An Internet hub for moderates, centrists, and independents, with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, and right

One Latino’s Opinion on Sotomayor’s “Wise Latina Woman” Comment

sotomayor4

I watched in amazement this morning as Senator John Cornyn, from the great state of Texas—a state where Latinos make up about 36% of the population—once again was fixated on the “wise Latina” contention.

Of course, Cornyn also brought up Sotomayor’s involvement with the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund, an organization whose mission is to provide equal opportunity for Latinos—a large part of Cornyn’s constituency.

At one time during the four days of hearings, it got so bad, that, after one of Cornyn’s commentaries, Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy announced that he was entering “into the record” a letter of support for Sotomayor from Latino chambers of commerce across the nation. Leahy specifically mentioned the chambers of commerce in Dallas, Houston and Odessa. Guess what state these cities are in.

But let’s focus on the wise Latina woman “issue.”

In a 2001 speech, Judge Sonia Sotomayor had the “temerity” to say: “I would hope 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.”

Before and during the many hours of intense questioning by her Republican critics—Cornyn among them—Sotomayor explained, clarified, put into context, and even apologized for any offense or misunderstanding her remarks may have caused or resulted in.

For example:

If you read on and read the rest of my speech you wouldn’t be concerned with it, but it was a poor choice of words.

It was bad because it left an impression that I believed that life experiences commanded a result in a case, but that’s clearly not what I do as a judge.

And

No words I have ever spoken or written have received so much attention…I want to state up front, unequivocally and without doubt: I do not believe that any ethnic, racial or gender group has an advantage in sound judging…”

But to no avail. The seven wise, white, male senators were intent on proving that Sotomayor remarks were racial, even racist.

But what is so wrong with Sotomayor’s comment?

In this Latino’s opinion, nothing, when viewed in context, and considering some aspects of Hispanic/Latino culture and tradition.

Others—including Latinos—may disagree with me, but as a Latino who grew up most of my young life with wise Latina women, I can attest that there is a lot of tradition behind and basis for Sotomayor’s words.

Hispanic/Latina women traditionally play a strong and central role in their community and within their family.

In the Latino home I grew up in, my grandmother (my abuelita) was a strong matriarch, and my loving grandfather (my abuelito) was a quiet man, a true gentle man.

And I know that in our home, our abuelita would more often than not make the decisions—and the right decisions.

Now, had our abuelito not been Hispanic—say, perhaps, a white male—I know that my abuelita would still have reached good conclusions, more often than not.

Hispanic women, mothers, grandmothers, and especially great-grandmothers (bisabuelas), with the richness of their heritage, their culture and their experiences are indeed wise women.

Their home is their castillo; they run a tight ship, and the male (white or not) understands and appreciates such.

When I view Sotomayor’s comments from this perspective, I can understand how she would have made them without any sinister, racist or ulterior motives.

I hasten to say that none of this should be viewed as implying that Hispanic or Latino males are meek, weak or indecisive. On the contrary, we respect women, we value their wisdom, and we tremendously appreciate the uniqueness and richness of their life experiences.

In final comments today, addressing a final question by the Republican Senator from South Carolina, Lindsey Graham, on the “wise Latina” issue, Sotomayor answered:

I regret that I have offended some people. I believe that my life demonstrates that that was not my intent to leave the impression that some have taken from my words.

To which the Senator from South Carolina, graciously answered, “You know what Judge, I agree with you. Good Luck”

Will the Texas Senator with a large Hispanic/Latino voting bloc in his state be equally gracious—and wise?

  • DLS
    Dorian, the amazement is irrational and misplaced. Sotomayor's remark is just cause for concern among those who fear any hint at additional liberal judicial activism (the kind of activism we have seen in the 20th and 21st centuries, to date) in addition to liberal and Democratic defense and attempts to perpetuate it.

    Her remarks make all normal people (unless they support judicial activism) concerned, as they should.

