White Men Can't Judge: Stewart Takes On Sotomayor's Confirmation Hearings (VIDEO)

Jon Stewart managed to make Sonia Sotomayor's fairly dry confirmation hearings hilarious last night by calling out her questioners on issues of race, self-aggrandizement, and general ridiculousness. The only person who didn't look like a caricature of himself was Al Franken.

He began by showing clips of conservatives calling her racist for a 2001 speech in which 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 that life." Of course she was talking about judicial diversity and also said, "Let us not forget that wise men like Oliver Wendell Holmes and Justice Cardozo voted on cases which upheld both sex and race discrimination in our society," in the speech, but of course no one brought that up. Stewart showed clips of Republicans praising other Hispanic judges and said "We like Hispanics just not this one. Give us Alberto Gonzales, we would have confirmed the shit out of that guy."

Democrats didn't come out unscathed. Stewart mocked them mercilessly for their intense praise and emotion during the hearings. "There's no crying in confirmation hearings!" He yelled at Chuck Schumer.


WATCH:

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
White Men Can't Judge
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Joke of the Day

Get HuffPost Comedy On Facebook and Twitter!

Comments

[OswegoKayaker]

This is the first laugh I have had about this whole hearing. It was hard to watch and hear the slurs and outright racism aimed at this woman. Thank you Jon!

[lagumbo]

The brilliance of our PRESIDENT. H e picked a latino, women, and one with the brains and the record to back her up. To the republicans and their cohort it is a hornets nest and they have walked right into it.
A lot of these republicans will have a very hard time gettting elected again. Like I say the brillances of our president.

[blackwhitegirl]

Jon Stewart is so brilliantly funny!

He's saying out loud what (I hope) most people get. That this hearing has almost nothing to do with Sotomayor - who will be confirmed - but with Senators posturing on live TV for the base of their respective party. (Gotta make sure the folks back home see they're "working hard for the money.") lol

[peggyhill]

LOL, 'She sat so still, her body screen saver turned on' - classic!

[Opti]

I spit my coffee! Damn him for being so funny ;-)

[lisakaz2]

Yet another insightful perspective by Jon. And funny as h-ll.

[BringmeReason]

I think any minority group that has to stand out-side and look in will have a more richer point of view than the norm/majority. It is that simple, until the playing field is more balance, and equality is given to all rightfully, there will always be a particular group of people that will have to fight harder to gain standings. Judge Sotomayor is an example of race and gender diversity that presently the courts do not have enough of. Of course her back-group and past experience would have been more richer which would enable her to make wiser analytical decisions, simply because she had tremendous strives to get to where she currently is.

The sad truth that most people still refuse to acknowledge is that we are not all equal, that being said, it's not a coincident that the number of "white anglosaxon males" dominate the courts at an alarming rate. Lets stop that non-sense of parsing words and focus on her past cases; it seems that Republicans refuse to analyze her case decisions, but would rather dissect her past speeches which had nothing to do with her ruling as a judge.

[PoliticalRockChick]

Amen, Amen, Amen

[cayuse]

At least they can ask stupid questions

[BlackJAC]

Is it me, or does Chuck Schumer sound a lot like Elliot Gould?

[MrMostly]

I no longer support this nomination. She has responded to Republican challenges by swearing to God, her country and the US Senate that she will do her best to act like a man. I for one do not want an emotionless automaton sitting on the Supreme Court denying every scrap of human element in judicial decision making. It disgusted me.

Also, all this talk about the American Constitution. What is it really. Some basic stuff that the elite WHITE slave owners slapped together on the quick to try to maintain their status-quo? To adhere to it now, centuries later is more like submission to inter-generatioal tyranny.

[AgentMuu]

If she doesn't respond that way, she won't get the nomination anyway, so relax and just let this massive, uncomfortable formality get over with.

[callmemara]

so instead who would you suggest? Palin? you no longer support her after one day??? wow, you were a real supporter.

[Foreground]

Er, no. While I agree that one shouldn't act like the founding fathers were omniscient dieties like the Right has a tendency of doing (especially when trying to prevent social reform), the constitution itself was built with the understanding that society changes and the respectable norms of today will be the backwards embarassments of tomorrow, hence they built within it the ability to update it in the form of the Amendment process.

[Solja]

This must be your first time paying attention to a hearing for a Supreme Court nominee. They all do the same things, say the same things, and act the same way when in that hot seat. They know what to say, and what not to say. Judge Sotomayor is no different.

