not in the Ricci case.

And to Mr. Navarrette, your logic concerning the fault you found in Rehnquist, Alito and Roberts excusing Sotomayor’s bigotry is that of a five year old who still thinks two wrongs make a right. If you think those three should have been questioned for their actions or remarks, then shouldn’t Sotomayor be questioned? At least be consistent or one might think you are a bit biased.

Jun 12, 2009 - 8:19 am 30. The Shadow:

It is going to be great to see Judge Sotomayor confirmed if only to silence the wingnuts

Jun 12, 2009 - 8:20 am 31. Macko:

The left needs to pick someone to demonize. Right now it’s white folks with authority and money. russia went after royalty. China after the rich business owners. Hitler the jews(they had money and factories). What confuses me is that the leaders of the left are rich and white too. The fact that they have alot of regular white folks(or should I say typical white persons)following them shows what lemmings they are.

Remember the left won’t stick to any principals but will say whatever works at that particular time to achieve their goals at that time. They can go back and justify it later when they have the power.

There is no such thing as reverse racism there is only racism. To complain only when it’s directed at you is hypocritical.

To the left it’s any tool they can use because they want archany first then they feel they can rebuild from there. Meanwhile we are debating the situation based on our principals. They have distracted us with sotomayor, waterboarding and executive bonuses. Meanwhile the goverment is buying up the banking and automotive industry and selling out our allies.

Sotomayor is an incompetent judge with 60% of her rulings being overturned. I guess she determines her rulings based on race instead of the law. She should not be confirmed but will.

Jun 12, 2009 - 8:45 am 32. Delia:

Jun 12, 2009 - 8:56 am 33. blotto:

Freehat: The same question can be asked of you. But how about you answer a few questions regarding affirmative action and diversity.
1. How come diversity only relates to race/gender/sexual orientation and not to intellectual or political orientation?
2. How come affirmative action is not mandated in historically black colleges/universities? Aren’t they graduating poorly educated graduates?
3. How come affirmative action is not mandated by the staffs, administrations and professors at colleges/universities? Most professors are those white male liberals so shouldn’t they be fired and a minority hired in their stead? Most top university administrator staffs are dominated again by white male and female liberals. If they truly believed in diversity shouldn’t say Ms.Colemen at UMichigan fire half of her staff and hire only minorities?
4. How does affirmiative action affect physics, math, science, English, etc??? How does having a diverse student population help learning?
5. Shouldn’t the CBC Congressional Black Caucus allow white members as well for diversity’s sake?
6. Most newsrooms are dominated by those pesky white male liberals both TV and news print. So shouldn’t they lead by example?
7. I am sure you would support affirmative action for white males in college and professional basketball and football, right?

Minorities have been so dumbed down that they believe that white male liberals actually have their future’s in mind instead of their own poltical future.

Jun 12, 2009 - 8:58 am 34. Doug:

blotto:
re:
“5. Shouldn’t the CBC Congressional Black Caucus allow white members as well for diversity’s sake?”
—
About as likely as Dave Horowitz or Justice Thomas being invited to speak at a Harvard commencement ceremony.
“Bastions of Free Speech“

Jun 12, 2009 - 9:10 am 35. WR Jonas:

I’ve never been particularly impressed by Mr. Navarettes biases which form the complete structure of his reasoning and judgement.
Yet he never questions whether those biases could guide his opinions or judgement . They shape his view of everything and if he would admit that biases are an essential part of every human psyche he might recognize a truth.
The accomplishment of Sonia Sotomayor and all of her achievements were, as those of Obama, awarded within a system that was eager, even enthusiastic to pronounce them as high, great or worthy. It is not the way of Liberals to be shy about trumpeting their glory and those it finds wonderful. Their paths were paved by hordes of adoring counselors , professors and admirers. ‘Affirmative Action in action was and is a slanted, stacked deck and tilted playing field in the game of life. Every single minority moves to the top and all are hailed.
So don’t give us this “accomplished, wise and great ” nonsense because she hasn’t done a damned thing courageous or brave or wise. Her actions could have been done by a fifteen year old and wouldn’t have cost nearly as much.
Great people are recognized by their accomplishments not from a bunch of self congratulatory liberal praise.

Jun 12, 2009 - 9:19 am 36. Self-hating Boomer:

None of which has anything to do with the real issue: judicial temperament. When judges become part of the racial spoils system, justice is dead, and the US becomes like all of those banana republics that the supposed “wise latinas” come from.

Except latinas don’t have the opportunity to become judges in those banana republics, because they’re not such wonderful places.

This is like arguing that we should have islamist women who want sharia law in charge here, so that women won’t be allowed to be in charge. Wee bit of a problem with that, no?

Jun 12, 2009 - 9:26 am 37. The Shadow:

WR Jones – Try looking at the mote in your own eye

Jun 12, 2009 - 9:30 am 38. Frank:

Hey Hat, I really admire people who have so much time on their hands that they camp around websites of people they seem to despise just to troll.

