Guest author Skyagunsta: In a variation of the Elephant fears the Mouse story, Pat Buchanan’s White Maleness fears Sonia Sotomayor’s Latin Femaleness
An opinion piece by guest author Skyagunsta
In a variation of the Elephant fears the Mouse story,
Pat Buchanan’s White Maleness fears Sonia Sotomayor’s Latin Femaleness
By SKYAGUNSTA
This morning, I listened to Pat Buchanan on National Television rant about how he thinks Sonia Sotomayor is the, “White Man’s” public enemy No 1. Hardly believing what I was listening to, I went back to look for a video clip of Pat’s Buchanan rant this morning and I could not find it, but I did find this clip of Buchanan carrying on during an, “Andrea Mitchell Reports” program last week in which he is basically making the same argument.
According to Buchanan, Sotomayor supports race preferences … “at the expense of the white male to advance people of color”. (discussed here) because her 2008 opinion to throw out the results of a firefighter promotion exam, in favor of the city of New Haven’s Program to uphold what the city wanted: a ruling in favor of Affirmative Action . (Minority Set Asides) , because almost no minorities qualified for promotions, is, in Buchanan’s words, an act of judicial bigotry committed by Sotomayor.
Pat rails and rails against Sotomayor for siding with the city and its Affirmative Action Program: The female Judge, a Hispanic, a Minority herself, siding against the white firefighter.
Pat’s railings against Sotomayor really caused me to stop and think. Did he ever listen to any minority? Did he hear any minority make the case, again and again, and again, that doors in housing, employment, schools, church locations were barred to them just because they are a minority?
Why, Pat Buchanan, are you making it sound as if the Judge stands’ for Affirmative Action Rulings, which you call bigoted rulings are … bigoted? Why are you standing for White Supremacy? Why does it sound so in my ears?
You are calling your stance, a stance in favor of equality? What equality is there in a land where the White Man has reigned supreme for years, and years and years while minorities of every color have been held down, passed over, discounted, made to walk on a different tier?
You want Sotomayor to be honest and say what she thinks, what she really thinks but then, are you really being honest about why you are railing so against her?
Pat Buchanan devalues Sotomayor’s pick for consideration for a place at the bench of the SCOTUS, because, he says, she was picked for it because of affirmative action; because she is a woman, and because she is a Hispanic, and because, he says, Obama believes in Affirmative Action she was elected to be Obama’s nominee; thus, denying in one fell swoop, whatever accomplishments or achievements Sotomayor may have garnered throughout her career as a Judge, or that she was picked precisely because of whatever accomplishments, achievements, discernments, good opinions, Sotomayor accumulated on her C.V.
He goes on to take her down, distorting her words, by saying, “what is it about a Latino Woman that can make a better decision than a white male,” even when, as Bob Shrum points out that, what Sonia Sotomayor said, was:
” I would hope, given my background, that more often than not, I would make a better decision” .
As John Lorenz points out, Sotomayor was refuting an argument made by Sandra Day O’Connor that wise men and women will rule the same way:
- in context she was answering back and refuting a comment that had been made by Sandra Day O’Connor that ‘wise men and women judges will rule the same way” on court cases. Sotomayor is arguing in the context of this quote that NO, a person’s background and experience often ARE a factor in the conclusions they come to. And when a person of minority background rules on a gender and discrimination case, if it is a woman in this case, she will be influenced differently from white judges by her minority background experience when deciding this kind of cases. All she was doing was refuting Sandra Day O’Connor’s statement to the effect that judges all rule according to the same instincts no matter what their gender or background.
- Lorenz, further highlights the point being made by Sotomayor 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”
Pat Buchanan, Rush Limbaugh, and many others seeding fear, hatred and antagonism against Sonia Sotomayor in the hopes of taking down her nomination for a spot on the bench of the Supreme Court of the United States might as well just be screaming at the top of their lungs .
A MOUSE, A MOUSE - all the time wishing that their antagonistic antics against Sotomayor will cause a stampede against her nomination which will give them, the White Man as they see the White Man, their corporate state, their supremacy, a continued hold on this country, sending, meanwhile, a real chance for equality rolling down a hill to the valley of Minorities need not apply.
