GOP: No To Sotomayor And La Raza

Heeding Pat Buchanan's advice, the Republican Party is just saying No to Latinos, be they Sonia Sotomayor, the first Latina nominee for the Supreme Court, or La Raza:

The National Council of La Raza (NCLR), the nation’s largest Hispanic civil rights and advocacy organization, has been holding its annual conference over the past few days in Chicago. Speakers have included Obama adviser Valerie Jarrett, CNN’s Soledad O’Brien, Rep. Luis Guitierrez (D-IL), and others.

Republicans are conspicuously absent from the line-up. Greg Sargent spoke with NCLR spokesperson Marie Watteau, who said that it wasn’t for lack of trying. In fact, the group invited RNC chairman Michael Steele, Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour, Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, and Puerto Rico Gov. Luis Fortuno, but they all “declined the invitations through the RNC.”


Speaking for me only

< Report: Charles Manson Reaches Out to Phil Spector in Prison | Judiciary Committee Votes 13 to 6 For Judge Sotomayor >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    geez, what part of this (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 02:53:13 PM EST
    Republicans have been given fair warning.

    Should GOP senators treat Sonia Sotomayor as contemptuously as Democrats treated Robert Bork, Clarence Thomas and Sam Alito, they should expect Hispanic hostility for a generation.

    do they not understand.  its remarkable.

    La Raza (5.00 / 3) (#5)
    by Steve M on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 03:07:01 PM EST
    is the new NAACP.  Radical, subversive, and did I mention they don't look like us?  Man, when you get one of the hardcore wingnuts going on the subject of La Raza it's a sight to behold.

    thats a pretty good way to put it (none / 0) (#6)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 03:09:08 PM EST
    I am constantly amazed by the completely unhinged emails I get from otherwise "hinged" people on the subject of latinos and immigration.

    I'm doing my part (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by Steve M on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 03:10:09 PM EST
    breeding little white babies, just like Fox News tells me to do.

    You only have two, right? (none / 0) (#10)
    by jbindc on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 03:12:15 PM EST
    Better get busy, else they will think you're slacking in your quest to help keep the white race strong <snark>

    Indeed (none / 0) (#13)
    by Steve M on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 03:22:20 PM EST
    but the topic of #3 is a dangerous one right now!

    The third child will clearly be the best one (none / 0) (#15)
    by CST on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 03:26:33 PM EST
    Speaking as a third (and youngest) child.  But you will want to stop there.  Can't improve on perfection.

    Danger, schmanger, no need to discuss, that's what "accidents" are for.


    I concur.... (none / 0) (#17)
    by kdog on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 03:36:48 PM EST
    the third kid is always the charm...also speaking as a third:)

    Just don't go for four...thats who moms says gave her all her greys:)


    First borns rule (5.00 / 3) (#18)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 03:39:09 PM EST
    the rest just drool.

    I am the oldest (none / 0) (#20)
    by Steve M on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 03:41:02 PM EST
    but I am also the youngest.

    Like me, you are evidently (5.00 / 1) (#30)
    by MO Blue on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 04:02:04 PM EST
    the best and brightest child your parents ever had.

    I ended up that way (none / 0) (#24)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 03:51:38 PM EST
    It wasn't intended though and at one point I wasn't the youngest.  I remember a lot of drooling too.

    Im a fourth (5.00 / 1) (#26)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 03:53:26 PM EST
    and youngest

    It's just me but honestly (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 03:57:09 PM EST
    I always thought it took four kids to get it right.  You do all of your experiments on the first one.  You try to atone with the second one and you really mess that one up.  You had a chance with the third but you are busy in therapy.

    Only child? Figures! ;) (none / 0) (#25)
    by andgarden on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 03:52:31 PM EST
    this is a little OT (none / 0) (#14)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 03:24:16 PM EST
    but I swear to dog Brooks is frightening some times:

    Every day, I check a blog called Marginal Revolution, . . . Last week, one of those contributors asked a question that is fantastical but thought-provoking: What would happen if a freak solar event sterilized the people on the half of the earth that happened to be facing the sun?

    If, say, the Western Hemisphere were sterilized, there would soon be a cataclysmic spiritual crisis. Both Judaism and Christianity are promise-centered faiths. They are based on narratives that lead from Genesis through progressive revelation to a glorious culmination.

    and it just gets weirder.  the guy is creepy.


    The comments are interesting (none / 0) (#21)
    by cymro on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 03:41:23 PM EST
    No time to read all 200+, but I liked #18 from vermontague:

    David, you mystified me. I tried and tried to figure out why you would write about such a parable. And at last I understood. Republicans have effectively denied that they have children.

    They have come to the conclusion that only the present counts. One certainly wouldn't want to tax people in the present to build schools and infrastructure for a coming generation (or even a present generation). Republicans/your sort of conservatives have decided that government ought to be essentially free, and therefore they have made a mantra of "small government" and "No taxes." What a wonderful world that would be! unless, of course, people have children who need to be educated, who need health care, and on and on.

    The truth is that we are, finally, one large community. We do need roads and bridges and schools and defense, and these things cost money. But one large group in our community wants--illogically--miraculously--to have these things without paying for them. They emphasize defense, in fact--but won't pay for the cost of a real war--the injured soldiers who return. They want a war without cost.

    You know it won't work, David, and in your better moments, you resist that sort of distorted conservativism. Thanks for this parable that reminds us that there is a future, and it's going to cost a lot.