Go get laid, brah

Jun 12, 2009 - 9:45 am 39. Penny:

White men don’t need affirmative action like obama and sodamier. White men control fusion, make babies and take care of them and their mothers. White men are movers and shakers, own industry, employ good folks. If anyone out there is really worried about white men, believe me they don’t need your concern. White men can change tires, fix engines, build bridges, go to the moon. White men love America. It is because of white MEN America is exceptional. God will always bless white men because God helps them as helps themselves. Sure, justice is dead. Sure government is trying to kill whitey. Don’t y’all worry, white men will figure out a way to thrive while the “justice” corrupt government affirmative actions wimps sink in their own cess pools. bye bye libs. you may think you are in control now you have “control” ha ha think again. white men are working around you, ignoring you and taking us white women with them. Just remember what happened to your heroes Lenin, Stalin, Marx, Idi Amin, Robert Mugabe, Hugo Chavez

Jun 12, 2009 - 10:09 am 40. Blackwell:

I apologize. As a presumptively unwise white male, I keep forgetting that its my job and no one else’s to be the national lampoon cover dog for every real an imagined ill.

Let me apologize for all the white males from poor families, with dead or poor fathers, who worked in school and came out from small towns with good grades to find . . .that they ALONE were supposed to forfeit jobs, promotions and college slots to compensate for years of preferential living by whites of all sexes.

It hadn’t benefitted them much if at all, but what can I say? If they had been wise enough to play the victim card, they could have at least insisted that upper middle class and wealthy white women and indeed women in general, take some hits to advance african americans, and african american males in particular. Had we done that, it might have broadened the entire idea to the point where it became less acceptable to insist that one group compensate so much for so long for everything under the sun.

And for all males of whatever color that lost 99.9% of the legs, arms, eyes and lives in world wars, the revolutionary and civil wars, fires, police encounters and what not–if only they’d been wise enough to stay home and save money, invest and send “dear Jane” letters to women fighting abroad. We’d be better positioned to absorb all these endless preferences for everyone else and we could discuss it over green tea. (Why Chuck Pelto might have become a yoga instructor or professor of herbal studies).

Sotomayor was poor–so what? Lots of kids are. They don’t racialize it though. Justice Thomas had it harder than she did and he never racialized his diligence and intellect.

And let me apologize as well, for people of all sexes and colors that thought that race and sex preferences are not the way to fight racism and sexism, particularly on the backs on white males alone. We can indeed thank Judge Sotomayor for reminding us that not everyone endorses the dreamy idea from the 60’s–that races and sexes can live together “buying the world a coke” etc. The “wise” ones treat the idea as an opportunity to continually scam everyone else by one preference after the other.

Assumptions that one race and sex are inferior keep finding new “victims” that need compensating. Its great that some poor white kid from Iowa or Ohio is now being presumptively classified as a privileged, out of touch moron by Sotomayor.

Yes, elevating a “wise latina” over all those dumb white males is a great thing. We should thank her! We keep thinking that this preference stuff should end. She thinks to the contrary that its just started: that its a permanent fixture of life. After all, all white males are presumptively privileged and not too smart. And what good is a racial-sexual category if you can’t put all white men into it?

White males today would immediately hustle anyone seeking public life and denegrating another sex or race into a closet. But we ought to thank her indeed, for reminding us that its still open season on one color and one sex according to Sotomayor.

Yes Mr. navarette I do thank her. She’s done nothign more than poor kids do all the time, but she’s convinced she ahs some special insight because of her sex and race: and that white males are morons. She’s a vestige from maybe the 50’s, that ought to be bundled into a closet and banished from any public office. Her views are offensive; her intellectual arrogance based only on a thinly spread veneer of women’s studies, inflated self esteem, and unenriched by real world experience. Its good to be reminded though, that out there, there are people who think that demeaning one sex and one color is still quite OK. You included I see.

Jun 12, 2009 - 10:47 am 41. Cheri:

Gee, Ruben. All this time, I thought you defended Alberto Gonzales because he had done no wrong and had been unjustly vilified. Now I realize that you defended him because he’s a Latino. I’m sad.

Jun 12, 2009 - 11:23 am 42. smith:

The less fortunate and the underrepresented minorities get all the breaks!

It’s time for white male voices to be heard, at long last!

Jun 12, 2009 - 12:16 pm 43. Sparky:

I’m sorry. I’m a white male. I apologize. Sorry.

Jun 12, 2009 - 12:30 pm 44. shempus:

Boris, another weftie wib buying into the myth of the brilliance and righteousness of the great latina. Even she admits she wouldn’t have been admitted to EITHER high-brow school, let alone do ’so well’ were it not for affimative action and the quota mentality of the age. Wise up and time to empty your own vapid drool buckets.

Jun 12, 2009 - 12:30 pm 45. Ron:

Would someone explain what is the big deal with a woman of Puerto Rican descent anyway? Is she different than an Italian or Pole? I really do not understand why she is “special”. I am sure there were at least a few Italian women in her same neighborhood with similar means who have not spent their lives trading on some phony categorization.

Jun 12, 2009 - 12:30 pm 46. Saiga:

You and Geraldo Rivera suffer from the same sickness; “Latinitis”. Latinos can do no wrong, and everything whitie does is racist.

How can you have an objective supreme court justice if she too is ate up with a debilitating case of “Latinitis” just like you, Geraldo, and Juan Hernandez?

If Latinos are so brilliant, why is Latin America such as corrupt trainwreck? A Latinitis Pandemic perhaps?

Jun 12, 2009 - 12:33 pm 47. malclave:

“This whole Sotomayor affair is really good for white males. They need it.”

So, by this comment you mean that you agree with lumping together whole segments of society based on ethnicity and gender, to fit the stereotype you want?

