Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

Top-ranking Republican strategists who specialize in Hispanic outreach say they are outraged, disturbed and concerned by the type of reception Barack Obama's pick for the Supreme Court has received from conservative activists.

In the days since the nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court, several prominent conservative voices have leveled unusually blunt attacks at her resume. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and radio host Rush Limbaugh both insisted that the court of appeals judge was a racist for saying that her Hispanic background allowed her to come to better judicial decisions. Former Congressman Tom Tancredo, on Friday, called Sotomayor a member of the "Latino KKK."

The rhetoric has been enough to make Republican strategists in heavily Latino states cringe -- concerned that such slights could cement Democrats advantages among a growing and increasingly influential political constituency.

"Of course this disturbs me," said Lionel Sosa, one of the more influential Hispanic media advisers in the GOP. "I'm not surprised at Rush Limbaugh but I'm very surprised at Speaker Gingrich because he is one of the key people who knows the importance of the Latino vote to the Republican Party. He must realize how his rhetoric, if it does influence any Hispanics, how damaging it could be. This [confirmation] is something that is going to happen anyway. For a senator to have strong opposition to her, they are either not aware of the impact Latinos will have on the next election or they don't care."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/2 ... 09240.html

Rush is right. She IS a racist. But that's ok in the big rainbow, right Jon?

AZGrizFan wrote:Rush is right. She IS a racist. But that's ok in the big rainbow, right Jon?

yet she rules against minorities over 10 to 1 in her verdicts...? Explain that..?
I hope Rush and the hate machine run her off so Obama picks a really Liberal judge

be careful what you wish for AZGF

Cleets Part 2 wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:Rush is right. She IS a racist. But that's ok in the big rainbow, right Jon?

yet she rules against minorities over 10 to 1 in her verdicts...? Explain that..?
I hope Rush and the hate machine run her off so Obama picks a really Liberal judge

be careful what you wish for AZGF

That's just a cover, Cleetus.

AZGrizFan wrote:

Cleets Part 2 wrote:
yet she rules against minorities over 10 to 1 in her verdicts...? Explain that..?
I hope Rush and the hate machine run her off so Obama picks a really Liberal judge

be careful what you wish for AZGF

That's just a cover, Cleetus.

a 25 year cover... wow... that shows how important planning ahead can be

AZGrizFan wrote:Rush is right. She IS a racist. But that's ok in the big rainbow, right Jon?

How is she a racist?

The best strategy for the GOP is to confirm Sotomayor and move on. This isn't the right battle to fight. Actuarial odds are that the next two Justices to retire/croak will be liberals as well -- Ginsburg and Stevens -- and that Obama won't have a politically appealing "twofer" like her to pull out of his bag of tricks. Barry's probably too smart to nominate a "red meat liberal" like Professor Larry Tribe (also too old) or a Ninth Circuit whackjob.

Ivytalk wrote:The best strategy for the GOP is to confirm Sotomayor and move on. This isn't the right battle to fight. Actuarial odds are that the next two Justices to retire/croak will be liberals as well -- Ginsburg and Stevens -- and that Obama won't have a politically appealing "twofer" like her to pull out of his bag of tricks. Barry's probably too smart to nominate a "red meat liberal" like Professor Larry Tribe (also too old) or a Ninth Circuit whackjob.

BULLSEYE

Ivytalk wrote:The best strategy for the GOP is to confirm Sotomayor and move on. This isn't the right battle to fight. Actuarial odds are that the next two Justices to retire/croak will be liberals as well -- Ginsburg and Stevens -- and that Obama won't have a politically appealing "twofer" like her to pull out of his bag of tricks. Barry's probably too smart to nominate a "red meat liberal" like Professor Larry Tribe (also too old) or a Ninth Circuit whackjob.

you are quite right, the GOP could have been looking at a much more upsetting nominee... and yes, Ginsburg and Stevens are getting up there and will likely be replaced soon.

i'm still hoping scalia retires, but i suspect he will die on the bench before he lets a dem replace him...

dbackjon wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:Rush is right. She IS a racist. But that's ok in the big rainbow, right Jon?

