Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, asked Sonia Sotomayor this morning whether President Obama -- by getting elected in large part from private fundraising -- "can say with credibility that he's carrying out the mandate of a democratic society."

The question was asked in the context of campaign finance, specifically referring to a 1996 Suffolk University Law Review article in which Sotomayor raised concerns about the propriety of political contributions. At the time, she wrote:

Our system of election financing permits extensive private, including corporate, financing of candidates' campaigns raising again and again the question of whether -- of what the difference is between contributions and bribes and how legislators or other officials can operate objectively on behalf of the electorate.

Cornyn initially asked Sotomayor what she thinks that difference is. When she deflected the question, Cornyn rephrased it by mentioning the president.

She again dodged, saying, "That wasn't what I was talking about" in the article. Cornyn fired back: "What I'm getting at is, are you basically painting with such a broad brush when it comes to people's rights under the First Amendment to participate in the political process, either to volunteer their time, make in-kind contributions, make financial contributions? Do you consider that a form of bribery or in any way improper?"

Sotomayor simply replied: "No, sir."

Senate Majority Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., raised the same concern last week in remarks on the Senate floor. "The suggestion that such contributions are tantamount to bribery should offend anyone who's ever contributed to a political campaign -- including the millions of Americans who donated money in small and large amounts to the presidential campaign of the man who nominated Judge Sotomayor to the Supreme Court," McConnell said.