Kay Bailey Hutchison chose McAllen - and a meeting of Mexican-American chambers of commerce - to officially say she will vote `no’ this week against the Supreme Court nomination of Sonia Sotomayor, a stunning announcement to be sure.

The Republican senator’s decision on Judge Sotomayor was widely expected. If she was expecting a show of approval from the Texas Association of Mexican-American Chambers of Commerce, Hutchison didn’t get it. The Associated Press reported that Hutchison received “a tepid” response from those gathered at the Friday meeting in McAllen.

Tepid, indeed, as the Texas senator and would-be governor carefully described her opposition as one being based on the gun rights ownership issue. Our senator, you see, cannot vote for any Supreme Court nominee who is not rock-solid on guns.

A couple of gaping holes in Hutchison’s contention come in the form of Jon Tester and Max Baucus, two conservative Democratic senators from Montana who are ardent pro-gun guys. And guess what? They’re both going to vote `yes’ on Sotomayor, with Tester saying, “She (Sotomayor) is solid on the Second Amendment, (the right to bear arms).”

And then there’s the Fraternal Order of Police, one of the nation’s largest law enforcement organizations. The fraternal order is for Sotomayor, too, with the organization’s president calling the judge “a model jurist, tough, fair-minded and mindful of the constitutional protections afforded to all citizens.”

The American Hunters and Shooters Association would differ with Hutchison as well. The hunters and shooters have endorsed Sotomayor, too. Kay Bailey, however, believes Sotomayor is soft on guns. Yes, right, that’s it. The reason the Mexican-American chamber didn’t buy Hutchison’s reasoning is because her real     reason is so transparent. Hutchison is running for governor against a politican merchant, the incumbent Rick Perry, who has kissed the butt of every tea party/anti-government/Obama hater in the state.

For Hutchison to have endorsed Sotomayor would have been fatal for her gubernatorial campaign against an opponent who is already depicting the senator as the second coming of  Nancy Pelosi. To tout guns as the reason she is opposing Sotomayor is nonsense. It’s a political calculation, pure and simple.

Meanwhile, this state’s other senator, John Cornyn, announced last week that he, too, is against Sotomayor because he doesn’t know which Sonia Sotomayor America will get once she is a Supreme Court justice. Cornyn was among the GOP white guy senators who couldn’t get over Sotomayor calling herself “a wise Latina” in speeches to law students.

Sotomayor did appear to be rather wise and learned in her confirmation hearings, but apparently once confirmed and on the Supreme Court, she may go from being wise to being a Latina activist, (hence not knowing which Judge Sotomayor we will get).

So, Sotomayor is good enough for two gun rights advocates/conservative senators from Montana, (where like 100 Hispanics live), but she’s not good enough for two senators who  represent a state, (Texas), where close to 40 percent of the population is Latino.

Hutchison and Cornyn are on the wrong side of history - and demographics. They will vote against a Supreme Court nominee with 17 years of federal judgeship experience, who received the highest rating and recommendation from the American Bar Association, and  is someone whose nomination will likely mean to Hispanics what Thurgood Marshall meant to African-Americans when he was named to the high court in the 1960s.

And for what?

Appeasing the tea baggers and the far right of the Texas Republican primary apparently means more to Texas’ two senators than latching on to a historic Supreme Court nomination - and demonstrating to their state’s fastest-growing population segment that they understand their wishes and aspirations.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.