    I wrote on another thread that Sotomayor could have easily dispatched with this with a rational intelligent appeal to everyone who can comprehend it: that she, as an individual, differs from others, and that her personal attributes of course can color (or more properly, threaten to color, resisted by her as a judge) her actions and judicial decisions. To the extent that differences between her and others are at issue rather than the issue of letting _anything_ affect objective judgment, she differs from other people, but so does everyone else. As I wrote, we aren't all clones. Even older white male Ivy League Justices differ with each other (outside the realm of liberal judicial activism as we still sometimes have on the Court) because no two people are alike. "We are not clones," I wrote. There rarely is a unanimous verdict (9-0) or decision (to affirm or to reverse a lower court decision). There are normally multiple opinions, including on the deciding as well as the dissenting side. Even those who join together on one person's opinion often add notes to distinguish their arrival at a decision from the others'. Sotomayor expresses a concern which largely is due to decades of liberal judicial activism, which flavor her controversial statements. The nature of the activists (and the Dems' behavior in the hearings, among which I noted Al Franken's recently) is actually more concerning (and annoying and insulting to intelligence and morality) than she is.

    In fact, she's presenting herself deliberately in this hearing as someone, more anti-activist than the GOP questioners. (So much so we are starting to wonder how much is real and how much is bogus and may hurt not only her but future Obama candidates later, especially if the next candidate is more blatantly liberal and activist. "Is Sonia Sotomayor a right-wing extremist?")

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124775868855652...
  • D. E.Rodriguez
    DLS

    Thank you for your reasoned and extensive comments.

    I limited my commments to the perceived racism (not activism) that some concluded from her comments on the "wise Latina woman," and tried to look at them from a Hispanic/Latino traditions viewpoint.

    Since Sotomayor has already explained, apologized, and unequivocally stated that she does not " believe that any ethnic, racial or gender group has an advantage in sound judging…” it wasn't even necessary.

    I do appreciate your opinions on Judge Sotomayor, albeit I respectfully disagree with them

    Dorian
  • DaGoat
    That's great DDW, but based on my heritage, tradition and upbringing a wise old white guy will more often than not reach a better conclusion than a Latina.

    Neverless I hope Sotomayor is speedily confirmed.
  • SteveK
    DaGoat wrote: "That's great DDW, but based on my heritage, tradition and upbringing a wise old white guy will more often than not reach a better conclusion than a Latina."
    And therein lies the problem DaGoat. The old white guys in congress who are truly wise know this IS NOT ALWAYS the case and therefore are not saying a thing. The only ones we're hearing from are the old white guys who think that they, and only they (Latina's not welcome) are WISE. They'll never understand how foolish they look to so many of the people they need to stay in office. The world is changing.
    DaGoat also wrote: "Neverless I hope Sotomayor is speedily confirmed."
    You've said this several times and I believe you, I feel the same... I also believe that that is what will happen.
  • Janjanjan
    She has never been an activist judge, and she's been a judge for 17 years. Are we to believe that she is really a radical activist who has been hiding her true colors through all these court decisions just to fool everybody so she could get confirmed someday as a Supreme?
  • D. E.Rodriguez
    DG

    Glad that you're proud of your wise white guy heritage, tradition and upbringing. We should all be proud of our respective heritage, tradition and upbringing.

    And hopefully no one will call you racist for believeing that you'll more often than not will reach a better conclusion than a Latina, because it is neither racial not racist...nor activism
  • Father_Time
    Ho hum. Some women are wise some are not. Hispanic or not Hispanic, no ethnicity has a corner on the wise women market. I must point out though, it does appear that Spanish speaking people world wide are working hard trying to catch up with the modern world. Seems that even among Hispanics diversity is as rich and diverse as say...Puerto Rican and Mexican, with the commonalities being the Spanish Language and Catholicism? Precious little else they tell me.

    Might want to also point out that it was Spain that gave up slavery last.
  • SteveK
    Father_Time wrote: I must point out though, it does appear that Spanish speaking people world wide are working hard trying to catch up with the modern world.
    Father_Time also wrote: "Might want to also point out that it was Spain that gave up slavery last."
    Phooey!
  • Davebo
    Might want to also point out that it was Spain that gave up slavery last.


    Huh?

    Slavery is still going on today. And Spain abolished slavery within Spain in and in all colonies except Cuba, Puerto Rico, and Santo Domingo in 1811.

