On Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor

by Newt Gingrich

*UPDATE* Read my newsletter on Sotomayor here

Imagine a judicial nominee said "my experience as a white man makes me better than a latina woman" Wouldn't they have to withdraw? New racism is no better than old racism.

A white man racist nominee would be forced to withdraw. Latina woman racist should also withdraw.

Tag |

Email |

Print |

Comments

By cb12221 @ Wednesday, June 10, 2009 11:33 PM

I was thrilled and proud when Newt came out and stated she was a racist.
I was so disappointed when he retracted the statement.
We need the truth loud and clear. Appeasement loses.

By Anonymous @ Tuesday, June 09, 2009 11:19 AM

First and foremost let me say that Newt G. is an idiot. Anyone who can say that waterboarding is not torture....when the sole definition of waterboarding is a form of torture (that can cause extreme pain, dry drowning, damage to lungs, brain damage from oxygen deprivation, other physical injuries including broken bones due to struggling against restraints) should not be speaking for anyone. Furthermore he epitomizes why republicans are near extinction and widely viewed by the majority of younger voters as idiots.

M. Sotomayer may very well be a racist. In no way should racism ever be allowed in a position of leadership, but how many racist old-white supreme court justices have been appointed in us history. i'll say hundreds, so newt don't try to play the race card.... especially when you aren't the most "minority" friendly guy yourself.

By Anonymous @ Tuesday, June 09, 2009 10:46 AM

I agree 100%. Racism doesn't only exist in white people, but white people are the ONLY ones that are vilified for being racist. Whenever a race other than white makes a racial comment they always use the excuse that they were misquoted or misspoke or some other lame excuse, and all is forgotten. When a white person does it everybody wants to ruin the person and his family. This woman IS a racist and she should not be allowed on the Supreme Court. But of course she will be because nobody has the nerve to stand up and do anything about it. You're not allowed to be proud to be white these days. But it's okay to be a racist if you're a "Minority" and you can still get a pass. Who's the real minority here?

By Anonymous @ Tuesday, June 09, 2009 9:18 AM

Personally I think your an idiot, an the younger generation does not support you, an your words for Obama are meaningless, so stay in your place, an ride his ass

By Teri.L @ Saturday, June 06, 2009 10:26 PM

Why are we judging Sotomayor based primarily on words anyway? Even if her speech appeared to be racial or gender biased, which to me it did, let’s look at the whole picture.

First, focus on the organization NCLR, The National Council of La Raza ("The National Council of the Race") behind its respectable front, lies the real agenda, The La Raza agenda that led thousands of illegal immigrants down American streets, waving Mexican flags, brazenly defying our laws and demanding concessions. This organization, which fiercely defends that it is a civil rights group, not a hate group, is tied to another Hispanic organization called MEChA - a group who is not at all shy about its goals.

MEChA, a hate group with racist and separatist views, who has a motto “For the race everything, outside the race nothing”, states on their website, "As Chicanas and Chicanos of Aztlán, we are a nationalist movement of Indigenous Gente that lay claim to the land that is ours by birthright. As a nationalist movement we seek to free our people from the exploitation of an oppressive society that occupies our land. Thus, the principle of nationalism serves to preserve the cultural traditions of La Familia de La Raza and promotes our identity as a Chicana/Chicano Gente."

Sotomayor is a member of La Raza and is thereby also associated with MechA.

How is association with these groups any different than being associated with the KKK or the Black Panthers?

There is one BIG difference however that most taxpayers are probably are not aware of - neither the KKK or Black Panthers are funded by the US Federal government. La Raza on the other hand received over 15 million in Federal grants in one year. So guess who paid for those pro-amnesty marches across the US that I just mentioned?

The fact is these groups actions are considered de facto discrimination (not punishable by law); they contradict the ideals of that the founding fathers of the United States proclaimed. The fact that she is a member of one of these groups and is allowed to be a judge at all is appalling to me. What an outrage that the President of our country nominated her to the Supreme Court! Shame on you Obama.

I am not sure why Newt would retract his statement but I think that it was the right thing to do. Calling someone a racist is labeling which is an act of demeaning them. (Racist, racist, racist. Isn’t that what those opposed to American immigration policy call Americans?) It would have been better for him to describe her behavior which in my opinion speaks volumes about her character.

Anyone opposed ought to send Obama and their congressman or woman a letter. We voted these people into office and we need to hold them accountable.

By Anonymous @ Friday, June 05, 2009 12:23 PM

Newt. I have to echo the thougts of so many on this page. You have once again backed down and unnecessarily. We long for the good old days when you were not afraid to take on even the toughest of liberals. Now, no one can pressure you to be removed from any office, and yet you are still afraid to stand up like you used to. Please rethink your position, clarify it, and be at least ONE conservative who stands up for conservative values and positions. You have a great platform from which to do so...don't squander your opportunity. Just to the left it reads "Make Real Change Happen". Im not sure if you belive what your own website says.

By Anonymous @ Thursday, June 04, 2009 11:48 AM

I lost 2 key jobs in my working career because of minority racism and Spineless Newt is worried about offending minority racists! I will never vote for another Democrat and I will NOT vote for ANY Spineless Republican! Sotomayer is a far, far, far left wing nutcase extremist! Any Republican that supports IT is a RINO!

By Anonymous @ Thursday, June 04, 2009 10:26 AM

Newt, you are no better than the other lousy spineless "Republicans" serving in Congress.
First you capitulate to Pelosi and her envirowhacko agenda, appearing with her on a TV ad.
Now you surrender in a weak kneed, no guts manner apologizing for calling a spade a spade or a racist a rascist.
Sotomayor has SPOKEN and RULED, by definition, in racist fashion.
STAND UP and SPEAK THE TRUTH

By Anonymous @ Thursday, June 04, 2009 8:50 AM

Sonia Sotomayor is an incompetent judge for the following reasons: 1. She is a racist & sexist bigot. 2. She discriminated against fire-fighters based exclusively on their race. 3. She believes the 2nd Amendment does not apply to individuals. 4. She has ruled for eminent domain for the greater greed. 5. She has condoned and practiced legislating from the bench. All the rationalizations in the world do not begin to change the facts. She is not fit to be a judge, let alone a Supreme Court Justice. Rather than being nominated for the Supreme court, she should be impeached as an appeals court judge. However, she will be confirmed because common sense and clear thinking are dead. Welcome to Facist America!

By mickhughes @ Thursday, June 04, 2009 7:57 AM

The LA times has a story claiming that Newt retracted his statement about Sotomayor being a racist. Why did Newt fold. It's true...she's a bigot, a racist, and marxist ideolgue..just like Obama. I'm pissed off. What happened to your cajones Mr. Speaker?

By Anonymous @ Thursday, June 04, 2009 7:50 AM

I think she is trouble. She is too unpredicable. Her comments in the past and more recent show a two faced person. She can't be trusted with interrupting the law.

By Anonymous @ Wednesday, June 03, 2009 9:34 PM

It is clear that Sotomayor will be biased toward cases that affect her emotions. The law is not to be based on emotions...that is why it is law. I can't believe any American can sit back and let this woman be selected as a Federal Supreme Court Justice. It matters not that she is female, Latino or whatever. It is her blatant perception that the constitution is to be interpreted from her emotions, and that her decisions will be based on her own emotions. Ridiculous!

By Anonymous @ Wednesday, June 03, 2009 8:04 PM

That was just her opinion!! It should not be transformed into a racist issue !!!
Stop using Hate and Race and NO to rebuild the Republican Party it reflects the Old South of the 50's and 60's when White was the Law !!

By Anonymous @ Wednesday, June 03, 2009 6:42 PM

In regard to your retraction of "racist" label to a blatantly racist Supreme Court nominee: Newt, you have a very brilliant conservative mind, but like many of those that espouse themselves to conservatism these days, you lack testicles.

By Anonymous @ Wednesday, June 03, 2009 6:40 PM

I read about your apology....but Newt..it's to little...too late. Should have been a true man and apologized to her face.

By Anonymous @ Wednesday, June 03, 2009 5:10 PM

There were several remarks she made which gave me pause to reflect on how unbiased she is in her judgements. I hope these statements she has made will be addressed and questioned during the confirmation hearings.

By Anonymous @ Wednesday, June 03, 2009 4:51 PM

I'm personally not offended by her "racial" remarks, but with her nomination I feel like our goverment has lost it's sense of checks and balances. We need representatives from both parties to have a healthy checks and balances system in our government. Ms. Sotomayer is far to liberal and left wing, and I feel as though this was yet another political move of Obama's, as opposed to one that would benefit the country.

By Anonymous @ Wednesday, June 03, 2009 4:29 PM

Folks, keep in mind that the majority of opinions & posts in this blog (including the views of Newt Gringrich) are in the MINORITY of this country. Most Americans are open minded enough to let the process work for itself & not be swayed by one comment or the antics of Rush Limbaugh.

Unfortunately the Republican party is filled with politicians & conservative activists who jump at any opportunity to escalate an issue, at all cost. Calling this woman a racist is wrong & by doing so, you yourself are a racist.

By Anonymous @ Wednesday, June 03, 2009 3:07 PM

You went to the heart of the issue, it is all about rule of law and that to remain free each of us regardless of race, sex, etc. must be judged as an individual against the same standard. Inequality comes with using various standards and personal opinions. Any proposed Justice who qualifies otherwise, but is unwilling to use the same standard for all has just disqualified him/herself.

By Anonymous @ Wednesday, June 03, 2009 1:44 PM

I read the whole article and found it to be rather worrisome. First off, a judge should go by the letter of the law and if you are of color or poor, or female or rich, or white or male should not be a part of the equation. What should be the whole of your judgment is if the person broke the law and if in doing so it was self defence or just breaking the law. Murder is murder no matter where you started in life unless it is to protect yourself. theft is theft no matter what, and we do not need judges who look at race, sex or money making the call. A rich person that kills is just as guilty as a poor person, and reversed and it does not matter what color or sex you are. Where does sex, color or wealth come into it? The law is the law.