Jun 12, 2009 - 12:42 pm 48. Daniel:

I am a white male who finds the nomination of Judge Sotomayor based her race (affirmative action?) and based upon her racisist leaning as very disturbing and a reflection of the Obama agenda. I want to compliment the excellent posts by so many readers who are extremely critical of Ruben Navarrette Jr. In my personal life I try to stay completely away from liberals like Mr. Navarrette. Why ever talk with people like him?

Jun 12, 2009 - 12:58 pm 49. Kathy:

Does Ruben ever write anything that’s not about race? Dude, get a life. There really is more out there than just your obsession.

Jun 12, 2009 - 12:59 pm 50. Conservador:

Hey Ruben, before you go and become a pawn for the power brokers of LULAC and La Raza, before you decide to focus on race and identity as your platform to make your arguments, you should maybe focus on understanding why I am upset with Sotomayor as a choice. I am first generation American and a son of former illegal immigrants.
SO shut your mouth and understand that we might argue about stuff based on race and melanin content but when it comes to judicial philosophy and choosing a supreme court justice, biased empathy sucks and in the end it is just arbitrary, stark eyed justice. Your the reason why our people are stuck in the rut they are, because of power pimps like you who makes us look bad. What about Miguel Estrada huh??

Jun 12, 2009 - 1:02 pm 51. Self-hating Boomer:

Let’s play devil’s advocate for a minute and assume for the sake of argument that Sotomayor was, in fact, accepted at Princeton only on merit, and did graduate with honors without any affirmative action tipping of the scales, etc., etc.

Doesn’t that completely refute the argument that she was a victim of discrimination, and that the deck was stacked against her? Are we supposed to accept, with a straight face, that she was so superhuman that she achieved all of this despite a conspiracy of white men at all levels of these universities to make sure that she fails?

You can’t have it both ways. Either she was pushed beyond her competence by the institutions, or she was treated fairly.

Jun 12, 2009 - 1:13 pm 52. VibrioCocci:

I hope Mr. Navarrette Jr. doesn’t write this article about Sotomayor with any racial bias or prejudice against white men, or more broadly, the U.S. in general.

Nah …

The U.S. is just full of Xenophobes: http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/05/01/navarrette/index.html

Illegal immigration is our fault: http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/10/15/navarrette/index.html?iref=newssearch

Local law enforcement should not enforce immigration laws: http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/10/22/navarrette/index.html?iref=mpstoryview

Illegals do the jobs Americans won’t do: http://www.vdare.com/rubenstein/060223_nd.htm

He opposes the SAVE act (The Secure America with Verification and Enforcement (SAVE) Act targets employers with stiff penalties for hiring illegal aliens, secures the northern and southern border by adding 8,000 new border patrol agents and increases interior enforcement by allowing for additional federal district court judges and providing more resources for law enforcement officers.): http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/op-ed/navarrette/20080406-9999-lz1e6navarret.html

Plus a whole slew of other angry Hispanic rants and raves: http://www.vdare.com/awall/080528_memo.htm

Jun 12, 2009 - 1:22 pm 53. Ed:

Did you actually write ‘able to get along with the species.”? So white males are a separate species from you?
Lets see, white males invented the telegraph, telephone, internet, radio, TV, satelites- those are just the communication advancements. Bicycle, automobile, train, airplane, jet, rockets- are just transportion inventions, while your “wise” people never even invented the wheel! White males maybe to you are a separate species, but even you have to admit they sure have made advancements and contributions to humanity above and beyond other ’species”

Jun 12, 2009 - 1:32 pm 54. djaymick:

The first sentence says it all. All those years, white men tried to stop women and minorities from playing the victim. The operative word is tried. However, Sodomayor has successed in playing the white man as the victim. How many white men at the Supreme Court level have tried or succeeded in doing this?
Your piece reflects the total white male population, but the Supreme Court is a different story. Their job is to preserve the Constitution, without prejudice.
Another fact that you bring up is the fact that Sodomayor finished second in her class. This is a tremendous feat in and of itself, but does that mean anything? Who’s the richest person in the world and what level of education did he/she achieve? The answer is Bill Gates, who happens to be a college dropout. Therefore, even though it is a great accomplishment, it cannot justify the argument that she is smarter than the other white men in her class.

Jun 12, 2009 - 1:34 pm 55. Ephraim:

The thing that most mystifies me in all of this is Sotomayor’s apparent use of the odd phrase “Latina woman”.

“Latino” is masculine and “Latina” is feminine, right? So isn’t saying “Latina woman” sort of redundant, like saying “pizza pie”?

I can understand non-Spanish speaking people making this mistake, since English grammar doesn’t have thes sorts od constructions, but it’s odd to hear Sotomayor use it (I assume she’s been quoted correctly). Does she not speak proper Spanish?

Jun 12, 2009 - 1:36 pm 56. Why censor this:

Did you actually write ‘able to get along with the species.”? So white males are a separate species from you?
Lets see, white males invented the telegraph, telephone, internet, radio, TV, satelites- those are just the communication advancements. Bicycle, automobile, train, airplane, jet, rockets- are just transportion inventions, while your “wise” people never even invented the wheel! White males maybe to you are a separate species, but even you have to admit they sure have made advancements and contributions to humanity above and beyond most other ’species”

Jun 12, 2009 - 1:47 pm 57. Jimmyjames:

No, he never does.

Jun 12, 2009 - 1:50 pm 58. djaymick:

Speaking on where Sodomayor finished in her class, how do you think people would have reacted if a Wall Street executive went before the public saying, “Hey, I finished first in my class at Wharton, therefore, I’m smarter than all of you.”?