    Buwhahahahaha...Unbelieveable! (none / 0) (#23)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 03:48:29 PM EST
    When your entire ideology that is directly connected to all of your employment obligations is imploding on itself it is always most beneficial to compare the navels of orphans :)  Cheese and Rice......these really were the people in charge of most everything for about eight of the longest years I'll ever ever ever cognitively experience!

    The righties are doing everything possible (none / 0) (#7)
    by shoephone on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 03:09:44 PM EST
    to lose the Latino vote -- permanently.

    I can't bring myself to interfere (5.00 / 2) (#11)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 03:18:20 PM EST
    with nuclear fusion.  I'm just a spectator.  I think they are entering the white dwarf stage now.

    can't interfere (5.00 / 2) (#12)
    by CST on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 03:22:10 PM EST
    but like a car crash - can't look away either.

    I just went and refreshed myself (none / 0) (#16)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 03:28:16 PM EST
    on a white dwarf via the wiki; essentially held together by degenerate energy pressure causing it to be extremely dense.  I could go on all day.  It's the science geek Buddha in me.

    Now, that's witty! (none / 0) (#27)
    by mexboy on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 03:56:28 PM EST
    The Republicans are at checkmate. (5.00 / 2) (#29)
    by mexboy on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 04:01:01 PM EST
    But the Democrats need to get proactive. They can't  just sit on their behinds and assume we have no where to go...which is their modus operandi, as far as I'm concerned.

    The latino population is expected to be 30% of the U.S. population by 2050. Are these guys that crazy? Even if you hate Latinos that much; at least try and look out for your best interest.

    Maybe I shouldn't give them advice, huh?

    Their HBO must be broken too (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 04:05:39 PM EST
    Have they missed every single recent George Lopez trailer?  We're taking over while white America was busy playing Sudoku?  The revolution will be televised and closed captioned in Spanish?  Isn't building a wall like putting the condom on afterwards:)?

    I can't believe all the good food (5.00 / 1) (#34)
    by Chuck0 on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 05:32:41 PM EST
    they're passing up. I'm sure there's much better eating at the La Raza conference than any white bread GOP gathering.

    I was actually at this conference.. (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by LatinoDC on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 08:21:29 PM EST
    still am...leaving tomorrow.  Yesterday's Luncheon was very intense and moving.  Raul Yzaguirre saying good bye and starting a new era in Latinos' civil rights, Soledad O'brien mentioning her family has lived in Texas since the 1600s (via Prof. Gates's project to identify famous people's ancestry), and Luis Gutierrez giving the key-note speech (with big chunks in Spanish) and addressing many different issues (immigration, Obama's administration, veterans, etc.)

    and yes, the dulce de tres leches was just amazing (none / 0) (#36)
    by LatinoDC on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 08:23:01 PM EST
    It's a weird short term strategy... (5.00 / 0) (#39)
    by mike in dc on Wed Jul 29, 2009 at 10:09:56 AM EST
    ...they're assuming the following:
    1. The Hispanic vote will continue to turnout at a significantly lower rate than, for example, the white vote.
    2. They can win nationally by consolidating a larger share of the white vote, which they're betting will turn out well in 2010, by stoking racial resentments
    3. They're assuming the minority and female voter turnout for the midterms will decline significantly, so that their strategy in item 2 will pay off.

    Of course, if any of the above assumptions are erroneous (and I'm pretty sure at least one will prove to be so), they're screwing themselves over pretty badly in both the short and long term.

    Hand them another shovel (none / 0) (#2)
    by ruffian on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 02:53:18 PM EST
    They are so good at digging this hole.

    seriously (none / 0) (#3)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 02:56:38 PM EST
    add that to this:

    The birthers in Congress

    Seventeen men and women who are either enabling the fringe movement or having trouble admitting Obama is president

    when you even have the National Review saying drop it, you have to wonder.


    This is what happens when Ronald Reagan (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 03:11:34 PM EST
    completely removes the ability to self critique from your party :)  Everybody ends up in Denali.

    Amongst hardcore right-wingers... (none / 0) (#4)
    by kdog on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 03:03:41 PM EST
    La Raza may as well be Al Qaida.

    Kind of a Catch-22 for Brand R...if they accept the invitation, they get villified in right-wing circles and likely lose their next election.  Don't accept the invite and they ensure Brand D gets the lion share of latino support for years to come.

    La Raza? (none / 0) (#22)
    by coigue on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 03:47:32 PM EST
    Isn't that some type of terrorist organization?

    Every time I see/hear La Raza I think of this guy (none / 0) (#32)
    by vicndabx on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 04:26:52 PM EST
    Kid Frost um, "sings", "This is for La Raza"

    Let's try that link (none / 0) (#33)
    by vicndabx on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 04:29:10 PM EST
    Just took, a look at facts & figures (none / 0) (#37)
    by BackFromOhio on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 08:25:20 PM EST
    over at Pew Hispanic site.

    Latinos have accounted for over 50% of the total U.S. population growth since 2000.  Latinos comprised 8% of the electorate in 2004 & 9% in 2008.  They voted 67% Democratic (Obama) to 31% Republican (McCain) in Nov. 2008.  

    The Latino vote is a force in several key states and growing.  

    Need I say more???

    Are Republicans Still Practicing Benign Neglect (none / 0) (#38)
    by john horse on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 10:41:02 PM EST
    or just the regular run-of-the-mill type of neglect?  Its becoming harder to tell the difference.