Doing a 180...

Rep. Nydia M. Velazquez, D-N.Y., a friend of Sotomayor and a fellow Puerto Rican, said Sotomayor's gender may be clouding the views of some critics.

"She has the responsibility as a judge to question and to challenge. If it's a man, that is `tough' -- it's OK -- if it's a woman then somehow she is a bully or has a bad tamper," Velazquez said.

Ah...now we delve into the gender issue as the "Latina" issue seems to have bitten her in the ass due to a multitude of other occurrences showing Judge Sotomayor to be racist.

Last week she was a proud Latina woman with better insight on the Bench based purely on that issue. Today, she is a victim based on that very same understanding. Sometimes it's hard to decide whether to bunt or swing-away.

Uncharacteristically truthful quote...

"There has not been a nominee in several generations who has brought the depth of judicial experience to this job that she offers," Obama says.

Yeah...I can't remember the last time a President nominated a racist for the position...

On a side note, I have taken to approaching each dilemma in my life by following the example of Sotomayor. I just ask myself... "What would a Latina woman do?"

Mc-Loven...High Priestess with the Leastest...

The effort to buttress the appeals court judge's nomination from behind a curtain of anonymity highlights the administration's determination to frame the narrative, even as cable news pundits and bloggers were alternately praising and criticizing Sotomayor.

"We protest in the strongest terms the Obama administration's frequent use of briefings done on a background basis . . . especially when the same officials briefing often appear ubiquitously on television shows with similar information," said Jennifer Loven of the Associated Press, president of the White House Correspondents' Association. She said this was particularly true on a Supreme Court nomination, "when the issue does not involve sensitive material such as national security information."

Asked for a response, Gibbs said it was "interesting" that the AP had no qualms about relying on unnamed "officials" in breaking the news of Sotomayor's nomination. "I'm not sure today is the day I'd make that argument," he said.

This is from a Howard Kurtz piece in the Washington Post today on the nomination of Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court. I found it amusing because Jennifer Loven is the AP reporter who filed her observations on the President's Inaugural address many hours ahead of the delivery. It was one of the examples we use on this site to point out that the Associated Press possesses a Time Machine.

I wasn't aware that she was the President of the White House Correspondents' Association. I suppose it has something to do with her infinite energy to carry the water for anything and anyone anti-Bush. Apparently, the rest of the cadre is wary of her other tools from the future, and decided to placate her in the event that she holds a death ray gadget, or perhaps can read their minds.

A media debate over Sotomayor erupted immediately after the AP reported her selection at 8:25 a.m., nearly two hours before Obama's announcement. There had been earlier skirmishes because Sotomayor was high on every media organization's list of possible appointees, unlike in some previous instances where the nominee -- Harriet Miers, for instance -- came as a surprise.

Damn Time Machine...