Jun 12, 2009 - 1:51 pm 59. Punk:

Did you actually write ‘able to get along with the species.”? So white males are a separate species from you?

Jun 12, 2009 - 1:52 pm 60. Robert O. Lopez:

I usually like Ruben Navarrete’s work. But this piece is weak, I’m sorry, Ruben.

Her comments are ignorant and she’s stuck in the 1970s. I am a professor and teach Latina/o Literature as well as other areas relating to American minorities.

In the field of Ethnic Studies, “essentialism” has been debunked since the 1980s. Edward Said, Homi Bhabha, Gayatri Spivak, Diana Fuss, and countless other scholars — all on the Left and allied to the struggles of people of color — have rejected the idea that there are inherent differences in outlook and experienced that one can match to race.

Sotomayor sees these differences as “inherent,” Ruben. She believes in stereotypes. She’s not astute, current, or particularly considerate of people’s unique experiences.

You shouldn’t be defending her. Ruben, you missed a great chance to show that you’re not simply going to defend any Latino who comes your way. I am disappointed because I have enjoyed a lot of your writing in the past. This is a let down.

Jun 12, 2009 - 2:03 pm 61. Steve:

I’ll sum this tripe up so no one else has to read it, it’s just another iteration of the “only whites can be racist” nonsense.

Rubens proof that Sotomayor isn’t a racist? She worked with whitey. Apparently Ruben would be more than willing to concede David Duke isn’t a racist if he just said some of his best friends are black.

So don’t bother with this fools nonsense.

Jun 12, 2009 - 2:12 pm 62. WR Jonas:

To the Shadow. Who uses such a strange pseudo -name to identify himself ? Show us your courage man. You see , I identified myself clearly by my Christian name WR Jonas,not Jones. If you will notice, I could say there clearly is a mote in your eye since you seem to have trouble reading or digesting the text of my comment . Which, incidentally I thought was quite accurate . I have been reading Mr. Navarette for some time and his act is like a one trick pony.
As for Affirmative Action it is a disgraceful reverse discrimination program to punish people . Those who gain or profit from it are tainted by the fact that their achievements were awarded not earned.

Jun 12, 2009 - 2:16 pm 63. Mike:

Hispanic racism is okay; it’s defending the constitutional rights of White people that bothers the Left.

Jun 12, 2009 - 2:25 pm 64. Jerome:

You have to give Ruben credit. Even with a nominee that he obviously supports, he finds a way to make himself into a race victim of evil, whiny white males. Poor thing.

He might want to consider the possibility that a bad Supreme Court judge is a problem for everyone, not just evil white males. But when you’re always a race victim, clear thinking is difficult.

Jun 12, 2009 - 2:26 pm 65. Big E:

Angry much there Ruben? Kinda sucks to have to defend the kind of racially tinged statements you’ve made a career out of decrying doesn’t it? When in doubt just let the emotion flow and let your feelings do the thinking for you. Good stuff. I also appreciated the slandering of other justices (pointing to other made-up bad behavior to justify real bad behavior, nice spin on the usual leftist argumentation techniques) to justify your support for her. What’d you spend all of about 15 minutes on wikipedia for those?

Anyway when you get done hate f#cking to death all those strawmen you’ve set up maybe you’ll calm down and write a column that accurately portrays the real issues with her statement. Or maybe not (I’m guessing not).

PS- You seem to be implying in the latter stages of your column that white men don’t normally feel empathy. Which would be kind of racist don’t you think? Maybe it’s time for Ruben to do a little self reflection and ponder the possibilty that you’ve become what you always though you hated (and were morally superior to), a racist.

Jun 12, 2009 - 2:30 pm 66. Ed Wallis:

Mr. Lopez #60,

Please take a look at some of the articles linked at Post #52.

I think they may reflect more of this, as you describe, “disappointing” aspect of this author which may not have crossed your path. It is not the “exception” but the “rule” of Navarrette.

Jun 12, 2009 - 2:51 pm 67. faruglyracistsexistpig:

“Beating whitemen at their own game”

There is a repressive political correctness on campus. Whitemen are reviled in the feminist and affirmative action culture present on campus.

Students who answer questions or write papers not in line with the PC agenda will fail.

For example I was required to read a paper called “Love is Pathological” and write a supporting critique for English class. When I protested that I did agree with the thesis I was flunked-out of the class.

The fact is that without affirmative action, etc, the fat old intestine eating racist hag would be at home.

Let’s have affirmative action on the battlefield. There is a disproportionate number of males dying in wars. It is time for women to get equal opportunity to be blown to bits. Men die to enable racist sexist pigs that oppress them.

When USA, Inc, falls, and it will fall, and the obama institutes sharia law, and this will happen, women will rue the day that they stabbed their men in the back. Think about the women in France during WWII…

Jun 12, 2009 - 2:51 pm 68. Beth:

I don’t think it’s “playing the victim” as much as it is a recognition of this constant undercurrent of white bashing that goes on without anyone caring at all lately. It’s cool to bash white people now. We just hear it and are supposed to think, “they deserve it!” There is NO outcry or outrage but if illegals or blacks or asians or jews are bashed then we never hear the end of it.

WE ARE ALL BEGINNING TO NOTICE IT AND WE ARE SICK OF IT AND WE ARE NOT GOING TO BE BULLIED INTO SILENCE JUST BECAUSE IT MAKES YOU FEEL BETTER.

