The Sotomayor confirmation hearings continue, and one of the exchanges between the nominee and Senator Tom Coburn has attracted some attention:
WASHINGTON (AP) -- One of Sonia Sotomayor's Senate interrogators had a joking response Wednesday when she talked hypothetically -- and humorously -- about getting a gun to shoot him in self-defense.
"You'll have lots of 'splainin' to do," replied GOP Sen. Tom Coburn, evoking the 1950s TV show "I Love Lucy" to laughter from the crowd and the judge."I'd be in a lot of trouble, then," Sotomayor quipped back.
What Coburn said -- and how he said it -- was a riff on a Hispanic television character, Ricky Ricardo, whose accent is now widely considered a broad parody. [...]
Yvette Melendez, a Glastonbury, Conn., woman attending Sotomayor's confirmation hearing to be the Supreme Court's first Hispanic justice, said she winced inwardly when Coburn made his comment but did not feel offended.
"I personally did not think it was appropriate," she said. "But I'm sure he said it as a joke."
Ms. Melendez may be willing to dismiss the senator's remark as an unfortunate attempt at humor, but I'm guessing, based on her recent NYT op-ed column, Maureen Dowd would have a different take:
Despite the best efforts of Republicans to root out any sign that Sonia Sotomayor has emotions that color her views on the law, the Bronx Bomber kept a robotic mask in place.
A wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not know that a gaggle of white Republican men afraid of extinction are out to trip her up.After all, these guys have never needed to speak inspirational words to others like them, as Sotomayor has done. They've had codes, handshakes and clubs to do that.
In the world of Dowd's imagination, you see, white men, all white men, are universally powerful, and everyone else is under the heels of their boots of oppression. So Sen. Coburn's remark can't possibly be an attempt at responding to Sotomayor's own humorous example in discussing the Second Amendment--in which she joked about getting a gun with which to shoot the senator--in an equally humorous way.
In the real world, of course, things are more complicated. There are powerful, wealthy white men, and there are plenty of white men who are out of work like everybody else. There are Ivy-league educated minorities with impressive skill sets and important positions, and there are minorities who struggle against poverty and racism on a daily basis. There are white men who would adopt a "Ricky Ricardo" catch phrase as a slur to demean Hispanic-Americans, and there are others who do so as a way of responding to a wise Latina's joking example about shooting them.
The "us vs. them" construct that Dowd refers to is the first thing that needs to go if race relations are ever going to improve in America. After all, the very notion that all (or most) white men are powerful, wealthy oppressors of women and minorities is itself a racist point of view. We need to move forward from that assumption, if we really want to create a society where all races are treated equally.
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Subscribe
someone needs to really spell out the reasons why it's completely irrational to suggest that the republican party is swiftly becoming the last redoubt of angry white men, to the exclusion of almost everyone not white and bitter. because the image of the party that is becoming more institutionalized by the week is one of a dwindling clique of pissed off, self-pitying white guys.
and people can blame 'the mainstream media' or keith olbermann or al sharpton or the french. but you'll find that most of the people dismissing this image are conservatives trying desperately to salve other conservatives. outside of that circle, don't you wonder how this is becoming so obvious to everyone else.
it's like someone with really bad breath who, as everyone continually hints to them that they have bad breath, just shrugs it off and tells themselves that it can't possibly be true. that it can't really be them with the problem.
watch alabama senator jefferson beauregard sessions III hammer judge sonia sotomayor, or republlicans just savage immigrants, and then wonder what the problem is if anybody notices. it's almost sad in it's denial. like the people who just can't, or won't, ever accept how much they stink.
someone needs to really spell out the reasons why it's completely irrational to suggest that the republican party is swiftly becoming the last redoubt of angry white men
Well first, some of the Republican politicians most under attack from the left, like Sarah Palin and Michele Bachman. So lets take the 'men' out of your statement.
Now, the Republican Party is fast becoming the party of white Americans is more lie it -- that has some truth in the electoral results. After al, 55% of whites voted against Obama. The thing is, however, the party as of yet hasn't really served the interest of whites. Look at 'W' -- did absolutely zero about illegal immigration. Look at McCain, afraid to mention any sort of isue affcting whites -- immigration, affirmative action. Even Palin, while maybe 'implicitly' championing whites with the small town values schtick never explicitly did anything to promote the political interests of whites.
But Dowd's irrationality lies not so muc in her pointing out that a few Republican senators are championing the interests of the people that elected them = and whether they like it or not of the idiot whites who didn't. No, it is Dowd's outright hatred, and the ability to get that hatred published, that is the cause of complaint. .
stari, you seem to be more at odds with erin and the original post, than with with maureen dowd.
the "us vs. them" construct that erin is suggesting is a fiction drummed up by dowd is just underscored with statements like;
a. " . . served the interest of whites."
b. " . . any sort of isue affcting whites . ."
c. " . .Palin, while maybe 'implicitly' championing whites
the political interests of whites . . "
what republican or conservative wants to stand up and articulate exactly what the interests of, and issues affecting, us whites are. and how exactly that is different from . . . . y'know . . . them.
"Notice the title of the op-ed is 'White Man's Last Stand' -- and though its quite possible she didn't choose that, it certainly is racially charged."
Never mind who writes a culture's essays--what matters is who writes the titles.
And really, what sort of 'part' of the US has its own Olympic team.
The Iriquois have a national Lacross team.
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.