How is she a racist?

Because she is.


And calling her one gets y'all's blood just a BOILIN'!!!

....frothing at the mouth to defend her....JESUS that's some entertainment.

AZGrizFan wrote:

dbackjon wrote:
How is she a racist?

Because she is.


And calling her one gets y'all's blood just a BOILIN'!!!

....frothing at the mouth to defend her....JESUS that's some entertainment.

Sounds like an argument Someone Else would make.

Col Hogan wrote:

Ivytalk wrote:The best strategy for the GOP is to confirm Sotomayor and move on. This isn't the right battle to fight. Actuarial odds are that the next two Justices to retire/croak will be liberals as well -- Ginsburg and Stevens -- and that Obama won't have a politically appealing "twofer" like her to pull out of his bag of tricks. Barry's probably too smart to nominate a "red meat liberal" like Professor Larry Tribe (also too old) or a Ninth Circuit whackjob.

BULLSEYE

I hear ya both, and I understand the tactical and strategic consequences for courting the Hispanic vote.

However, I think Sotomayor is a racist at heart, and that her nomination by President Obama proves that he is NOT the post-racial President that many of us hoped and prayed for. They may be "soft" racists, perhaps, but are racists nonetheless.

Republicans failing to stand on Martin Luther King's principle of color-blindness surrenders the field to racism and diminishes the validity of future principled arguments on this issue, much as profligate Republican spending in recent years has diminished the validity of Republican arguments on taxes and spending.

Now is not the time to sit down and shut up. Republican Senators can be fair and open minded and avoid demonizing Sotomayor but must remain steadfast in providing due diligence on this issue and avoid surrendering the field.

native wrote:

Col Hogan wrote:
BULLSEYE

I hear ya both, and I understand the tactical and strategic consequences for courting the Hispanic vote.

However, I think Sotomayor is a racist at heart, and that her nomination by President Obama proves that he is NOT the post-racial President that many of us hoped and prayed for. They may be "soft" racists, perhaps, but are racists nonetheless.

Republicans failing to stand on Martin Luther King's principle of color-blindness surrenders the field to racism and diminishes the validity of future principled arguments on this issue, much as profligate Republican spending in recent years has diminihed the validity of Republican arguments on taxes and spending.

Now is not the time to sit down and shut up. Republican Senators can be fair and open minded and avoid demonizing Sotomayor but must remain steadfast in providing due diligence on this issue and avoid surrendering the field.

And THAT'S the ballgame!

I hope the GOP listens to you, native

dbackjon wrote:I hope the GOP listens to you, native

agreed...

piss away what little future they have and out themselves as the party of straight, middle-aged, white, christian males...

TwinTownBisonFan wrote:

dbackjon wrote:I hope the GOP listens to you, native

agreed...

piss away what little future they have and out themselves as the party of straight, middle-aged, white, christian males...

My family is neither white, nor Christian, TTBF. I honestly hope my sons are straight, but if not, I have already made up my mind that I love 'em infinitely, no matter what.

I do not judge you or anyone else based on what you claim your faith to be, but I do judge you and everyone else by your actions. Some of the posters here acquit themselves well, and you are normally one of them.

I have never needed to be outed, but your definition of victory and how to earn it is probably different than mine, brotha.

native wrote:

TwinTownBisonFan wrote:
agreed...

piss away what little future they have and out themselves as the party of straight, middle-aged, white, christian males...

My family is neither white, nor Christian, TTBF. I honestly hope my sons are straight, but if not, I have already made up my mind that I love 'em infinitely, no matter what.

I do not judge you or anyone else based on what you claim your faith to be, but I do judge you and everyone else by your actions. Some of the posters here acquit themselves well, and you are normally one of them.

I have never needed to be outed, but your definition of victory and how to earn it is probably different than mine, brotha.

OK, dipshit, so if one of your kids is gay and wants to get married, are you gonna be the prick that you are now about it?

