I adore TPM, think it's the best political blog out there and am a dedicated reader.  Josh Marshall is brilliant, and rather than flog him, I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt and assuming that he was making the point just why a Hispanic is needed on the Supreme Court.  Perhaps he was feigning stupidity so blatantly to make a strong case for Sotomayor.

HIspanic refers to someone of Spanish origins:  Spain or Spanish-speaking countries (Mexico, Cuba, Puerto Rico, Chile, Spain...).  Latino refers to someone of Latin American background and is broader:  Brazilians, Haitians, Hispanics.  However many Portuguese (from Portugal which is NOT part of Spain!) as well as Spaniards and even Italians refer to themselves as Latinos.

Hispanics are Latinos.  Not all Latinos are Hispanic.

But this is all beside the point.  Hispanics in the U.S. generally are not Europeans, they are of Latin American ancestry and would not see the appointment of Antonio Banderas the same way they would see Edward J. Olmos.  The Spaniards were the conquerers as were the Portuguese.  They are considered white in the complicated scheme of varying centuries old hierarchies in places like Mexico or Brazil.  Color, race and ancestry is deep and alive and well in these countries (as it is in the U.S. only people act like it's not since we elected a African-American president.)

Josh in his subsequent postings about the "Hispanic" Cardozo supreme looks more and more idiotic.  He really needs to straighten this out clearly since he made a fool of himself to Hispanics, that is.

Do some homework and post a proper correction Josh.  You demand the same from George WIll and others when they screw up.  You might blow it off as nothing, but it is a deep part of the point of a Hispanic in the Supreme Court or even in the media.  Perhaps TPM should look into putting your next wanted ad in the CCNMA, NAHJ or Unity Journalists of Color:  you need a Hispanic on your staff, sir.