Yes he should. Put her in the place of liberty, justice and equality for all. Because right now she's one racist uppity bitch.
Yup, one racist uppity bitch that's going to be confirmed. Maybe if we're lucky your nuts will retract so far your eyes will explode.
You guys really get to me. You don't think Sotomayor has more "life experiance" making it to the Supreme Court on her own bare Latino feet then the WASP driving there in his town car?
Gamingphreek
Lifer
- Mar 31, 2003
- 11,679
- 0
- 81
Oh so racism is ok when it is against us white people then? I am just supposed to turn the other cheek? Sorry - doesn't work that way!
My race has no affect on my intelligence, performance in life, or anything else. I don't expect or want anyone to tell me anything different.
-Kevin
OrByte
Diamond Member
- Jul 21, 2000
- 9,303
- 144
- 106
I think all the white men are afraid of her.
Everyone knows that a strong latina woman won't put up with their shit.
John Roberts is probably having nightmares, Sam Alito probably pissed himself.
Congrats to the "racist" Puerto Rican. As for the rest of you...enjoy!
Everyone knows that a strong latina woman won't put up with their shit.
John Roberts is probably having nightmares, Sam Alito probably pissed himself.
Congrats to the "racist" Puerto Rican. As for the rest of you...enjoy!
It's amazing to think that there are still people in this country who think we need affirmative action. It IS, in its own way, racism. Anytime you take race into consideration for anything, you're being racist. Maybe not racist like a plantation owner, but it's still inherently racism at its most basic level.
It's like one day a few decades ago, someone decided that since we had enslaved blacks and spit on non whites for so long, they should be given special privileges or something so that they could get even. As wrong as that was, it's even more wrong today, when we have entire cities and areas of America where those people with "special privileges" are the MAJORITY, not the minority any more. It is very difficult for anyone to make the argument that blacks or Latinas or any other group needs special consideration when it comes to the law.
That is why she is prolly a poor choice for a judge. In trying to ensure that supposed "minorities" are given special consideration, she is prolonging the "what race are you" attitude that we're so desperately trying to avoid in this country. Who cares if she's Latina, and it's a given she will be pro-choice. The only thing wrong is her views on racism. While I'm sure she means the best, putting her into a position where we will be seeing the effects for decades, even centuries from now, is a bad idea when we're just now pulling out of the racism war that she is still trying to fight.
It's like one day a few decades ago, someone decided that since we had enslaved blacks and spit on non whites for so long, they should be given special privileges or something so that they could get even. As wrong as that was, it's even more wrong today, when we have entire cities and areas of America where those people with "special privileges" are the MAJORITY, not the minority any more. It is very difficult for anyone to make the argument that blacks or Latinas or any other group needs special consideration when it comes to the law.
That is why she is prolly a poor choice for a judge. In trying to ensure that supposed "minorities" are given special consideration, she is prolonging the "what race are you" attitude that we're so desperately trying to avoid in this country. Who cares if she's Latina, and it's a given she will be pro-choice. The only thing wrong is her views on racism. While I'm sure she means the best, putting her into a position where we will be seeing the effects for decades, even centuries from now, is a bad idea when we're just now pulling out of the racism war that she is still trying to fight.
So far it seems like she is getting grilled on her change of heart. Her past rulings, statements, quotes all suggest she truly believes in her racial prejudices and bias but only just recently since being nominated has she changed her tune. So far she can't explain that. She only says she won't let her personal views affect her rulings, so in reality she's saying "I know I'm a racist, but that won't affect my rulings"
Really? Like it seems to have affected all your previous rulings? And now suddenly that is going to change? Grill that bitch on the New Haven firefighter case. Hammer it home, let the public watch her squirm.
Really? Like it seems to have affected all your previous rulings? And now suddenly that is going to change? Grill that bitch on the New Haven firefighter case. Hammer it home, let the public watch her squirm.
OrByte
Diamond Member
- Jul 21, 2000
- 9,303
- 144
- 106
I am sorry to burst your bubble (and every other half-brain out there) but Affirmative Action is not inherently racist
Affirmative Action is inherently prejudiced
racism is an idea of one race being inferior to a superior race. Racism contains an element of hate to all races different than ones own. Affirmative Action does not operate within these parameters. Think about it....
