The right's irrational view of race is on full display in Sotomayor hearings
By David Neiwert Thursday Jul 16, 2009 8:00am
"Empathy for one party is always prejudice against another." -- Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Alabama
I was struck by this key sentence in Sessions' opening remarks Monday in the Sonia Sotomayor hearings, especially because he presented it as the essential logic behind their opposition to Sotomayor -- their abiding fear that when she sits on the court, she'll be ruling against every white man who crosses her path.
We know this, according to their logic, because she is Latino -- and because she emphasizes her "empathy" for other Latinos, she will be prejudiced against any non-Latinos in her courtroom.
It is, as logic goes, about as obviously faulty as syllogisms get. Normal human empathy is not exclusive -- that is, our ability to feel empathy for one party does not necessarily exclude empathy for another party (or moreover, in Sessions' formulation, necessitate an animus to any other party). Being empathetic typically means the ability to place oneself in another person's shoes regardless of background. Identifying closely with one group at the exclusion of another typically is the antithesis of empathy.
What Sessions is describing is not empathy but rather the crude tribalism that underscores and animates most racist belief systems, and has done so since time immemorial. It is, essentially, an almost astonishing confession to being racist on Sessions' part.
And it animates not just Sessions but nearly the whole of movement conservatism and the Republican Party. If you were to poll Republican senators this week and ask them if they agreed with Sessions' "logic," I'd wager the numbers would be in the vicinity of 90 percent.
Nor is it just the senators. Look at Pat Buchanan yesterday, and Rush Limbaugh every day. The same core belief -- that empathy for Latinos, or black people, or any nonwhite, equals prejudice against whites -- indeed animates nearly the entirety of the conservative movement. I'd like to find a single conservative who would repudiate Sessions' formula. I bet I won't.
Rachel Maddow provided an ample survey of how bad it is out there last night. She was especially appalled by his column calling for Republicans to indulge in nakedly racial appeals to gain the sympathy of white voters -- though of course, for Buchanan, this is nothing particularly new. Back in 1989, he was arguing to the GOP to gradually adopt David Duke's positions at the time. And you know what? They did.
Maddow says Buchanan will be on her show to explain himself tonight. That should be entertaining. She won't need to ask Buchanan if he agrees with Sessions -- I think we already know the answer.
Login or Register to post comments.
"Empathy for one party is always prejudice against another." -- Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Alabama
and as David points out, also the antithesis to empathy. What's the effin' problem with these GOPers not understanding what words mean? And of course their idiotic view of this underscores "you're either with us or against us!" WTF?!
Time for everyone to grow the eff up! These fools need to behave like adults... I'm appalled at how they're showing us all the hurt little boys they carry around.
gotta spread the word - gotta let average voters know that Republicans do not embrace democracy.
I know that sounds rediculous, but they will tell you to your face. Don't ever vote republican again if you value your democracy.
Not that Sen Sessions does even know what that means...
C'mon, we all recognize this BS statement.
GOP talking points
1) quotas discriminate against "ordinary" folks
2) affirmative action disenfranchises talented non-minorities
3) no one should receive preferential treatment, we're all equal in the eyes of the Lord...dontcha know *wink* (sorry, felt the need to throw that in).
So says Jefferson (as in Jefferson Davis, no doubt) BEAUREGARD Sessions III. With a name like that, no doubt this is a guy who knows a thing or two about prejudice.
because republicans are just children. its all MINE MINE MINE! ALL MINE! you cant have any because it....is.....MINE!
first they are greedy and then they cannot fathom how you could be for anybody BUT their side. the HAVE to be right and if you think that they are wrong, you are automatically some sort of (insert insult here)
in my thinking, this all goes back to the studies that point out that children who are the most fearful of the unknown and the least tolerant of ambiguity tend to cling to a rigid belief system and become strictly conservative.
being a conservative is the easiest thing in the world. you play by the republican playbook and you dont have to really think anymore about anything but being a greedy bastard. if republicans see something that they dont understand, the rulebook says KILL IT! and if it comes between them and what they want, once again just KILL IT! they have been like that since birth and it will never change. the only way they know how to rule is through fear and intimidation (see bush/cheney)
With Sessions logic, if a dog bites my neighbor, by helping my neighbor, it means that I have decided that I hate the dog. Or something like that.
