I've not commented specifically on the nomination of Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court. There's not a lot to say. I don't doubt for a minute that she's at least as qualified as the bulk of the sitting justices, nor that her sex and ethnicity were an important consideration. What's of most -- albeit diminishing -- interest here is the right-wing histrionics that we're going to be subjected to.
The Great Pimple on the Butt of the Republican Party has already christened her a "racist," which, considering his standards, should probably be taken as a compliment. I did note, in my update to yesterday's post on rebranding the Republican party, just how pathetic the attempts to smear Sotomayor have already become. And the real smear attempts have nothing to do with her qualifications or even the "affirmative action" aspects of the nomination. (That's another one designed to play to the base.)
Jeffrey Rosen gets the gold star for dragging the discourse into the muck as quickly as possible -- in fact, he managed to do it before Sotomayor was even nominated. Digby:
But TPMDC missed the one individual who has certainly gained the most in the early going of this nomination - New Republic writer Jeffrey Rosen. After all, his use of gossipy talking points has driven the entire discussion in the media, and made him ubiquitous even if he hasn't graced the camera with his presence. And though his reputation ought to be in tatters for pushing such demeaning talking points into the mainstream, as it turns out, he has the lead story in this week's New York Times magazine.
(There is a problem with Hullabaloo, at least on my system: random YouTube videos get plopped into strange places. In this case, I can't get to the link to Digby's post, but it's titled "The Early Winner in the Sotomayor Battle." If I can get to the link at some point, I'll get it in here. It's worth reading (and it's up today, so you can just go to the blog and look.)
Digby also has her usual incisive look at the question of personal experience shaping judicial decisions. That's one I wonder about myself: is anyone really dim enough to think that white men don't have personal experiences? Or that any judge's opinions are not shaped by those experiences? (Or anyone's anything, for that matter.)
Don't let anyone doubt that this is a political process, and the Republicans are going to attempt to play Karl Rove as much as they can -- granted the sitting senators are in the hot seats on this one, but, as Digby points out, their surrogates are already going full speed ahead. Let's hope they run into some really big torpedoes.