By Gailvandeurzen @ Wednesday, June 03, 2009 12:42 PM

Ms Sotomayor is 2 years older than I am. She is an American woman. I have never walked around calling myself a German, English, Irish American demanding better and different treatments. Her folks like my ancestors worked hard to provide a better life for her. Keep your heritage but be proud to be an American. I am a female and felt that her statements were very sexist and racist. Anyone of any race or sex can reach the top through hard work and sacrifice. Quit whining and complaining about other peoples who choose to be lazy and suck off the system because of their race. Poor me, can't do it, the world is against me. BULL

By Anonymous @ Wednesday, June 03, 2009 12:25 PM

Newt, I have admired you for years and what you have said about Judge Sotomayor is spot on! What is wrong with our party?!!! Why am I not hearing outrage from other members of our party who hold office?!!! I will be watching her confirmation hearings (hope they will be televised) and I pray that those questioning her will ask tough and fair questions. By the way, I'm a gretawire blogger and I love seeing you on On The Record.

By Anonymous @ Wednesday, June 03, 2009 12:20 PM

Since joining the GOP @ 18yrs old, I have continued to support most of the parties policies over the past 27 years. But, this latest attack on Sotomayor who was appointed by a Bush and later promoted by Clinton has caused me to change my alliance. The woman is more than qualified, and WILL BE CONFIRMED. Yet, another defection to the DEMS. How sad for the GOP!

By Anonymous @ Wednesday, June 03, 2009 12:17 PM

A warning Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee - if you vote for the racist latina then you will be voted out of office.

A racist should not be elevated to the Supreme Court.

A warning to Newt - it is time for you to be intellectually honest - she is a racist, stop waffling.

By Anonymous @ Wednesday, June 03, 2009 12:10 PM

I am very disappointed that you changed your description of Sotomayor. Words have meanings and she is not only a racist but also a sexist.

The context of her speech was pure bigotry. The faster you get back to your original conclusion the better.

Stop being a coward.

By Anonymous @ Wednesday, June 03, 2009 12:02 PM

See you finally came to your senses, Newt. It took some time, but I guess someone finally clued you in that it's in your own best interest to tone down the hate. I am positive you will from time to time, slither out from your rock and spew forth more division, dissent, fear, and hate, but for the time being, I will relish the peace and quiet......oh, the sound of silence! FORMER Speaker of the House is finally quiet!

By Anonymous @ Wednesday, June 03, 2009 11:53 AM

I was very disappointed to see you back away from your initial comment of "racist" in regards to Judge Sotomayor. The liberals will use this apology to justify their own convoluted thinking. If the term racist does not apply to Sotomayor, then we might as well remove it from the English language. Her speech clearly depicts her racist and sexist views. She believes that Latina women make better judges than white males.

I was especially struck by Judge Sotomayor's following comment:

"As recognized by legal scholars, whatever the reason, not one woman or person of color in any one position but as a group we will have an effect on the development of the law and on judging."

She clearly favors Latina women as a group to take over the Judiciary, and she readily admits that this bias affects her decision making process.

I hate to bring up the Hitler name, but this truly was the motivation of Hitler to advance the Arian race. If we can't apply the term "racist," then we might as well never use the term for anyone still living.

By Anonymous @ Wednesday, June 03, 2009 11:42 AM

Newt--Not you too............Where is the testosterone in this country? If I belonged to the KKK, I would be a racist, Sotomayor is a racist for belonging to "La Raza" where the founder clearly stated in the mission statement: "Whities are getting old and dying, blah, blah, blah, if worse comes to worse, we will kill them" Please---do not back down now, for Gods Sake!!

By billmangum @ Wednesday, June 03, 2009 11:34 AM

On Sotomayor. One definition of racism, and probably the best one, is "thinking one race is superior to another".
Having read a couple pages of Sotomayor's speech at Berkley, she defines herself as a racist, because all of her comments tell us that she thinks one race is better than another, La Raza. She speaks of being born of Puerto Rican parents in New York City, which does not even make her an immigrant, but rather a native born citizen. Yet she continually spouts the themes of La Raze, touting the Latinos and Latinas. During the great education she received in this country, her home country, apparently no one ever showed her the motto E Plurabus Unum, out of many, one.

Newt, you were not too harsh with your initial comments, you instead were not harsh enough. This woman does not espouse the values of our court system, she wants her rulings to be made from a racial standpoint, and the diversity that she so praises are actually a divisive influence.

She just isn't fit to be a Supreme Court Justice, especially with a record of being overturned by that court 67% of the time.

Bill Mangum

By Anonymous @ Wednesday, June 03, 2009 11:19 AM

Thank goodness that we have someone to speak the truth about all the losers that Obama is trying to get into the government. Thank you Newt.

By Lloyd D. @ Wednesday, June 03, 2009 11:04 AM

Newt--Nominee (Sotomayor) is a Bigot and with her history of bad judgement resulting in many reversals--She should not be nominated--I suggest that if [1] one Republican helps this nominee in then we need to know who he/she is so we will have the opportunity to vote that rep. out when the time comes. Thanks--God Bless and have a happy Fathers Day!!

By Anonymous @ Wednesday, June 03, 2009 11:03 AM

Thank you Newt....I am an American missionary living in Bolivia for 31 years. I adopted a struggling Bolivian mother (not Legally) with 3 children. I have a children's center at her parents home.
Latins are wonder people ... they are not bound to the laws of the land nor a schedule. The idea that we need a latin to hold up our laws and constitution is still several generation down the road .... and only if they have adapted into our American culture.
We are a German family with very different work values. USA was founded by hard working and giving people. Not scholarships and governmente handouts. Just look at the boarder problems and you will see Latins are there with their hands reaching out to recieve. Not give. "Pushing down door" Even breaking the system and asking for more.

Our family did not live in a getto. We lived on farms and worked and and helped other .... lets get it right... we already have a getto "hands out to recieve" presendent. _Spend it all and ask for more. Not even saying "thank you America". We already have a broken system on the south boarder.... Not even saying "thank You America". Latins generally do no say thanks.
I am retired in Bolivia and no one reaches out to me accept to ask for MORE from me.... even loans to church friends are not repaid.
Its NOT time to put any LATIN is such a high office and especially NOT for life. There are so many other places she could serve well. My adopted daughter helps me in many ways...... but I have to admit for all the I have done for that extended family.... they do VERY VERY little for me. I have educated them, I have paid their hospital bills, and I can't even get them to visit me let alone come clean my house....Anything they do they expect to be paid for it.
WHY ARE YOU VENTING JUST ONE PERSON?
PLEASE start looking for someone else. Please, thank you,

Clara Ueltschi, born 1938
in Vancouver WA ,
living in Santa Cruz,
Bolivia,

By Anonymous @ Wednesday, June 03, 2009 11:02 AM

Newt,
Why are you backing away from your statements about Sotomayor’s racism?

Liberals, no matter how wrong or misguided their purpose, will fight shoulder to shoulder to the last man. Conservatives, on the other hand, no matter how righteous or brilliant their purpose are forever engaging in hand wringing and self analyses when they ought to fight. You are right about her. Now just go do the right thing.

If the republicans don't get serious and fight this Supreme Court Nominee with everything they’ve got (a filibuster for example), if they won't fight for the rule of law, what, in God's name will they fight for?

For the life of me I can’t understand why so much that is obvious to the rest of the country is such a mystery to so-called conservatives in Washington. Any leader in Washington could be the next POTUS if they would just study Reagan's platform, believe it, and run on it.

Here’s how it works:
1.) Smaller Government
2.) Social Conservatism
3.) Fiscal Conservatism

Number "1" will draw the vote of most patriotic Americans who believe in free enterprise and the American dream.
Number "2" will draw the religious right
Number "3" will draw the Libertarians (sp?)
And suddenly, Shazzam, whole new coalition and a Republican in the White house…

Bush got “2” but he screwed up “1” and “3”. McCain was fuzzy on everything. His running mate was clear about all three and could be the next president.

This is not brain surgery.

Perhaps Washington conservative’s problem is that they actually care what liberals think. We out here in “fly over country” don’t . That is why our head is clear and theirs is not.

By Anonymous @ Wednesday, June 03, 2009 10:48 AM

Newt, I read your article about justice nominee Sotomayor and I commend you for taking the high road and scaling back on your initial accusation of racist. It has been my experience with some - NOT ALL - Hispanics in America and seems to be the EXACT case with judge Sotomayor that they are not racist but simply very hispanic-centric in ALL of their thinking and actions.
I enjoy a great deal of the culture from all the various Spanish-speaking people of the world and welcome it to be expressed and assimilated into our culture here in the United States but what all too often seems to occur is that our national culture is ignored or disregarded and only thereby becomes more and more diluted. I simply cannot see the logic in wanting to come to a country or be part of a country that too often people are continually trying to change. You hit the nail on the head when you stated that a while male making similar statements would be ousted from contention faster than a liberal to a tax hike. If she wasn't so "Latino-focused" in her speeches and so obviously focused in her thinking that she must make a Latina-statement I might think that she would belong on the supreme court. After reviewing all the EXPLICIT evidence showing who she really is and what she stands for I for one implore the Republican Senate members to oppose her nomination with full force. One has to ask why Latinos or Hispanics as a whole weren't up in arms when the nomination of Alberto Gonzales was blocked. Lastly, let's be dignified and rise above the name-calling tactics of the liberals that blogger "rdarling" posted just this morning. We conservatives can be better than that. I wish not to judge Ms. Sotomayor since I have not lived her life or experienced her life's trials. She may simply be what she is because of all that and we, under the same circumstances might well be the same. I hold no malice for her but simply want for someone more open and impartial to be appointed to the high court. They are there to UPHOLD the law - not interpret it - for ALL AMERICANS equally.

By Anonymous @ Wednesday, June 03, 2009 10:44 AM

I read her entire speech. Two observations-
1. If a white or conservative appointee of any variety had said the same thingm they would have been drummed out ot the process by the press and the liberals.
2. Taken in its entirety the comment is not as racist as it appears. She says "I am also not so sure that I agree with the statement. First, as Professor Martha Minnow has noted, there can never be a universal definition of wise. Second, 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.'
Note she denies that a standard of "wise" exists. Therefore "a better conclusion" now also has no standard. Better conclusion is what she defines as better.
I did find the speech interesting as it tries to examine the effect our personal culture has on our ability to judge. She did claim to aspire to be able to overcome that as long as she was dealing in a realm that hd been previously expored. But an unexplored realm is open for the extrapolation of herr personal culture not exploring the Constitution.
I think she is still too preocuped with race and gender as is pretty consistent with the Liberal establishment.