    Cuba and Puerto Rico later abolished slavery by1880 or so.

    .
  • D. E.Rodriguez
    FatherTime:

    If you are trying to disparage Hispanic/Latino history, culture, etc., why don't you come right out and do so,

    Yes, Spain officially abolished slavery 15 to 19 years after the U.S., So???
  • Davebo
    But I couldn't believe it was legal in many mid east countries up until the 1960's. (Saudi Arabia, Qatar, UAE etc.)
  • Davebo
    D.E., actually around 40 years before the US.
  • D. E.Rodriguez
    Davebo: I was basing my aboliton comments on the U.S. 1865 passage of the 13th Amendment, and on Spain's gradual abolition of slavery in the colonies from 1880-1886.

    But you are correct that Spain abolished slavery in Spain (metropolis) in 1837

    I am still waiting for FatherTime to explain the relevance, and what his intentions were with his comments on Hispanics, Puerto Ricans and Mexicans..

    But he seems to drop one smokebomb in each thread and never retrurn to debate or face the consequences

    Maybe I'll catch him on the next smoke bomb, before he runs off
  • Gegenschattenbild
    If I'm not mistaken (I often am), Brazil was the last country to abolish slavery nationwide, in 1888.
  • D. E.Rodriguez
    Just in case my post is considered racist, let me add the following "self-deprecating" comment::


    There are also white English ladies (wives) who also believe that a wise English woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than her Latino husband (in this case me).

    I may call this misguided (under my breath), but I would never call it racist.

    Dorian

    Hey, British ladies, lighten up, just kidding...
  • Dorian,

    Your reflections on your abuelita are touching but unfortunately completely miss the point. No one is disputing that Latinas can be wise. The problem is with her use of her word "better". And there is nothing in the context of her speech that negates the clear meaning of her sentence. Even she, upon reflecting on her words, has admitted that they were not a good representation of her true feelings on the matter. For that I give her credit, but yet you continue to defend the same words that she has already recanted. And at the same time you imply that in order to get the support of Hispanics, you must patronize them and tell them they are better than anyone else. A wise person, latina or otherwise, will see that for what it is: identity politics at it's worst.

    Furthermore, while I have no doubt that your family is representative of many great Hispanic families, I am a little surprised that you don't mention at all a much darker side if Hispanic culture: machismo. I am just a white guy, but I have happened to spend a few years mingling with Spanish speaking people in central America as well as in the US, and I've seen the ugly face of machismo too many times. I'm not trying to pit race against race here (heaven knows there are plenty of chauvanist white guys), but let's see the whole picture befor. We glorify a culture.
  • D. E.Rodriguez
    Adelinesdad:

    Thanks for you comments.

    You are right that Judge Sotomayor has clarified, apologized, etc., etc., for her poor choice of words.

    However, she has never apologized for, nor admitted to, her words being racist, as they have been interpreted by many, because she never intended them to be so.

    My post, an opinion, was intended to put her words and perhaps the reason for them, in a cultural context, based upon my own cultural experiences---which, I admit, may be unrepresentative of the entire Hispanic/Latino culture.

    I did say up front, that many, including Latinos, may not agree with me, That is to be expected with any opinion piece, and that is fine.

    However, nowhere in my post did I say or imply that "in order to get the support of Hispanics, you must patronize them and tell them they are better than anyone else."

    I did express the opinion that Senator Cornyn, with his unflattering remarks of and accusations against a brilliant and accomplished Latina woman, and with a large Latino population in his home state, may not be making too many Latino friends. Again, an opinion.

    With respect to what you call "the ugly face of machismo," what about it?

    Thanks again,

    Dorian
  • Father_Time
    Smoke Bombs.

    No, just a different perspective without Hispanic bias.

    Racism? No. Hispanic, Latino ect.. Are not race, but ethnicity. What is your race anyway Mr. Rodriguez?
  • D. E.Rodriguez
    Glad to have you drop by again, FT.

