Greg Sargent's title is telling in his latest post:
Tomorrow’s Attack On Sotomayor, Today
But it's just slightly off. The attack has already started.
Deoliver and Clamnyc are among many to highlight Media Matters tolerance of reading the filth Jeff Rosen spit a few weeks ago. But, as expected, the ball on the attack is rolling as you read from other sources.
The Washington Monthly brings up (via Anonymous Liberal's thoro annihilation)how Sotomayor's quote back in 2001 in which she says policy is made in the appeal courts is under conservative barrage.
The Monthly's Steve Benen noticed this after the clip surfaced:
Conservative activists and Republican senators have seized on those four words as evidence of "judicial activism."
Not surprising one of those links came from Politico aka Hackio/Gossipo.
Glenn Greenwald already sees how the quintessential arrogant nut Charles Krauthammer spews more bitter as usual, this time on today's top news:
Charles Krauthammer is already snarling on Fox News, warning viewers of the possible danger that -- as he put it -- Sotomayor's "concern for certain ethnicities override justice." He said that although her confirmation is certain, conservatives should oppose her nomination on principle and highlight that the type of justice Sotomayor allegedly represents -- justice that is unfair to white people in favor of "certain ethnicities" -- is deeply pernicious. That is a such a baseless and ugly attack on her, but almost certainly what will be a focus of the right-wing strategy.
Sotomayor's ascent from Bronx housing project to Princeton and Yale Law School to Supreme Court nominee -- driven by merit, intellect, talent and diligence -- is nothing short of inspiring. Ugly, baseless attacks of the kind Krauthammer recommends will resonate with nobody outside of the small rump that is now the Republican Party.
Think Progress's newest writer Ian Millhiser highlights how right-wing groups unsurprisingly are driven by financial means (getting on their inner Cheney) to obstruct.
The attack gets more ridiculous, as even calling her the wrong name (and I can't see it as just a honesty slip) happened. And it's not her last name the dumb Huck screwed up.
I know the civil Josh Marshall wanted to give a Keith Olbermann-esque "WTF" when he linked to how the National Review's high pitched nutcase Ramesh Ponnuru called Sotomayor "Obama's Harriet Miers."
Then you have the corporate media adding their slant, as you are probably already hearing the start of this quote that will filter throughout the "Centrist Television Universe."
"She's not as intellectually as creative or compelling as others."
The only person not condescending in his criticism is the always terrific Jonathan Turley, but they only have him on air to conflates their narrative of Sotomayor being "unqualified."
But this final analysis fits it all under one umbrella (no Rihanna, of course).
DougJ of the great Balloon Juice probably creates the realest question of the day when he says this:
Who will be the first to compare her to J-Lo?
Couldn't have framed it better, even if I was adjusting a mirror.
Update: Based off this, I guess it's coming real soon (via TP's braveheart Ms. Terkel):
Michael Goldfarb writes, "[O]n the issue of diversity, Obama seems to have the views of a 21-year-old Hispanic girl -- that is, only by having a black president, an Hispanic justice, a female secretary of State, and Bozo the Clown as vice president will the United States become a true 'vanguard of societal ideas and changes.'"
To be honest here ladies and gentleman, we all know that most of these people are irrelevant, stupid and/or a bunch of world class haters. Just like Eric Boehlart said about Newt Gingrich ("Who cares what he thinks?) the same applies to these people of course.
That's why I post it for any comedic purposes you can get out of them (though some are so distasteful that they aren't funny at all.)