Sen. Russell Feingold (D-Wisconsin) one of the leading members of the Senate Judiciary Committee and Chairman of its Subcomittee on the Constitution, on Wednesday met with Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor. Although Feingold had earlier hailed Sotomayor's pick ("...she is a highly qualified and very experienced judge with a personal story that is a testament to the opportunities this country provides...") and although this meeting was routine and pleasant, one clueless member of the Washington D.C. punditry is already distorting the meeting. Josh Gerstein at Politico--under the very misleading title, "Feingold dings Sotomayor as 'very cautious' " --manages to mangle Feingold's name, twist his statement of endorsement, and gets called out by Politico posters for doing so. Gerstein uses the tagline "Josh Gerstein on the Courts, Transparency & More". So Mr. Gerstein, is this "transparency" or "More" or just further evidence that one must use caution whenever dealing with D.C. spinmeisters? Meanwhile, right-wing websites quickly picked up and spread Gerstein's distortions in what appears to be part of their anti-Sotomayor campaign.
Before we look at what really happened between Sen. Feingold and Sotomayor on Wednesday, a little background is helpful. Almost immediately after Sotomayor was selected by President Obama as his first court pick on the Supreme Court, Sen. Russ Feingold had very enthusiastic things to say about her while at the same time noting his responsibilities as a member of the committee that would screen Sotomayor:
"My initial reaction to President Obama’s selection of Judge Sotomayor was very positive," Feingold said. "By all accounts, she is a highly qualified and very experienced judge with a personal story that is a testament to the opportunities this country provides. But evaluating a nominee for the United States Supreme Court is a responsibility that must be taken very seriously considering the impact a Supreme Court Justice can have on our nation. And in addition to a thorough review of her record, the concerns and opinions of people in Wisconsin are very important to me and will be included in the decision making process."
SOURCE: http://feingold.senate.gov/...
After Obama chose Sotomayor, Feingold's enthusiasm for her was noted in a report from Wisconsin Public Radio which stated that Feingold "already likes what he knows about Sotomayor." WPR has a story and a link to the audio broadcast where Feingold is interviewed and praises Sotomayor. I transcribed part of it and here's Feingold's glowing words for the first Latina appointment to the Supreme Court:
The way she's been brought up, what she's accomplished in her life, her brilliance, really are exciting and she could make an exciting addition to the Supreme Court. ...We'll give her a thorough look but I'm hopeful she'll do well. ...The only thing that can stop this is if there's something in her background."
SOURCE: http://74.125.153.132/...
On his senatorial website, Feingold laid out a roadmap for how he would deal with Sotomayor's nomination and confirmation including meeting with her personally and soliciting information and feedback from his constituents (isn't that a refreshing idea?):
In order to prepare for the confirmation hearings he will participate in, Feingold will take the following steps:
Review the nominee's qualifications, including analyzing the nominee's opinions and reading commentary about, and analysis of, the nominee's record.
Meet personally with Judge Sotomayor ahead of the Senate Judiciary Committee hearings. This meeting will take place in Senator Feingold’s Washington, D.C. office. Feingold will consider the concerns and ideas of people from Wisconsin about Sotomayor’s nomination.
Consider constituent feedback. Throughout the confirmation process, Senator Feingold will consider the concerns and ideas of people from Wisconsin about Sotomayor’s nomination.
Wisconsinites can attend listening sessions to offer their concerns and opinions. A schedule of Senator Feingold’s listening sessions is available at http://feingold.senate.gov/...
Wisconsinites can also make their views known at a special section of Senator Feingold’s website, which can be found at http://feingold.senate.gov/...
Senator Feingold welcomes analysis and advice from lawyers and law professors in Wisconsin. Memos on legal issues, suggested lines of questioning and other materials can also be submitted at http://feingold.senate.gov/...
Same Source.
So, the process including the personal meeting with appointee Sotomayor was a well laid-out, deliberate plan of action as befits a senator who has a constitutional duty: screening a justice for the Supreme Court.
Now, getting back to Wednesday's Feingold-Sotomayor meeting, here's how the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel's Craig Gilbert described it in his article "Feingold Likely to Back Judge". Note that it is completely contrary to Politico's hack-job description of a "dinging":
After meeting with Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor on Wednesday, Senate Democrat Russ Feingold said he was "highly likely to support her" but wanted to know more about her approach on legal issues where her thinking is not well documented. In an interview, Feingold cited war powers and the role of the courts on national security issues, areas where the Wisconsin lawmaker has been outspoken about what he sees as presidential overreach.
