National Review Perplexingly Depicts Sotomayor As Asian

Good gravy, have you all seen the cover that the good people from the Journal of Lowered Expectations known as the National Review have put together? Courtesy of Talking Points Memo's Brian Beutler, BEHOLD!

Yes. It seems that the National Review has confused their ethnic stereotypes, or their religions, or maybe they just wanted some sort of two-fer, because their "Wise Latina" cover story presents Sotomayor as an Asian, in some sort of Buddhist pose.

Anyway, the good news is this will surely provide a excellent P.R. opportunity to Puerto Rico's little talked-about Buddhist community.

[Would you like to follow me on Twitter? Because why not? Also, please send tips to [e-mail] -- learn more about our media monitoring project here.]

Comments

[BurgessPenguin]

I'll say this -- it's a colorful cover.

[StillAmused]

Worth a thousand words.

This cover's an example of why the expression, "blurt it out", was added to the lexicon.

[DeeW]

That's a very bizarre cover, lol. beeeeeee-zar

[mslindab]

Is there a group left that the GOP is not alienating and offending?

[benne]

I don't like this mag, but I think it's more accurate to say that they depict Sotomayor as the Dali Lama or perhaps the Buddha.

[synergie]

Actually it is Buddha.

[lifesucks]

Why not depict Sotomayor as she is? She's not the Dali Lama and she's not Buddah. Why not show a picture of her in her judge's robe - would that be too respectful?

[NotMcCain]

Is Stephen Colbert the only one with the brain cells to be able to diffuse this quote?

How did he do it? What was his brilliant strategy?

He, uh, SHOWED the whole quote. Read the text for one. Showed the full clip of the other.

They're both so innocuous that it's embarrassing to hear Gingrich, Limbaugh, et al ranting on and on about them (and MORE embarrassing that the "journalists" talking to them keep letting them get away with it).

[lifesucks]

I watched the special with Brian Williams as he followed Obama around. Williams asked him if he watched news (specifically cable news) and Obama said - not really. He made a good point that cable news is filled with characters who are on set to play a certain role. He said he doesn't really learn anything by watching it.

[neocon666]

Perplexingly? Do you actually think the republican blowhards can tell a Latina from an Asian?

[k6007]

Well, of course they did.

[SneathLane]

What is this kerfuffle about?

Portraying political and social figures who are perceived as wise (or as attempting to be wise) as the sitting Buddha is a longstanding tradition in political cartoons.

Being the Buddha is not a part of any stereotype of South Asians I've ever heard. I checked with a couple of Indian-American friends, and they say they've never been called "Buddha". They've been called lots of other things, but never that. And the cover says, in large letters below the image, "The Wise Latina".

What is the article about? No clue from the cover. But is it really an insult to be called a wise Latina?

There are so many real reasons why the right wing is bad for the U.S. and bad for the world - this cover isn't one of them.

[avocats]

What he said.

[20090120]

The National Review......the National Inquirer Fixed News of the John Birch Society far right.

[ssfahrer]

Actually, the REAL John Birch Society has its own publication, titled "The New American". Check it out here: http://www.shopjbs.org/index.php/tna.html .

[oldandintheway1]

Another Tempest in a tea pot...

[motoGpifupleez]

In the eyes of the RepubliKlan party there are two types of people:
1) White
2) Others who exist to serve the whites.
Ah yes, the dilemma of the shrinking white population.

[neocon666]

That's why the love Gone With the Wind so much -reminds them of the "good old days".

[philko]

Yup. The National Review can kiss all their liberal and progressive Hispanic readers goodbye. I'm sure it worries them as much as the idea of someone stealing my Rolls Royce worries me.

[sdskelton03]

I don't think National Review has very many progressive readers. It is the conservative journal started by the William F Buckley.

[loveofdemocracy]

Fascinating. Racism springs forth for a bunch of reasons but ignorance and isolation are two big ones. One wonders how the writers/editors of the National Review can be successful if they are either ignorant, isolated or both?

I'm not sure Mr. Buckley would approve.

[ssfahrer]

I believe that Buckley and The National Review had a falling out before he died. Being anti War in Iraq (as of 2006), pro- drug legalization (to an extent), etc. led to such. Perhaps he was losing any claim on sanity toward the end of his life, which led to these philosophical changes....

[OBXartist]

Wow, that is wrong on so many levels.