Jun 12, 2009 - 3:10 pm 69. Beth:

Also, I recently saw a clip of Sotomayer saying how much she had benefitted by affirmative action. She said she wasn’t the smartest and did not have the best scores but she got into the best schools BECAUSE she was Latino.

So this is what I tell my white children when they do not get into colleges when they are over-qualified and they see minorities that they know have not performed as well as they have, get into these colleges, “You didn’t get in because you are white–not because you aren’t smart enough or well rounded enough. You’re too white.”

Jun 12, 2009 - 3:21 pm 70. chad3337:

Well, it’s nice of you to reinterpret Judge Satomayor’s remarks for her, but the problem with your analysis is that your characterization is not actually what she said.

She didn’t just say diversity may result in bringing more viewpoints to the table and might result in superior decisions by panels of appellate judges. She said that she could judge better than a white male because of her race, gender and life experience, as if white males have no life experiences or empathy. Her actual words, in conjunction with the fact that she didn’t even deign to address the merits of a compelling reverse discrimination case gives white males adequate cause to be concerned about whether racial stereotyping will infuse the her judgments and whether they will be treated fairly under law.

Your argument that other judges have said things as bad and been confirmed doesn’t negate what Judge Satomayor said. Two wrongs don’t make a right.

And finally, this is so hypocritical. You know for a fact that if a white appellate judge had made the same remark, he would have been required to withdraw already. Good for Senator Graham for calling her on it.

Jun 12, 2009 - 3:21 pm 71. Drifter:

Navarrette once wrote a column that didn’t involve race, and my jaw dropped. Actually, it was pretty good. Once. He’s a race-baiter who prostitutes himself and his intellect for money. He can’t be stupid enough to actually believe the things he writes. Anyone who is just finding this out hasn’t read many of his “works”.

Jun 12, 2009 - 4:17 pm 72. texasconservative:

I have never read an article by Mr. Navarrette that wasn’t racially slanted. His ability to spin facts is improving but, along with his racial spin comes the glaring wholes you can drive a truck through. Mr. Navarrette really should be ashamed!

Jun 12, 2009 - 4:52 pm 73. kathy:

56. Why censor this: “Lets see, white males invented the telegraph, telephone, internet, radio, TV, satellites- those are just the communication advancements. Bicycle, automobile, train, airplane, jet, rockets-”

Your list gave me an idea: to keep from being hypocrites, all the white-bashing hacks should have to give up every last invention or convenience that has white-cooties on its creation or development. Let’s start with Ruben’s use of the First Amendment to post these opinion pieces: Ruben, you’re barred from ever posting another article – them Founding Fathers were mighty-white as I recall. SCOTUS, ditto: white-male development = only white-males get to play.

Jun 12, 2009 - 5:29 pm 74. Bilgeman:

Navarette:
“This whole Sotomayor affair is really good for white males. They need it. They’re so used to seeing people who look like them occupy most of the top positions in society — in fact, six of the eight currently occupied seats on the Supreme Court”

Big Deal… hey, sport, how many “White Males” are ther in the governments of Latin America, from the Rio Grande right down to Tierra del Fuego?

C’mon, open up your pie-hole and lay on us how well Latin America’s Affirmative Action has performed.

Fact of the matter is that there are exactly TWO Anglo-settled nations on the Western Hemisphere’s mainland,VERYTHING else is Hispanic or Portuguese, and clowns like you won’t be happy until you’ve got an ethnic hegemony of the whole thing.

BTW, Senor Navarette, since I married into a southwestern “Land Grant” family, and our child has a high-caste Puerto Rican godmother I happen to know a thing or two about Latino.a cuture that isn’t played up to the Liberal gringos.

Caste.

Sotomayor would stand less of a chance of being invited ino your home than I would.

She’s got heavy Indian blood in her, and among the Creoles, that makes her mestiza trash…on PR as it does in Mexico.

Go tell your racist lies to dipstick undergrads.

Jun 12, 2009 - 5:44 pm 75. SukieTawdry:

Gad, Ruben, but that was lame, even for you.

Jun 12, 2009 - 6:18 pm 76. The Shadow:

jonas or jones – does it really make a difference – nut job is more apt.

Jun 12, 2009 - 6:59 pm 77. venividivici:

Having read all of this guy’s articles here on PJ Media, I have come to the conclusion that Ruben loves being Hispanic even more than Hitler loved being German.

What a f*cking loser.

Jun 12, 2009 - 7:59 pm 78. Clayton E. Cramer:

I’ve been restraining myself a bit in the pieces that I’ve written for PJM. But after reading this piece by Navarette, I can tell that I need not hold back.

Jun 12, 2009 - 8:28 pm 79. Clayton E. Cramer:

“they don’t know how to react to a perfectly harmless comment about how different people with different life experiences might apply a different lens.”

That’s not what she said that has people upset. It’s that she said that a wise Latina is wiser than a wise white person. You know: racial superiority and all.

Jun 12, 2009 - 8:30 pm 80. Ms. Attitude:

If a white woman were to aspire to a high government position in Mexico and made the remark, “I would hope that a wise White woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a mexican male who hasn’t lived that life,” would mexican men rejoice?

Jun 12, 2009 - 8:50 pm 81. Pat J:

This white male embraces diversity and welcomes a highly qualified judge to the highest court of the land.

To some of you other white males out there? I say quit making the rest of us look like dinosaurs.