..."I think she's a very good choice," said Feingold, who like other Democrats on the Judiciary Committee is all but certain to back Sotomayor's confirmation...Feingold said their meeting lasted just under an hour and Sotomayor was very personable but "also, in terms of answering questions, very cautious, very concerned to not in any way compromise anything that may come before her."
He said he hoped that at her confirmation hearing, Sotomayor would be more expansive about her views on legal questions from executive power to criminal defense, freedom of information, government secrecy and the right to bear arms."
So, far from Feingold "dinging" Sotomayer as Politico's Gerstein misleads, Feingold called her an "excellent choice" and just wants more information on her views of executive power. That's pretty typical of the only Senator who voted "NO" on the Patriot Act and proposed to censure George W. Bush for abuse of his executive powers. That's not a "dinging", Mr. Gerstein. Moreover, the account in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel (which Gerstein was aware of since he provided a link to it even though that account demolishes his position) says that Feingold raised with Sotomayor her controversial 2001 remarks about a "wise Latina woman" and that Feingold observes that her remark:
"...is not greatly troubling once you see the context" and that "she was talking about the process judges go through as opposed to how they should rule." Feingold said Sotomayor was convincing in their conversation that "the law has to control (the decision), not a person's background."
SOURCE: http://www.jsonline.com/...
Now let's look in more detail at Mr. Josh Gerstein's misleading comments under the title "Feingold Dings Sotomayor as 'Very Cautious' ". Gerstein gets it all wrong in his very first sentence:
"After a sit-down with Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor this morning, Senator Russ Feingold (D-Wisc.) came out with a statement that's somewhat less than a rousing endorsement."
SOURCE: (emphasis added)
http://www.politico.com/...
Contrast the "less than a rousing endorsement" with Feingold's comments quoted by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: she is "a very good choice;" the "wise Latina" comment is "not greatly troubling"; and, Feingold is "likely to support her confirmation". Does Mr. Gerstein live in a parallel universe or is he trying to drum up some opposition (even false opposition) to Sotomayor? Who knows, but whatever he was doing he was misleading the public. Gerstein shows his bias by saying in his next paragraph that Feingold "signaled that he was rankled by Sotomayor's responses to his questions." Rankled? Again at odds with what happened and not consistent with Feingold or his approach. Not until the third paragraph of Gerstein's article does he let Feingold speak freely; indeed Gerstein quotes from the official "Statement of U.S. Senator Russ Feingold on his Meeting with United States Supreme Court Nominee, Judge Sonia Sotomayor." Witness that Sen. Feingold's words destroy Gerstein's premise of Feingold being "rankled" and that he "dinged" Sotomayor and also witness that Gerstein mangles Feingold's name:
"I was pleased to have the opportunity to meet with Judge Sotomayor, and I enjoyed speaking with her. I found her to be bright and engaging, while very cautious in her answers," Fengold [sic] wrote. "She’s clearly a very able and thoughtful judge. I take the confirmation process very seriously, and I look forward to continuing to review her record and questioning her during her hearing before the Judiciary Committee."
Same source.
Three posters to Gerstein's article (yes, only 3 posts to this drivel--all critical of Gerstein) indicated that Gerstein had gone overboard and challenged his wording and conclusions. One wrote:
Was there more to Feingold's statement? I didn't read where he signaled that he was "rankled" by her responses. I'm also not sure that cautious means she was evasive on issues...
Another poster was equally unimpressed with Gerstein's writing:
Yep, Russ may vote no . In a pigs arse .
So Josh Gerstein and Politico mislead the public by attempting to create a controversy where none exists: just another typical day for the Beltway pundits.
UPDATE #1: One website of conservative bent has already picked up on this and is running a post from someone identified only as "texan4Hillary" as a Home Page top story under the headline: "Sen. Feingold Not Thrilled w/Sotomayor's Answers". Here's that post complete with all of its misspellings:
Sen feingold has meet with Judge Sotomayor. He expressed similiar cocnerns of mine. He likes her story but her answers were vague on key issues of our day. Feingold clearly is not satisfied. Im afraid the eharings wont answer much. the senate has allowed noms to evade giving straight up answers on how they will rule on roe etc.. we know nothing ofher views of roe and related matters. none. more from politico:
http://tinyurl.com/...
This post was submitted by texan4hillary.