By Anonymous @ Wednesday, June 03, 2009 10:08 AM

Well, her words were taken drastically out of context. Perhaps whatever she was speaking of in the terms of a white man not being able to come to a better conclusion than herself may have been understandably applicable. Perhaps she was speaking for an citizen who's had a hard life - and whoever was opposing her was a white man born into affluent society, while she was not, who was not able to sympathize with said citizen. She may have been pointing out that her background and Latina heritage (one that is oft, unfortunately, persecuted in the US) had given her leverage over the white man in terms of experience.

By tillerman @ Wednesday, June 03, 2009 9:59 AM

Sotomayor must withdraw. It is the only correct thing for her to do. But as in the past with all Democrats thinking for the common good of the country is not their main interest. She must be ' Borked'

By rdarling @ Wednesday, June 03, 2009 9:27 AM

I am not surprised so far with all the idiotic crap this current administration has pulled, and I will not be surprised if this racist bitch gets appointed, what surprises me is the way the people of this country allow all this crap to continue.

By Anonymous @ Wednesday, June 03, 2009 9:00 AM

as one who has the unfortunate experience of going thru a lenghty probate court following the death of my father I would say I agree with the fact that judges do impact our lives . A person claimed to be my fathers daughter without any legal proof except for a forged document her mother signed my dads name to . she ultimately had her name listed as a lineal descendant and then sued us and she was awarded my dads entire estate . My dad was 76 years old when he died the fraud commited in court made me angry and bitter . We his biological and legal heirs had no sympathy from the judge . No dna test no birth-certificate and no marriage to her mother but still she had more rights than we did .

By Anonymous @ Wednesday, June 03, 2009 8:49 AM

Not much here of substance, but surely a lot of hate and retardation.
Judge S. makes quite a few interesting comments: "a deeply confused image of itself that is in perpetual tension"; "feminist theories of judging are in the midst of creation"; "there is no objective stance but only a series of perspectives - no neutrality, no escape from CHOICE in judging"; "personal experiences affect the facts that judges CHOOSE to see"; "... better conclusion than a white male" - and more.
Mainly she discusses race and gender bias cases, and advocates for more women and people of color on the various judiciary benches SO THAT "WE CAN FINALLY MEASURE THE DIFFERENCES WE WILL AND ARE MAKING". To me, Judge S' bottom line is for more decisions in favor of race or gender bias 'victims', and the only way to achieve that result is to "figure out how we go about creating the opportunity for more women and people of color on the bench". This espouses an opinion that there aren't enough decisions in favor of people ALLEDGING race or gender bias --- it's very troubling to me that she's predisposed in that way. I think that is what should be explored in the congressional hearings on her appointment.

By Anonymous @ Wednesday, June 03, 2009 8:02 AM

If Judge Sotomayor believes that a judge's role is to interpret the constitution and the law then why would she give lectures saying (1) judges make policy, (2) life experience should be one of a judge's decision making tools and (3) a female judge can fix a world dominated by the power and words of men.

I am very concerned about this nominee!

By Anonymous @ Wednesday, June 03, 2009 6:49 AM

I think we as American people better wake up and get involved in what is going on. To much of American is being sold off. We have to fight for our right that being over taken, by liberal views, this country was and should always be first Under God, second for the people. And what I am seeing and hearing, we are make America a target of weakness, and our jobs,,, thank you Clinton for signing the bill that sent our job over seas. Thank the bullies in Washington for GM, Chrysler , how does that make America strong. Send weapons throught Russia... Hello, it does not take a smart person to know where this is headed.
We are can not keep bailing people out, and we can not give on Party of Bullys so much power to rule, this is and never will be good for our country.. So it is time to wake up America, and say enough is enough, Not on my watch. Lies and deciet needs to come to and end. Palosi treason is still a crime in America and you are the biggest a fender of such. America wake up get involved, stop hiding your head in the sand, Remember what we stand for, America one Nation under God, remember History repeats itself. Look back and see what history says .. what is it telling us, what is our example left to us by our Four Fathers. This is not what they would have us doing believe you me. Sell off America, buying what we can not pay for, Job need to be brought back to America, Secure our Boards, Help the small business, no the big Corporations, for they have always been the one to pull us out . Start making things here again in America. What do we make now ? That is my point, Our goverment has sold us out. Wake up time!

By Anonymous @ Wednesday, June 03, 2009 6:39 AM

The woman is racist or the comment would not have been made. A judge is supposed to adjudicate based on the law....not hand down rulings based on his/her own life experiences or what he/she would like the law to be. When taking the oath of office, I am sure it requires one to swear or affirm that he/she will follow the law....not be a creator of law. She should not be confirmed....but she will..............

By bantan8 @ Tuesday, June 02, 2009 1:25 PM

As a U.S. Citizen-Costa Rican I can't figure out why Americans have difficulty accepting that to Latin American people her words " White male" means she is referring to Americans/Americanos and is used when mocking,insulting, being racist against Americans, it is common lingo. Latin Americans do not get insulted that Republicans call her a racist since her comment in racist in the view of Latin Americans and besides she is Puerto Rican, a Caribbean/Islander, not a Latin American. They'll consider her Hispanic only because they speak Spanish in Puerto Rico. The question Latin Americans have is why didn't President Obama find an Latin American-US born descendant from Columbia, Costa Rica, Chile, Venezuela, Honduras, Nicaragua, Argentina if he is trying to satisfy the Latin vote? Puerto Rican doesn't count and neither do Cubans as they are Caribbean/Islanders.

I as a U.S.Citizen-Costa Rican don't want anyone prejudice in the U.S. Supreme Court regardless of their ancestory,heritage or whom it might please.

Solis

By Gary Clark @ Monday, June 01, 2009 8:44 AM

I think the first indication was when the comment came out that Obama wasn't Black enough to have endured the sufferage of a real African American.
His responce was that he was a child of the civil rights era, that his parents had first met in the 1965 civil rights march from Selma to Montgomery Alabama. But Barack Obama was born in 1961.

By Gary Clark @ Monday, June 01, 2009 8:25 AM

Imagine if it were a Klansman standing outside a polling place in Phidelphia

By Anonymous @ Monday, June 01, 2009 12:52 AM

Newt, unfortunately you have been living with your eyes closes for years. You do not and will never be in Sotomayor's shoes and so you will never understand a minorities view and experiences with discrimination. The reps, you and rush, do not know the struggle she has gone through. She is not racist, if she was, she would not stand up for people's rights in our courts, more of her verdicts would be thrown out if she were. You have fear in your heart and with that fear, you feel you must spread your hate for someone who does not see what you want them to see. I feel sorry for people like you and rush. Comments like hers raise eyebrows because a minority woman has said it, if it were a white man like yourself....well, we minorities would expect it.

By angieC0972 @ Sunday, May 31, 2009 8:56 PM

It is ok to feel you have gained much knowledge and life experiences being a Latina woman, but lets not confuse that with rulings that she will make sitting on the highest court in the land. It is ok to be an activist for minority rights, but not on the bench. It would irresponsible for people to not question if she can seperate her heart from the facts of a case that must be decided by and only by the laws our founders put in place. Empathy has no place when interpreting the law. The judge may have an outstanding record, but before a person is placed in this high power for life, no stone should be unturned to make sure they are the right person for the job.

By Anonymous @ Sunday, May 31, 2009 6:07 AM

"Real Change Requires Real Change". That's brilliant, who came up with that one?

By Anonymous @ Saturday, May 30, 2009 10:40 PM

Just a quick comment about the Justice. If Justice S. is a racist against white males, then why did she descent against having pappas fired from the New York City Police Department for making racist comments against blacks and jews (see pappas v giuliani). Here is the comment that pappas sent via email from the comfort of his house, "The fliers asserted white supremacy, ridiculed black people and their culture, warned against the "Negro wolf... destroying American civilization with rape, robbery, and murder," and declaimed against "how the Jews control the TV networks and why they should be in the hands of the American public and not the Jews." She was against the white male supremacist being fired for making these comments because it was covered under the 1st amendment. How, then, is she racist against white males again, when she supported a white male supremacist comments as a protection of free speech, which were against BLACKS and JEWS?

By Anonymous @ Saturday, May 30, 2009 6:56 PM

Some of we seniors who have spent our entire lives working for our country and caring for ourselves, our families, our friends and imitating Christ, are feeling a glimmer of hope now that we have a man in the White House who is honest, cares about the people before his own entitlement. I wish that you and others who pretend to talk change could actually realize that change only comes when you open your heart and your damn pocketbook.

By muskie @ Saturday, May 30, 2009 11:41 AM

What do Rodney King and O.J tell us about Sotomayor? Quite a lot, actually.

As a headline that is, of course, preposterous. As an illustration of the dangerous nature of a Supreme Court justice who is predisposed to allowing “life experiences” to influence the application of law, it is not.

It is impossible to ignore the influence that “life experiences” played in the outcome of the Rodney King case and the O.J. murder trial. Not only in the verdicts then but in the reactions to them as well. In each case law was applied to achieve a particular result. In both cases the result was injustice. The fallout, in the case of the King trial, was tragic. In the O.J. case it allowed a murder to go free.

A verdict should be the derivative of applying law….period. A legal system is one of the foundations of civilization. It is the fair application of the law that allows for progress. In its absence you have anarchy.

Does this mean that if Sotomayor is confirmed that there will be no justice for victims of brutal police departments and murderers? Of course not. But it does mean that democracy defined as “of, for and by the people” becomes less robust. Allowing unelected judges to influence legal outcomes on anything but blind application of law chips away at that central tenant of American life.

Law is complicated and requires the best and brightest. Most importantly, it requires a judicial temperament. That means that rulings, even when they do not fit your view of how the world should work, need to be unbiased. Anything less weakens our society.

By muskie @ Saturday, May 30, 2009 11:39 AM

Lots of haters in here

By Anonymous @ Saturday, May 30, 2009 10:44 AM

The new form of racism is to project racism on others. The great thing about projection (and the reason it is a central plank of the Progressive paradigm) is that it allows the central power brokers to divide and conquer while no one knows the orgins of the divisiveness.

Speaking of projection. most people who make claims to empathy are usually doing nothing more than projecting their emotions on others. I would rather have judges making decisions on what actually happened than making decisions on the images they project onto others.

