But what is "ethnicity" in this Estrada case? He's from Honduras (I think) ---how many Hondurans are there to vote for him? Silvestre Reyes and the Hispanic Caucus in Congress are working against his nomination ---maybe someone should have asked them ahead of time? I think the Republicans made a fatal mistake in assuming most Hispanics even care ---I live in an 80% hispanic area (no Hondurans) and I haven't seen one bumper sticker for him, I have not heard one workplace conversation about the issue. To me it might be like nomination a French immigrant and expecting all Americans with any European ancestors to demand he be nominated because we felt part of the same ethnic group.
*** Fitz is saying ethnicity plays no useful role in the Estrada nomination.***
That would probably mean that Bush (who certainly knows the same facts as Fitz), did not nominate Estrada because of his ethnicity.
***Nanny, on the other hand, thinks Estrada was chosen only because of his race.***
I think your arguments are really with each other.
Please tell me -- which of you two I am supposed to believe?
I wish the liberals would get this contradiction sorted out, too. They won't, though, because the tactic serves their purposes.
One minute liberals say Estrada was chosen only because of his "race." The next minute they argue that ethnicity is not an issue at all, because Estrada is not "Hispanic."
This is why I like the Republicans. Republican thinking is less extreme, more moderate.