Conservatives vs. Sotomayor

A lot of conservatives are itching for a fight over the Supreme Court nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor.   Pat Robertson says that the Republicans will lose all chance of regaining power if they don’t put up a strong battle, and talk radio hosts like Limbaugh and Hannity seem to see this as a defining issue.

Yet the problem is that there is really nothing to fight about.

The case against Sotomayor is weak.   Most people fixate on two cherry picked quotes — one where she says ‘policy’ is made from the bench, and another where she compares the abilities of a ‘wise Latina’ to a ‘white male.’   From this the opponents say she is racist, or wants intense activism.  The trouble is, if that’s the best they can do in looking for embarrassing quotes examining a public career that has spanned decades, it’s pretty meager.

That’s the old game of ‘gotcha’ politics — find some quote and then magnify it to the point that it drowns out all rational discussion.   Yet in this case the quotes are old, relatively benign and can easily be dismissed as ‘poor wording’ designed for a specific context (a speech about her background, judicial policy, etc.)   After all, how many of us would have every quote  of ours withstand the scrutiny of those who want to give it the worst interpretation possible.

At first the abortion foes were upset with her, but under more scrutiny, many pro-choice groups are suspicious of her belief in their cause.   If both sides distrust her, that’s an argument for her.   Conservatives end up with disagreements about particular decisions (she didn’t see reverse discrimination where the right wing does), but that’s hardly acceptable for a Senator to vote against a nominee.

Then, of course, the political suicide of a fight.  The GOP angrily beat back Democratic attempts to filibuster the nomination of  Justice Alito a few years ago, arguing correctly that Supreme Court appointments should be voted on a straight up or down vote.   It would take every Republican to ditch this principle for the sake of partisan politics to have a chance for a filibuster to work.   And, though some partisans on the Left might say that Republicans have no principles, they do — and most truly believe that she deserves a straight up-down vote.   Already Senator Snowe has signaled her general approval of the pick, and who knows — by the time the vote comes Senator Franken might be seated giving the Democrats a full 60 votes to defeat an attempted filibuster.

What politician would sacrifice the stated principle — something that would be thrown back in his or her face — knowing that the personally dangerous act is in vain?

Beyond that, this pick is popular with the fastest growing demographic in the US: hispanics and Latinos.   The Republicans are losing big time in this group, something that has caught them by surprise.  They had hoped that the fact most hispanics are Roman Catholic and morally conservative would give the GOP a claim to at least a large chunk of their vote — all they need is a decent split.   Instead, thanks to the anti-immigration crusade of folk like Tancredo (who threatened to bomb Mecca if the US were hit by al qaeda again, something that would put him on a moral par with Adolf Hitler), and the vocal anti-immigration rhetoric from the right, the Democrats are winning that group over by a large margin.

Most Republican strategists believe this can be turned around, but not if the GOP fights against the history making first Latina Supreme Court Justice!   In fact, hispanic GOP strategists are already appalled at the attacks on Sotomayor, believing this is only making it less likely that their attempt to win hispanic voters will succeed.    They fear a long term Democratic majority, based on demographics.   Whites are soon to be a minority in the US (though will remain a plurality), and the GOP cannot be seen as the party of whites or, increasingly, white males.

So why do conservatives want this fight so badly?   For some like Limbaugh, they make money on pushing emotional buttons of about 14 million people.  They don’t need to win elections to keep their ratings, they need to satisfy their core audience.  That’s fine, but for some freakish reason Limbaugh has become seen as the face of the GOP — in large part because he makes headlines, and the Republicans have no one else representing them.   McCain is damaged by defeat, Cheney is, well, unpopular and spends his time defending torture and war, and Romney is boring and uninspiring.  Limbaugh inspires the base, who are as vocal and angry as ever, and the rest of the party doesn’t want to anger the base.

And this base wants to fight.  To them, Obama is “the clown” the “usurper” who is threatening all that is American by bringing socialism, debt, and big government to the fore.  He represents everything they have been fighting against, and he’s winning.  This is happening as gay marriage spreads, abortion recedes as an issue, and the Christian right becomes as weak as any time since the pre-Falwell era.   They sense they are losing and feel a need to fight back.  So they are itching for battle — any battle.

But to fight over Sotomayor will dig their hole deeper, and though they are losing to Obama, he’s not the demon their propagandists paint him as.  Yes, he is doing some risky government spending, but it’s with the partnership of capitalist Wall Street (something the left doesn’t like) and in response to a  major crisis.   He’s not the force behind the growth of gay marriage, he’s not going to bring socialism to the US, but he does have different policy goals than the Republicans.  They are traditional democratic positions.  If the Republicans fight smart, they’ll have their day again, and they can play the role of any opposition party in a two party system — to moderate the other side.

Understandably it’s tough for them to take having fallen so far so fast.  They felt on top of the world in 2002, perhaps near a permanent majority.   Now that talk has flipped around.  And therein is the lesson — it can flip around again.  That’s politics.   But to fight for the sake of fighting, especially in a battle they are sure to lose, is to engage in a self-defeating strategy.

Advertisements
  1. #1 by Mike Lovell on May 31, 2009 - 15:16

    One major question being brought up on the conservative side against Sotomayor is her participation in the decision for Ricci v. De Stefano, the New Haven fire department promotion issue. What are your thoughts on that particular issue?

  2. #2 by Scott Erb on May 31, 2009 - 16:53

    I don’t know the intricacies of the laws in that case, and so I’m not sure how I would rule. Discrimination cases are especially tricky since some forms of discrimination are allowed for a variety of reasons — the political and legal issues are difficult. In general, I don’t think agreement or disagreement with a judge on a particular case or even set of cases is enough to vote against someone. (I personally supported all of President Bush’s nominees as well, including Harriet Miers, since I thought they were qualified and had integrity — beyond that, I consider it the President’s call. My own judicial philosophy is apolitical — it’s the law, not the politics.)

  3. #3 by Josh on May 31, 2009 - 17:25

    Hi Scott,

    I wouldn’t worry about Republican reaction to Sotomayor too much Scott. When the Republicans take over again, the Democrats will act just as ridiculous and we’ll just complain again. So I’ve decided to do my best to ignore this kind of thing.

    Maybe I’m being too harsh, but I find politicians to be so illogical. It is so hard to watch C-SPAN and not roll my eyes at the poor debating skills of our elected officials.

    I wonder what would happen if we had just mathematicians as politicians? 🙂

  4. #4 by Scott Erb on May 31, 2009 - 18:23

    I think you’ve got a point, Josh. I was working in DC for a Senator (Republican) and made a decision to leave the job and ‘real world’ politics, even though I was moving up and had just been promoted. The power games and disconnnect between common sense and the political wars was too much for me, I couldn’t put my heart in that kind of life. From what I’ve heard, it’s got even worse since then. At that time you could have, say, Ted Kennedy and Jesse Helms of political opponents who would still be friendly together. Now it’s ideology and partisanship even more. Both Obama and Bush got elected on trying to stop that, but it could well be a task beyond any one President. As someone convinced that two solid parties with different perspectives — but able to compromise — are needed to avoid dangerous errors, I am a bit disheartened by the current state of affairs.

  5. #5 by Mike Lovell on June 1, 2009 - 14:47

    Don’t forget..in 2016, the Great Mookatollah (that’s me) will run for the Presidency as his first political office. My main platforms are allowing transfatty acid to be used in consumer products, and slashing and halting congressional pay structures!

  6. #6 by helenl on June 1, 2009 - 15:58

    The Republicans are running scared and fear white supremacy is over.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: