Getting our So So critique on target

There's been much gnashing of teeth on the Right about some rather simplistic attacks on Judge Sonia Sotomayor charging her with being a "racist".

Well, this is inflammatory, overblown and self-defeating.  It's pretty obvious that the frequent and deliberate "wise latina" comments don't rise to the commonly understood level of the term; nor is there evidence in her opinions that rises to this level.

On the other hand, a less emotionally charged term might fit here.  Do the numerous speeches given by Judge Sotomayor represent that she believes in multiculturalism?   

The traditional American cultural template is that while each group that enters our society enriches us, all join in a common nation sharing common goals.  E Pluribus Unum and all that. Multiculturalism turns this on its head, that we are members of separate groups first, and Americans to the extent we choose to align ourselves.

from Wikipedia: 

In 1991, Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr., a former advisor to the Kennedy and other US administrations and Pulitzer Prize winner, published a book with the title The Disuniting of America: Reflections on a Multicultural Society. Schlesinger states that a new attitude — one that celebrates difference and abandons assimilation — may replace the classic image of the melting pot, in which differences are submerged in democracy. He argues that ethnic awareness has had many positive consequences to unite a nation with a "history of prejudice"; however, the "cult of ethnicity", if pushed too far, may endanger the unity of society. According to Schlesinger, multiculturalists are "very often ethnocentric separatists who see little in the Western heritage other than Western crimes." Their "mood is one of divesting Americans of their sinful European inheritance and seeking redemptive infusions from non-Western cultures."

There's a big difference between the usual bean counting by ethnic, geographic and political groups (which it's clear Judge Sotomayor has engaged in) and being a multiculuralist.  I too want to see people of my background properly represented in the institutions of society. A multiculturalist wants to do this to change the institution itself. It's reasonable to ascertain if a nominee seeks to accomplish that and determine how comfortable we are with that approach.

The frequent appearance by this jurist before a group labelling itself "La Raza" is a reasonable place of inquiry: to what extend does she share this group's goals and agenda and to what extent does that influence her future judicial conduct?  Certaintly it is as reasonable a point of inquiry as whether a jurist is a member of the Federalist Society? 

In this venue, the summary treatment of the Ricci case may provide insight: that a reverse discrimination claim appeared not to be of sufficient weight  to warrant an elaborate legal  review. Perhaps the Judge doesn't see when do we reach the end of the affirmative action road as viewed by Justice O'Connor?.

I also reject that all Hispanic lawyers and jurists are of similar mind on these points: to that end I'd like to hear from the likes of Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz on this nominee's agenda.

In the late 1990's former NYC Mayor Giuliani challenged the application of multiculturalism in the administration of justice.  His approach was "One City, One Standard".  As a NY resident, it should be hard for the Judge not to have an opinion on the wisdom and efficicacy of Giuliani's race-neutral approach to governance.  The rest of America ought to get a sense where she stands on this. 

And abrasive name calling simply makes it easier for her to duck the important philosophical questions she ought to address. 

Judge Sotomayor is an experienced appellate jurist who is qualified to be promoted and probably will be confirmed. Are we going to use this to make this a teachable moment on what judicial policies we favor, or will we just let this pass?