By John Ansell @ Friday, May 29, 2009 11:36 PM

Wow Newt, looks like the truth is bait for the troglodytes to come out of their caves. Great job.

By Anonymous @ Friday, May 29, 2009 11:08 PM

Thank god your not in charge!! hope you enjoyed your life in politics because it's over. But just think you can get a show like rush or hannity and spread your hate everday!

By Anonymous @ Friday, May 29, 2009 4:19 PM

I LOVE IT!!! Three loud mouths who are really tough when it comes to slamming a woman, but never put on the uniform of their country. Could it be that Rush Limbought-oxy, Newter, and the dickless x-VP, are just too chicken when it comes to manly things? Could you picture these three in school? In your wildest dreams could you see any of them being picked for a lunch pick-up game? LOL LOL LOL They are all synonyms for cats. Isn't it always the wimps who get picked on in school who become the vengeful jerks.

By Anonymous @ Friday, May 29, 2009 4:12 PM

I just want to THANK whomever controls the strings to Newt's mouth. I sure hope he keeps coming up with these ridiculous comments. Newt is the poster child for the recruitment of more and more Democrats. Newter, Rush Limbought-illegal pills, and Flush-the-Cheney, will help keep Democrats in control of government for decades to come. Thank you slimy lizard name.

By Anonymous @ Friday, May 29, 2009 4:06 PM

Someone posting here called Newt a snake oil salesman. As a snake oil salesman, myself, I would never stoop to the level of that loud mouth. Please note that Newt, the name of my favorite slimy lizard, is simply a noise-generator. He adds nothing of value to the discussion, IMHO. He's all heat, and no light. Just like Rush Limbought-oxy, and Prick Cheney. These loud mouths serve only to magically change formerly good people, into selfish morons, who believe we still live in the old west, or in the late 1700s, where there were only a few million people. The simpletons who follow the knee-jerks above don't want a country, they want to live in a company.

By Anonymous @ Friday, May 29, 2009 2:41 PM

Hahaha......go fishing with W.........better yet, retire and go hunting with Cheney!

By Anonymous @ Friday, May 29, 2009 2:39 PM

Newt, even members of your own party are saying that your comments and Rusho's were inappropriate. When are you going to retract your statement and make a formal appology? Oh,never mind......I get it.......when pigs can fly. Oh, speaking of pigs......Newt, Rushbo.......Happy hating!

By Anonymous @ Friday, May 29, 2009 12:20 PM

Newt's comment doesn't take the comment made by Ms. Sotomayor to a oversimplified status at all. Just ask yourself the question that Newt proposes, and look at it objectively. Once you have done that, this statement is clearly true. No one would stand for a white man making the converse of Sotomayor's original statement. End of story!

By Anonymous @ Friday, May 29, 2009 10:51 AM

And the President just smiles...

By the time Obama's one term is over - he will have set race relations back in this country by decades.

You "anonymous" liberals with your hypocritical double-standard are PATHETIC.

By Anonymous @ Friday, May 29, 2009 9:45 AM

And this...from one of the greatest BIGOTS to ever walk the earth. Newt Gingrich, you should be ashamed of yourself, but you're to selfish, self-indulged and self-centered to know how to be.

Do the U.S. a favor...Retire, go fishing with George W., Jump of a bridge, but only after suggestion the other Right Wing nuts who follow your twisted mindset agree to jump with you.

Republican? More like disgrace!

By Chookon @ Friday, May 29, 2009 2:00 AM

Sotomayer believes private gun ownership should be illegal....Leave it to Obama to nominate a hyper-liberal ,anti-constitution,anti 2nd amendment radical kook cloaked as a minority woman hoping the minority status would prevail in squelching any criticism of this left wing zealot.

‘Sotomayor is a graduate from Princeton University, where her legal theses included “Race in the American Classroom“, and “Undying Injustice: American ‘Exceptionalism’ and Permanent Bigotry“, and “Deadly Obsession: American Gun Culture“. In this text, the student Sotomayor explained that the Second Amendment to the Constitution did not actually afford individual citizens the right to bear arms, but only duly conferred organizations, like the military. Instead of making guns illegal, she argues that they have been illegal for individuals to own since the passing of the Bill of Rights.

Source:

http://exposingliberallies.blogspot.com/2009/05/sotomayer-opposes-second-amendment.html

Isnt that the typical Liberal...advocates that Illegal Aliens should not have to obey the law of the land while in the same breath trys to deny law abiding citizens their 2nd amendment rights. This woman is dangerous to america,americans,and the constitution.

she argues that they have been illegal for individuals to own since the passing of the Bill of Rights.

there is no room for constitutional revisionist on the supreme court or in america.

Lets be clear...NO ONE in the main stream believes that the bill of rights applies to anything but INDIVIDUALS...the whole purpose of the bill of rights was to protect the rights of the INDIVIDUAL from the state....The GOP must mount the strongest opposition to this appointment it has ever mounted to any appointee...the GOP must drain the democrats of every ounce of its political capital in this upcoming fight...your constitutional rights depend on it.

By Chookon @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 10:36 PM

Thanks for the grammer lesson, i agree your sex and your ancestory are irrelevant. However it is you who brought them up so dont blame me for the irrelevancy.

Interesting factoid about the english language, one need only to spell with 60% accuracy to be well understood..you pass the test..however it is you who should look up the definition of " Student"...see ya later grasshopper...wax on..wax off..you'll be a good secretary someday...hopefully for a successfull attorney

By Chookon @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 10:36 PM

By Anonymous @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 10:29 PM

Chookon: You are border line illiterate.....seriously. Because I am Italian-American and a female, really has no correlation or relevancy to cracking a law book.......I can't seem to make the connection or even figure out the simplest (simpleton) component to your argument. Also, the word, "vagina" needs only capitalization when it begins a sentence. It is not a proper noun. Non only do you fit into the " no nothing about the Constitution or US government" category, you suck at the very language that I am sure, you recognize as the only language on this planet.....ENGLISH!

Educate yourself bubba, and quit relying on the Newtster to do it for you!

So what a

By Chookon @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 9:45 PM

Just because you have a Vagina and are of Italian ancestory dosnt make you the only one who has ever cracked a law book...for example even "former speakers of the house retain their 1st amendmend rights...maybe its YOU who should shut up and sit down till you get that through your left wing liberal brain cells...all two of them

By Anonymous @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 9:38 PM

As a second-generation Italian-American FEMALE, I concur that Antonin Scalia (yeah, like Antonin is an Italian name, perhaps, Antonio.....) is an idiot. He is so far reicht he needs to look left to see Mussolini. I believe it was Nixon that really wanted an Italian American on the bench. Well, that didn't happen until later and we got Anotonin......yeah. Thanks Party of No for always thinking of "We the People."

I am a law student and have read many of Justice Scalia's rulings. He surprised me a few times with his ruling on Fourth Amendment rulings.......search and seizure for you Newt fans that have never taken a basic U.S. Government class or know virtually nothing about the Constitution other than what this clown and El Rushbo twist.

Judge Sotomayor will do just fine and you neocons need to settle down. We voted loudly for change and that is what we want and that is what we are getting, Newt: sit down, shut-up and just go away.......remember the definition of the word, "FORMER."

By Chookon @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 9:33 PM

Rush Limbaugh is an unadulterated liberal waterboy for the GOP.Just Like G.W.Bush and Rove are liberals to me..and you are a race-baiting left wing bigot...take your race-baiting liberal bigotry back to the left wing liberal sewer from where it came...you have no game and your race baiting dosnt cut here...save it for the next meeting of the progressive caucus.

By Anonymous @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 9:29 PM

Rush Lymbaugh whom you support is an unacredited radio talk show host. He is a drop out and has little knowledge. Rush being racist and you supporting him makes you a racist. Well you might think that is outrageous and that's what I think about the fact that you call Soto a racist. She just commented a personal opinion, free speech and you took her comment out of context. May God punish you, shame on you.

By Chookon @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 8:53 PM

Sonia Sotomayor is the liberal, left wing stench from the bench that will make you clench.

This woman is a far left wing ideologue,a member of LaRaza,and has openly professed that illegal Aliens need not obey the law of the land...no wonder Obama apointed her ! She has no values in protecting the constitution and the rule of law,she is interested only in her far left wing,radicalized LaRaza agenda. She is wholely disqualified from serving on the Supreme Court.The GOP should force obama and his socialist democrats to expend every ounce of political capital they have in trying to get this woman on the court.A 24 month confirmation hearing is in order.Not only no, but Hell No to This left wing extremist sotamayor

By Anonymous @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 7:41 PM

the left winger who said a bout the italian picks was a goof more italians died in ww2 for this county than any other group if you left wingers are all obamas yes men i want him to fail and his pick to

By Chookon @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 6:55 PM

By Anonymous @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 6:48 PM
Well, I did go to the New York Times site to read her speech in its entirety, and guess what...the quote is NOT taken out of context and the speech is NOT about "reverse discrimination and political correctness". In fact, Sotomayor says that (paraphrased) although 9 white males have addressed discrimination in the past, there's no guarantee they would do so in the future, so the important thing is to stack the courts with lots of minorities to ensure the "right thing" will be done.

This is more racism: the idea that only minorities can be counted on to do the right thing, and that they will all vote the same way.

Not only racists...but sexist as well...

By Anonymous @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 6:48 PM

Well, I did go to the New York Times site to read her speech in its entirety, and guess what...the quote is NOT taken out of context and the speech is NOT about "reverse discrimination and political correctness". In fact, Sotomayor says that (paraphrased) although 9 white males have addressed discrimination in the past, there's no guarantee they would do so in the future, so the important thing is to stack the courts with lots of minorities to ensure the "right thing" will be done.

This is more racism: the idea that only minorities can be counted on to do the right thing, and that they will all vote the same way.

By Chookon @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 6:41 PM

The Bottom Line...

