Mitt Romney's Latest Ad Attacks Santorum's Vote For Sotomayor (VIDEO, AUDIO)

Mitt Romney's campaign debuted a radio ad in Ohio today attacking Santorum for his 1998 vote to confirm Sonia Sotomayor -- now Supreme Court Justice -- to the federal circuit court, BuzzFeed reports.

In the sound byte, conservative lawyer Jay Sekulow criticizes Santorum for supporting Sotomayor, when 29 other Republicans did not.

"With Mitt Romney, we know what kind of judges we will get," Sekulow concludes in the ad. [SCROLL DOWN TO LISTEN TO AD]

Democrats have jumped on the opportunity to take advantage of Romney’s decision to use Sotomayor, the first Hispanic Supreme Court justice, as a "political pawn" by pointing out how Romney is clearly on the wrong side of the issues that bear importance in the Latino community.

"Mitt Romney has shown time and again that he is after the Tea Party vote, not the Latino vote, and with each attack he locks himself more to his extreme positions," Juan Sepulveda, Democratic National Committee Senior Advisor for Hispanic Affairs, said in a statement.

This is not the first time Romney has used Sotomayor in his ads against Santorum. In a February TV spot released in Michigan, a voiceover critiques Santorum's lack of experience and voting choices -- including his vote for Sotomayor -- before telling viewers to vote for Romney.

Florida State Rep. Darren Soto (D-Orlando) called the TV spot "the latest chapter in Romney's anti-Hispanic campaign," Voxxi reports.

Along with his stance on immigration issues and promise to veto the DREAM act, Romney’s ads are not the only aspect of his campaign that's upsetting some of the Latino population.

"Hispanics are listening, and Mitt Romney's attacks will not going unnoticed," Sepulveda wrote.

Listen to the radio ad and check out the TV spot below.

LISTEN: Romney's Ohio Radio Ad

WATCH: Romney's Michigan Television Ad

Comments

[LMPE]

06:40 PM on 03/07/2012

Now, Mittens, what is your opinion of Newt Gingrich's calling Sonia Sotomayor a racist for her "wise Latina" comment (which Newtered proved correct by attacking her)?

[nypapajoe]

02:26 PM on 03/07/2012

Hey Romney, spew your ignorance all you want, but don't underestimate the wrath of the Puerto Rican population! We are not illegal nor ignorant and do not appreciate talk about our people! So back off fool!

[LMPE]

06:42 PM on 03/07/2012

Telling Mittens not to attack Puerto Ricans? That's wishful thinking. Remember, this is a man who flaunted his pleasure in firing people.

[El Jefe]

12:23 PM on 03/06/2012

Romney is such a snake. His economic plan is unconstitutional and would increase the national deficit, yet he says that he will balance the budget and believes in American ideals.

[Summer77]

11:59 AM on 03/06/2012

Let see he can attack a women but won't stand up to Rush, Yep he's a republican!

[alpina]

12:01 AM on 03/06/2012

Obama appointed her for purely political reasons and mentions her to anyone remotely hispanic in lieu of his failure to deliver blanket amnesty, so opposition candidates are completely within their rights to mention their issues with her from a political perspective. Who a president appoints to the supreme court is one of THE most important duties they will perform, because the choice long outlasts their presidency and cannot be reversed.

[l78lancer]

03:10 AM on 03/06/2012

Wrong. You clearly don't know what you are talking about. The republicans tried to block her back in 1998 at the lower court because even at that time she was seen as having the ability and intelligence to be a justice. There was a bit of a scandal about it. The only thing Obama's politics had to do with it was appointing the best available justice at the time.

See the attached articles.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/26/leahy-rips-gop-for-blocki_n_207739.html

http://www.nytimes.com/1998/06/13/nyregion/gop-its-eyes-on-high-court-blocks-a-judge.html?pagewanted=2&src=pm

[arecibo48]

07:43 AM on 03/06/2012

You will never say that she was qualified.

[JBaker]

11:22 PM on 03/05/2012

And what legal opinions expressed by Sotomayor does Romney object to? I seriously doubt he knows how she voted on any case during her brief term on the court. I doubt that Romney even knows what major cases have been before the court during the last two years with the vile exception of Citizen's United that benefits him so hugely.