I watched her on cspan's airing of Duke University Law School's Moot Trial Competition, and she was accompanied by another judge from the 2nd circuit court and Supreme Court Justice John Roberts. She is tough, and she is good, and she looks for the lawyer to explain their position, based on the established law. That is what defines a good judge. If you do a search on cspan.org for "moot trial competition", you'll be able to watch it for yourself.

She explained just yesterday that judges are not "robots"; that they have feelings and thoughts on cases they hear, but they have to put aside their feelings and apply the laws. Every single Supreme Court nominee had better say that, or they will not be getting that position. Even Democrats would vote against her if she said anything else, but especially Republicans because a "conservative" judge reads the laws verbatim, without ANY feeling or emotion or thought as to how their decision affects peoples' lives. Judge Sotomayor, being a liberal judge, applies the laws, but considers the people involved and the effects of her decision. This is the core of the arguments, without anyone actually saying it.

[JumpDownTurnAround]

Does the South not have any male Senators that aren't little Southern Belles?

My Gawd, they are pathetic. Sessions and Graham are absolutely pitiful. You would think the citizens in the States of these men would get a clue and be so embarrassed.

[ARTIST50]

Why do these Southern white men sound so stupid?

[JumpDownTurnAround]

Because it comes naturally for them. Is it not pathetic to watch them? OMG!

[harriscrl3]

They sound like Tennssee Ernie Ford.

[William Coleman]

A Confederacy of Dunces

[Carl Caroli]

You've got to love Jon Stewart's' pin point accuracy on a multitude of social, economic and political issues. He can cut through other peoples bull droppings like a laser guided scud missile. The man speaks my mind as if he were channeling me.

[JumpDownTurnAround]

"He can cut through other peoples bull droppings like a laser guided scud missile."

I think that is my most favorite analogy I have ever read on the HP. ROTFLMAO!
That was beautiful!

[KT8711]

People have to stop dissecting Sotomayor's comment. Unless you're a dolt, it's clear she was talking about how there needs to be a diversity of judges sitting on the bench. She wasn't trying to say that one race/gender is more intelligent than the other.

I was listening to Hasselbeck on The View on Monday and she was blabbing on about how Sotomayor's comment proves she can't be impartial when making judicial decisions about race and gender. Really great logic there, Hasselbeck. So does that mean that Ginsburg should have abstained from the recent decision about the 13 year old girl that got strip searched, because she's also a female? Or that Roberts, Alito, Breyer, Kennedy, Stevens, Scalia, and Souter shouldn't ever make decisions that involve white men? It's IMPOSSIBLE to find anyone that doesn't have some something in common with a certain plaintiff or a set of facts. The best we can hope to do is bring some diversity to the Supreme Court so that it reflects the American public and a range of opinions. Because right now, the SCOTUS looks more like the 9th green at a country club than a sample of the American population. Hardly any diversity.

[Rational-1]

Who cares what race a judge is? Do you what the Supreme Court to meet its affirmative action quota? I don't care what color the justices are... I just want impartial non-racist judges who don't think they are better superior to anyone else.

Stewart's not funny.

[Haditup2here]

If that was the case, how do you explain the election of George Bush not once but TWICE.?! I'd like to see your counter argument for that case.

A proud "C" student that failed every business endeavor that he got access to. . . .

[darkburningrain]

For those who don't understand Sotomayor's position, I offer this analysis. I lived for a while in a very different culture and it was "eye opening." I had to learn to understand the majority perspective - they didn't have to understand mine.

I never really had that experience in my own country, although I do feel that as a woman, I have made more efforts to understand men than they have made to understand me. Maybe men disagree with this, but as a general rule, I do think women understand men more than men understand women. Black people are forced to understand white people in a way that white people are not forced to understand them and the children of immigrants understand the dominant culture as well as their own.

Sotomayor does bring something to the court from which it can benefit. If the court was just churning out decisions using a predetermined algorithm, we could just utilize computers, but as we are deferring to the judgment of humans, they ought to bring multiple perspectives to bear on the question. This is a way of removing prejudice and bias, not imposing it. We already have seven men on the court and only one member of a minority, and he is going out of his way to prove that he is no different from a white man. It's not like men in power, or white men in particular, are going extinct or anything.

[mmmd]

well said.

[JoeBlough]

Be more specific. Southern whit men can't judge.

[JumpDownTurnAround]

I keep waiting for Julia Sugabaker to come out and read them the riot act. Or Leslie Jordan to come out with a line from "Southern Baptist Sissies".