the front page tie in to this editorial says this:
Though the Supreme Court candidate hasnt been picked, the character assassination has begun
reading the article tho i see three things mentioned none of which speaks to character and those are weight, intelligence and sexual orientation. mebbe im being overly sensitive here but to lead in the ed with the above tie in suggests that someones weight, intelligence or sexual orientation are things that might be attacked as matters of character rather than personal descriptions. it suggests that those who are overweight, not a member of mensa or in the case of the women mentioned, lesbian that their character is in question and that represents, for me at least, the kind of unconscious discrimination that we are all subjected to.
Editorial
Choosing a New Justice
Never mind that President Obama has not even tipped his hand about his choice to replace Justice David Souter on the Supreme Court. Its never too early, it appears, to start the character assassination, especially against one possible candidate, Judge Sonia Sotomayor.
It has been a long time since a Democratic president has been able to fill a Supreme Court vacancy. The decision is especially delicate because the court is so closely divided. If Mr. Obama chooses someone who believes Roe v. Wade was wrong, for example, abortion rights could be lost for a generation. If he chooses someone who thinks campaign finance laws violate the First Amendment, the entire campaign finance regime could be struck down.
One reason that Judge Sotomayor, of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in New York, is often mentioned is that, as a woman of Puerto Rican descent, she offers diversity. She would be the first Hispanic justice and would raise the number of women on the court back to two. She grew up in a Bronx housing project, and her father, a Spanish-speaking tool-and-die worker with a third-grade education, died when she was young. She graduated summa cum laude from Princeton and from Yale Law School.
Diane Wood, a judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in Chicago who, like the president, has taught at the University of Chicago Law School is another strong candidate.
Should Mr. Obama decide on a nonjudge, bringing real-world experience to a cloistered society, he could consider Michigans governor, Jennifer Granholm, a former federal prosecutor. The former dean of the Harvard Law School, Elena Kagan, who now is solicitor general, and the dean of the Yale Law School, Harold Hongjuh Koh, who has been nominated as legal adviser to the State Department, are good candidates for one of the next few vacancies.
Supreme Court vacancies have long been political fights, sometimes intense ones, but generally, they begin when a candidate is picked. This time, the attacks have already begun, many aimed at Judge Sotomayor and beyond the pale of reasonable debate. She is being called insufficiently intellectual despite her stellar academic credentials. Her temperament is being assailed, generally by anonymous detractors. Online critics have even groused about her weight.
Conservatives also have been attacking some of the potential nominees for being gay, possibly gay, or gay friendly. At a time when states such as Iowa and Maine are legalizing same-sex marriage, Mr. Obama should not be deterred. Adding a gay justice would make the court more fully representative of the nation.
The White House has no doubt been reviewing a long list of nominees. When President Obama makes his decision, he should ignore the uninformed and mean-spirited chattering and select the best person for the job.