SOURCE: http://www.taylormarsh.com/...
I have never heard of this Taylormarsh website before but it is run by a lady named, surprise, Taylor Marsh. Some of her highlights as given from her own website:
[Taylor Marsh] is a political analyst, author, and insightful journalist focusing on political analysis and foreign policy, as well as anything happening on the national scene. She’s been profiled in the Washington Post (pdf version), The New Republic (pdf version), and has been seen on CNN, MSNBC, Al Jazeera English and beyond, as well as radio interviews across the dial, like Bill O’Reilly’s ‘The Factor,’ and satellite radio. Taylor is based out of Washington D.C. ...In September 2002 Marsh launched her radio show in Las Vegas, but couldn’t find a permanent home, though that’s still the plan. In 2005, Marsh, a former Broadway performer, wrote, produced and performed "Weeping for J.F.K.," a one woman political tour show staged in Los Angeles that traces politics from 1960 to today.
Taylor was also a "relationship consultant" and columnist for alt newsweekly LA Weekly, making her an expert on relationships, dating and marriage, who, at the time of this work, likely interviewed as many people as anyone with "Dr." behind their name. Taylor’s curiosities evolved into investigative work of the sex trade business, prostitution and phone sex that included interviews with real desperate housewives, single, married and divorced women, religious of all stripes, and lots and lots and lots of men...
Her political passions began through watching her big brother’s political career, which included a Missouri state senator gig, running for Congress, as well as working for John Ashcroft; not to mention being called on by Sen. Orin Hatch during Ashcroft’s confirmation.
NOTE her brother's ties to John Ashcroft and Sen. Orin Hatch and I think we know where this storyline is coming from!
UPDATE #2:
Another website is running with Politico's slanted story. This one is called "Getting Paid to Watch", clearly is right-wing, and features among its "most active discussions" topics like these:
- "The link between Obama, ACORN, the Woods Fund, Earmarks and the Mortgage Crisis"
- "Marxist indoctrination was funded by Ayers/Obama..."
- "POLITICS: Bill Richardson shameless in his hit job against McCain..."
Here's what this rightwing spewing website says:
It links to the Politico story and in its lead story on the Home Page says, "Russ Feingold on Sotomayor: "...very cautious in her answers." It then asks: "Why so with a liberal democrat like Feingold?" That's the total sum of the story. The Politico link, the quote taken out of context, and then the misleading suggestion that Feingold as a liberal democrat doesn't seem to like Sotomayor either. It's part of the right-wing campaign.
SOURCE: http://www.gettingpaidtowatch.com/...
UPDATE #3:
Here is Senator Feingold's (not Fengold, Mr. Gerstein) official statement (and a nice picture of Feingold shaking hands with Sotomayor):
Statement of U.S. Senator Russ Feingold on his Meeting with United States Supreme Court Nominee, Judge Sonia Sotomayor
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
Washington, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator Russ Feingold met with Judge Sonia Sotomayor to discuss her nomination to the United States Supreme Court. Feingold is a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, which is considering Judge Sotomayor’s nomination. Following the morning meeting, Feingold released the following statement.
"I was pleased to have the opportunity to meet with Judge Sotomayor, and I enjoyed speaking with her. I found her to be bright and engaging, while very cautious in her answers. She’s clearly a very able and thoughtful judge. I take the confirmation process very seriously, and I look forward to continuing to review her record and questioning her during her hearing before the Judiciary Committee."
SOURCE: http://feingold.senate.gov/...
UPDATE #4:
Politico posters ding Gerstein.
Gerstein's article now has all of 5 posts, with 4 of them very critical. Here's the latest post over there:
What a pathetic attempt to gin up controversy where none exists. I guess that is what Politico does best. Josh Gerstein should be ashamed of himself for this garbage.
Posted By: Ted Olson | June 10, 2009 at 11:33 PM
SOURCE:
http://www.politico.com/...
UPDATE #5:
I posted the following message (with typos corrected) over at Gerstein's column/article at Politico. To their credit, it is easy to post there and they do not seem to object to critical posts (since nearly all of the posters to Gerstein's writing flay him and his piece):
What a hack job, Gerstein, you not only mangle Feingold's positions but you mangle his name. It's frightening to think of what else you could get wrong [if you were given] more space. I've written a detailed analysis of your writing over at Dailykos and show how it's been pick[ed] up by the right wing blogs and websites.
SOURCE: Politico as above.