Has Bob Schieffer ever asked a worse question?
May 31, 2009 2:51 pm ET by Eric Boehlert
Of course Schieffer leaves out all the context when he hypes the "Latina woman" quote from Sonia Sotomayor. That's to be expected. That has become a cardinal rule within the Beltway. Because the only way to keep the phony 'racist" debate afloat is to leave out all context and fool news consumers into thinking Sotomayor was making some sort of wild, sweeping statement about Latina judges being superior to white male judges. The press must to leave out the fact that Sotomayor was specifically addressing discrimination cases when she made the "Latina woman" claim.
Fine, Schieffer purposefully left out all context. He had no choice because it's a Village thing. But Schieffer then went one better by asking a Republican senator if Sotomayor's "Latina woman" comment would be "enough to keep her from being confirmed as a justice on the Supreme Court."
Keep in mind that you can't find four Republican senators on the record today opposing Sotomayor, but Schieffer wants to know if her nomination is doomed--if every Republican senator will oppose her and be joined by scores of Democrats--because of the "Latina woman" quote.
Is someone can find a dumber question ever asked by Schieffer, we'd like to hear it.
"Al Gore stabs his loyal running mate, Joe Lieberman, in the back, endorses Howard Dean and sets off a debate about whether it was good politics. Would a better question be:<b> Is that the kind of thing one person should do to another?"</b>
MMFA is presuming there will be a full Senate vote, but that's ONLY if one Republican clears the debate to send the nomination off. They may not. It's Rule IV of the Judiciary Committee.
Not a dumb question, Eric; a loaded question. There can be no doubt that Schieffer knows the context of the quote, and no dobut he suppressed that context in his piece. Like you said, no surprise there. But the question isn't just a fluff one; it sounds to me like he's trying to find political cover for Democrats to oppose the nomination based on the quote. Frankly, I have no doubt that Schieffer wants Sotomayor to be defeated, and by putting the question in this manner, he seems to be trying to start a Democratic insurgency against Sotomayor...
Absolutely true, Mick, and it makes one wonder about the blackmail material comeone has over most media figures that it is true. On the other hand, it's entirely possible that Schieffer is just playing for his side, so to speak, and that most of the poilitical media are Con too...
The problem is, Rule IV of the Judiciary Committee requires at least one Republican vote to get Sotomayor on the floor of the full Senate-- in effect that means one Republican has to vote for her nomination.
So it may never get to a full Senate vote. There's all this presumption that the Dems have the votes to confirm, and yes, they do--but that's if there's a vote at all!