Wasn't it Pat who once told Rachel to shut up on a show? Wonder if he'll do it again tonight?
As an experiment, try turning the sound down while Pat is speaking tonight. Can you really imagine he's anything other than just an angry bitter old white codger?
Why does anyone still refer to him as an "analyst" and give him the time of day?
does he wave his hands around? does he pitch his voice like a high strung lap dog? I demand a DNA test or Buchanan can zip it.
The biggest question when the Sonia Sotomayor confirmation hearings began was: Would the GOP be so foolish as to make race an issue and taunt and condescend to the Latino community?
The answer is Yes, and to the GOP's detriment; those boys still just couldn't accept the brown and black as equal people.
I'm not surprised or disappointed, just happy that the GOP will suffer politically for its ultimately infantile display. The See The GOP Went Racist, Again.
"pay no attention to that man behind the curtain" from the Wizard of Oz.
See one thing and hear another.
so thought (thinks?) the bed sheet-clad senator from 'bama, jeff sessions
the msm is pathetic (except for maddow, imo) and has failed to put sessions race-baiting in context. and, sadly, the dems, again (and again, and again, and again) are too fucking weak to fight or even defend themselves, so they have not taken the opportunity to smack seesions across his racist mouth, and call him out on his racist remarks.
sessions and the rest of the GOP racists/sexists have dangled red meat right in front of the dems face...
i suppose the dems are letting the GOP conduct a racist/sexist attack on sotomayor b/c they figure why stop the other side from comitting slow suicide.
below is the history of sessions and his problem with minorities we are not hearing about in the msm, from TNR:
Senate Democrats tracked down a career justice department employee named J Gerald Hebert, who testified, albeit reluctantly, that in a conversation between the two men Sessions had labelled the National Association for the Advancement of Coloured People (NAACP) and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) "un-American" and "communist-inspired". Hebert said Sessions had claimed these groups "forced civil rights down the throats of people."
In his confirmation hearings, Sessions sealed his own fate by saying such groups could be construed as "un-American" when "they involve themselves in promoting un-American positions" in foreign policy. Hebert testified that the young lawyer tended to "pop off" on such topics regularly, noting that Sessions had called a white civil rights lawyer a "disgrace to his race" for litigating voting rights cases.
It got worse. Another damaging witness--a black former assistant U.S. Attorney in Alabama named Thomas Figures--testified that, during a 1981 murder investigation involving the Ku Klux Klan, Sessions was heard by several colleagues commenting that he "used to think they [the Klan] were OK" until he found out some of them were "pot smokers." Sessions claimed the comment was clearly said in jest. Figures didn't see it that way. Sessions, he said, had called him "boy" and, after overhearing him chastise a secretary, warned him to "be careful what you say to white folks." Figures echoed Hebert's claims, saying he too had heard Sessions call various civil rights organizations, including the National Council of Churches and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, "un-American." Sessions denied the accusations but again admitted to frequently joking in an off-color sort of way. In his defense, he said he was not a racist, pointing out that his children went to integrated schools and that he had shared a hotel room with a black attorney several times.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?...
I believe that is the way they sincerely feel. If you show empathy for say a black person you are at the same time showing prejudice against a white person. Why can't they understand and accept that you can feel empathy for both?
It probably conflicts with their screwed up twisted racist dogma.
The Republicanzi really, truly don't quite understand empathy or what it means. I would challenge them to recite what they believe the definition empathy is
Oh, and Sessions should seek the care of mental health professionals.
Graham has been insufferable ever since he had his TMJ flare up on Valentines day back in February.
and Sessions has been a real prick since those Korean dry cleaners shrunk his “legacy” sheet. it had been in use for over a and fifty years by the men in his family. it was lovingly handed down from one generation of racists to another. and unless his son is a midget, its not going to fit right.
sessions believes that this was a racial conspiracy against him. i think its called karma.