Affirmative Action is prejudicial in practice. Prejudice is a preconceived notion of belief or idea. Affirmative Action operates on the preconceived notion that institutions inherently and continuously employ hiring or accepting practices that are racist in nature. Affirmative Action in practice operates under the assumption that the culture of an institution is racist.
you all need to figure this shit out before you start labeling people racist, you look damn foolish.
And exactly what side do you think Sotomayor is in this "racism war" that you speak of?
Please think before you type.
Thump553
Lifer
- Jun 2, 2000
- 12,839
- 2,625
- 136
I'd sure like to see the factual proof tor the conclusions you reach. Without such a basis your conclusions are bogus. Please set forth the SPECIFIC rulings and the SPECIFIC language from each that you contend support your allegations of racial bias.
As we say in the business, the record just doesn't support your statements. Thank God you don't sit in judgment on anyone (except on the internet).
theeedude
Lifer
- Feb 5, 2006
- 35,787
- 6,197
- 126
Do you right wing idiots even read the Constitution? There is only one Constitutionally recognized court in this country, and it is the USSC. Appellate court cannot reverse USSC precedent, only USSC can do it. Standard used by USSC when she made the correct ruling was "disparate impact." It would be hubris and outrageous judicial activism for her to reverse a USSC precedent as an Appellate court judge. If you think this New Haven dog is gonna hunt, you are wrong, and simply going to make yourself look like a fool. It's easy to respond to, and make her attackers look unfair and advocates of judicial activism. And of course Democrats should be highlighting this in Latino and woman voter community. Make these Republican morons pay a price.
What would you care what they tell you if you weren't already defensive because you feel inferior. If I call you a pinkarian minkowas, do you get offended, but as soon as somebody says you're a dirty little white bag of shit, you immediately take offense. There is nothing tapped into there but prior deep feelings that you are inferior which you can't let yourself feel or know is hidden in you. If words hurt you it's because you already believe them. But in fact you are really lucky, because you are as good as me and I'm the best there's ever been.
OrByte
Diamond Member
- Jul 21, 2000
- 9,303
- 144
- 106
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
What would you care what they tell you if you weren't already defensive because you feel inferior. If I call you a pinkarian minkowas, do you get offended, but as soon as somebody says you're a dirty little white bag of shit, you immediately take offense. There is nothing tapped into there but prior deep feelings that you are inferior which you can't let yourself feel or know is hidden in you. If words hurt you it's because you already believe them. But in fact you are really lucky, because you are as good as me and I'm the best there's ever been.
They are all pinkarian minkowas... I've been saying that for years!
Actually it is more like Sotomayor thinks that she is a Rontankulus Assendria and white men can't stand that!
Believe it or not, prejudice does not preempt racism... The definition of racism that I'm using is not "white people in the 1800s who owned slaves," by that definition there are very few racists left. Racism in modern times is mostly limited to simply giving preference to a race, or special consideration. Giving preference to a race, in effect, is similar to one thinking that one or another race is superior. Notice the word effect before you go off. Also look at the dictionary.com's second definition of the word "racism."
But ok, let's just say she's prejudiced. Do you want a Supreme Court Judge who's prejudiced against anyone? I don't care who it is, but no. You really don't.
edit: Forgot to say, our culture is no longer racist so from your little spiel we don't need affirmative action anymore. And it should be obvious, in the whole racism war between racists and.... people trying to make everyone equal..... I'd place the lady in question in the latter party. It's not just that though, she's going beyond the bounds of equality to ensure that minorities get "fair" treatment. That's what affirmative action does.
Gamingphreek
Lifer
- Mar 31, 2003
- 11,679
- 0
- 81
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
What would you care what they tell you if you weren't already defensive because you feel inferior. If I call you a pinkarian minkowas, do you get offended, but as soon as somebody says you're a dirty little white bag of shit, you immediately take offense. There is nothing tapped into there but prior deep feelings that you are inferior which you can't let yourself feel or know is hidden in you. If words hurt you it's because you already believe them. But in fact you are really lucky, because you are as good as me and I'm the best there's ever been.
