‘Narrative’ Meant Nuthin When Nominees Weren’t Liberals

FinkelBlog ^ | Mark Finkelstein

[governsleastgovernsbest]

Between now and the final confirmation vote, how many times will we hear of Sonia Sotomayor’s “moving personal narrative”? But as Pat Buchanan, Joe Scarborough and Ann Coulter pointed out this morning, touching personal tales meant nada to Dems when the minority judicial nominee wasn’t a liberal.

Clarence Thomas and Miguel Estrada each had moving stories of their own. But that didn’t stop the Dems from savaging the former and filibustering the latter when Republican presidents nominated them to the Supreme Court and Court of Appeals, respectively.

View videos of Coulter and Morning Joe here.

[governsleastgovernsbest]

[governsleastgovernsbest]

“Moving personal narrative” only counts if you’re a liberal ping to Today show list.

[lacrew]

Do you have to be a minority in this country to have a ‘moving personal story’? Why should we care about this woman, or even Thomas more, because of their race?

I don’t think we should counter identity politics by lamenting that we didn’t get the full benefit of it in the past.

[ClearCase_guy]

I need to counter Identity Politics. It's been the method by which people got into power for some time. "I'm a victim, I've been oppressed, you owe me". This has never been good.

Now they are taking it to the next level -- Obama wants an "empathetic" court, and Sotomayer thinks that Latina women make better decision than white men.

Racism is being institutionalized. We need to fight back and expose the double-standards and hypocrisy.

[Donald Rumsfeld Fan]

Clarence Thomas and Miguel Estrada each had moving stories of their own. But that didn’t stop the Dems from savaging the former and filibustering the latter when Republican presidents nominated them to the Supreme Court and Court of Appeals, respectively.

Liberals are vermin.