I have this on the michael steal thread as well:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZIP4WY8FhUk&fe...
Site seems to be on a theme.
For all their inspiration..... http://www.kkk.bz/
... it is that .bz is the domain denominator for Belize. A Caribbean country chock full of black and brown people. You just can't make up sh*t like this, the KKK using a Belize web address, Jesus H. Murphy...
Don't get caught up in all the bullshit. There are really two things going on here:
1) by making as big a fuss as possible about Sotomajor the Republicans are attempting to make it much harder for Obama to pick an even more left leaning judge the next time around. The Democrats are falling into the trap of being apologists for Sotomayor. They should simply say she is a strong woman and latino and has strong views that are shaped by that. So what? Just wait until you see our next appointment!
2) The Republicans are really going after Obama. By attempting to make his supreme court picks look out there, they are trying to paint Obama as a far left wing nut who is also out there. They are trying to scare voters.
The Republicans know they have lost this. They are just using this to gain some political points in other areas or two make it more difficult to appoint an even more radical judge the next time.
interesting....
but you gotta give credit to the concern troll for trying to spin this clusterf*ck by the GOP, as somehow a debacle for the Dems.
Sotomayor is a shoe in, regardless of the silly spin games of the previous poster. The denial from the right is becoming pathetic but in the sad kind of way, not in the funny kind.
Happily, the repugs are doing such a poor job of it, they're making their racist tendencies plain as day to 75% of Americans (or 75% of those that are paying attention, so make that 15% of all Americans).
Sen. Sessions' has give us a wonderful example of how people who have low empathy reason. Because they don't really comprehend how empathy for others work they are forced back on reason and logic, they also tend to view interpersonal relations in a 'Zero Sum Game' manner. They really do have a hard time understanding that there are Win-Win outcomes in legal conflicts. They really do not understand what the character Hamilton Berger was saying when he said that his job was to see that justice was done and that when he lost a case because an innocent man was set free he did not feel bad because justice was done. People like Sen Sessions only see the prosecutor's job as to get convictions and not as seeing that the guilty are punished and the innocent exonerated.
Self centered toadys like Sessions and the GOP don't understand empathy because the whole world is all about them and their self centered interests. Others exist solely to serve their perceived needs and selfless, other centered service oriented people are naive weaklings who just need to suck it up and be authoritarian and confrontational buffoons.
Small wonder Sessions and his party of narcisstic sociopaths are in the tank. They are a toxic poison that compromises our political system and makes a mockery of the true meaning of public service.
Self centered toadys like Sessions and the GOP don't understand empathy because the whole world is all about them and their self centered interests. Others exist solely to serve their perceived needs and selfless, other centered service oriented people are naive weaklings who just need to suck it up and be authoritarian and confrontational buffoons.
Small wonder Sessions and his party of narcisstic sociopaths are in the tank. They are a toxic poison that compromises our political system and makes a mockery of the true meaning of public service.
The fact that the Republicans are a bunch of racist white guys doesn't somehow mystically elevate the Democratic senators to being anything other than what they are -- a bunch of lame, spineless, embarrassing losers (with the possibility of an exception or two).
Of course the Democrats are going to spend lots of time praising their Republican colleagues for their civility. That's because an essential part of being a modern Democratic senator is to always show weakness in the face of the Republican slime machine. Why waste an opportunity to make your Republican "friends" look better than they are, even if you have to lie to accomplish that?
No, what's really going on with going over the same BS again and again is an attempt to provoke an angry outburst from Sotomayor, so they can claim she lacks judicial temperament. One of the Dems should call them on it.
No big deal.
Nothing changes.
The White/Puke nervousness against any percolations of non-white power is wholly comprehensible from their perspective, and it is a tacit admission that the critiques by non-whites of the hegemony of white privilege and its historical abuse of non-whites is accurate, too.