In the spirit of impartiality and bi-partisanship the GOP should provide the EXACT same impartiality and bi-partisanship in Obama's supreme court appointment as the Democrat filth gave to Clarance Thomas and Judge Bork....after all the liberals seem to profess "fairness"...this would only be "fair" ... funny how pretentious and blameless this snot-nosed, left wing filth pretends to be...as if people dont remember how THEY handle judicial appointments....puhleez left wingers...grow a brain cell

By Chookon @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 6:20 PM

Yes, i capitalized the words Vagina and Spanish.....watch this....if i capitalize AND put these words in brackets these left wing imbeciles will go absolutely apoplectic...as far as your little race bait card....go back to your liberal sewer from where you came and maybe that thin veneer will be welcome...your race baiting ploys are purely transparent here...oh yes...{Vagina and Spanish ancestory} now make ready the padded room for the left wing imbeciles

By Anonymous @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 5:55 PM

I just read the entire speak by Sonia Sotomayor at The New York Times site (here: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/15/us/politics/15judge.text.html?_r=3&pagewanted=all)

For shame on any of you who do not have the decency to research something for yourself (including you Newt, who I must assume did not read the entirety of her speech in order to expose yourself in such an ignorant manner).

The entire speech is about the difficulties still being faced with discrimination by all people (due to reverse discrimination and political correctness).

Read the speech for yourself first. I am so sorry that you have exposed yourself in such a shameful manner. Actually, this goes for all Republicans on the "Remove Sonia for her naughty racists comments" campaign. Taken out of context, anything can be weaved and warped and twisted to meet your own needs.

By Anonymous @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 5:34 PM

I was saddened by your comments regarding this issue. I even cried when I learned about the comments you & some Republicans made yesterday. I have always been a die hard Republican Puerto Rican. Latinos tend to be very conservative regarding the issues that the Republican Party stands for. My father in-Law helped Bush Senior’s campaign during the primaries & I have a Picture of them together back then. Now I'm having second thoughts regarding what party I belong to. First of all Puerto Ricans are not immigrants. We are US Citizens. Puerto Rico is a Commonwealth of the Unite States just like Washington D.C., The American Virgin Islands, & Guam. I was a proud Reagan voter. You should have read the entire article regarding Sotomayor's comments. May God forgive you for your verbal injustice. The Latinos & Puerto Ricans I know feel that your comments show who the real racist is. Very sad :-( Thank you for letting us vent with our comments

By Anonymous @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 5:22 PM

Based on the majority of the comments posted below, very safe assumption that not a whole hell of a lot people like or respect you, Newtster.

Are you following all this on Twitter, Newtster? What will the next blog topic be about? Who will you label the next
"socialist" or "racicst" Oh, I know! Please bag on the first family's dog, again. That was real fun and it demonstrated your level of maturity! Yeah, let's pick on the dog.

Or, perhaps you can recycle some of those brilliant failed, miserable, and tired ideas of the past. You know, refresh our memories on how cutting taxes on the wealthy will create jobs?

Oh, I can hardly wait for the next episode of....."HOW THE STOMACH TURNS." Don't change that Newt channel!

By Anonymous @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 4:44 PM

This blod is for Newt and everyone here hates him. . lol He just can't accept defeat.

By Anonymous @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 3:58 PM

I love it that someone wrote:"This argument is not about your distain for Republicans or their figure heads"

Claiming Newt, Rush, and Cheney are your figure heads, reminds me that Germans put Hitler on their stamps. You fools are so stupid you don't realize that these people will keep you out of the white house for many years to come. But that's a great thing, so all I can say is "Thanks a lot!"

By Anonymous @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 3:54 PM

I love it that some jerk capitalized the word vagina... "Vagina and Spanish ancestory."

That this dolt would even make the statement above just indicates that he can't think beyond ones private parts or parent's nationality. I guess if he were an undercover agent, he'd wear bright yellow, with strobe lights across his chest.

Your words show your bigotry without the need for your further explanation.

By Anonymous @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 3:50 PM

Some Republican idiot wrote something so stupid which I refute below. They wrote:
"Do you know that out of 6 opinions of Judge Sotomeyer's that went to the Supreme Court 4 of them were reversed! Think....Read....Get Educated and stop the hate"****** You moron, you are the one who needs to get educated, you need to think because you only have learned to "read and rote." Obviously, you know nothing about appeals or the courts. Yet you feel qualified to comment about them based only on the bull you get fed by haters, like, in my opinion, Gingrich. You don't even know that the average for overturned appeals from the Supreme Court IS 60%. So you mock someone who fits right into that number. I'd tell you to read and get educated, but you don't even have the capacity to THINK!

By Chookon @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 3:46 PM

This particular individual posesses a Vagina and Spanish ancestory...in the liberal mind this innoculates the candidate against criticism irrespective of how foolhardy this jurists decisions have been.How untempered her speech has been...clearly by the mere comments this jurists has made in this regard exhibit a loose tongue ,lack of forethought,and sheer sloppiness in consideration of the impact her words have...this in itself disqualifies this jurist from the supreme court....these mistakes she has made are purely sophmoric in nature....amatures are not needed on the supreme court...even if they do posess a vagina and hispanic ancestory.

By Anonymous @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 3:43 PM

I always find it interesting and ask myself why people calling themselves Americans, in the great tradition of freedom and fair play, fall in line behind such hate mongers as Gingrich, Limbaugh, and Cheney, in my opinion. These sad excuses for human beings deal in fear, hate, and racism, and many reading these comments are no better. America, where hate is the national Republican pastime. I don't believe in Jesus, but I'm so much more moral than those on this site who claim they do. So much for religion being where morals come from.

By Anonymous @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 3:33 PM

This argument is not about your distain for Republicans or their figure heads, it's about OUR freedom as American citizens. Do any of you naysayers know anything about her judgments? Do you know that out of 6 opinions of Judge Sotomeyer's that went to the Supreme Court 4 of them were reversed! Think....Read....Get Educated and stop the hate

By Anonymous @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 3:32 PM

To the newt apologist who said we are owned by China? You just prove how stupid Republicans are. We are only owned by China because George AWOL Bush had to borrow so much money for his winless war in Iraq. He sold us to China because of his 'daddy issues.' So when you think of the trillions we owe to China... think "Mission Accomplished."

It's my constitutionally protected right to be vulgar. However you are right. I shouldn't be vulgar around children... like you.

By Anonymous @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 3:29 PM

I love Obama's Supreme Court Pick. She will be a star compared to the mute porn addict, and the Italian jerk who thinks ridiculous means intelligent. Both morons.

Hey Obama, make the next pick more liberal please! If he/she makes Newt mad, you'll know you did the right thing.

Republicans are whining little cry babies who love to play the 'victim' of the left. Wimps. Pussies.

By Anonymous @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 3:26 PM

First, please refrain from your vulgar comments. Victims you say? The democratic party has made victims of the poor and minorities throughout their existence by allowing them to think Government is the answer to all their problems. Our country is now owned by China thanks to big government and a new president that has outspent generations. Who's the victim now? You are.

By Anonymous @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 3:24 PM

Newt, Rush, Cheney, and AWOL Bush: never cared enough about America to put on the uniform.

Oh, yeah, Bush did put one on to play fly-boy on the aircraft carrier with the infamous sign, "Mission Accomplished." If destroying America was his mission, he almost accomplished it.

By Anonymous @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 3:21 PM

If an ex drug addict took down a child abductor that was kidnapping your child would you object? I think not. It's fine if you don't like Newt, but this is not about him, it's about appointing a clear racist to our Supreme court. Be smart, this isn't high school drama class.

By Anonymous @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 3:19 PM

Anyone who approves of Newt, Rush, or Cheney, has become a victim. These jerks have convinced formerly good people, to become bad people. Republicans, when I was one, would never take on the role of a victim. But now, Republicans have turned into cry babies. Poor little children who blame the left for their problems. If you like Newt, Cheney, and Rush, you are a wimp who needs these bozos to get you going about topics you don't understand.

Republicans- the pussies of the USA.

By Anonymous @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 3:16 PM

Why do the liberal always choose to deflect what is wrong onto someone else? Does it make you feel good to point out Newts past mistakes? Newt's not the person nominated for the Supreme Court folks. His past (We all have one) does not negate him from speaking the truth now. Obama has a past too incase you forget. Yet he doesn't get called out when mudslinging. I am never surprised by the ignorance of the left.

By Anonymous @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 3:15 PM

My Opinion: Newt - never served in uniform. Cheney - never served in uniform. Rush - never served in uniform and required the gov't support when he lost his job. Bush - AWOL.

Arrogant repuklicans preaching about topics they were too chicken to participate in.

Repuklican wimps and pussies.

By Aben @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 3:10 PM

Newt, when the Socialists DemocRATS have no reply, they resort in calling names. I am a Hispanic male and agree Sotomayor has displayed Racist attitudes, even in her courtroom. It is an insult to say we Hispanics want someone like her to represent me. My vote and my values are not contingent whether the DemocRATS keep Hispanics as servents, ignorant and waiting to receive the bones they will throw at us. Obama thinks we will continue to vote a party in because he gives the very worst a society can offer. My vote will be counted, but not to this elitists lies.

By Anonymous @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 3:09 PM

...And let's not forget that other piece of sh!t, in my opinion, Prick Cheney. Rush, Newton, Prick; disasters alway seem to come in threes...

By Anonymous @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 3:07 PM

On Gingrich's remark about our new Supreme Court pick:

What can you expect when his own parents named him after a slimy lizard?

This failed politician has it easy as a sniper without any responsibility. It's easy to cut-down, but hard to create. I've seen nothing in Newt's wasted life that will remain after he's gone for a minute. My opinion: Rush Limbought-oxy, and Newt, two large pieces of sh!t that we should just forget, now.

By Anonymous @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 2:57 PM

Wow……now, you are labeling Judge Sotomayor a racist……and you, Newt are a draft dodger. You wrap yourself so tightly in our flag, but where were you during Viet Nam or any other conflict for that matter? Please explain to your public, FORMER Speaker of the House. How did you manage dodging the draft? We are all anxious to know. You love the spot light enlighten us.

Why do you support thousands of American men and women getting their asses blown off in both Afghanistan and Iraq but you never ever saw a "front line,” a war zone, or a blown up village. How can you be so hypocritical? Tell us what your plans are in helping our returning soldiers?

You appear to have all the answers or at least opinions on many issues, but I have never heard you once utter a single word on this topic. Is that because you have taken it upon yourself to criticize our President on virtually everything he proposes because you have no real solutions or ideas on how to address any issue that our Country faces? Is this what would be deemed a diversion tactic? Are you jealous or just obsessed with the fact that our President is leading our Country in the right and not reicht direction?

Why don't we see any of your own comments on this blog, Newt? Do you take the time to read your own blog and see what your public thinks? Do you ever see how they really feel?

