Liberals still amazed that women and minorities are qualified to do things—all on their own!

CBC.ca headline:  “Obama taps Sotomayor for Supreme Court Video”  …  (“Taps”?  What is this—a kegger?  And is there a Sotomayor Lite?)

I love how the CBC and all the liberal media is playing this up as another golden Obama moment wherein he is appointing not simply a judge, but — and everybody pay attention now… a woman! …. and a “minority”! 

Like their election of their self-made man Barack Obama, the only ones shocked and amazed at the rise of women and minorities to places of high position are liberals who all think this was and is not possible, at least not without a law or a government affirmative action program or some form of state regulation or requirement.  (Of course in this case it may well be driven by Obama’s incessant, reflexive nod to political correctness and his pursuit of the appeasement of the Left and political vote-buying instead of simply “because she’s the best person qualified in the United States” or some such drivel… but whatever…). 
SMALL, FUN UPDATE – 10:22 AM PDT:  Even the ever so politically correct CBC’s big (white, Anglo-Saxon, male) reporter in Washington, Neil Macdonald, described the appointment of what he pointed out was a “Latina” judge, as:  “politically huge”.  That’s a Neil Macdonald “reality check” I can cotton onto.

THIS WILL HELP, MAYBE
I’m sure liberals and the left generally will eventually accept the fact, as conservatives always have, that “women and minorities” are and always have been as adept as men and “majorities” at achieving anything they want, on their own, without the know-it-all, misdirected, racist, sexist, busy-body help of liberals and their big nanny-state government.  The clear-thinking set — right-thinking conservative folks — see the racist paternalism of the liberal-left as an egregious hindrance and an overt sleight against women and minorities —and men and majorities, for that matter.

ALL OF THAT NOTWITHSTANDING
The New York Times points to some of the other, unspoken, real reasons she was chosen, which happens to have something to do with the fact that she is a thoroughbred liberal-left activist judge who thinks the Supreme Court is where social policy is made —rather than it being made by and from within the unwashed masses, also known to you and me as “the Constitution” and “the people”.

…This month, for example, a video surfaced of Judge Sotomayor asserting in 2005 that a “court of appeals is where policy is made.” She then immediately adds: “And I know — I know this is on tape, and I should never say that because we don’t make law. I know. O.K. I know. I’m not promoting it. I’m not advocating it. I’m — you know.”

The video was of a panel discussion for law students interested in becoming clerks, and she was explaining the different experiences gained when working at district courts and appeals courts. Her remarks caught the eye of conservative bloggers who accused her of being a “judicial activist,” although Jonathan H. Adler, a professor at Case Western Reserve University law school, argued that critics were reading far too much into those remarks.

Additional quote from Sotomayor:

“I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion (as a judge) than a white male who hasn’t lived that life.”

Let’s play my fun li’l game “Imagine If A White Republican Guy Said It!” and pretend he said he figures white men make better decisions that Latina women, based on his experiences as a white male.   

 

Powered by WordPress. Designed by WooThemes