Sotomayor Nomination Ad Wars Begin (VIDEO)

Let the ad wars begin. The progressive-leaning Coalition for Constitutional Values is up with a new ad on Wednesday, "introducing" Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor "to the American public."

The spot, titled "Justice," uses clips of President Obama describing his ideal choice for the bench, spliced with images of Sotomayor and captions of her accomplishments, including:

* Princeton Univ. & Yale Law. * First Appointed by George H.W. Bush in 1991. * U.S. Court of Appeals, 11 Years. * Lost her father at age 9. * Raised in public housing by a working mom, who taught her the power of education. * Tough Prosecutor. * Distinguished Judge. * Practical Understanding of the Law.

WATCH:

Heavy on biography, the ad is geared towards what, at this point, is the most significant task in the confirmation battle: framing the debate. The ad will be airing on national network news and cable, where primarily inside-the-beltway and media types will see it.

A source for the Coalition for Constitutional Values -- a public interest group that is co-chaired by the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, Alliance for Justice and People for the American Way -- says that the group is putting "six figures" behind the ad.

"This spot introduces the American people to Judge Sonia Sotomayor," said Wade Henderson, co-chair of the Coalition for Constitutional Values and president of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights. "Every aspect of American life is affected by our justice system. It's important that they understand her fair-minded approach to the law which is grounded both in her eminent legal qualifications and her life experiences."

Get HuffPost Politics On Facebook and Twitter!

Comments

[JXJASON]

We need judges who are competent, honest and fair minded.

I think Judge Sotomayor is a good choice because she is competent, honest and fair minded.

Too bad George Bush did not appoint a better Secretary of Defense and a better Secretary of the Treasury..­.who were competent, honest and fair minded.

[pmag88]

I don't know much about her yet, but I hope that as her record is explored, history will show that she was a good choice.

[tallisse]

OK everyone just calm down, go back and read her comment in the context of her speech like I did. What Sotomayor was talking about in her Berkeley speech is the importance of diversity in our judges. This speech is a call for all types of judges, white males included but also others, because, in her words, personal experiences affect the facts that judges choose to see.

She said, 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 her life, IN THE CONTEXT OF DECIDING SEX OR RACIAL DISCRIMINATION CASES. Just like in deciding an antitrust case, a judge who only had the experience of being a big corporate CEO might look at the case differently than a judge who only had the experience of being a small business owner.

Now you can agree or disagree with her sentiment that having judges with varying personal experiences makes the judicial system better. But calling her a racist because of it is completely and utterly INACCURATE. Once again I fear the conservative bigots will win on spinning this one.

[hilary916]

That's too much for their little brains to handle.

[absolutetruth09]

What does this have to do with anything(the Constitution is all that matters)

[Matt Wilstein]

Here's the video of Gibbs responding the Newt's tweets:

http://www.gotchamediablog.com/2009/05/gibbs-responds-to-newts-racism-tweets.html

[Cuyahoga]

I am not going to watch these. As a matter of fact - I'm raising the bar FOR MYSELF and not paying attn to the garbage put out by both sides any more. I have work to do to make my life and those around me better. And frankly folks - I've only been wasting my time reading blogs and responding to blogs and thinking it makes me an activist. It doesn't. It's another form of being a couch potato and that pretty much sums up way too much of my life.

I'll read the articles. I'll occasionally respond. But I'm not giving the extremists on the right any more attention, and ditto for the extremists on the left (though I am occasionally an extremist on the left, as least people tell me I am).

There's too much life to live to waste it blogging and sending in stupid comments and pretending it's worthwhile.

Over and out.

[jatkins]

Well said. +1

[doublehelix68]

I really think it's been to the lefts detriment over the years not to be forward thinking with the spin. Getting the message out first , whatever it might be, is tantamount; otherwise a party, a label or an important policy decision will be made for them.

For so long the right has been the spin machine master. Whether they were accurate (mostly not) with their rhetoric, they were on the ball, often pumping out ad's faster than any corporation might and en mass. While I agree that the hype is just that, hype, I believe that it has become a necessity when K-street special interests, evangelicals and the talking heads can create a narrative for those of us that do not pay attention to the real issues.

[BannedInBoston]

Republicans don't even have any talking points against Sotomayor. All they have is yada yada yada non-points­....

[brooklyncitizen]

LOL
so true

[reggieb]

Empathy? We don't need no stinkin empathy.

"Mere factual innocence is no reason not to carry out a death sentence properly reached”

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia
Herrera v. Collins 506 US 390 1993

[jwander1]

The GOP is for torture and against empathy. That's a winning ticket! What's next - a constitutional ban on laughter? How about touting poverty as a great way to lose weight?

[claypoint2]

Still laughing, jwander! Well said. Thanks for posting.

[brooklyncitizen]

Sotomayor is clamored to be the first "hispanic" (no this is not a Cardoza post). Since Latinos in this country are lumped as one big ethnic/minority group most overlook that as people we're greatly varied and each country has its own history.Th­e particular significance of her nomination is that she is the daughter of colonialism, and as a Puerto Rican she is an ethnic national not a hyphenated-american (irish-american, mexican-american, japanese-american etc). Her country was invaded by the US and she is now nominated to the very Supreme Court that decided to grant citizenship to an occupied Puerto Rico, a US territory, but decided to withhold statehood and incorporate PR into the American union.

[claypoint2]

Sorry, Brooklyn, but as someone personally concerned about the matters that you address, let me start by saying that the United States never "invaded" Puerto Rico. Until 1898, Puerto Rico was a colony of Spain -- and, by the way, Spain was a harsh colonial master, something that we often forget nowadays when we fiercely identify with our "Spanish" heritage.

In 1898 Spain lost the Spanish-American War to the United States and gave up the colonies of Puerto Rico, Cuba, and the Philippines as war booty. Cuba and the Philippines were granted their independence by the U.S. because they were deemed to be sufficiently advanced in their self-government, whereas Puerto Rico was not. But you know what? Things didn't turn out too badly for Puerto Rico after all. In the end, Puerto Ricans on the island have an infinitely higher standard of living than the people of Cuba or even the Philippines. Puerto Ricans are also fully in charge of their local government, much like the people of any state of the Union.

That's why an overwhelming majority of Puerto Ricans on the island (95-98%) oppose independence and are glad that Puerto Rico is still under the U.S. mantle. I know that the Puerto Rican community in New York feels differently, probably because it (understandably) wants to identify with its culture as being distinct from the United States -- especially when Latinos in the U.S. have been marginalized for so long.

[brooklyncitizen]

You're misinformed. PR has a long history of resistance and indeed had sovereign powers in the 19th c.complete with its own flag.

The US invaded the island in May 1898 under the command of General Miles with 17,000 troops.In August when the Spanish American war ended , Spain's colonial rule in the Americas also ended and the island of PR was officially ceded to the US. The island was then under American military rule (occupation) with its first military governor.

The issue isn't so much independence- the issue is its limbo status.Nei­ther sovereign nor a state of the union.It is naive to say that it "didn't turn out so badly for PR" when it is a colony.
Also you say Latinos have been marginalized and my initial point is that we cannot be grouped under one umbrella.

Not all Latinos have been marginalized- Cuban Americans run Miami; it is practically all Spanish speaking and Cubans' status has always been elevated for political reasons by the US govt.Mexic­ans have a different story as do Puerto Ricans.The­n there's the rest of us.

[claypoint2]

Brooklyn, I should add that I agree with you that, as a constitutional matter, Puerto Rico should be incorporated into the Union as the 51st State. A person born in Puerto Rico after May 1, 1917 is a citizen of the United States by birth and can vote for President, as long as they don't reside in Puerto Rico. Likewise, a person born in North Dakota would not be able to vote for President if he moved to Puerto Rico. Ridiculous.

[barriosbabe]

Isn't it weird how this centrist moderate person is being cast as an extremist? OMG!

Signed, extreme prog

[Chris]

I belevie she will be much more like Kennedy than Souter.

[huffyfan2]

Two words for Rightwingers:


"Harriet Miers" Least qualified ( ever )

[YouCanKeepYourChange]

Sotomayor does a disservice to minorities -- to women and minorities -- that we are supposed to be empathizing for. Saying that someone would decide a case differentl­y... because she's a Latina, not a white male, that statement by definition is racist."

[reggieb]

well let's face it - old white men aren't inspiring a lot of confidence lately

[jatkins]

Well, it depends who you are. I've got no doubt Scalia, Thomas, Roberts, and Alito inspire confidence in big, bloated, monopolizing, arrogant corporations, and executioners, across the country.

[Chris]

Reid and Biden are gaffe machines

[BannedInBoston]

Evidently, one of the main conservative "talking points" against Sotomayor is the accusation of "identity justice" based on a single remark she once made on the subject of her own Hispanic upbringing as a source of judicial wisdom. How typical of conservatives.

[alienufo]

that ad looks like it was made in windows movie maker

[jatkins]

Well if it was, they did a damn good job.

[kasinca]

If ever I want an opintion about anything, the last place I would go to get an answer is to the reichwingnut losers. They have no answers to any question. They are failures at governance. What they think and say is irrelevant.

[reggieb]

and often comical

[BannedInBoston]

And the main reason that what they say and think is irrelevant is that they have no concern for either facts or logic. Give them a clever rhetorical "talking point" -- a hot, steaming meme -- and they're off and running with no regard for reality.