Offhand on Sotomayor

I couldn't watch much of the Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing for Sonia Sotomayor which disqualifies me from dealing with specifics. However, I got the gist of what she was saying.

My impression is that Sotomayor took good notes in her college debate classes. Sonia Legree, as Maureen Dowd termed her in Wednesday's NYT column, can convincingly argue a viewpoint that is diametrically opposed to her core beliefs. Those beliefs don't change overnight and empirical evidence over the years indicates Sotomayor often radically interprets or outright disagrees with the provisions of the U.S. Constitution. Before the committee, she sounded to me like a strict constitutionalist.

Therefore, I see her as shifty -- more a politician than a prudent judicial decision-maker.

A competent interviewer would question gross disparities between an applicant's history and his/her pronounced viewpoints during vetting. Of course, the Senate Judiciary Committee is hardly a competent interviewer since it adheres to no common position regarding what is best for the country. The committee is made up of individuals watching out for themselves.

Naturally, after Sotomayor is confirmed, as has been predicted, she can holster her shiftiness and relax as the superior human being she perceives herself to be.