Crackers like Sessions are silently assenting to the injustice of their rule by opposing Sotomayor (and Obama) because they fear retribution, the EXACT SAME retribution they'd inflict on their oppressors had they--white people--been as relentlessly repressed and culturally injured as they, they whites, had inflicted on non-Whites for more than 300 years on this continent.
By their own logic, they'd be entitled to visit revenge upon folks who had misused them, and they rightly fear that non-whites would use their accession to positions of power to get even.
This of course ignores the evident truth that, in order to be in the position to be allowed access to that kind of power, non-whates have to demonstrate their utter fidelity to the status quo which might have oppressed them or their relatives for centuries, just as the price for getting in the door.
Y'all say irrationality like it's a bad thing
Why it's my raison d'être.
Unfortunately for the Republicans the guys they have asking questions are idiots. It really shows that the Repug talent pool has really shrunk. They just have these white southern idiots. There strategy is majorily backfiring on them and it just makes them look like a bunch of racists old white men asking a latino woman why are you not like us. They are terrible at trying to play the vicitim. The majority of the American public see through this and only the fully committed see Sotomayor as a threat or are playing into the Repug strategy.
I think Obama should pick a gay black woman as his next supreme court pick. Tell the Repugs to go fuck themselves.
I'm looking forward to that!
obama should nominate someone specifically from the left
because he's too scared, or weak, or nice, to actually stand up to the GOP and drop this nonsense of being "bipartisan". So ultimately, the GOP are still in control.
I"m disappointed that Obama so far appears to lack the strength to carry out what he claimed he would do.
Why can't he pick the best person that could possibly do the job, regardless of ideology?
and his nominees probably won't be either. It was the Right who wanted to portray him as being a Left-wing extremist and a lot of Dems bought into that - even hoped he really is, but he isn't.
Is he a Liberal? Sure. But more than that, he's a pragmatic politician. He isn't going to go to the Left's version of the last eight years, he's going straight to the left side of the middle of the road.
Especially until the mid-term elections. He isn't going to give the Right anything extremist to pin on him - they make it all up on their own anyway.
I kind of wondered what would happen when people who thought he was far left realized he isn't.
The guy is also a master tactician. Watch how he plays the Right - even when it looks like they have something on him, they end up looking like the asses they are and he just keeps moving forward.
by giving the right a lot of what they want? (see foreign policy, environmental policy, economic policy, health reform, etc)
great plan.... /snark
As the gene pool goes..
Any Baby Ruths floating there?
I'll call Carl.
The important part of this video is toward the end where they discuss the Democrats' lost opportunity. I guess these folks are so used to sucking-up to Republicans and moving toward the right that they've forgotten how to espouse liberal viewpoints. Thank god for Al Franken.
never met anyone besides old white men.
Uh...ever play golf or attend civic association meetings in the South?
besides old white men, but never as equals.
"Empathy for one party is always prejudice against another." -- Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Alabama
Sessions, like everyone else in the right wing echo chamber, is deliberately conflating the term "empathy" with "sympathy". They are not the same.
Empathy is the ability to see and feel a situation from another person's point of view. i.e. to stand in their shoes. It does not mean that you agree with them or are even sympathetic - it just means understanding.
When the GOP argues that Judges shouldn't use empathy, they are arguing that judges should rule from a position of ignorance.
The white men on the committee chastising Sotomayor for "wise Latina" is the same thing as Rep. Westmoreland calling Obama "uppity" and condemning Brandi Chastain for ripping her shirt off in celebration at the women's world cup.
These things are all fine if white men do them, and not fine if done by women, blacks, latinos (or geez, a woman latino!).
We just need to expose this as the hypocrisy that it is. Obviously Lindsay Graham goes out into the world and tells everyone that he is the BEST and MOST QUALIFIED person to serve in the U.S. Senate. He doesn't downplay his credentials so as to not upset his sensitive constituents.
And yet, that is exactly what Judge Sotomayor is supposed to do. She's supposed to tiptoe around how qualified she thinks she is. She's supposed to play coy and UN-boastful.
I think she would make better decisions. She's a highly trained lawyer, former prosecutor. She would certainly make better decisions than me and about 99 percent of the other people in this country.