It is my hope that America can see through Buchanan’s and the others’ ploy and give America a chance for the equality which could come from the wise rulings of someone who has met inequality face to face.




June 2nd, 2009 at 2:31 pm
This is tongue in cheek, but I see a business opportunity here. back in the 70’s my brother had a t shirt that said “white middle class male” on the back it said “it’s all my fault”.
Bet I could sell it on Fox.
That said, This was the topic on public radio. I will see if I can locate it online as I was in the car and in and out of the discussion. They were talking about the harm of parsing.
Wizcon Reply:
June 2nd, 2009 at 7:02 pm
Here it is
http://www.wpr.org/kathleendunn/
Click on the archive for June 2. They talked about the Republican approach to Sotomayor
June 2nd, 2009 at 4:04 pm
[...] Original post: Guest author Skyagunsta: In a variation of the Elephant fears the Mouse story, Pat Buchanan’s Whit… [...]
June 2nd, 2009 at 9:04 pm
I really kind of hope the Republicans keep on attacking. It really makes them quite foolish.
I think Sotomayor will do a great job and she definitely can understand better the struggles of minorities.
June 2nd, 2009 at 9:25 pm
I agree on both points. Oberman has said he isn’t going to mention O Reilly. For how long I am sure. Now if he’d do the same thing with Rush.
June 2nd, 2009 at 9:30 pm
I was musing on all this today while waiting (which I do a lot of in my work) and go to thinking that if they want justice to be totally blind, no gender, no race, no socioeconomic issues to influence decisions, they should let computers rule on these decisions. Hard cold facts and point of law. Computers have no empathy
Sage Reply:
June 2nd, 2009 at 9:43 pm
There’s a plan!
June 2nd, 2009 at 10:34 pm
Here’s a question for you. Why did they make Symbol of Justice a woman?
For the the characteristics of the female?
Sage Reply:
June 2nd, 2009 at 11:01 pm
Great question.
June 3rd, 2009 at 7:04 am
Maybe because women are more logical ?
Even though men like to paint it the opposite, I think women think more LOGICAL and less emotional. Vice versa for men! But because men don’t cry every month on their periods, they pretend women are emotional. Actually both sexes are meant to be emotional, but men surpress it throughout most of their life. Women who cry with their friends actually RELIEVE the pressure and can go on. Men surpress it until it BLOWS. I think this is where the term ‘middle age crazies’ comes from. Men hold it in all their lives and when they finally ‘feel’, they go nuts because it is a foreign concept!
Bring it on boys, I’m ready ! LOL
Wizcon Reply:
June 3rd, 2009 at 10:35 am
My oldest daughter’s class (a whopping 36 of them- small school) was part of the Northwestern University rearch project. They took the ACT test in 7th grade and 15 scored high enough for college admission. They were 11 – 12 yrs old. The parents filled out surveys that asked socio economic, family dynamics, parents level of education etc pretty detailed.
What really interested me was that they provided us with the earmarks of intelligence. The most recent addition was “Intuition”
Wizcon Reply:
June 3rd, 2009 at 10:42 am
“Gardner originally identified seven core intelligences: linguistic, logical-mathematical, spatial, bodily-kinesthetic, musical, interpersonal and intrapersonal. In 1997 at the symposium “MIND 97″ (Multiple Intelligences New Directions) he added an eighth, the “Naturalist” Intelligence. Investigation continues on whether there are Existentialist (existential) and Spiritualist (spiritual) Intelligences.
The theory has been widely criticized in the psychology and educational theory communities. The most common criticisms argue that Gardner’s theory is based on his own intuition rather than empirical data and that the intelligences are just other names for talents or personality types. Despite these criticisms, the theory has enjoyed a great deal of popularity amongst educators over the past twenty years. There are several schools which espouse MI as a pedagogy, and many individual teachers who incorporate some or all of the theory into their methodology. Many books and educational materials exist which explain the theory and how it may be applied to the school of IFSS.”
June 3rd, 2009 at 7:04 am
Leads to another interesting question……mother earth,,, boats and cars are known as females,,,, I may look into it now it’s becoming an interesting point!
June 3rd, 2009 at 7:05 am
Statue of Liberty……….not a dude !
