And such a “slam dunk” just yesterday. Seems she has a bit of a “temper”, and oh, yeah, thinks that latina women are smarter than white men. The Ny Times would have us believe that her temper on the bench is kinda “cute”.

“WASHINGTON — Judge Sonia Sotomayor, President Obama’s Supreme Court choice, has a blunt and even testy side, and it was on display in December during an argument before the federal appeals court in New York. The case concerned a Canadian man who said American officials had sent him to Syria to be tortured, and Judge Sotomayor peppered a government lawyer with skeptical questions.

“So the minute the executive raises the specter of foreign policy, national security,” Judge Sotomayor asked the lawyer, Jonathan F. Cohn, “it is the government’s position that that is a license to torture anyone?”

Mr. Cohn managed to get out two and a half words: “No, your hon—— .”

Judge Sotomayor cut him off, then hit him with two more questions and a flat declaration of what she said was his position. The lawyer managed to say she was wrong, but could not clarify the point until the chief judge, Dennis G. Jacobs, stepped in, asking, “Why don’t we just get the position?”

To supporters, Judge Sotomayor’s vigorous questioning of the Bush administration’s position in the case of the Canadian, Maher Arar, showcases some of her strengths. She is known as a formidably intelligent judge with a prodigious memory who meticulously prepares for oral arguments and is not shy about grilling the lawyers who appear before her to ensure that she fully understands their arguments.

But to detractors, Judge Sotomayor’s sharp-tongued and occasionally combative manner — some lawyers have described her as “difficult” and “nasty” — raises questions about her judicial temperament and willingness to listen. Her demeanor on the bench is an issue that conservatives opposed to her nomination see as a potential vulnerability — and one that Mr. Obama carefully considered before selecting her.”

That’s only the surface. Sotomayor is well known here in legal circles, and the responses I got were along the line of the negative here. Yet if temperament were the only disqualification, her decidedly racist remarks just might prove insurmountable. Her, “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”, is beginning to gain ground. So much so that the Obama administration is being urged to “address” the racist charge.

That’s going to be hard to do. She said what she said, and more than that, she’s said or indicated such beliefs on more than one occasion.

The left and the Obama administration know this is a problem, indeed they knew nothing of the statement before it exposed by blogs yesterday. But one wonders what more can be uncovered. What other racist statements has she made and what other examples temperament can be uncovered.

Her membership in La Raza may prove to be another problem, especially with conservative democrats. As 2010 looms, illegal immigration is still a hot topic and carefully crafted mailings in these senators home states – many of which take a dim view of illegals may prove troublesome. After all who wants to be pegged as a supporter of a woman who belongs to a group that wants driver’s licenses for illegal aliens, amnesty programs, and no immigration law enforcement by local and state police? Unless you’re missing the point, if we can sway a “No” from enough of these “blue dog” democrats her nomination just might fail

Lastly, I’m tired of the “Oh don’t rock the boat, you’ll make the latino population mad”. That’s tough, but we should never sacrifice our principles to stand idly by while such a woman is elevated to the top court of the land.

Technorati Tags: ,