It is a ridiculous double standard.
on his blatant racism?
During the campaign he wrote an unbelievably racist op-ed in which he said, among other things, that American blacks should be "grateful" that their anscestors had been brought here in slavery, because it was the best thing that could have happened to them.
He added something about how Obama was as slick as any ghetto street hustler, or close to it.
And nobody ever busted him on it, including Maddow.
I don't get it. He's a failed politician who cannot get elected to anything, and a blatant racist. He's an outdated relic from an ugly part of our history. Why is he given a microphone?
there is still a large percentage of US citizens who agree with his brand of BS.
With the changing demographics accelerating against the rich white bigot crowd, methinks they are just worried about getting some of their own medicine from the future majority.
The way they treated everyone else over the last several hundred years, I think they have good reason to worry about their "com-uppins!"
Can't resist:
http://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~norman/Jokes-file...
Enjoy!
Thanks for that.
... are going great. The Repugs have reached rock bottom and then started digging!
but I try to tell myself that as hurtful as it often is to watch the Repugs go after a fellow Latina in this way, something good may come of it, that enough people will be sickened to the point that the Repugs will get an even worse spanking at the ballot booth. I have to hold onto that hope...
has gone from screaming loon to rabid, frothing racist. I used to find his ravings amusing on McLaughlin Report, but now he's just scary.
He always was rabid and frothing, he would just be sure to wipe his mouth before going on shows before. The guy wrote the Nixon southern strategy (didn't he?). He's bringing in the redux.
The only reason I think Pat Buchanan is at all interesting is he is a representative of a different time. I wouldn't mind if every time he appears on a teevee show he were treated like some sort of museum exhibit - and Maddow does that to some extent. The interesting thing is to see the disdain and confusion with which he now views the Republican Party and it's complete lack of intellectual depth.
Must be a terrible thing, livin' in fear all the time.
I'd almost feel sorry for you, except that all you are really doing is projecting. You fear having done to you what you do to everyone else.
Republicans, for the most part, seem to believe that there is only one way to interpret laws. If there is, then what's the point of having arguments and lawyers in a case? Evidence would be submitted and the issue is black and white so the answer is one everyone would come to. Unfortunately for them, the world isn't black and white and it's the job of lawyers and judges to help work the gray.
I think someone should remind Republicans that if it wasn't for "judges legislating from the bench", certain progress would not have been made for non-whites, such as their favorite judge for pointing out that "they aren't racist", Justice Thomas. Another one of the main jobs of the judiciary is to make certain that laws passed by Congress are Constitutional. Did these people sleep through History and Civics?
We have always been a nation of "checks and balances." So why is it so hard to balance wealth and status in this country? The majority has found a way to keep it all. Any attempt to equalize the playing field has been put down by the same reasoning the minorities have used to gain a fair foothold into our country.
How do we balance the playing field? Do we just give up and wait for the monopolized to have a moment of "can we all just get along?" If we look at this issue from the perspective of "if one thing does not work, what does?" Can we come up with an objective solution to what is fair for all?
I thought since trying to equalize the playing field as we go along is not fair maybe we should just do it all at once. Yes, a one time deal: Take half the wealth in question and distribute it to those who don't have a "pot to pee in." Of course we would have to do the same thing with the top jobs. In this way we could avoid this trap the conservatives have put on this issue.
My point is this: We should be trying to deal with the issue of equalization effectively. As it stands, the one way we have approached it has been effectively hindered by reverse tactics. We deserve a solution.
Joseph
with Sotomayor:
"But, but...she's brown!"
The End.
The title of his column was very disrespectful in my opinion. It reminded me of a guy with caveman mentality who thinks womenfolk have to be handled (read: controlled) by the supposedly much smarter, much stronger menfolk.
Psst, Buchanan, you're a racist, bigoted jerk.....and it is not simply Sonia. She deserves respect because she has earned it. It is JUDGE SOTOMAYOR. Soon to be SUPREME COURT JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR.
was racist...but holy shit...these hearings really drove that point home.
Login or Register to post comments.