    Race, ethnicity...gender, sex...what's yours FT.
  • jwest
    Sotomayor is a “Wise” Latina? Let’s look at this again:

    http://themoderatevoice.com/39552/sotomayor-and...
  • D. E.Rodriguez
    Excellent cartoon...fits the GOP down to a T
  • jwest
    Actually, Dorian, I was referring to the comment I left on that thread. Reproduced here for clarity:

    Keying off of the headline of this piece – “Sotomayor and Palin” – let’s contemplate the disparity of treatment the two receive.

    In Sotomayor’s testimony, she made numerous grammatical errors that reveal she is less than comfortable with the English language, especially the big words. Here are a few examples with the help of Rush Limbaugh’s transcript:

    SOTOMAYOR: “ This first seven who are gonna be hired, only because of the (pause) uh, vagrancies (sic) of the vacancies at that moment.”

    She wanted to say “vagaries”.

    SOTOMAYOR: “Under New York law, if you are being threatened with eminent (sic) death or very serious injury –“

    Imminent is the word that works.

    SOTOMAYOR:” -- is educate themselves. They build up a story (sic) of knowledge about legal thinking.”

    Store of knowledge, Sonia.

    SOTOMAYOR: “ All questions of policy are within the providence (sic) of Congress first.”

    Province, Ms. Sotomayor. En Ingles, por favor.

    Argue, rationalize, excuse or justify these verbal gaffs any way you want. The point of my comment is that if Sarah Palin had made any combination of these mistakes in a speech or interview, the media would be playing them 24/7 as evidence she was too stupid to function in society.

    How can liberals be a party to such gross hypocrisy?
  • D. E.Rodriguez
    "In Sotomayor’s testimony, she made numerous grammatical errors that reveal she is less than comfortable with the English language, "

    Wow, let's not even get started on not being "comfortable with the English language" I remember, a long, long time ago, a guy whose initials were GWB...

    By the way, how is your Spanish?
  • D. E.Rodriguez
    ...and GWB was a native born and raised Texan, whose native language (and only language) was supposed to be English...
  • jwest
    Ricorun & Dorian,

    The gross hypocrisy is the difference between how the press and liberals treat these miscues as acceptable by Sotomayor, as opposed to the crucifixion that would ensue if Palin had said the same thing.
  • D. E.Rodriguez
    Sonia Maria Sotomayor was born in the Bronx. Her father, Juan Sotomayor, had a third-grade education and did not speak English. Her mother, Celina Báez was from the neighborhood of Santa Rosa in Lajas, a rural area in Puerto Rico.

    Sotomayor grew up among Puerto Ricans who settled in the South Bronx and East Bronx.

    After her father died of heart problems, when Sotomayor was nine years old, Sotomayor started to become fluent in English---but apparently not fluent enough for some.

    When did Palin become fluent in English? And how many other languages does she speak?
  • jwest
    Sonia Maria Sotomayor was fortunate enough to be born in an era of affirmative action. As she grew up, every test, every school, every job, every promotion, every word spoken or printed about her would be tilted in her favor by ethnic quotas and liberal self-guilt.

    Sarah Palin was unfortunate enough to be just another white girl from a middle class family. While people like Sotomayor were getting into Ivy League colleges with less-than-stellar scores, Palin was working her way through mundane schools. As the public sector competed for minorities to fill their self-imposed quotas, Palin was fighting the most well financed and entrenched political and corporate interests. As Sotomayor was appointed to ever higher office so that the politicians elevating her could take credit for their empathy to minorities, Palin was winning elective office on her own.

    And yet, the media paints Sotomayor as a rags to riches, smart, scrappy Latina while deriding Palin at every turn.

    There is no justice when liberal write history.
  • D. E.Rodriguez
    Thank you for bringing up affirmative action.

    The facts that you bring up, that a young Latina girl, daughter of poor immigrants, who couldn't even speak English, whose father had a third grade education, whose mother worked her rear end off to support her family, and who herself, through hard study, hard work, initiative, perseverance, true grit, has been able to rise up to possibly become a Supreme Court Justice in the United States of America, is the greatest tribute you could have given to affirmative action and to our nation.

    Thank you again
  • jwest
    Dorian,

    Thank you for not even attempting to argue the point of my comment – the difference in the treatment by the press of Sotomayor, a product of affirmative action, and Sarah Palin, a self-made woman of extraordinary achievement.

