The people complaining about Judge Sotomayor being called a racist, seem to have selective outrage.

[Afternoon update]

Here are more examples of Judge Sotomayor’s “misspeaking”:

In the lecture, she used a former colleague, Judge Miriam Cedarbaum, as a foil. Cedarbaum believes, according to Sotomayor, “that judges must transcend their personal sympathies and prejudices.” Sotomayor endorsed this view as an aspiration, but added, “I wonder whether achieving that goal is possible in all or even in most cases.” Darn! What she meant to say — if it hadn’t gotten so garbled — is that this aspiration can be achieved, certainly in most and perhaps in all cases.

In the next sentence, she mused, “I wonder whether by ignoring our differences as women or men of color we do a disservice both to the law and society.” Not again! This sentence was entirely misspoken and shouldn’t have been included in the text, since — as a straight-shooting, just-the-facts judge — Sotomayor naturally wondered no such thing.

In the very next sentence, she raised the possibility that people of different races “have basic differences in logic and reasoning.” Oh, no! In this passage, Sotomayor was badly victimized by misspeaking. An appeals-court judge flirting with the existence of Black Logic, or White Logic, or Latino Logic, is preposterous on its face. Again, in an innocent mishap, she must have poorly chosen her words by choosing to include them.

In a curious coincidence, she misspoke the same way later when she posited different judging by different races and genders might result from “inherent physiological” differences. #@$%&! Sotomayor clearly couldn’t catch a break, with her serial misspeaking obscuring her inspiring vision of a nation of laws that is no respecter of persons.

She’s just so misunderstood.