About us Login Get email updates
Quick Clip
Print

Buchanan claims that "it appears" that Sotomayor "believe[s] in reverse discrimination against white males"

May 27, 2009 7:25 am ET

Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.

EMBED
Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by jbrantow (May 27, 2009 7:31 am ET)
      3  
      Pat Buchanon is a relic of the past. He has values that are great for the 19 century. Also he is still in love with Sarah Palin and listening to him gush about her causes him to loose any remaining credibility he may have had. His sister Bay is just as obnoxious.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by wzwriter (May 27, 2009 11:52 am ET)
        3  
        He has values that are great for the 19 century.


        19th Century BC.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by NiceguyEddie (May 27, 2009 8:34 am ET)
      2  
      Yeah... Pat? You missing one thing that kind of important, and ironic considering we're discussing a JUDGE...

      EVINDENCE.

      You have no evidence. You have one statement, taken out of context, that even still is hardly racist. And that's it: ONE LINE. If that's the best you idiots can do, she should be a unanimous pick, and breeze trhrough virtually unopposed.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by lede39571545 (May 27, 2009 9:16 am ET)
      3  
      President Obama is "amazing". He manages to outsmart the old guard every step of the way. He is their worst nightmare. But then I guess, turn-about is fairplay.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by magnolialover (May 27, 2009 9:41 am ET)
      3  
      If Pat is talking about the firefighter's case, then this talking point has already been disproven, as in, she ruled in the case along precedent that was, and had been established already. In other words, conservatives should LAUD this decision, because she didn't change the direction that the court had taken before, in other words, she was not an "activist".
      Report Abuse
      • Author by pauldeman (May 27, 2009 9:53 am ET)
        4  
        Let's just hope they come up with a better argument. The two memes against Sotomayor have been debunked. When the WSJ declares that Sotomayor is a moderate and GOPs continue to call her an activist, u have a credibility problem. As Rush goes, so goes the Cheney apologists.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by magnolialover (May 27, 2009 10:13 am ET)
          3  
          They won't. Anyone who has read through her opinions (not that I have, but I heard someone talking about it this morning on NPR) will say, she's a moderate, and has been praised by her colleagues as being a very good jurist, and follows the rule of law, and she's not an activist.

          The only way they can show she's an "activist" is to take out of context, parts of speeches she has made, or to take out of context, decisions and rulings she has made (like this firefighter case).

          Which is why I believe you won't see anyone in the party, as in Senators, or other elected officials, really go after her for much of anything. Will they question her thoroughly, and with great depth? I frickin hope so because this is a lifetime appointment, and all pertinent questions need to be asked. I think she'll come out better than even going in.
          Report Abuse
      • Author by wzwriter (May 27, 2009 11:54 am ET)
           
        You have to put this in the conservatives' perspective.

        A judge who follows a liberal agenda is an "activist".

        A judge who follows a conservative agenda is a "guardian of the Constitution".

        :-)
        Report Abuse
    • Author by pauldeman (May 27, 2009 9:43 am ET)
      4  
      I don't even think this was the worst part of the whole discussion. Rather, it was the fact that the whole panel seemed to agree with Pat and Rush. Let me see, 5 white people talking about a Latina being a racist without even bothering to present the other side of the argument.

      All of this is so predictable, right out of Rush. Rush says Cheney is right so MJ says Cheney is right. Rush rants against Pelosi so MJ rants against Pelosi. Rush says Sotomayor is a racist so Sotomayor is a racist. Same old, same old.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by phredicles (May 27, 2009 10:24 am ET)
      4  
      Ever notice how people like Buchanan, Dobbs, Limbaugh, Coulter, etc., etc., all get much more worked up over "reverse racism" than the regular kind?
      Report Abuse
      • Author by magnolialover (May 27, 2009 10:33 am ET)
        3  
        True enough, true enough...
        Report Abuse
      • Author by Preston (May 27, 2009 11:10 am ET)
        7  
        That's the only racism that exist to them. When minorities feel the brunt of racism, and such minorities call it out, they're just "playing the victim" and "whining". Reich-wing 101: no one is more persecuted and oppressed than white men.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by SMTDL (May 27, 2009 12:56 pm ET)
          3  
          Well said and exactly right.The same people(like Buchanan) that are so quick to call something reverse discrimination almost never admit to any racism occurring against minorities.I got so tired of this old bigot referring to the Jena,La. case as "nonsense" and his defending the Sean Bell decision in NYC ...same ole same ole from this crowd..Another couple of cases recently with "smack on the wrist "convictions of the defendants that killed a young Hispanic man in Pa and a black teenager in Va.These will never be criticized by the Buchanan types..yet they will attack this judge as racist.
          Report Abuse
      • Author by Easy to refute wingnuts (May 27, 2009 11:57 am ET)
        2  
        There's no such thing as "reverse racism." Racism is racism, no matter who is getting hurt.

        Buchanan just imagines being a victim in a case where no such racism exists.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by AdalineOrtwo (May 27, 2009 10:51 am ET)
      5  
      I think the only place this 'reverse discrimination' garbage is going to play is with the wingnuts fringe base of white supremacists, they'll eat this propaganda up.

      The charge of RD is as old as the hills and for the majority of sane people, we see it for what it is...an attempt by white men to hold on to their privilege.

      Diversity and equality are the bane of the rights existence.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by latanza (May 27, 2009 11:34 am ET)
         
      He should back it up and investigate instead of conversate. How so? Is there any reason for her to give a look to the power, authority, check and balance regimes and see that it is all a cause rallied around from the White Male perspective?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by wolf kotenberg (May 27, 2009 11:35 am ET)
      3  
      Wonder if Buchanan is talking about himself. Knowing what I know about Buchanan, and for long I have known him, I would shun him too.
      Report Abuse