[l78lancer]

03:17 AM on 03/06/2012

He clearly had no idea about the politics that occurred back then. While Rick Santorum is a clown, Mitt's criticism of Santorum on this issue makes him sound like an amateur, a political opportunist, or totally careless.

[Daniel Velmon Lynch]

04:43 AM on 03/06/2012

I'll agree with you on most points except the little part of the sentence that says "benefits him so hugely"...Romney would have ended up raising a load of money no matter what, Citizen's United harms him because all it takes is one enthusiastic billionaire to keep a Santorum or Gingrich going when they'd have been toasted any other year

[JBaker]

12:44 PM on 03/06/2012

Good point!

[revr]

10:38 PM on 03/05/2012

Like we trust you to pick judges? We trust that you will take good care of those that need the help the least.

[hrc04]

10:29 PM on 03/05/2012

He's really embracing that Latino vote, isn't he?

[Summer77]

12:07 PM on 03/06/2012

They all are! But not to worry we will remember in 2012!

[CoronaDischarge]

10:03 PM on 03/05/2012

I don't even begin to understand why this ad should have any currency at all. A vote in 1996 ... for Federal Judgeship ... a routine appointment and confirmation and Saint Orem is supposed to look in a crystal ball and vote against her because 15 years later she rises to the Supreme Court?

Clearly this is in response to the fact that Romney himself appointed more liberal judges while in Massachusetts, and undoubtedly for the same pragmatic reasons. What I don't understand is why he thinks this will do anything but remind Conservatives of his own record, and be a signal that if he ever becomes President he would be making appointments on the basis of his own narrow personal calculus which apparently doesn't include Hispanics.

[CoronaDischarge]

10:12 PM on 03/05/2012

Oops, 1998. As if that changes anything but the record.

[Javalation]

09:54 PM on 03/05/2012

Thanks Mitt, for another weapon for Obama to use in Florida and other heavily Latin populated areas for the general election.

[liebs94]

09:46 PM on 03/05/2012

"With Mitt Romney, we know what kind of judges we will get," Sekulow concludes in the ad.

Don't ever let the facts get in the way of a misleading ad Willard.

In 2005, The Boston Globe ran a story on Romney’s judicial appointments. The article stated:

Governor Mitt Romney, who touts his conservative credentials to out-of-state Republicans, has passed over GOP lawyers for three-quarters (75%) of the 36 judicial vacancies he has faced, instead tapping registered Democrats or independents – including two gay lawyers who have supported expanded same-sex rights.

Of the 36 people Romney named to be judges or clerk magistrates, 23 are either registered Democrats or unenrolled voters who have made multiple contributions to Democratic politicians or who voted in Democratic primaries, state and local records show. In all, he has nominated nine registered Republicans, 13 unenrolled voters, and 14 registered Democrats.

[Devin Garner]

09:17 PM on 03/05/2012

Romney has lost his soul. He has become a shallow, self absorbed candidate that will say and do anything to win the nomination. It's sad because he has allowed himself to morph into someone who bears little resemblance to the person we thought we knew.

[LMPE]

06:44 PM on 03/07/2012

Mittens would be guaranteed to appoint another Scalia-Thomas-Roberts clone to the SCOTUS.

BTW, after only a few months on the bench, Sotomayor had already asked more questions than Thomas had in eighteen years.

[efell]

08:59 PM on 03/05/2012

NIGHTMARE SCENARIO: Mitt Romney with two Supreme Court appointees.

[Summer77]

08:15 PM on 03/05/2012

This would be one of the best reason why non of these clowns are ready to be President of anything!

[El Jefe]

12:25 PM on 03/06/2012

I wouldn't include Ron Paul in the same group as the other 3. His ideas are much different.

[Summer77]

12:31 PM on 03/06/2012

Ron Paul would have done better if he would have been Independent, I won't vote for any Republican this time around.

[Isela D]

07:55 PM on 03/05/2012

Another reason among hundreds not to vote Republican!

[efell]

09:00 PM on 03/05/2012

Among hundreds! Love it. F & F. Cheers