Newt’s tweets on Sotomayor’s “racist statements”

May 20, 2009

First Rush Limbaugh then Newt Gingrich comment on Judge Sotomayor’s “racist” comments.

JUDGE SOTOMAYOR:

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. Whether born from experience or inherent physiological or cultural differences, our gender and national origins may and will make a difference in our judging.

Gingrich brings up the very real issue of The Double Standard.

His tweets:

Imagine a judicial nominee said “my experience as a white man makes me better than a latina woman” new racism is no better than old racism

9:24 AM May 27th from TwitterBerry

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

9:34 AM May 27th from TwitterBerry

Is there a special way to denote tweets?

ROBERT GIBBS press briefing May 27th:

Q And are you familiar with — switching topics for a moment to Sotomayor — are you familiar with Newt Gingrich’s blog — (laughter.) You are not?

MR. GIBBS: No.

Q Okay. Well, he apparently — I’m told it is on his blog that he said, “Imagine a judicial nominee said ‘my experience as a white man makes me better than a Latino 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. A Latino woman racist should also withdraw.”

MR. GIBBS: Well, I think it is probably important for anybody involved in this debate to be exceedingly careful with the way in which they’ve decided to describe different aspects of this impending confirmation. I think we’re satisfied that when the people of America and the people of the Senate get a chance to look at more than just the blog of a former lawmaker –

Q He also tweeted us. (Laughter.)

MR. GIBBS: — that they’ll come to the same conclusion that the President did: that judicial experience that exceeds any nominee — federal judicial experience that exceeds any nominee for a hundred years, strict adherence to precedent — I think when people get a chance to look at her record, I feel certain that partisan politics will take a backseat to common sense and open-minded decisions based on a full examination of the record. And I think that’s what every Supreme Court and every judicial nominee deserves.

I think if you look at — again, I mentioned this yesterday — this is somebody who was appointed by George Herbert Walker Bush and Bill Clinton, approved by the Senate in each occasion. So I think she is somebody who is highly qualified, of keen intellect, and somebody that’s going to be a great member of the Supreme Court. I’ve heard a lot of people in the last couple days, they’ve mentioned intellect. I’m not entirely sure where people that make that argument — I’m not sure what number they graduated in their class at Princeton, but my sense is it’s not second.

Then he is pushed on the racial and gender aspects and he launches into his usual sarcasm. He is really unprofessional as are the rest of the frat boys who sit and laugh with him and at the person he’s making fun of. It’s not worth putting the whole exchange here – this is enough.

Q In all fairness, a follow to that — it’s not just a racial dimension, but it’s a gender dimension. And do you at least acknowledge that she did say these words? You’re asking us to look beyond.

MR. GIBBS: I can confirm that it appears likely that she intoned both of those sentences, yes.