Your thinking is seriously in the minority, Newt. Roughly 21% of the country buys into your rhetoric (b/s). Does that concern you? Or would it be better to say that, like your partner in chaos, El Rushbo, should you be considered a special class because you are now an oppressed minority? Those are Rushbo's words...See, Karma is beautiful and works in very mysterious ways......what goes around ,comes around. And for all your oppression, this is mild in comparison.

Sorry this is so long, but I really despise you, Newt. I believe you are a hypocrite, an ego maniac, a draft dodger, a dead beat dad, a narcissist, and just an all around jerk. Oh and BTW, the military , which was a huge "base" for the Party of NO, is now jumping ship. Most enlisted personnel are........Democrats and LOVE President Obama!

Can't get any worse, can it, Newt? Or can it? 2010 is just around the corner.

By Anonymous @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 2:50 PM

Newt,

You are a loser. Stop picking on winners and get a life.

By Anonymous @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 2:37 PM

After reading comments in objection to Newt's comments - I am SHOCKED! Has right and wrong actually been blurred so much that you cannot see wrong even when you see it in front of your face??? The Constitution is NOT something anyone can inject their own experiences in to. Every person no matter what their background or experience sees things from their own perspective. The Constitution is America's guiding light. A lighthouse keeper's job is to tend to the care of the lighthouse, not to direct the light in the direction he or she thinks it should go. I am amazed at the lack of wisdom and thoughtless comments that do not take the reprocusions of their points into consideration. What a dangerous game you play.

By Anonymous @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 2:25 PM

FINALLY! It's time true Republican conservatives to start calling the kettle black. Why is it the liberal left can repeatedly get away with their nasty BRANDING of our conservative views? They have thrown sticks and stones at our party and we have allowed it! Now, with the ignorance of the common "American Idol" American, they are able to pull it off and no-one bats and eye. Thank you Newt for speaking the TRUTH. Sometimes the TRUTH is not so nice!

By Concerned USA Citizen @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 2:20 PM

Spare me the liberal claptrap. If the nominee was a conservative, a male or purple, the same mud-slinging would be in the news..so what is your point? Do all of you 'holier than thou/ PC, walk-on-water' types think you are above being called to task for stupid statements? Where have you been? The media is notorious for taking comments out of context; it's just particularly amusing how outrageous you think it is when it is aimed at a liberal. Gingrich is right, I can just imagine the media frenzy if this nominee's statement had been made by a conservative, white male...all hell would break loose and they would run the nominee out of town on a rail for being sexist AND racist. My, my, how indignant you liberals become when you are on the receiving end.

By Anonymous @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 2:13 PM

This is right on. There is not moving away from it. She has racial hate in her heart and we are supposed to ignore it because it is socially acceptable for minorities to be angry. There is no excuse for racism and if Roberts or Scalia had said such a thing there would be outcry and rightly so.

This woman is dangerous to the judicial system. She has no judicial principle and goes on how she feels is right rather what the law states. Look at her record!!

By Anonymous @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 2:11 PM

Ah, yes. From the pale male who served his first of (is it three now) wife with divorce papers while she was in the hospital hooked up to chemotherapy and whose children had to be fed by a church! Is it possible a woman from Puerto Rico could have better judgment?

By SurgeUSAorg @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 2:09 PM

Racist or not, she's certainly not going to withdraw, nor is anybody going to stop this appointment. We need to pick our battles. Rather than waste energy on this fight, we need to focus on 2010 preparations so that we will never again face such an appointee as a fait accompli, nor face other tyranny as a one party state.

By Anonymous @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 1:08 PM

I read her whole 2001 speech in the NY Times because I thought that right wingers might have taken her out of context but there's really no mistaking it. It's a racist statement. She doesn't say that a latina could make better decisions in matters regarding latinos. She says that a latina could make better decisions IN GENERAL and that is racist comment. Anyone who is a member of La Raza, as she is, is a dangerous racist zealot in my book. Imagine prominent white political leaders involved in an organization that promotes white supremacy and special treatment for whites?

By Anonymous @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 1:06 PM

Imagine you getting Judge Sottomayor's quote correct. Imagine women having a better perspective on life for anyone - white, black, brown, yellow, mixed. You bet they do! You obviously have a fascination with the word "racist." The Judge's comments were NOT EVEN CLOSE to be racist. What is wrong with all this insanity is people like you using overblown rhetoric to incite stupidity!

By Dallas55 @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 1:04 PM

I am with you almost 100% of the time. I am a conservative republican who worked hard to get McCain elected. I happen to think that Obama is the worst thing that ever happened to this country. However, I have to respectfully disagree with you on this one. You are completely wrong about Sonia Sotomayor.

I am white woman of Italian descent, third generation. I came from the Bronx and went to the same Catholic High School as Sonia. She was President of our graduating class. While we haven't spoken often over the years, over the last ten we've communicated a few times and had lunch. We come from the same generation, same area of New York and we are both women who became successful during the same era.

I don't believe that you understood what she said. While Judges are to make decisions based on the written law, everything they need to rely on isn't explicitly written on the piece of paper. If it were we wouldn't need Judges, we'd just need strong reading glasses.

There are cases were a wise old man and a wise old woman may not arrive at the same decision based on their experiences. The most classic example that I can give you is what defines equal protection under the law between men and women. As a 54 year old woman who has risen to a significant status in business I've live through a set of experiences that I also believe gives me a unique position to recognize things and make decisions that a man in the same position may not make. The early years of my career were marked by anything but equal protection under the law. At one job I was asked out by my leering boss on a daily basis until I quit because I couldn't take it anymore. I didn't just change jobs, I had to change industries. He was very powerful and well known on Wall Street. He told me that he would make sure that I never worked on the Street again as anything other than a janitor because I wouldn't have sex with him. At another job I was denied a promotion against a less qualified man, three months after my marriage based on same vague inference by my boss at the time that he expected me to tell him any day I was pregnant. I did ultimately get pregnant, five years later working at another company. I quit the job I had working for that boss as well.

In another company I was denied consideration for a supervisor's job over a department that was predominantly male because I didn't have the right "demeanor" for the job (i.e. meaning I wasn't male). At another job I was told that my appearance wasn't acceptable (when I'd gained weight but still wore well fitting, expensive professional suits) but my coworker who could barely button his jacket over his beer belly was extremely professional. The message was that women needed to be of a certain size, weight and look to be professional but men didn't. I could go on and on. However, I persevered through all of it and in spite of all of it became a very successful, well respected division head at a few different companies. I run a company now. However, in each and every one of those circumstances I wasn't being afforded equal protection under the law. I was being discriminated against. How I compensated for it was to work longer, harder and smarter than any man in any company I ever worked in.

In hearing a case that would define equal protection, I'm not sure that a wise old man without those experiences would reach the same decisions as a wise old woman who had those experiences. Discrimination can be very subtle. Someone that hasn't experienced it in those forms may not recognize it when they are looking at it. The value of having a court made up of Judges of different perspectives, backgrounds, races and sexes is that you have the full breadth of their life of experiences to decide cases, according to the law, when the situations presented are subtle.

By Anonymous @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 1:01 PM

Isn't it amazing how there is complete silence or a defense when Trent Lott, former Senator George Allen, and a host of others. Oh and by the way, when Rush made the statement that a benefit of slavery was that it made the streets safe after dark, well I guess that doesn't require comment. I think this is pure politics, and I don't know how you can refer to someone you don't know as a racist. I think this type of political discourse is despicable.

By Anonymous @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 12:47 PM

I think that the Supreme Court Nominee should be based solely on their qualifications, experience, decisions in their legal careers and the quality of their character. The comments she made are inexcusable for anyone. And her decisions as a judge show a consistent attitude of choosing certain racial preferences over the facts of the case and laws. I dont understand the country's attitude that we must elect the first _____ (insert race/gender/religious background/sexual preference here) person to positions of power in order to justify their election. All the US must do in order to remove the scars of previous generations' bigotry is judge people on character and actions. Leave the other demographical info out of it.

By Anonymous @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 11:57 AM

Mr. Newt, you really have no idea how race relations and politics play out in this country, do you? Negating racial politics doesn't make them disappear. A white male can comment on the reality of racial politics in this country, but just like anyone else, he needs to be cautious about what he says and how. This is especially warranted because of the long history of institutionalized oppression and eurocentricism still extremely present in our everyday culture. Please read some books on the subject as to educate yourself, attend conferences and meeting of well-known and respected ethnic studies experts. It'll do you, and those around you, much good.

By Anonymous @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 11:35 AM

That last comment re: the KKK was quite a Beltway spin doctor maneuver.

By Anonymous @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 11:28 AM

I totally agree
The Grand Dragon, KKK
ps when u gonna be at the next rally?

By Anonymous @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 11:24 AM

But one can also argue that Condi Rice was treated with kid gloves because she is an African American woman. Wasn't she National Security Advisor on 911? Where was she when the sh** hit the fan? Shouldn't she have been fired?

By Anonymous @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 10:29 AM

Excellent, excellent point. I am amazed at the blatant racism of this nominee. I am a life-long Democrat and probably always will be, but stuff like this makes me question my party and the fact that we have become racists ourselves.

By Anonymous @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 10:23 AM

The only people calling Sona "racist" are descendants of the defeated Plantation Owners from the 1860s? Quite frankly I don't think you-all have any creditability on the subject whatsoever, considering the history. We need to stop reliving both the Civil War & Mexican-American War and move on. The Supreme Court should reflect the demographics of America, with half women & at least 1 Black, 1 Hispanic & 1 Asian; That is not racist, it is "Real Change". A panel of old white guys grilling Sona on racist views is political suicide - it is akin to Germans grilling Jews on genocide.

By Anonymous @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 10:21 AM

Where does Miss Sonia Sotomayor stand on the implementation of SHARIA LAW ? Does she intend to insidiously implement this over the years as a Supreme Court Justice to satisfy the Muslim minority of the United States?

SHARIA LAW was forced upon England within the past eighteen months. Most victims are wives and daughters who have "shame upon their spouse and father" in the eyes of the faithful man. It is brutal murder of innocent lives unpunishable by law. It should not be accepted in the United States nor should it ever be excused!

Let's open the discussion and make Obama and Sotomayor answer the question about their intents of SHARIA LAW!!!

Gratefully Yours.

By Anonymous @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 9:59 AM

Calling one a racist, by taking a quote out of a speech, and therefore removing the true meaning of the quote, proves that you look for ways to condemn someone using racism as an excuse. You Sir, and I use Sir lightly, as a redneck right wing neo-Conservative are more of a racist then Sotomayer. Get a life Newt, and quit listening to and agreeing with the biggest blowhard in America.....Rush Limburger.

By Anonymous @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 9:32 AM

I am not familiar with the background of this new nominee. Without additional time to investigate myself, I respect Newt Gingrich's thoughts on her background. I guess I call that trust. I am level headed on the issue but I submit that New Racism is WORSE than Old Racism. Why? Because we have a mountain of recent historical fact to show the downside of racism and some are making methodical plans to promote more! Very disturbing because I desire true equality for opportunity and hard work.

By Anonymous @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 8:56 AM

Barry Soetoro, aka B.O. Obama our first non-American president has put forth the first latina racist in the hope that he and his administration will intimidate and thrash the whimpy republicans and so-called conservatives into submission.

The arrogance, imperious and hubrous of the jerky and creton president's Press Secretary who announced that everyone better tread lighltly and carefully concerning this nomination smells of Hitler's sidekick propagandist Joseph Goebbel's of equal ilk, is but the intial shot across the bough.

Unfortunately, soetoro will succeed.

Our -the true conservative's hopes for
success in defeating the soto-watchamacallit are but fleeting. Testicular fortitude has literally left the "House"

By Anonymous @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 8:44 AM

I completely agree with your comment. As an Hispanic woman, I am disgusted by this woman's comments. If this were David Duke making the statement that a white male's personal empathies about a subject makes him somehow more qualified to interpret law, the media would be outraged, and rightly so!

And why is it so amazing that an Hispanic woman must be highlighted as being successful? Living as an American, these people have the same opportunities as anyone else. However, living as someone who feels more connected to another country or heritage, and then expects Americans to honor that before American principle is what cripples so many minorities. Why aren't Asians seen as an oppressed, under-represented minority? BECAUSE THEY DON'T WANT SPECIAL TREATMENT!

I am so tired of Hispanics wanting special treatment. If anyone complains about illegal immigration from our south, we are racist. If anyone complains about someone like Sotomayor making the comments that she has made, we are racist. If anyone complains about "press one for English, press two for Spanish" we are racist. But let me also point out that La Raza means "The Race" in Spanish. THEY are a very racist group and they want Latin American Hispanic culture to become the norm in this country. And any Latina who brings her "unique Hispanic experience" to the bench to interpret the Constitution is a racist.

By Anonymous @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 8:06 AM

I feel Obama is like a shrewd chessplayer, carefully sitting up his little army to insure he wins his own personal agendia's.

I certainly do not feel he has America, Americans, or our nation's values first and foremost in his decission making.

By Anonymous @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 7:56 AM

Women, especially Mexican women, should be at home making babies. Oh no I'm not racist just joking, let me not call them Mexicans, I mean Latinas. This is somebody who has always gotten the free ride because she was of color and still wants the free ride on the bus. Go to the back. Why can't the white man get a free ride? Oh because our president is black. This disgusts me. White men built this country and wrote the Constitution that this judge supposed to make decisions about.

By Anonymous @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 5:53 AM

I suppose this comment from the founder of La Raza, Sotomayors group, is also cherry picking.

The founder of La Raza and professor at University of Texas, Arlington, Jose Angel Gutierrez, is on record as saying “We have got to eliminate the gringo, and what I mean by that is if the worst comes to the worst, we have got to kill him.”

This entire nighmare scenario is analagous to David Duke winning the Presidency then appointing a Klansmen as Supreme Court Judge. I see absolutely no difference.

By Anonymous @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 5:47 AM

Hello, the woman is a La Raza member, you know as in "The Race", whose motto is; "Everything for the Race, nothing for any others" They wish to reclaim the southwestern states and eliminate whites from them. This is the KKK with a suntan-wake up people

By Anonymous @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 5:26 AM

I read the complete text of Sonia Sotomayor's speech at the Judge Mario G. Olmos Memorial Lecture in 2001, which was delivered at the University of California, Berkeley, School of Law. In very brief summary, the context of the speech was the affect of Sotomayor's Latina heritage on her decision making.

The comment, "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", which is held as an example of Sotomayor's racism , was made to a largely Hispanic audience present to celebrate the memory of another Hispanic jurist. In that context Sotomayor’s comments were intended to highlight the positive aspects of her life experience, and how it has affected her decision-making on the bench.

That comment, which was made 8 years ago, immediately preceded the comment, “… 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. Many are so capable. As Judge Cedarbaum pointed out to me, nine white men on the Supreme Court in the past have done so on many occasions and on many issues…”

Given the context of the speech… and note the last segment of the quote, “…who hasn’t lived that life” is clearly an example of Sotomayor’s reference to the inability of a white man to know what the life experience of a Latina woman is like. Who could disagree with that?

This comment was not, as is suggested, that a Latina woman’s life experience makes her more qualified to make legal decisions than a white man.

The accusations of “racism” as a result of this speech are clearly an example of cherry-picking comments from someone’s life in order to highlight the supposed worst aspect of their life in order to solicit a negative response.

Although we all have a responsibility to investigate our elected leaders, and especially a Supreme Court Justice, we don’t have the right or responsibility to miscategorize or misrepresent the character of anyone in order maintain a stance as the “loyal opposition”. Our loyalties should be to this country and doing the right thing… not representing the interests or any particular organization. This is the sort of behavior that alienates the public, and polarizes our citizens.

By Anonymous @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 4:30 AM

Newt has it right on this one, Sotomayor is clearly a racist!

By Anonymous @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 3:45 AM

Mr. Gingrich here speaks a brutal truth. Leftists, if they support this woman, will be fully exposed (as if more exposure is needed) as complete hypocrites. Or do they now embrace double standards? How convenient.

By Anonymous @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 3:07 AM

I love how the people attacking you over this blog post say nothing about the simple issue raised in your post. Instead, they attack you for unrelated issues.

It is simple... if we applied the same standard used by the democrats to measure any potential white male nominee, this nomination would fail.

We are treating her differently and allowing her to be racist because she is a latina. What is really amusing about this is that it is her hardship that supposedly makes her more suitable than a white male. All I see at this point is special treatment and lowered standards. Based on her statements this would mean she is no longer qualified.

Noodle that one, Newt.

By Anonymous @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 3:06 AM

I love how the people attacking you over this blog post say nothing about the simple issue raised in your post. Instead, they attack you for unrelated issues.

It is simple... if we applied the same standard used by the democrats to measure any potential white male nominee, this nomination would fail.

We are treating her differently and allowing her to be racist because she is a latina. What is really amusing about this is that it is her hardship that supposedly makes her more suitable than a white mail. All I see at this point is special treatment and lowered standards. Based on her statements this would mean she is no longer qualified.

Noodle that one, Newt.

By Anonymous @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 2:30 AM

Newt ---keep talking you not only lost the Hispanic vote but how can you still call youself a Christian when you are living an adulterer life----Buy a Bible and read it!!!!

By Anonymous @ Thursday, May 28, 2009 1:40 AM

Witch of the Dem's back in the day when the first Black Supreme Court nominee, Clarence Thomas was going through the the nomination process stood up and said hey maybe we should not be brigning up talk of a pubic hair in a coke can. this was one persons word against another...and by the way remember Anita complained to no one back then and told no one back when it happend. Not something said on video tape. That is her recdord "The truth". Back then I remember the dems all saying this should be brought up over and over hearings day after day because of the seriousness of the charge! "With no proof" Anita Hill and the dems that paraded her in front of our TV's night after night, with no proof. brought down the Nomination Prosses to the gutter. The truth is no one is taking this new nominee's "Provable" remarks out of context. Words Mean things especially when you are telling other jurest's her race and being a woman from a certian area makes her desisions better than a white Man, that is racest plain and clear. Newt was right and sometimes doing the right thing takes courrage good job Newt. This Judge admited also that the courts really are where pollicy is made. I would much rather have the next supreme court Judge be confermed or not confermed by the truth and facts and their record over pubic hair in a Coke or no Pubic Hair in a coke give me a break! .....and just rember all the news media jumping all over the dems and if I am not mistaken our current vice president was sitting up their looking down in Clarence Thomas besmerching his good name with no provable facts please someone dig that one up "HINT HINT FOX NEWS".. that dug up and parraded Anita Hill in front of the Camera's oh thats right they said nothing then, when they really should have spoke up..they only jump to the defence of a miniorty when they lean to the left. Rember how they treated Condy Rice, and a Black General when he "was" a Republican! think about it. or how the Media treated the top hispanic laywer working for Bush Roberto Gonzales?

By Anonymous @ Wednesday, May 27, 2009 11:56 PM

Newt,
You are the man.
We love you.

By Anonymous @ Wednesday, May 27, 2009 11:06 PM

I have read many posts on this blog that charg Mr. Gingrich with taking the nominee's remarks out of context. If so, will at least one of you put the remarks in proper context? I have read the whole speech, and I think it would be a real challenge to put a positive spin on her contraversial words. I wish at least one of her supporters would try.

By Anonymous @ Wednesday, May 27, 2009 10:22 PM

Why do you think you are still relevant? I like to remember you the way you left politics. In disgrace after failing in the 1996 mid-term elections in spite of Ken Starr and the zippergate impeachment of President Clinton. Congress has Fake-Tan Man and Ole Sourpuss for GOP "leadership" now. Not to mention Darth Cheney. Go home.

By Anonymous @ Wednesday, May 27, 2009 10:14 PM

So let's see -- if you think Judge Sotomajor is a racist based on her previous statements and behavior, then you must be a serial adulterer and disgraced former Speaker of the House, a phony Catholic, a draft dodger...and a real piece of lying Republican crap. I really hope you run in 2012...You and your Republican ilk don't give a shit about this country...you Sir, have no shame...

By Anonymous @ Wednesday, May 27, 2009 9:01 PM

How has Newt taken her statement out of context? Those are her words; I'm not sure how you could preface it to change the context.

By Anonymous @ Wednesday, May 27, 2009 8:55 PM

First, I don't think he's quoting or misquoting anyone. I think he's trying to make a valid point. Second, justice is supposed to be blind. Judge Sotomayor questioned the notion, often put forth by the other women justices, Ginsburg and O'Connor, that a wise old man and a wise old woman would reach the same conclusion when deciding cases. Judge Sotomayor disagrees and adds race to the equation by saying “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.” Could a white man make such a statement?

By Anonymous @ Wednesday, May 27, 2009 8:11 PM

Is anyone else bothered by the way Newt and Rush are misquoting her? I have no problem criticizes her, but the intellectual dishonesty in this statement by Newt is sickening. I have always been a moderate, but in the past 2 election cycle I have moved farther and farther away from Republicans. Partly because of policy, but also because of ridiculous comments like this. I do not like when politicians misrepresent and divide like the uneducated DJ does. Let's stop with this foolish garbage and debate issues.

By Volubrjotr @ Wednesday, May 27, 2009 8:02 PM

Sonia Sotomayor is empathetic to the legend in her own mind.

This revealing statement by Sonja Red signals a Constitutional Defect a defect that shows herself as incompatible to what The Founding Fathers Wrote in The Constitution.

Throw her under Obama's Bus!

To constructively and emphatically make an unconstitutional declaration as such shows the modus behind the Socialist Cartel.

By Volubrjotr @ Wednesday, May 27, 2009 8:02 PM

By Anonymous @ Wednesday, May 27, 2009 7:50 PM

The old rhetoric has not changed, even though Obama is in office. The idea of dissent for the sake of dissent is thriving, especially in conservatives like Newt who feel a moral duty to oppose at any cost. Fortunately the country is lucky that Newt is getting older and less influential and as he ages ungracefully the random mutterings of an old man become more evident. An old man whose (brief) glory days have long gone and all that's left are blurred and hazy memories. The adage of grasping for smoke rings to stay afloat is very evident here- except that ooops - most people don't even smoke anymore!

By Anonymous @ Wednesday, May 27, 2009 7:10 PM

You're quite right Newt

By Anonymous @ Wednesday, May 27, 2009 7:07 PM

I think a person of my own race and gender who has lived similar experiences that I have are better at understanding me than someone not of my race and not of my gender.

By Anonymous @ Wednesday, May 27, 2009 6:57 PM

Just like a leftie (Anonymous at 6:50) to take issue with Newt calling a racist "a racist" but not with the racist herself. Gotta love how those defective little minds on the left work. They know they can't defend her ugly views on race and sex and the proper role of the judiciary, so they try by sleight of hand to divert the issue. We won't let them.

By Anonymous @ Wednesday, May 27, 2009 6:50 PM

Nope, no context can insulate her idiotic, racist remarks. She said, unequivocally, that Latina women should be better judges than white men. She's to blame for saying something so vile and discriminatory, not Newt for merely reacting to it the way any sane, nonprejudiced person would. Sotomayor must now be held to account for her strange, intemperate views. Racists and sexists like her have no business being on the bench.

By Anonymous @ Wednesday, May 27, 2009 6:50 PM

Your statement calling someone a racist is typical of the Republican Party as it is today, always looking for something negative to say. I am a white male and I don't see a problem with her statement. Let's talk about real issues, we have so many problems in this country. Maybe we fear discussing them, because we and maybe especailly the Republican old guard have no answers and so can only stay relevant in their mind by attacking anyone or anything that does not agree with them.
Why can't the party I used to be a part of really focus on principles and develop a real agenda to make our country a better place. What happened to the real conservatives that like William F. Buckley who at least showed intelligence that you could recognize even if you did not agree with them. Now the only thing out of the Republicans is name-calling or the attempt to scare everybody and keep them scared of terrorists, non-believers, gays, minorities, etc. etc. Freedom of speech is great but it would be nice if you used that freedom to talk about real issues.

By Anonymous @ Wednesday, May 27, 2009 6:45 PM

Newt is intentionally taking her statement out of context in order to distort it for political purposes. I do not believe Newt really thinks she is a racist. He is demonstrating how manipulative he is willing to be for the sake of partisan politics.

By Anonymous @ Wednesday, May 27, 2009 6:27 PM

You're absolutely right, Newt, as always. In addition to demonstrating that she has no clue about what it is judges are supposed to do, her public comments have revealed her to be an unabashed racist. As you pointed out, one can just imagine the howls of the Dumb-o-crats had Roberts and Alito made similar statements about the superior judicial prowess of white men. Racism and sexism, in any form, has no place on the Supreme Court -- indeed, ANY federal bench. Republicans must stand firm and force this abomination of a nomination to be withdrawn -- or defeated, if need be -- due to the nominee's improper conception of the judiciary and her shockingly racist, sexist views.

By Anonymous @ Wednesday, May 27, 2009 6:03 PM

Mike..........after reading your illiterate comment, you proved my point when I stated that many of Newt's followers are simpletons. Read your post....it makes no sense and it calls for speculation. "There is already a prediction of an attack on this country in the latter portion of this year. Obama is setting us up."

Where is your proof or are you getting this information from the de facto leaders of the Party of No......Newt and Rush? Faux News?

You do recall that prior to 911, Bush and DICK were warned about a potential attack on American soil.......well, they were.....and it happened. So, unless you have solid evidence of your claim, you need to shut-up. This country does not need anymore fear mongers!

By Anonymous @ Wednesday, May 27, 2009 5:50 PM

Hmmm..

I guess from the passage quoted "latina women are wiser than white men" Or is it Wise latina women are better suited to judge than dumb white men? Who is she calling dumb white men?

Had she just said wise people make better decisions than dumb people ... okay. But why is it that Latina Women (who've lived the life and experiences) are better than people who haven't? WHAT???

Interesting in today's USA Today Headline something to the extent "her life story, ..." makes her qualified... Bull Shivers to that.

She may be qualified but I'm not sold on it; these remarks seems like the tip of the iceburg that's gonna sink her.

By Anonymous @ Wednesday, May 27, 2009 5:25 PM

Excerpt from NPR:

But a few paragraphs later, she uttered one of her speech's most controversial lines. Here's the relevant passage:

Whether born from experience or inherent physiological or cultural differences, a possibility I abhor less or discount less than my colleague Judge Cedarbaum, our gender and national origins may and will make a difference in our judging. Justice O'Connor has often been cited as saying that a wise old man and wise old woman will reach the same conclusion in deciding cases. I am not so sure Justice O'Connor is the author of that line since Professor Resnik attributes that line to Supreme Court Justice Coyle. I am also not so sure that I agree with the statement. First, as Professor Martha Minnow has noted, there can never be a universal definition of wise. Second, 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.

Whoever first said "a wise old man and a wise old woman will reach the same conclusion in deciding cases" it's a good line. It intuitively feels right. Wisdom is wisdom, whoever it comes from.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2009/05/sotomayors_wise_latina_line_ma.html

By Anonymous @ Wednesday, May 27, 2009 5:15 PM

In context or "out of context", any white person in a place of public trust who made a similar comment would be verbally tarred and feathered and run out of office.
Racism is racism, regardless of the perp or the victim.

By Anonymous @ Wednesday, May 27, 2009 4:15 PM

Mr. Gingrich, please stop taking quotes out of context so you can get on Fox News and make a few bucks.

You are nothing more than the snake oil salesman.

By Anonymous @ Wednesday, May 27, 2009 3:50 PM

Whatsa matter. You dont like the statement by the Former Speaker? Where did you think it was going, especially by a guy who refers to his own family as TYPICAL WHITE. A person who abides by a preacher for 20 years who denounces this country. A president who refuses to present his birth certificate. On and On. I watched a TV segment where Mr. Gingrich was pitted against a left winger Mr. Durbin. Mr. Durbin danced around the issues like the balerina he is.
The left doesnt like Mr. Gingrich because they arent as smart as he and have no
plan except to bankrupt this country. Not EVERYONE can be on a govt program SOMEBODY has to work and pay the freight. Obama says the things he does because of his popularity and people will look the other way. UNTIL ITS TO LATE.
By the way, the first priority for any American President is to protect the people. There is already a prediction of an attack on this country in the latter portion of this year. Obama is setting us up.
Mike

By Anonymous @ Wednesday, May 27, 2009 3:21 PM

Newt, you took a part, and a very small part, of that particular speech and spun it to your liking. Yes, I am sure the simpletons who hang on your every word will agree with you, without question. But those of us who lived through your Failed Contract with America and endured your incompetency as Speaker of the House, know very well not to take you seriously.

Newt, you seriously need to get over it. Your party lost and lost huge. There is a new generation that voted for change and that is what we want and that is what we are getting.

Your failed, miserable, and tired policies screwed us over, huge! We no longer embrace trickle down economics, or more appropriately, VOODOO economics because the majority of us were pissed on. Those alleged jobs created by cutting taxes on the wealthy......where are they? Oh, I know.......they left! They went off-shore. So, having said that........whatever you say, Newt.......really means nothing. Your thoughts, words, ideas, and mere existence is irrelevant!

But, what truely amazes me is that all you neocons with the word "FORMER," in front of your name, have come out of the woodwork and to throw yourselves back into the attention starved, spotlight. Do you know what the word, "former" means? It's past tense! And that, sir, is what you are.........PAST TENSE!

Obama/Biden 2012

By Anonymous @ Wednesday, May 27, 2009 3:19 PM

Is this a legitimate post?

If so, I am so disappointed that Speaker Gingrich has made such a comment without letting the nominating process move forward, allowing the nominee an opportunity to respond to concerns one may have before passing judgement.

I have grave doubts about the nominee. Labeling this nominee as a "racist Latina" adds nothing to the hopefully more civil discourse to come.

Given the embarassing grammar used in these comments, I have doubts as to whether Speaker Gingrich actually is the author.

By Anonymous @ Wednesday, May 27, 2009 2:54 PM

This is a shameful misrepresentation of what the Judge said. I can only presume that you are taking this path to satisfy the baser instincts in the GOP's core constituency, but to me you seem to be doing nothing more than throwing dung into the debate.

By Anonymous @ Wednesday, May 27, 2009 2:41 PM

Congratulations on identifying and exposing her "racist" view which will she will carry into the Supreme Court and influence all of her decisions!

By Anonymous @ Wednesday, May 27, 2009 2:32 PM

Newt, your statement is an oversimplification, and it's irresponsible. I'm glad that you will get absolutely no traction with this issue.

By Anonymous @ Wednesday, May 27, 2009 2:18 PM

first

Click Here to post a comment