I have never been so appalled as I was today to read an opinion from the New York Times. I never thought Maureen Down to be a racist, but she clearly is. I thought Maureen Dowd to be a smart woman, an excellent writer and a voice for the left. But, I am afraid to write, that she is a racist, an alarmist, and is actually debasing the confirmation hearings and a strong candidate for the Supreme Court.
Perhaps Ms Dowd should wear a t-shirt: "Maybe It's A Non-White Thing." She seems so determined to bring race into her writings concerning this hearing, that she is herself showing her racism by attacking a complete group of people.
To say the following about a group of people, each with their own merits and, perhaps if you look at the article as a unit, a whole race of people, is clearly racist. We quote: "After all, these guys [the Republicans in the confirmation hearings] 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". This is an insult to any white man who has earned his place. It's as great an insult as any that Judge Sotomayor may have received for it is directed at just what Ms Dowd is so vehement about in defending Judge Sotomayor: Race. Whether you criticise a white person for being white or a Latina for being Latina, it's still racism Ms Dowd. If you assume white men only have clubs and handshakes, that's just as racist to the white individual as assuming that an African American must have been a member of an African-American fraternity at University.
Each person in this great country has their own distinct upbringing and qualities far beyond their limited "colored" heritage and to group and generalize in such a manner is wholly unprofessional, debasing and, in reality, very narrow-minded.
We have all made statements that we wish we could sweep under the rug. I wonder if Judge Sotomayor wishes she could change this statement now or make an amendment to it: “I simply do not know exactly what the difference will be in my judging, but I accept there will be some based on gender and my Latina heritage.” Only Judge Sotomayor will know the amending she would perform. But I am sure Maureen Dowd would criticise and call a racist Clarence Thomas if he had said "“I simply do not know exactly what the difference will be in my judging, but I accept there will be some based on gender and my African-American heritage.” Or, if Oliver Wendell Homes had said the same and replaced African-American with "White".
It should not matter what background a justice brings to the bench. It should not matter his or her skin color, his or her financial standing, his or her club memberships whether it be a golf club, a PTA, a law review, or a scout's group or a fraternity. It should not matter what religion or good book a justice may follow. A good justice should be able to see above all this and beyond. A justice should know the law, the Constitution, and the case law and apply it better than anyone else in this country in the best way he or she sees fit based on a personal interpretation of the Constitution. We all have various views and to say these views are based soley on race is itself racist. But Ms Dowd believes the men in the Senate are all formed from the same melting pot she and we are from and yet, they, and they alone, are performing "White Man's Last Stand."
Maureen Dowd can't see beyond any of the above and does not deserve the space she receives consistently in our daily read. I shall never hold her or her writings in regard again and I believe she lost a lot of people who hope for good in this country besides me.