June 3rd, 2009 at 7:07 am
In fact the only thing men are consistently on is CURRENCY……. O M Lordy Lordy,,, what have we stumbled on ?
Wizcon Reply:
June 3rd, 2009 at 10:46 am
You are making me feel old Ali.
June 3rd, 2009 at 11:22 am
Sorry Wiz. But don’t you feel WISE!
Wizcon Reply:
June 3rd, 2009 at 12:28 pm
Looking back over 56 yrs of life, I feel patient. Putting things into perspective when comparing womens issues (there were none publically) in the 50’s to now, we’ve come a long way. at 17 I decided to get over the cinderella complex and get busy. That is when I went to college and started supporting myself. The one thing I needed help from my folks was buying a house at 19, but because that was an age of contract thing, my brothers would have needed that help at 19 as well.
I forget that younger women do not have the experience of the restrictions women had then which in my mind was nothing compared to what my mother and grandmothers experienced. My grandmother inherited some money from her mother. Her brother in law was staying with her (he was deaf) while Grandpa was in Trinidad working during the depression. The bank turned controll of the money over to the brother in law who promptly spent it on himself. All while living for free at grandma’s. What did grandma have to say. He complained a lot about having white gravy and bread so much”. Grandma was feeding 4 kids beside him.
June 3rd, 2009 at 4:34 pm
Wiz,, Youi’re only 56? You talk like you’re an old woman! You’re just a spring chicken !
I’ve heard you say an old woman so many times, I believed it.
Stop calling yourself that or you’ll start feeling OLD for real.
You’re only halfway done, honey!!!!!
June 3rd, 2009 at 4:55 pm
because her 2008 opinion to throw out the results of a firefighter promotion exam, in favor of the city of New Haven’s Program to uphold what the city wanted: a ruling in favor of Affirmative Action . (Minority Set Asides) , because almost no minorities qualified for promotions
………………………………………………………
Does this bother anyone ?
Wizcon Reply:
June 3rd, 2009 at 5:51 pm
There were many many studies done on college entrance and job exams like this. It was found that the tests were slanted to whites. There is a cultural bias that is based on white culture
Sage Reply:
June 3rd, 2009 at 5:57 pm
I’d have to know more about it including what was on the firefighter exam. Tests in the past have been skewed to favor white males. If the test were unduly geared toward one segment of the population then no I wouldn’t have a problem with the ruling. For years the system has favored white males so no I don’t have a problem with a system that might give minorities a fair shot at something….or even a bit of an advantage. It takes awhile to balance things out.
June 3rd, 2009 at 4:56 pm
Oh, not in regards to sonya s. , but just in regards to affirmative action….
June 3rd, 2009 at 6:04 pm
Intentionally ’skewed’ to favor whites? Or just written by whites and based on decades of whites’ experiences ?
Sage Reply:
June 3rd, 2009 at 6:09 pm
Some of each. I think it was in Miami they had a case where the test for police officers was deliberately skewed…no Cubans need apply.
June 3rd, 2009 at 6:06 pm
I read about this kinda thing with regard to affirmative action and it’s troublesome. I agree, we’d need to see the test. I may not be talking about this particular fire exam, but the general idea of the statement on a broader scope.
Sage Reply:
June 3rd, 2009 at 6:11 pm
I think that Affirmative Action has played a HUGE part in elevating minorities and women in the work place. It was needed and unfortunately probably still is in some areas of the country where discrimination is still the norm.
It hasn’t been but about 7 years ago that I was an assistant manager in an apartment complex and the manager did everything possible to not hire Mexicans or rent to them so we haven’t gotten beyond discrimination yet. Maybe some day.
Wizcon Reply:
June 3rd, 2009 at 7:01 pm
Theres something before the Supreme court now on affirmative action
Same thing white fire fighters tests thrown out.
They will rule this month.
http://www.racismreview.com/blog/2009/04/27/remedying-racism-the-supreme-court-and-affirmative-action/
Wizcon Reply:
June 4th, 2009 at 8:28 am
Actually the That case is the one that Sotomayer was a judge on in the lower court. If it came before her on the supreme court, she’d have to recuse herself.
June 4th, 2009 at 8:29 am
Coffee