Same Old Story for Sotomayor

How come the only racism that bothers some people is reverse racism?

People of color have been oppressed for centuries in this country, and while progress has been made, it has come slowly.

But Sonia Sotomayor makes one speech suggesting that her background as a Latina might actually give her superior insight or wisdom to a white man and there is an explosion — an eruption! a volcano! — of indignation.

She is a reverse racist! She has dared to suggest that a non-white woman could ever be superior in any way, under any circumstances, to a white man. So how can she now sit on the Supreme Court (a court that for most of its existence has resembled a country club board)?

Newt Gingrich, a former Republican speaker of the House, called her a "Latina woman racist" and said she should withdraw her name from consideration.

Pat Buchanan, an MSNBC commentator and former Republican presidential candidate, said on "Hardball With Chris Matthews" that Sotomayor was an "affirmative action" choice for the job.

Other Republicans — those worried about the future of their party — have been more temperate in their remarks, but even the White House is now concerned about what Sotomayor said.

Here is what she said in a speech in 2001: "I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life."

I have read those words over and over, and I still fail to see what is wrong with them.

Yet the White House is now nervous. "I'm sure she would have restated it," President Obama said in an interview with NBC News.

"But if you look in the entire sweep of the essay that she wrote, what's clear is that she was simply saying that her life experiences will give her information about the struggles and hardships that people are going through."

White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said, "I think she'd say that her word choice in 2001 was poor."

Why? I don't get it. Why was her word choice poor if "she was simply saying that her life experiences" gave her "information about the struggles and hardships" of people?

We all know why. If you are not white, you have to be careful what you say. You cannot hint that you may actually know more than white people.

If a white man gets appointed to a top job, there is no suggestion he got that job through racism. But a Latina gets appointed to a top job? It's affirmative action! Has to be!

What other reason could there be for Sotomayor's nomination to the Supreme Court? Her education? The fact she served more than six years as a federal district court judge and more than a decade on a U.S. court of appeals?

No. Impossible. Still, she might have gotten through the confirmation process easily if she had not made that gaffe back in 2001.

And I know what she said was a gaffe because I know Kinsley's Law as formulated by journalist Michael Kinsley: A gaffe in Washington is when someone tells the truth.

Sotomayor told the truth in 2001, and now she must pay for it. She must "walk back" her remarks. She must choose new words.

As a justice of the Supreme Court, she will be able to speak freely and, I hope, with understanding, knowledge and courage.

But as for now, she knows what she must do. She must do what non-white people have been taught to do in this country: She must watch her mouth.

To find out more about Roger Simon, and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at www.creators.com.

COPYRIGHT 2009, CREATORS SYNDICATE INC.