Jun 12, 2009 - 9:23 pm 82. True:

LaRaza (aka Bus Boy Union) is a racist organization. So you corn crushers have ruined your own country (Too many cowards in Mexican Gov) Stay out of ours.

HeyBilge go have so guacamole, you silly puta~

Jun 12, 2009 - 10:00 pm 83. lee:

We can’t have a Supreme court judge whose decisions are influence by minority politics, and Sotomayor’s “wise Latina” comment casts doubt on her ability to stay impartial. She made similar comments twice, and revealed that she was a product of “affirmative action”. It was an bit unsettling for me to hear her admitting that on her grades alone, she would not have attained her high standing in those elite insitutions. Then she rambled remarks about “cultural bias” in tests that priortize whites, which was somehow recfied by affirmative action. This is a pattern, and it can’t be compared to racially insensitive remarks made by a Reagan appointee 10,15 years ago.

The affirmative action policy is really the underlying issue here. She’s a mildy qualified candidate who’s (apparently) not known for making much groundbreaking decisions behind the bench. Her ivy educational background is impressive, but that’s true for a number of other politicians. As a minority, I’m not even sure what makes her life story so compelling. If she actually contributed to minority empowerment, other than a generic success story of a non white individual climbing the white dominated field (which isn’t all that uncommon), I haven’t heard it.

But presto, here’s a chance to “diversify” the SCOTUS, so we manufacture yet another sense of looming history. I don’t want a acvitist minority judege. I want someone willing to rule against her own people if only to uphold the law. 50,60 years ago, I would have asked the mostly white SCOTUS to grant us civil liberties, despite oppositions from their fellow white class and segregationists. They did, eventually.

Jun 12, 2009 - 11:11 pm 84. Dave Surls:

“They ought to thank her.”

I make it a practice never to thank bigoted idiots just for being bigoted idiots.

Jun 13, 2009 - 12:34 am 85. Flying Dutchman:

We’re involved in stealth tribal warfare. We thought it was something else but it’s not. We all need to accept that reality.

The competing tribes in this war have very successfully used guilt-trips over racism as a political weapon. White people need to start ignoring the hypocritical guilt-trips and organize collectively in defense of their self-interest before they are dispossessed entirely of everything our ancestors passed on to us.

This collective self-defense will of neccessity *not* include the white elites as they will always sacrifice the lower orders if it buys them more time at the top of the tree.

Jun 13, 2009 - 1:31 am 86. Ed Wallis:

#77 vvv, AGREED. The guy is pathetic and his bigotry in no way deserving of sympathy.

The greater pity is that too many focus on the “wise latina” bigotry “angle”, when
her “Appellate Courts are where policy is made” remark (and other similar…) go to
the heart of her ultimate disqualification: disregard for preserving the integrity of#
The U.S. Constitution.

Quite like Pat J #81 (whom his colleagues undoubtedly proudly label a “race traitor”…though I’d skip the “race” part…), Sotomayor is only about “appearances” and to h*ll with the integrity of the system. Smoke and mirrors.

Jun 13, 2009 - 2:29 am 87. mhr:

Why shouldn’t white men play the victim card?
It’s worked for a great many people. White man have been excoriated by liberal Democrat pressure groups for years and blamed for the historical ills suffered by women, blacks, homosexuals, Hispanics, American Indians, etc etc for years now. By “white men”, of course, liberals mean conservatives. Even though the worst characters were the Democrats of the old racist South- who were the base of FDR’s New Deal, KKK members and Democrats like Bull Connors and Senators like Stennis, Bilbo, Fullbight, Irvin and many more. In truth Mexican-Americans like him have nothing in common with Puerto Ricans and most dislike them intensely. But, of course, he cannot write that.

Jun 13, 2009 - 7:05 am 88. Dave Surls:

“White people need to start ignoring the hypocritical guilt-trips and organize collectively”

No thanks, I’m not into organizing on the basis of skin color.

I’ll leave that to the idiots in the KKK, La Raza and the NAACP.

Jun 13, 2009 - 9:01 am 89. Jim Baker:

Affirmative action is completely based on a racial view of the world. It was founded on the notion that if I am white and if I am male and if I also don’t make an unusual sexual preference a public issue then it follows that I am economically advantaged over people who do not fit that description. Someone tell me why statistics that lump me into this minority make this my problem? For Mr Navarrette, don’t express that I can’t wait to cast myself in a victim’s role, I don’t. I am an individual and, because of that, I am not a victim, and not a racist. You are.

Jun 13, 2009 - 10:00 am 90. Self-hating Boomer:

Being a victim and having a grievance are two completely different things. The former is a permanent identity and a basis for insatiable demands, the latter is a situation that needs to be dealt with.

Nice red herring, there.

Jun 13, 2009 - 12:55 pm 91. DavidN:

The weird thing about this whole Sotomayor debate is what it shows about how far America has come, when it comes to race relations. Judges are supposed to be impartial, and apply the law as it’s written, regardless of their personal convictions. It never actually entirely happens that way, but of course it’s what we aspire to anyway, when we hire a judge. A hundred years ago, women, and often Latinos, were prohibited from being judges. If you’d asked the guys who decided not to let women or Latinos into the judging business why they did it, they’d have given various bs excuses. If you’d been able to hypnotize them and get honest answers, however, you’d have been told that these guys (white themselves, and male in all probability) were afraid the women or racial minorities would interpret the law *differently*.

During the civil rights movement, the argument was that blacks, Latinos, and women should be treated equally. Thurgood Marshall made his career arguing Brown vs. the Board of Education, which essentially sanctioned this sort of color-blind government. When he got onto the Bench, of course, he wasn’t exactly colorblind himself, and now we’re told that colorblindness isn’t all it’s cracked up to be. It turns out that those guys a century ago were mistaken when they feared women and Latinos would interpret the law differently, because it’s a *good thing* when they do! I suppose next Mr. Navarette will be telling us that the firefighters in New Haven who didn’t get promoted because they’re the wrong color should also be grateful to her, for providing more challenges in their lives, which will make their characters stronger?

Jun 13, 2009 - 1:14 pm 92. fartuglyracistsexistpig:

The agenda is divide and conquer. The peasants or third estate gained power before the French Revolution by uniting.

The reason that we are being treated with this pc agenda of race, sex, and polarized partisan politics, is to divide the mainstream class.

It is only by dividing us that the corrupt fascist globalist corporations and their government cronies rule.

Non violent civil disobedience al la Gandhi is the answer. It is that cohesiveness that the Orwellian dark forces seek to destroy.

They not only have destroyed America. They have wreaked misery and destruction in South America and foreign lands across the globe.

Their mo is to turn people against each other and create division and internecine warfare along racial, sex, afe, and political lines.

Let us all stand together and oust these despots. They are purposely creating this conflict. As Ross Perot said
“It’s time to take a shovel and clean out the barn”.

Jun 13, 2009 - 1:30 pm 93. Jan Van:

Ruben Navarrette Jr. is a very curious person. Your photos on the internet and you look like you just got off an airplane from Spain. You look like a Conquistador. But the mass of Mexicans are Indians and half-Indians who look nothing like you
In fact the pure (puro) bred Spanish (like you) are the ones who rule Mexico and oppress all those darker than them. Hypocrisy, thy name is Reuben Navarette

Jun 13, 2009 - 2:09 pm 94. fartuglyracistsexistpig:

Jan Van:

Hypocrisy or deliberate Machiavellian manipulation?

Jun 13, 2009 - 2:30 pm 95. I.M. Copper:

And here I thought selection to the highest Court in the land would have been about qualifications and scholarly acumen.

Those that hide behind the equal protection and affirmative action arguments that have been afforded to them by the Fourteenth Amendment, decrees, and case law then discard it at soon as it is politically convenient-usually around appointment time-will not receive legitimacy in their roles unless they distinguish themselves. For one to genuinely believe race, sex, descent, and other factors are not serious criterion for selection in any endeavor-especially high profile ones-are naive, blind, and lacking an astute nature.

To acknowledge sexism, racism, and discrimination, but not to acknowledge that reverse discrimination against White males does not exist is short-sided and morally indefensible-even for a liberal.

Jun 13, 2009 - 2:37 pm 96. Bill45:

Try a little honesty. Puts Sotomayor’s words in the mouth of Roberts or Alito, adjust for gender and ethnicity (Boricuan is an ethnicity, not a race) and see how YOU feel about having him on the Sct judging YOUR civil rights.

Jun 13, 2009 - 3:15 pm 97. Jan Van:

fartuglyracistsexistpig—-

Take Vicente Fox and the European/Spanish elite of Mexico…. Yes they are Machiavellian using their Indians as a battering ram against what they see as the Anglo United States. Catholic Spain and Protestant England were at war for centuries. Mexico vs USA is a continuation

Reuben is a just a fool who discovered he can make money shooting his mouth off

Jun 13, 2009 - 4:51 pm 98. Meryl:

43. Sparky

It’s ok. I forgive you.

What I actually mean is, don’t you DARE apologize! I like American men. The normal ones productively kick butt just by getting up and going to work in the morning.

Delia!!!!!!……..you make me laugh even when you don’t say anything!

Jun 13, 2009 - 8:52 pm 99. Horace Wells:

I wouldn’t nominate her, and like in Clarence Thomas, there is the element of tokenism involved. Aside from that, while she may not be the best, she is bright and certainly qualified. She is hardly some leftist straw woman some cranks here are making her out to be. Since her nomination is all but certain, barring some hiden bodies, venting and fuming and whining about racism (just like those awful liberals do) is not going to derail her. This is even a bigger non starter than those clowns protesting at Notre Dame who deluded themselves into thinking they were making history.

Jun 13, 2009 - 11:51 pm 100. Horace Wells:

What a bunch of whiners here!

Jun 13, 2009 - 11:54 pm 101. Meryl:

99.HoraceWells

“whining about racism (just like those awful liberals do) is not going to derail her”

How is it racism to quote racist things she has said, and ask that those things be acknowledged as part of who she is?

Or is this another instance where telling the truth brings accusations of launching a smear campaign?

Jun 14, 2009 - 1:04 am 102. Horace Wells:

Meryl
because she is not a racist and it is totally hypocritical to hear people on the right, who spend half their time complaining about being smeared as a racist & PC, go out and do the same to someone else. But I guess consistency and principle aren’t your strong points.
Oh I know, if a white male said something similiar he’d be smeared as a racist so you have to be just as petty as they are in a tit for a tat way and start your own smear campaign, which, BTW, is going nowhere

Jun 14, 2009 - 5:32 am 103. Brian Richard Allen:

Thanks, Blackwater, that about covers it for me, too.

And as for the racialist who spewed this vomitus, let our beloved fraternal republic’s door sully itself on neither his nor on Sotomayor’s ugly fat arse as he and she make their escape from all of the projected hatred and rage that clearly is visible only through the distorting lenses of their psychopathologically hesperophobic self and our-culture loathing!

