Quote:
Originally Posted by Eclipse
What about the justice (Scalia?) who talked about his Italian American heritage and how he thinks about his ancestors who came to this country when making decisions. I do not recall anyone worrying about his identity politics.
|
During Scalia's confirmation process, Rehnquist was going through the Chief Justice confirmation process. Most of the concern was directed at Rehnquist, and honestly, there wasn't a whole lot of attention paid to Scalia.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TonyB06
The president is "selling" different things to different audiences with regard to this nominee. (just like every late 20th century, 21st century president before him has done.)
To the general electorate (political, gender, racial) audiences who, beyond an expected passing interest in her legal qualifications, want to connect on some deeper socio-political level, the persavearance angle plays and plays well. It's really politics 101.
The legal community will (regardless of whatever else the president says to other audiences) focus on her legal credentials. Again, standard operating procedure.
I really don't see what the big deal is. This is America. We see what we want to see.
|
Oh, I understand that it's politics 101, and I think pretty much everyone understands that there are political ramifications with the way these types of nominations (whether SCOTUS, Cabinet, or whatever) are presented to the public. Also, as I said, at the end of the day I agree that it's not a big deal. It's just something that bothered me stylistically about the way Sotomayor was presented. It's something that bothers me about the SCOTUS nomination process overall (i.e. the public posturing), and it just happens to be the current President who's at the center of it at the moment.
Hybrid Mode
