Calling Sotomayor a “Racist” Accomplishes Nothing
Steve Adubato, Ph.D.
CBS 2 Political Analyst

Politics, name calling and labeling people is the norm in today’s society.  When you don’t agree with someone, you call them a “liberal”.  Those on the left label people they disagree with on the issue of guns as “gun nuts”, or pro- choice advocates as “pro life zealots”.  The word “socialist” is big these days. 

Now consider the case of Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor.  Clearly she has said things— including her statement about Latinas making better decisions than white men— that are controversial and need to be explained.  Further, her decision to throw out the New Haven firefighter test when a white applicant scored dramatically higher than many minorities is highly suspect at best. 

However, to call her a “racist” as Rush Limbaugh did is not only counter productive, it’s divisive and absurd.  Limbaugh has been joined by Newt Gingrich in playing the name-calling game against Sotomayor.  For Limbaugh, calling her a “racist” does nothing but help him stay in the news and keep his listeners coming back for more.  For Gingrich, it helps keep him relevant with certain constituents in the Republican Party. 

But I keep wondering what it would be like to have Senate hearings in which the merits of Sonia Sotomayor’s decisions and statements can be debated, as opposed to vilifying her and attempting to destroy her reputation.  When Al Franken wrote his best-selling book “Rush Limbaugh is a Big Fat Idiot”, the title was catchy and it helped move a lot of books.  But obviously, it was a marketing tool.  Franken attempted to make his case within the body of the book, but it was the name-calling that captured everyone’s attention.  While I didn’t love the title of Franken’s book, I understood why he did it.  I can also understand how many could be offended.  Yet, as bad as that was, Franken was referring to Limbaugh, whose reputation as a radio talk show host has largely been based on calling others names.  Not only can he take it, but that’s the world he lives in.

In this case, we are talking about putting someone on the Supreme Court who will make decisions about the most important issues in American life.  The stakes are much higher.  But to Rush Limbaugh and Newt Gingrich, this is a game that they love playing.  They have little (if any) desire to have a meaningful dialogue about the pros and cons of Sotomayor’s record, because that would mean they would actually agree or consider the validity of some of what she has said, even if they disagree with much of it.  Name calling and reputation bashing is so much easier.  The only problem is, these personalities continue to tear away at the fabric of civil and meaningful public dialogue when our country faces such serious problems and while the role of the Supreme Court has never been more important.

Back to CBS 2 Column