Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor, deflecting tough questioning by Republicans on the second day of her confirmation hearings, said Tuesday that in 17 years as a judge she has never let her own life experiences or opinions influence her decisions. Sotomayor, 55, said her now-famous remarks that she would hope a 'wise Latina' would make better decisions because of her life experiences than a white male was a regrettable 'rhetorical flourish that fell flat,' and does not reflect her views. 'I want ... to give everyone assurances, I want to state up front, unequivocally and without doubt, I do not believe that any ethnic, racial or gender group has an advantage in sound judging,' she said. 'I do believe that every person has an equal opportunity to be a good and wise judge regardless of their background or life experiences.' Over the course of the day, members of the Senate Judiciary Committee asked Sotomayor about most of the controversial remarks and decisions she has made as a district judge and on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit, as well as enduring issues such as abortion and executive power. Like most of the modern nominees before her, President Obama's nominee largely dodged giving her own opinions on the issues, pledging to be guided by precedent and declining to say how she might act if a particular issue returned to the court. 'I don't prejudge,' she said. Sotomayor said her wise Latina remark was an attempt to play off a famous observation by former justice Sandra Day O'Connor and others that, all other things being equal, a wise old man should reach the same decision as a wise old woman. 'I knew that Justice O'Connor couldn't have meant that if judges reached different conclusions -- legal conclusions -- that one of them wasn't wise,' Sotomayor said. 'That couldn't have been her meaning, because reasonable judges disagree on legal conclusions in some cases.' At the same time, Sotomayor acknowledged, her own comment 'was bad, because it left an impression that I believed that life experiences commanded a result in a case.' Sotomayor said she was trying 'to inspire young Hispanics, Latino students and lawyers to believe that their life experiences added value to the process.' Sotomayor was first given the chance to explain her remarks -- 'no words I have ever spoken or written have received so much attention,' she said -- by committee chairman Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., who guided her gently. But Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama, the ranking Republican on the panel, was not satisfied by Sotomayor's explanations to Leahy about controversial parts of her record. Reading a series of remarks Sotomayor has made about how life experiences affect the outlook of a judge, Sessions questioned whether she could be fair. 'I think it's consistent in the comments I've quoted to you and your previous statements that you do believe that your backgrounds will ... affect the result in cases, and that's troubling me,' Sessions said. 'Don't you think that is not consistent with your statement, that you believe your role as a judge is to serve the larger interest of impartial justice?' Sotomayor replied: 'My record shows that at no point or time have I ever permitted my personal views or sympathies to influence an outcome of a case. In every case where I have identified a sympathy, I have articulated it and explained to the litigant why the law requires a different result.' Sotomayor said her remarks about prejudices and points of view show only that judges are human -- 'not robots' -- but must consciously work to put those feelings aside when following the law. Sotomayor, in her first session taking questions from the senators, made for an unflappable witness. She spoke slowly and carefully, in a deep voice. She took notes on each question and showed no offense at tough questions from Sessions and Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, the only other Republican senator who had a chance to quiz her during the morning session. 'I don't think her answers were responsive, no,' Sessions told reporters during a lunch break, suggesting that her explanation that her 'wise Latina' comments 'fell flat' did not clear up the issue. 'It was really confusing to me.' He said that stylistically the nominee 'handled herself well.' Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., congratulated Sotomayor on her demeanor, which was devoid of any of the sharp remarks she acknowledges that she sometimes employs on the bench. 'I must say that, if there's a test for judicial temperament, you pass it with an A-plus-plus,' Feinstein said. 'I want you to know that, because I wanted to respond, and my adrenaline was moving along. And you have just sat there, very quietly, and responded to questions that, in their very nature, are quite provocative.' Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., noted Sotomayor's answers about judicial restraint and thought of another recent nominee. 'I listen to you today, I think I'm listening to Judge Roberts,' he said, referring to Cheif Justice John G. Roberts Jr. Graham seemed to find no fault with Sotomayor's decisions, but said her speeches make the Republicans on the committee wonder what kind of justice she would become. 'Don't become a speechwriter if this law thing doesn't work out,' he said. Sotomayor smiled. In their questioning of the nominee, the senators tread over much of the same ground. By 11:30 a.m. the word 'wise' -- as framed in some context around Sotomayor's 'wise Latina' speech -- had been already been uttered 11 times. 'Ricci,' the short-hand phrase for the Ricci v. DeStefano discrimination case involving New Haven's fire department, had been said at least four times, with 'Heller' being referenced at least a half-dozen times. That's the shorthand for the key gun rights case of District of Columbia v. Heller, in which the Supreme Court recognized in the Second Amendment an individual right to own guns. 