This pair are clearly not yet fit to belong to the Judeo-Christian/Western/Human Civilization we have long vanguarded. And not fit, also, to comment on it.

Nor yet, as both have very well demonstrated, to even comprehend, let alone to adjudicate our nation’s Law.

Brian Richard Allen
Los Angeles Califobambicated 90028
And the Far Abroad

Jun 14, 2009 - 5:39 am 104. Delia:

102. Horace Wells:

Horace, if a white man had said those type of things [repeatedly *ahem*], you’re saying that it would have been ‘okay’ in the public eye? HA! RIIIIIIIIIIGHT. -And, I’ve got a bridge to sell ya, bucko.

BTW, it’s kind of pathetic that the only people who can’t have pride in their ethnicity are ‘white’ people now. ‘White pride’ is akin to racism now? LAME.

Jun 14, 2009 - 9:36 am 105. Meryl:

102. Horace Wells

“she is not a racist”

I thought racism was when an individual believed that their particular RACE gave them inherent perceived value and privilege over others….(like getting a stool at the coffee shop counter, using a different water fountain and rest room, getting better insurance rates).

Oh well. Based on your logic, even if she really is racist, it doesn’t matter because once upon a time, some white men WERE racist.

Well, shoot, looks to me like the only people qualified to be racists now (since “you have to have power to be a racist”) are going to be “people of color”. YaHOO!!!

What goes around comes around, Bunky, and here it comes. Don’t let it hit you in the head.

Jun 14, 2009 - 11:28 am 106. Dave Surls:

“because she is not a racist”

LOL. She’s a total bigot, and she ain’t ashamed to admit it.

Jun 14, 2009 - 12:21 pm 107. NMSC:

Look Mr. Navarrette, this isn’t hard. This has less to do with the wise Latina comment and everything to do with the Ricci case. The two put together spell trouble. Justices have to be as relevant in the distant future as they are now, and in the future, Sotormayer’s racist views will be irrelevant and outdated. That’s the point and that’s why she, just like Rehnquist, should have never been justices.

Jun 14, 2009 - 12:32 pm 108. Dave Surls:

“She is not only unfit but also unqualified.”

She’s qualified to be a toll-taker on the bridge or a cleaning woman (maybe)…just not qualified to be a judge.

Jun 14, 2009 - 12:58 pm 109. Self-hating Boomer:

Every once in a while, I have to post this, just to remind people that “racism” does have a definition.

From Merriam-Webster:

Main Entry: rac·ism
Pronunciation: \ˈrā-ˌsi-zəm also -ˌshi-\
Function: noun
Date: 1933

1 : a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
2 : racial prejudice or discrimination

Seems like a pretty snug fit to me.

Jun 14, 2009 - 6:22 pm 110. Ed Wallis:

Dear S-h B #109

You forgot one:

3 : screeds from Ruben Navarrette

(do ya think he might try a reverse-’Geraldo Rivera’…born Jerry Rivers…as a career enhancer, and become Rube Navaretsky)?!? heh

Jun 14, 2009 - 6:48 pm 111. Dan:

Mr Navarrette,

Ms. Sotomayor made a racist comment. If a white man had make the reverse of that comment about a hispanic woman, people would be ready to burn him at the stake.

This issue should not have anything to do with race or sex. Who cares if she is a hispanic woman? Who cares if she came from a poor background or that she put herself through school. Guess what? Please of people fit this profile. These are not qualifications to sit on the highest court in the land. She has sat on a federal bench for 17 years. She has won over 40 various awards for achievements and working with human rights.

What we need to be discussing here is not race or sexism. It is qualifications. It is articles like yours that take up people’s times and keep them distracted from what we really should be looking at: Does she qualify for the seat?

I honestly don’t care about her beating white males to get into a great school or that she wrote from some publication. And I do not care if her getting appointed is a “historic” event. Gee, can you think of a more stupid reason to put someone on the bench? In fact, if it was just a “historic” event, would that take away from other legit “historic” events?

Let’s actually take a look at some of her REAL achievements. Besides finishing 2nd at an Ivy League School and serving 17 years on a federal bench, I could not find a lot of additional information. I know that she has sat over a lot of important cases, yet no one talks about them.

It would just be nice for once if our press stopped talking about racism for once and tried informing the public for a change.

Jun 15, 2009 - 7:26 am 112. Avitar:

Connecticut is not a big place. When this wingnut racist bigot of a woman ruled that if New Haven did not have a woman or a Black to promote then they shouldn’t promote anybody she was curtainling fire department services for nearly 4% of the state.

We knew who she was before Obama decided that she should do to America what she does to Connecticut.

Jun 15, 2009 - 12:58 pm 113. stosh-o:

all i ever see anymore is latina news anchors,latino journalist,latin judges on t.v., hispanic this hispanic that..blah blah blah…but you know “white man bad!” basically we LET you write this terrible article.. thanks to the white man for being so nice lately…. black presidents.. blah blah blah….

Jul 1, 2009 - 3:21 pm 114. mike:

looks like rueben is mad at the white man again…hey rueben: your idenity crisis is leaking in to you professional life once again.

Jul 1, 2009 - 3:29 pm 115. mike:

dont foeget judge sodomizer won 8000 at bingo..now thats just racist!

Jul 1, 2009 - 3:31 pm

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed)
Comments: