BREAKING THE CODE

Hoo Boy! The code-words are flying around DC and the cable news channels like a food fight in a frat-house!

The nomination of Sonia (even her name is code –more below) Sotomayor to the SCOTUS has all the GOPosaurs in high lingo mode cranking out the wink-winks to their troglodyte base so they’ll know SHE’S BAAAAAAD!

As a public service to the more educated I, your humble scribe, have compiled a (by no means complete) list of phrases you’ll hear in the coming nomination “battle” and their TRUE meanings.

I use the term “battle” loosely, because it’s an all but foregone conclusion she’ll be confirmed, as enough Repubs have said they’ll vote for her that she’ll likely get 70 or so votes, and even if they vote in lock-step the seating of Al Franken will have given the Dems a 60-vote lock by then. The real purpose of these phrases (and indeed the entire fight) are to stir up the fundies so that they’ll empty their pockets to “combat them evil libruls” another day.

In no particular order:

1. Empathy: As I commented the other day, though the actual meaning of this is more akin to “putting yourself in another’s shoes”, the right use it to mean “using ones emotions to decide an issue rather than reason and precedent” which is only an OK thing to do if you’re a republican-leaning justice deciding favorably to republicans. (see “Judicial Activism”, see also Bush v. Gore)
2. Intellectual Lightweight or “not an Intellectual Heavyweight": This is code for “minority”. This woman graduated 2nd in her class at Princeton and was President of the Yale Law Review. Therefore she’s in the top 1% of the top 1% academically. Therefore (according to republican lore) she must have been given those honors because of Affirmative Action and like policies over some more intelligent white person whom she surpassed because of preference to her race.
3. Temperament or Aggressive: Female. They wouldn’t dare accuse a male nominee of the same “tendencies”. According to them any woman who shows even the slightest trace of strength or mettle is an aggressive ball-busting lesbian trying to make up for the fact that she’s not a man. Which leads to…
4. Emotions: Histrionics. Whenever you hear cons use this word in reference to judges its code for “hey she’s a woman –they’re too unstable to be judges!" Pure misogyny.
5. “Maria”: This is rich. Former Governor and failed presidential hopeful turned FOXNews host Mike Huckabee recently referred to her as “Maria Sotomayor” –yeah because all them dang Messican names soundsa’ same don’t they Merv, er, Mike? Carmen Guadalupe Marisol Maria -whassa dang differunce? This just shows how deeply ingrained the racism is on the right. You’re a talk show host Mike. Her name is Sonia –you might want to take the time to learn the names of the people you’re talking about or at least put them in the teleprompter?
6. Judicial Activism: While the right-wing noise machine claim this means “legislating from the bench” what it really means is “deciding in any way unfavorably to conservative causes –even when following iron-clad precedent”. Let’s be clear: Bush v. Gore was the most precedent-ignoring, lower court superseding decision in American History. Even the SCOTUS itself said that it was a one-time-deal and should never be used as precedent (which tells you that they knew EXACTLY what they were doing and were embarrassed about it), but do you ever hear the parrots on the right refer to that as Judicial Activism? Of course not –that’s only used to refer to (perceived) liberal judges deciding in accordance with precedent which is unfavorable to conservatives.
7. Stare Decisis: This is the term referring to the legal tradition of judges deciding cases based on decisions of prior case-law. E.g. according to precedent. Lower courts are beholden to higher court decisions unless they can come up with some compelling reason to break with precedent and decide differently. To Republicans however this term only applies (as above) to decisions in accordance with republican orthodoxy. E.g. Roe v. Wade is precedent from the highest court in the land but “bad law” according to GOP mouthpieces (oddly they can never explain WHY it’s “bad law” –probably because the only reason is that is contradicts their tightly held beliefs) and therefore any decision weakening Roe can safely ignore Stare Decisis. In Sotomayor’s case –the “Connecticut Firefighter case” was one where not only did she not write anything relating to the case (not the opinion, not a concurring opinion, nothing) but she merely signed on to the majority opinion of the court which followed both SCOTUS precedent (see Crosson, Adarand) as well as the precedent of her own circuit . Text book example of Stare Decisis -but that’s unacceptable to the cons when it tilts against them. Which leads us to…
8. Reverse Racism: Minority. This is the most ridiculous and base assertion of them all. “Reverse Racism” necessarily implies that a) there IS racism, and b) that it is the provenance of whites so that there can be a “backlash” against it from minorities –but according to them racism doesn’t exist, and if it does whites are just as likely the target as minorities. Pretzel logic. Racism is racism no matter who it comes from or is directed to right? And since there is no racism what are they so worried about? This is just more code for “minority”.

This list is as I said by no means exhaustive and I’ll update it when new terms come up, but I hope it serves as a basic glossary to use when viewing the next few months of the cable news circus.

Adding: I know I know, it's been a long time in betweeen posts, sorry! Nothing like a good ol SCOTUS nomination to stir up yer ol OP's typin' fingers! See here, here, here, here, and here for precedent!