D1B wrote:

native wrote:
My family is neither white, nor Christian, TTBF. I honestly hope my sons are straight, but if not, I have already made up my mind that I love 'em infinitely, no matter what.

I do not judge you or anyone else based on what you claim your faith to be, but I do judge you and everyone else by your actions. Some of the posters here acquit themselves well, and you are normally one of them.

I have never needed to be outed, but your definition of victory and how to earn it is probably different than mine, brotha.

OK, dipshit, so if one of your kids is gay and wants to get married, are you gonna be the prick that you are now about it?

If he wants a civil union, I will support it, but if he wants to call it "marriage" and $h!t all over religious people, he will not have my support.

D1B wrote:

native wrote:
My family is neither white, nor Christian, TTBF. I honestly hope my sons are straight, but if not, I have already made up my mind that I love 'em infinitely, no matter what.

I do not judge you or anyone else based on what you claim your faith to be, but I do judge you and everyone else by your actions. Some of the posters here acquit themselves well, and you are normally one of them.

I have never needed to be outed, but your definition of victory and how to earn it is probably different than mine, brotha.

OK, dipshit, so if one of your kids is gay and wants to get married, are you gonna be the prick that you are now about it?

It pains me to do so, d1b, but in all truthfulness I must admit that, since engaging on this politics board, you and a handful of other souls have changed my mind on some important social issues.

native wrote:

D1B wrote:
OK, dipshit, so if one of your kids is gay and wants to get married, are you gonna be the prick that you are now about it?

If he wants a civil union, I will support it, but if he wants to call it "marriage" and $h!t all over religious people, he will not have my support.

How does gay marriage shit all over religious people?

Religious people are shitting all over gays and lesbians, you are confused as to who is fucking and oppressing whom.

dbackjon wrote:

native wrote:
If he wants a civil union, I will support it, but if he wants to call it "marriage" and $h!t all over religious people, he will not have my support.

How does gay marriage shit all over religious people?

Religious people are shitting all over gays and lesbians, you are confused as to who is fucking and oppressing whom.

Native was probably taking a shot at me with that one.

TwinTownBisonFan wrote:

dbackjon wrote:I hope the GOP listens to you, native

agreed...

piss away what little future they have and out themselves as the party of straight, middle-aged, white, christian males...

Yeah right, and I'll show you a snow ski resort in Hawaii. Christian, please. Instigators that drags God's name to claim their superiority, yes. That would be a better description of the GOP.

wkuhillhound wrote:

TwinTownBisonFan wrote:
agreed...

piss away what little future they have and out themselves as the party of straight, middle-aged, white, christian males...

Yeah right, and I'll show you a snow ski resort in Hawaii. Christian, please. Instigators that drags God's name to claim their superiority, yes. That would be a better description of the GOP.

shoulda put it in cheesy air-quotes.

from my time in the GOP they aren't too keen on Catholics either (some of them)

wkuhillhound wrote:

TwinTownBisonFan wrote:
agreed...

piss away what little future they have and out themselves as the party of straight, middle-aged, white, christian males...

Yeah right, and I'll show you a snow ski resort in Hawaii. Christian, please. Instigators that drags God's name to claim their superiority, yes. That would be a better description of the GOP.

That would be the equivalent of me stating that the donk party consists solely of Godless heathens to the left of Lenin who want to redistribute my wealth to the lazy sponges who choose to live off the government.



Wait.....my statement is accurate. Never mind.

AZGrizFan wrote:

wkuhillhound wrote:
Yeah right, and I'll show you a snow ski resort in Hawaii. Christian, please. Instigators that drags God's name to claim their superiority, yes. That would be a better description of the GOP.

That would be the equivalent of me stating that the donk party consists solely of Godless heathens to the left of Lenin who want to redistribute my wealth to the lazy sponges who choose to live off the government.



Wait.....my statement is accurate. Never mind.

So you are saying that my statement is true. Great! I knew you would agree.

Narcissist. Not everything is about you.