Aristotle’s Law of Identity states that all entities have a specific nature, particulars and characteristics. Simply put, a tree is a tree. A tree is not a turtle.  A (the tree) is A .  A is not B (the turtle). Clear?  Okay, no more Aristotle, you can wipe that basted turkey glaze look from your eyes. Let’s talk some film.

In movies, a director uses a camera to get an objective view of his subject. When screened at twenty-four frames per second a trick of the eye creates the illusion of motion.  If the camera is shooting a small dog, what the film will show is that small dog.  But the director has at his disposal a variety of lenses to distort and vary the image. So the small dog can appear to be blue, pink or so obscured that it could be interpreted by the viewer as a cat. Thus the director has taken "A is A", and turned it into "A is B". He has taken Objectivity and with poetic license turned it into Subjectivity.

So what does this have to do with the nomination of Sonia Sotomayor? The answer is that “A is A” should be THE foundation of the Republican argument—but it won’t. The Democrats will follow Chuck Schumer’s lead daring the Republicans to take Sotomayor on at their “own peril”; knowing that any fight would be slanted by the mainstream media more as a test for the Republicans than for Sotomayor.

 But deep down we all know Schumer’s slipped on his rabbit suit and is really saying, “Hey Doc, we got us a female Hispanic candidate (carrot chomp sound effect) and you Republicans are racist and sexist if you don’t unconditionally confirm her( sound of a big kiss on Elmer's forehead). Of course what follows is the sound of our collective Republican Fudds all frustrated saying, “Ewwww, those waskily Democwats won’t get away with it this time!” But they will-- C’mon. How many times have we seen this cartoon?

So, Yo! Memo to our Elmer Fudds up there on the hill. Ms. Sotomayor is nothing but a silly wabbitt waiting to be bagged. Here is a woman who asserts it’s appropriate for a judge when making a decision to take into consideration experiences learned as a woman and a Latina. Think about it. She has said those experiences, “should affect our decisions”. Which brings us back to our buddy, Aristotle and his “A is A”.  An object cannot have two identities. The tree cannot be the turtle.

If a judicial decision is affected by an emotion or past experience, objectivity is corrupted. The decision has become subjective, downgraded to an opinion formed by sympathy, empathy and experience. This is not judging by rule of law, but from rule of opinion. 

And this is the way to take on Sotomayor. Yet somehow I just know our Fudds will cower in the face of the gender and race card, and Director Obama will get the subjective lens he’s wanted. He can then proclaim to the world his newest change: A is now B.