We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
In the Summer of ’68, I stayed with a hot French girl in an apartment in Manhattan’s Spanish Harlem. My Spanish was fluent enough then that I’d managed a store in Brooklyn’s Bedford Stuyvesant, where many poor Puerto Ricans lived, Puerto Rican Spanish being something like playing a 45-record at 78-speed.
My second-most delight after things French that Summer was eating Puerto Rican stews at local, cheap eateries, the great Eddie Palmieri often playing in the background.I prefer the meat-based ones to the seafood-based ones, but it’s the use of tropical vegetables and spices that make Puerto Rican stews so memorable that my mouth still waters.(Bird Dog, please don’t look for a photo of Puerto Rican stew to add to the post; none look anything like what I’m talking about, appearing Americanized, and the recipes on the Internet don’t resonate.I don’t want to mis-steer our readers.)
Years later, after a barefoot cruise deeper in the Caribbean I stopped off in Puerto Rico for a week, and was gratefully steered to a very busy neighborhood restaurant near Old San Juan reputed to have the best Puerto Rican stew.Sitting at a long lunch counter along the right wall, the elderly lady on the next stool turned out to be the aunt of the fantastic Puerto Rican actor Raul Julia, politically active on the Left but an authentic superb professional. She helped guide me to an afternoon of additional delectable tastings.
I’ve eaten at several Puerto Rican restaurants in the US outside NYC, and never have found those unique flavors. I guess the ingredients don’t travel too well and the recipes are adjusted to Americans’ tastes (don’t even start me on how I’ve never found a pizza elsewhere to equal New York’s).
So, what does this have to do with Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor, of Puerto Rican heritage?My fondness for Puerto Rican food and music are far more authentic – indeed may I say honest -- than hers about her legal positions and speeches at her confirmation hearing.Although the overwhelming Democrat majority in the Senate guarantees her a yea vote, and there’s no evidence of her “hiking” the Appalachian trail, Sotomayor is making a bad hash of the truth before the Senate Judiciary Committee.Even the Associated Press leadsits coverage with, “It’s a good thing Sonia Sotomayor speaks Sotomayoran,” as she baldly stirs false ingredients into her resume.
Sotomayor expects us to believe she didn’t really mean it when she repeatedly over the years said her “wise Latina” view of Justice should prevail over the clear law.Sotomayor expects us to believe that although she headed the Litigation Committee of the Board of the Puerto Rican Legal and Education Defense Fund (PRLEDF), she “never reviewed those briefs” from the PRLEDF that argued radical positions before courts.
I can accept that Sotomayor is a liberal replacement for a liberal retiring Supreme Court Justice.I can accept trying to defer to the selection of the sitting President.I cannot accept that she is publicly making a hash of the truth knowing, as with her overturned Ricci decision, she is making a legal mockery of the facts.Reasonably explaining yourself is one thing.Putting rotten ersatz ingredients in the public’s stomach is another.Puerto Rican stew is to be savored.Her hash should to be spit out.
Also, check out PowerLine’s “Sotomayor’s Nose Grows Longer” , and the other posts at PowerLine on Sotomayor, and at the Washington Post Eva Rodriguez writes “I'm surprised and disturbed by how many times today Sonia Sotomayor has backed off of or provided less-than-convincing explanations for some of her more controversial speeches about the role of gender and ethnicity in judicial decision-making.”
Mr. Kesler, maybe you have not noticed, but during the past 25 years Americans have learned to despise and feel nothing but contempt for their legal system. Attorneys who do nice websites, or pro bono work for raped mothers, or make big cash donations to worthy charities are simply hiding the fact that they do not have the courage to put their future, and the futures of the their loved ones, on the line in order to confront the truly evil in this country. There are of course the slime balls who defend the drug lords, but I am not talking about them, I am speaking about the attorneys who will not confront the corruption within their own legal community. Will not confront the corruption in their local schools, will not call upon their local attorney generals to fight for clean elections, will not demand that all judges be made to make public their background, and their sponsorships, as well as the positions they have taken on cases. Naah--we are not going to save this country until our attorneys show the same level of courage as our boys in Afghanistan--and I don't see that happening soon, do you?
Facultywife, you end by saying, "Naah--we are not going to save this country until our attorneys show the same level of courage as our boys in Afghanistan--and I don't see that happening soon, do you?"
First, I don't expect judges to show the same physical courage as our troops in Afghanistan. But, many actually do face down such threats and dangers. I have a High School and College friend, quite liberal, who rose to be a federal judge and ruled bravely in a very famous terrorism case in the early '90's, though he and his family had to be under federal armed guard.
Second, I do expect judges to have legal courage, the moral and professional bearing to follow the law. Though many, perhaps increasing numbers don't, most try very hard to have that integrity courage.
Third, when we have US Senators who have neither type of courage, judges will be favored for selection and confirmation who also have neither.
Fourth, Sotomayor fits in the latter category.
Perhaps, you have not lived in a "captured" state. One in which the attorneys are too afraid of the powerful to extend the law to all. It has been my experience that these states are "liberal", and have been for years.
Facultywife, I think we are agreeing upon the same thing: The US is diverse, and constructively so because of adherence to one law. When we stray from that, diversity becomes destructive divisiveness. -- That's the danger of a Sotomayor and ilk, and contrary to such judges' or attorneys' oaths.
It is one thing to explain away the meanings of her often repeated "wise latino woman" comments, to even misquote her to get it past the stupid (that would be me). But examining the organizations she has devoted her time to is another thing. I frequently remove one foot from my mouth in order to replace it with the other, however, when you examine my life, the people around me, and the jobs/clubs/organizations I have associated myself with, that can tell a story.....and, in sotomayor's case, it is not a nice story.
Revisionist history is occurring virtually unchallenged before us.
Even the liberal Washington Post was having hard time with the disingenuous Sotomayor. The author essentially calls her a liar. An intellectually dishonest person is just what we need in a Supreme Court justice. Not!
Imagine what would happen if a white male said, “I would hope that a wise white man, with the richness of his experiences, would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a Latina woman."? You know the answer.
Why is no one challenging her on her membership in the racist La Raza? Her Ricci decision shows she is racially biased at a minimum.
Whatever happened to the concept of finding the best jurist? The nomination process has turned into judicial affirmative action ever since Robert Bork had his character assassinated by the Democrats. Find Constitutional scholars who will uphold the Constitution. Let the legislators write the law. Judicial liberalism is a key reason for the demise of our republic.
Set up the shredder. What’s left of the Constitution will soon be gone.