(c) copyright ContrarianCommentary.com Andy Martin, Executive Editor June 1, 2009
THE CHICAGO CONNECTION: MUCKRAKER ANDY MARTIN SAYS SOTOMAYOR’S "EX-HUSBAND" IS A CHICAGO ATTORNEY
MARTIN SAYS SOTOMAYOR MAY HAVE ENGAGED IN A "SHAM" MARRIAGE AND OTHER ACTIONS TO CONCEAL HER SEXUAL IDENTITY
IS A VOTE FOR SOTOMAYOR A VOTE TO APPROVE GAY MARRIAGE AT THE U. S. SUPREME COURT?
MARTIN SUGGESTS SOTOMAYOR IS A "DEEPLY-CLOSETED" LESBIAN OR, POSSIBLY, A "COUGAR-STYLE" SEXUAL PREDATOR
SONIA SOTOMAYOR HEADS TOWARDS AN "ADVISE AND CONSENT" MOMENT
(NEW YORK)(June 1, 2009) This is a difficult column for me to write. As a man of the 60′s, my views on sexual morality are definitely liberal. With age has come tolerance. I passionately believe in an expansive personal right to privacy. You can read my blogs and won’t find anything on the gay marriage brouhaha. I have stayed away from the controversy because of close friends on both sides of the divide.
The media and politicians have been focused on Judge Sonia Sotomayor’s judicial decisions. They may be looking in the wrong place for an insight into her character and disposition.
My personal views and reluctance to write about sexual identity have to yield to the political reality that Judge Sonia Sotomayor has been living a carefully orchestrated secret life. Her personal life, particularly the concealed aspects of her life, bear on her fitness for the Supreme Court and reflect an invisible bias that will undoubtedly affect her voting on issues such as gay marriage.
The bestselling novel "Advise and Consent" by Allen Drury was based on the secret sexuality of a U. S. Senator. Ms. Sotomayor could be heading towards a similar "Advise and Consent" moment.
Before getting into the particulars of our investigation we start with the obvious fact that "sexuality" is not a state; sexuality is manifested as a continuum of human behavior and orientation. None of us is either completely heterosexual or completely homosexual. One set of genes and or conditions usually predominate; then there are those whose sexuality is ambiguous because their personal makeup is ambiguous or balanced.
There are three reasons why repressed or suppressed sexuality or closeted social behavior can be critical to a public employee, especially a Supreme Court justice.
First, blackmail. Someone with a secret they want kept secret is someone subject to improper influence. In my own past experience, intelligence agencies have routinely kept homosexual contacts on retainer to use in blackmailing gay diplomats, military officers and the like.
Second, concealment may reflect an unstable personality structure. A person who is so deeply committed to a secret aspect of her personality certainly carries with him or the potential for a disintegrating experience.
Third, a person with a concealed or repressed personality structure may have a secret agenda, an agenda that is not evident on the surface but that is, rather, buried deep below the surface of that individual’s visible identity. Each of the foregoing reasons makes inquiry into the entire spectrum of personality a critical factor in evaluating the fitness of candidates for high national office.
Finally, I would end this preamble with one aspect of my forty years of experience as a lawyer that stands out: people who conceal, usually have something to hide. Correlatively, that which is concealed, should be revealed. I have cross-examined people on the witness stand that broke down in "Perry Mason" moments. These epiphanies do exist.
Sonia Sotomayor is hiding her secret life.
Sotomayor is concealing some deep truths about herself; they deserve to see the light of day before her confirmation hearings begin, not after she is seated on the Supreme Court.
I bear Judge Sotomayor no personal animus. Nevertheless, she owes the United States Senate a full and complete disclosure of all aspects of her personality and personal life. I am glad that the New York Times also seems to agree with me that extra-judicial inquiry is appropriate, see http://www.nytimes.com/2009/
05/27/opinion/27wed1.html ("The Senate will have to carefully scrutinize Judge Sotomayor’s record on and off the bench…")
ContrarianCommentary.com began its investigation with a tip that we should look at her "sham" marriage in 1976. The mainstream media have mentioned her "marriage" but there are great peculiarities about that event.
First, Sotomayor and her husband apparently never lived together despite the fact that Sotomayor was "married" during her entire law school career. They were living in different cities. Second, the "husband" has never commented on his "wife’s" professional accomplishments.
Third, a decade ago Sotomayor conveniently produced a "fiancé," Peter White, when she was under review for the Court of Appeals. As soon as she was confirmed, the "fiancé" prop disappeared. White dropped from view. Once again, we see the recurring example of an apparent puzzle: the repeated use of "props" or "shams" to create a misleading appearance during periods of government evaluation. Particularly when these props disappear soon after the critical event, an appearance of concealment or deception is apparent.
Here our investigation yielded its first surprise: the Chicago connection. Sotomayor’s "ex-husband" is a Chicago attorney.
Fourth, rather surprisingly for a lawyer, since lawyers love to comment on the successes of other lawyers, Sotomayor’s "ex-husband" Kevin E. Noonan has never commented on his "ex-wife’s" appointments. Most lawyers would realize that this total silence is very unusual behavior.
The media, moreover, appear to have steered a wide course away from Mr. Noonan, when his views on the young Sotomayor would be of particular interest to anyone looking into her background.
Even more surprising, the local Chicago media have completely ignored the "Second City" aspect of this great national story. Why?
The Washington Post yesterday also drew a blank on Ms. Sotomayor’s personal identity:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/30/AR2009053002061.html
Rather elliptically, the Washington Post said Sotomayor "does date." Oh really.
Around the Second Circuit, a Court with which I am intimately familiar, Sotomayor’s "dates" draw raised eyebrows. If a male nominee for the Supreme Court were "dating" men young enough to be his children, that man would likely be deemed inappropriate for the high court. I was working on Capitol Hill when some Republicans wanted to impeach Justice William O. Douglas because he married a much younger woman. They felt his behavior embarrassed the Court. http://jurisdynamics.blogspot.com/2008/05/
wives-and-times-of-william-o-douglas.html
Sotomayor’s "boy toys" could be evidence of inability to function in a normal male-female environment or, once again, "beards" designed to conceal her deeply-closeted sexuality.
Whether Sotomayor is deeply-closeted, a factor that may be explained by the fact her legal career began in an era when lesbianism was potentially disqualifying behavior and therefore deeply repressed and suppressed, or whether she is a frustrated "cougar" whose predatory "boy toy" sexuality takes more from a skit on Saturday Night Live than what is expected of a U. S. (Second) Circuit Judge, or a Supreme Court justice, remains to be finally proven.
Either alternative raises serous questions about Sotomayor’s character and personal behavior that need to be fully explored by the United States Senate.
For example, both supporters and opponents of gay marriage have a right to know whether Sotomayor’s secret life reflects a disqualifying bias on that controversial issue.
Our investigation is continuing. We invite responses from persons having knowledge of Sotomayor’s "secret life."
Copy the code below to your web site.
Filed Under: USA News
Tags: advise consent • behavior • closeted • deeply • deeply closeted • Gay • gay marriage • Marriage • personal • repressed • secret life • sexuality • sonia • sonia sotomayor • sotomayor • sotomayor husband • supreme • Supreme Court
Link to this page
About the Author: I am Ray Holt. I am a natural born USA citizen. My ancestors were Native American Cherokee Indian. I am a believer of Jesus Christ. I love the Living God of Abraham. I love this country. I am an Empowered Patriot. What about you?