    You did have a point about Sotomayor knowing two languages, but just as George Bush spoke both Spanish and English, I don’t think Obama is an idiot simply because he’s not bilingual.
  • ccintexas
    Why was it so wrong for John Cornyn to do his job? This is a supreme court justice nomination hearing. TOUGH QUESTIONS should be asked. You are wanting my Senator to be politically correct because there is a large Hispanic community in his district? Please. This is why our country is in such shambles.

    Ask yourself this question Dorian. Why do so many people (including the Sotomayor's) want to live in our great nation? I will tell you why. Despite numerous mistakes in our past, America is the role model for the rest of the world because even if we don't have it completely right (racism) we try harder than any other country.
  • D. E.Rodriguez
    "Despite numerous mistakes in our past, America is the role model for the rest of the world because even if we don't have it completely right (racism) we try harder than any other country."

    You are so correct on both counts, and we can not stop trying (harder)

    Thanks,

    Dorian
  • Father_Time
    Well I am Caucasian Mr. Rodriguez,

    What is your race Mr. Rodriguez? Or do you know? There are only five. Surely you identify with one.
  • D. E.Rodriguez
    Well Mr, Father Time, My father was Dutch, my mother was Hispanic.

    So you tell me what "race" I am, if that's so important to you...
  • mariaycorazon
    I think that everyone is missing the point of Sotomayor's comment. Yes, a wise Latina woman in any court would be an asset because she adds diversity to the opinion which is sorely lacking in this country. The white male point of view is over-represented in all areas of our society and leaves out a large constiuency of this country. Isn't it about time that we expanded our points of view? As for Sarah Palin, she was priviledged on the day she popped out of the womb just by the nature of the color of her skin. Affirmative action has threatened the status quo of the priviledged class and therefore the program must be demonized to revert to an elitist society. Fear is what drives people to criticize any efforts to equalize the various groups in the U.S. It is evident in all the blogs that lash out in anger against affirmative action. Well, I'm sorry to tell you that you can't go back to the past. The Sleeping Giant has found its voice.
  • Father_Time
    Oh but Mr. Rodriguez, Hispanic is not a race, its an ethnicity and Dutch is a Nationality, again not a race. Though I am sure there are all races represented in both. Just wanted to let you know that I wasn't disparaging anything, just pointing out fact. If fact offends you then its a personal problem, certainly not "smoke bombs".
  • truthify
    I'm a white male. I've never suffered any gender or racial discrimination. I'd be willing to be that someone who had would be likely to have more insight on the issue than myself.

    However, there was no way Sotomayor could get deep enough into the issue to do any good. The whole thing was simply a way to manufacture something out of nothing so that Republican's could rile up the angry white male voters.

    It's a shame (or is that sham) really.
  • The problem with her comment was not that she argued that some diversity would be good for the court. She said that a latina would more often than not reach a *better* decision than a white male would. That is different than saying the court has too many white males on it (which is true). The logical conclusion of her comment, taken literally, is that we should stack the court with latinas, since they would make better decisions than the current crop. She says now that's not what she meant, and instead meant what you are saying--that diversity on the court is good. I take her at her word, but the fact remains that that's not what she originally said (and she said it multiple times), and so it's reasonable for some to press her on that issue.
  • melchior42
    The main thing is that Hispanic is not a race. Many hispanics are mestizos (Spanish and Indian). Many are more indian than anything else. And people from Spain are southern European. Why someone would think fit to single them out as separate race and not other mediterranean people like Italians, Greeks or Southern French, does not make any sense to me. Besides many Latin Americans have ancestry from other European countires not just Spain. Take Argentina for example, where a substantial part of the population is of Italian, German and even Slavic descent. To put an Anglo and a Hispanic who look similar side by side and say one is a different race just because they have a Spanish surname or come from a Spanish speaking country is beyond stupid in my opinion...and we have enough division in the US as it is.
blog comments powered by Disqus
© 2005-2009 The Moderate Voice | Site design by Elegant Themes | Site customization, hosting, and security by Enxit Group, LLC