One of the fascinating developments since President Obama nominated Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court is the contrast between the deluge of conservative writers who are highlighting her astonishingly liberal record and the deafening silence from the mainstream media. They and their leftist brethren in Congress are too busy celebrating the inevitability of Sotomayor's ascendancy to the highest court, riding the cultural coattails enshrined in judicial activism which has finally achieved its lifelong goal--an unfettered license to create law based on personal preferences.
Although it's not been widely published in the media, anyone perusing the center-right blogosphere couldn't have missed Sotomayor's racist comment that "I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion (as a judge) than a white male who hasn't lived that life." Upon questioning by the Senate Judiciary Committee she'll doubtless find a deft way to deflect or minimize that starkly hostile comment, but it provides us average folks a window into the left's curious universe, a place where values and principles are presupposed based on skin color and ethnicity.
Conservative writers such as George Will have reflected on the torrent of front-page invective that would have obtained had a Samuel Alito stated the converse--that "I would hope that a white male with the richness of this traditional American values would reach a better conclusion than a Latina woman who hasn't had that life." But the deeper paradox is that otherwise intelligent people such as Sotomayor sincerely believe that judicial decisions should often be predicated on one's life experiences versus the Constitution.
One of the key questions she must answer, therefore, is whether she truly believes that people's identity can be divined by their skin color or ethnicity? And, have we run so far afield that a member of one ethnicity is deemed incapable of rendering a fair legal judgment concerning a member of another ethnicity?
The transparently craven motivation of this president is abundantly evident by this choice because were this individual neither a female nor an American of Hispanic ancestry, her rather unremarkable legal career would never qualify her for the highest court in America.
As I've argued in numerous posts, culture is the civic engine of any society, which informs its character and plots its trajectory as a nation. Its strength and resilience depends upon a vigilant adherence to a set of principles, one immune from the sway of fashion and the allure of values codified by relativism. Tragically, Obama and millions like him in America today are convinced that the most superficial human traits--that is, pigment and ancestry--supersede the values and ideas we hold dear.
The president will likely have two more opportunities to put his stamp on the Supreme Court. If this nomination is prelude to the next two, we can expect a grim resurgence of judicial activism which can only inhibit the guarantee of equality under the law.