Cynthia Tucker: Racism and Sexism Behind Opposition to Sotomayor

by Mike on July 18, 2009

in Judicial Watch,Media Bias,Politics

In her most recent column in the Atlanta Journal Constitution, Cynthia Tucker argues that conservative opposition to Sonia Sotomayor’s nomination to the Supreme Court is racially motivated.  Normally such an assertion would cause thinking people to simply roll their eyes and move on to something a little more intellectual like TMZ, Politico or Meghan McCain’s Twitter page.  However, Tucker’s column is actually worth a read because it shows just how ignorant the left can be about their political opponents and politics in general.

After spending a little less than half her column defending Sotomayor based on her ethnicity and biography since there really isn’t anything of substance in Sotomayor’s record to defend, Tucker finally gets to her point while demonstrating her own jurisprudential ignorance.  According to Tucker, Sotomayor’s judicial activism can’t be the reason for conservative opposition to the nomination because [conservatives] would oppose any judge nominated by a Democratic president who favors reproductive rights and supports civil unions for gay couples.”

What Tucker fails to understand is that any nominee who would legislate pro-abortion or pro-civil union policy from the bench is, by definition, a judicial activist because there are no Constitutional provisions preventing the states from banning abortion or requiring states to establish civil unions.  Tucker would know that if she had actually taken the time to read the Constitution.

Tucker then displays her ignorance of the conservatives and her own column.  Building on her false premise that judicial activism can’t be the motivation behind conservative opposition to Sotomayor, Tucker “reasons” that the basis of conservative opposition to Sotomayor must be a hostility to minorities and women in positions of power.  Amazingly, Tucker cites conservatives’ affection for Sarah Palin to support of her assertion.

Perhaps a liberal would be able to speculate that conservatives are threatened by women and minorities in positions of power if conservatives didn’t have such a soft spot for leaders such as Sarah Palin, Clarence Thomas, Margaret Thatcher, Miguel Estrada (who opposed his nomination based on race?), Janice Rogers Brown, etc.  Then again, maybe we shouldn’t expect Tucker to know anything about those leaders if she knows so little about the Constitution.

But that begs the question.  How does a woman like Tucker actually get paid to write a column on the opposition to a Supreme Court nominee when she knows so little about Constitutional law and those who oppose the nomination?  What was it about her that caused the Atlanta Journal Constitution to hire her?  I can’t put my finger on it.

By the way, don’t bother leaving a comment on Tucker’s webpage, she disabled them.

{ 3 comments… read them below or add one }

Christian Prophet July 18, 2009 at 7:52 pm

Excellent! Taking it a step deeper, the left needs to destroy anyone who exhibits true heroism and artificially build up anti-heros into seeming heros. See:


Ryan July 19, 2009 at 10:45 am

This kind of criticism of conservatives is of the lowest form and should be expected by now. The moment you accuse the opposition of sexism or racism during an intellectual debate on substantive constitutional issues is: 1) the moment you actually lost the debate, and 2) the moment you just demonstrated the profundity of your intellectual weakness.

Cynthia Tucker certainly demonstrated the profundity of her intellectual weakness, and lost this debate before she even typed the first key of this article. She knows the Republicans will capitulate, have no power to stop Sotomayor, and wants her pitiful cheapshotting to be on the record.


john walden August 3, 2009 at 10:12 pm

dear sir;

the reason that jude sotomayor is unfit was stated in the case of havrum v the united states, 10 july, 1998, eight judical circuit court, jeffesron city.

thei was used in the quesioning of her over the 14TH amendment. you know justice souter was forced to retire, or go to prison for what he did to the person that brough out the truth to get the havrums a win for wrongful death
agasint the us.

the case of murdering of a 82 year old woman at a nursing home by this same male nurse (a serial killer) that was under fbi witness protection plan.


Leave a Comment

You can use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Previous post:

Next post: