investment poll

Last Friday in the White House in 2001, Judge Sonia Sotomayor in the word’s “bad choice” when it is said: “I’m a midwife and the Latina experience with wealth better than white as a result is not very likely that I hope that life did not man. “Today, the damage itself.

Assistant manager in a 2001 speech that included in a 1994 speech Sotomayor used almost identical language was pointed: “I experience the richness of their own, often better results than a sorceress. What I hope is good … I’m more compassionate care and to be closed means hope. ”

The White House view is that the similarity does not prove the Republicans are consistent. 1994 which have been included in the speech-related material Sotomayor confirmation to the Second Circuit Appeals court in 1997, and Republicans do not have to make cheep. Why are they objecting now, if not to delay the nomination on the reason they can find?

This is a small point in the White House to press when doing so exposes a larger problem. Last week, the White House decided to defuse the debate on the 32-word dustup said Sotomayor make poor choice of words, especially by using the word “better.” Sotomayor, spokesman Robert Gibbs explains, it only says the experience of his life he was assessing the influence. The President reiterated this alone in a television interview. But this new material undermines the White House’s argument.

The White House view is that the similarity does not prove the Republicans are consistent. 1994 which have been included in the speech-related material Sotomayor confirmation to the Second Circuit Appeals court in 1997, and Republicans do not have to make cheep. Why are they objecting now, if not to delay the nomination on the reason they can find?

This is a small point in the White House to press when doing so exposes a larger problem. Last week, the White House decided to defuse the debate on the 32-word dustup said Sotomayor make poor choice of words, especially by using the word “better.” Sotomayor, spokesman Robert Gibbs explains, it only says the experience of his life he was assessing the influence. The President reiterated this alone in a television interview. But this new material undermines the White House’s argument.

The White House view is that the similarity does not prove the Republicans are consistent. 1994 which have been included in the speech-related material Sotomayor confirmation to the Second Circuit Appeals court in 1997, and Republicans do not have to make cheep. Why are they objecting now, if not to delay the nomination on the reason they can find?

So last week when the president said Sotomayor made a poor choice of words in 2001, what was going on? Did his staffers who supposedly vetted Sotomayor’s life’s work let him down? Or was everyone at the White House just winging it to get past the political heat?

What’s odd is that the White House would be saying anything at all today about this, because the issue appeared to be fading. For the GOP, today was apparently Backtrack on Sonia Sotomayor Day. Both Newt Gingrich and Rush Limbaugh moderated their comments somewhat. More to the White House’s advantage, Gingrich pointed out that in her rulings—which are, after all, what’s germane—Sotomayor had been anything but a racist.

A second puzzle is why the White House would point out what Republicans missed in their review of Sotomayor’s record when it is engaged in a debate with those same Republicans over how much time the Senate needs to go through those very records. Republicans can now argue that they need lots more time in order to find tidbits as important as this one from 1994 that the White House is now trying to use to outmaneuver them.