*

No, Gonzalez PROVED he didn't have any smarts by his actions. Not because he's Hispanic. Did you happen to forget the number of times he testified before Congress that he really didn't have a clue as to what was going on in his own department?

mhr: The liberal bozos who savaged Alberto Gonzalez for his lack of smarts because he is Hispanic

I think what mhr is trying to say is that Gonzalez' "lack of smarts" was a given; that he was only "savaged" because he was a Hispanic moron. But the whole hypothesis falls apart when I remember our last President.

There's no Republican talking points at work here:

"She must prove her commitment to impartially deciding cases based on the law, rather than based on her own personal politics, feelings and preferences." -- Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas.

"The Judiciary Committee should take time to ensure that the nominee will be true to the Constitution and apply the law, not personal politics, feelings or preferences." -- Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa.

"Senate Republicans will treat Judge Sotomayor fairly. But we will thoroughly examine her record to ensure she understands that the role of a jurist in our democracy is to apply the law evenhandedly, despite their own feelings or personal or political preferences." -- Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky.

In reference to mhr's brilliant analysis, I feel like I should point out, as a liberal, I never assumed Gonzalez was an idiot because he's Hispanic, nor do I assume Sotomayor has a "superior intellect which she owes to the fact that she is Hispanic."

I assumed Gonzalez to be an idiot because I heard him speak and he said many stupid things, over and over again. Normally I'd give a lawyer the benefit of the doubt for being intelligent, as I know how much education noe needs to be a lawyer, but Gonzalez is the perfect storm of cruel and stupid.

Because I tend to assume lawyers have some degree of intelligence to get the job, regardless of nationality, I will continue to assume Sotomayor is intelligent until/unless she proves otherwise.

Otherwise, as I said, mhr's analysis is astute and clever and I wish to subscribe to his newsletter. I only hope the crayon doesn't smudge too much in the summer heat before it arrives in the mail (do they allow you to buy stamps where you currently reside, mhr? Does an orderly have to buy them for you? Do you purchase them with the proceeds you make from the baskets you weave? I'm curious about you, your ideas are awful...ly interesting).

Oh, and back on topic, yeah, seems like an interesting sort of oopsie. Shorter version: "We're not going to immediately trash Sotomayor for being a liberal. We're going to look closely at her record. So when we INEVITABLY DO start trashing her, you'll know we really thought it out! I mean, come on! It's in a talking points memo! Those things NEVER lie!"

The leak is a headfake. They're waiting for the Heritage Foundation and The Federalist Society to find another atrocity in Sotomayor's rulings, friends, or choice of pet. Her opinion in the affirmative action case (firefighter promotions) isn't enough by itself, so they will mine her 400 opinions to find some phrases to take out of context and repeat incessently on the teevee.

In the end, there will be Senate 'holds' followed by a filibuster threat that Dem. Senators (Ben Nelson, I'm looking at you) will consider so disruptive that they vote with the Elephants to prevent cloture.

Caveat: the latino vote is in the balance, and in some states (not just the southwest) the GOP would be taking great risks in opposing her.

I think they are also waiting to Rush, Hannity, Glenn Beck and O'Reilly to settle on the battle plan. Since she's a NYer, the commie charge will be high on their list, followed by 'activist judge' and friend of terrorists.

mhr's just a parody. No worries.

Do you suppose this is one of those deliberate "accidents," intended to make the party appear more responsible?

If the words "bitch" and "spic" aren't in there, yes.

And given the cluelessness of current GOP leadership, maybe even if they are.

This list of talking points could be a head-fake or it could be that Mark Halperin's analysis covered in an earlier post might turn out to be correct.

For that to happen, though, the Republican leadership would actually have to grow up and realize that simply throwing tantrums won't work anymore.

Given the mental disease that is modern Republican thinking up to this point, I wouldn't jump to any conclusions until the hearings actually take place.

Time will tell. Pass the popcorn, please.

The liberal bozos who savaged Alberto Gonzalez for his lack of smarts because he is Hispanic will now begin to sing the praises of Ms Sotomayor and her superior intellect which she owes to the fact that she is Hispanic.

That's right -- Princeton graduates every Latino/a with a summa cum laude, and Yale Law School will hire any minority who walks in off the street as an editor of their law journal. White man can't get a break any more.

"...Republicans will avoid partisanship and knee-jerk judgments."..."

What horse shit. This phrase alone should show it was an intended leak as republicans never say that...ever...unless it's to impress mindless supporters.

If FOX supports this nominee then I will be paranoid.

Only a liberal will do as most of America is liberal as far as what they want for the nation.

Better parody trolls, please.

QUOTE: For example, "Republicans are committed to a fair confirmation process and will reserve judgment until more is known about Judge Sotomayor's legal views, judicial record and qualifications," is one of the first points. It was soon followed by, "Republicans will avoid partisanship and knee-jerk judgments."

I'll believe this when I see it. I suspect it won't be very long before this claim turns out to be totally bogus and the media can therefore assume that essentially everything else on their list of "concerns" can be treated with the same level of credulity. Republicans can't exist without partisanship. It is the only thing they have left in their arsenal beyond a platform fixated on budget and tax cuts and a budget plan with no numbers.

The Party of NO will soon be adhering to its long-standing course of action.

Republicans are committed to a fair confirmation process and will reserve judgment until the whispering campaign started by even-the-liberal-New-Republic is continued.

Fixed for accuracy.

"Further eroding the rights of the unborn and property owners." Theres a strong voting block...what about those plain old "born renters"

if the party is going to mount a serious challenge to the Sotomayor nomination, it's going to rely more on surrogates and media allies to do the heavy lifting, and less on GOP elected officials.

The 'leaked' points strike me as aimed at the media. The bit about tone seems tailor-made for someone like Chuck Todd to regurgitate to someone like Chris Matthews -- "You know Chris, I do think you have to give the Republicans credit for attempting to change the tone, to avoid the sort of sharply partisan battles..."

And the best part for the Republicans is that they won't even have to do anything differently. They just have to telegraph their pretend intentions to sympathetic sources, and it'll end up in The Page/ WaPo, etc. soon enough.

The next step, no doubt, will be to label some Democratic senator as a 'partisan attack dog' for breaking up their beautiful bipartisan tea party.

They have no need to tell the corporate media talkers how to demonize Sotomayor for being a woman and an Hispanic. That is already an essential part of their nightly umbrage fest, left, right, and center.

Evidently, the clown they sent onto NPR this morning didn't get the memo. Asked to compare Sottomayor's background and situation with Antonin Scalia's, the clown utterly ignored the question, substituting instead a distorted rant about the New Haven case, with no context or introduction, much less even a passing mention to Scalia.

The tone and the approach breathed "attack! No! attack! No!"

This suggests that the wingers simply won't be able to resist the bait that the Obama team is gently swinging before them, and will leap, and bite, and froth.

mhr is a /failwhale

no one took issue with gonzo for his intelligence/race- it was his gross politicised Libertree University d-bagness.

You are correct: The talking points were deliberately "leaked" to demonstrate that Repubs are capable of reasoned, polite debate after all. It may work on some moderately involved audience members which is all the naysayers can hope for given that a Sotomayor confirmation will ultimately occur.