I don't know where you got your moral compass, but just because you don't believe a word or phrase to be true, doesn't mean you go unaffected. Additionally, this woman will be affecting the policy of an entire nation - if I go to court and she rules against me based on race - I'm screwed, nothing I can do at that point.
This has nothing to do with her political stance, at least for me. Sure I don't agree with her political stance, but if she has sound reasons for her judgement, then, while I don't like it, who am I but another person to say what is right or wrong.
This on the other hand is a blatant disregard for civil rights. I would be incredibly angry if I were one of the fire fighters who were denied advancement simply because not enough minorities advanced.
-Kevin
"Out of the park"? I don't know about that one. Is she competent? Seems to be. Should she be confirmed? Yes; I don't see any good evidence against her confirmation. But is she a preminent judge or legal scholar? I wouldn't say that.
Bleh...all political theater.
Barring some astounding revelation the Senators are all just speaking to their constituency (right or left...they all do it) and I doubt give a rat's ass about the procedure. Barring an amazing revelation they all know she is as good as in anyway. Her qualifications, on paper anyway, are better than many current justices and she got a unanimous "highly recommended" from the ABA.
Enjoy the show for that is all it really is these days. Since the government could use money these days they should make this a reality TV show and see if they can vote her off the island.
All you suppossed Republicans or conservitives are whining about nothing. Her voting record leans conservitive. You reactionaries should be happy this is Obamas nominee and not others that would have your "liberal deragment sydrome" kicking in high gear.
Lindsey Graham made some pretty honest comments when he said that everything was pretty much a show, that "it's really all about conservative and liberal politics," and told her "Unless you have a total meltdown, you're going to get confirmed."
He also said no Republicans in the Senate would have chosen her, but that was about politics, and that the Dems never would have chosen Roberts or Alito either and still voted to confirm them.
Barring some astounding revelation the Senators are all just speaking to their constituency (right or left...they all do it) and I doubt give a rat's ass about the procedure. Barring an amazing revelation they all know she is as good as in anyway. Her qualifications, on paper anyway, are better than many current justices and she got a unanimous "highly recommended" from the ABA.
Enjoy the show for that is all it really is these days. Since the government could use money these days they should make this a reality TV show and see if they can vote her off the island.
All you suppossed Republicans or conservitives are whining about nothing. Her voting record leans conservitive. You reactionaries should be happy this is Obamas nominee and not others that would have your "liberal deragment sydrome" kicking in high gear.
Lindsey Graham made some pretty honest comments when he said that everything was pretty much a show, that "it's really all about conservative and liberal politics," and told her "Unless you have a total meltdown, you're going to get confirmed."
He also said no Republicans in the Senate would have chosen her, but that was about politics, and that the Dems never would have chosen Roberts or Alito either and still voted to confirm them.
Thankfully this racist excuse for a judge is just replacing another Leftist. It is good to get some statements on record during the confirmation process, but this is pretty much a done deal already. It doesnt change the balance of the court.
No, but we can use it in the long list of Obama failures to win house and senate back in 2010.
"My congressional opponent allowed a racist judge to be confirmed, voted for bogus stimulus, etc, why in the world would you put him back in office? That's not the kind of change our nation needs and surely confirming racists is the opposite of what we need."
OrByte
Diamond Member
- Jul 21, 2000
- 9,303
- 144
- 106
no such definition of racism exists. You just made that one up. Congrats?
racism, look it up. It basically is about the superiority of a race being to all others. How does Afirmative Action fit into that? answer: it doesn't because affirmative action gives preferences to all races other than the majority (which happens to be white. Move to South America and I am sure it will be different)
I did read dictionary.com definitions. Apparently you haven't. Here, I will help.
As for prejudices...EVERYONE HAS A PREJUDICE. Even Supreme Court Judges. Which is why you get the opposition asking her if she will be impartial, and she is of course saying yes. Truth of the matter is, it is hard to find anyone impartial.
They dont really have a clue anyway, just reactionaries reacting. I don't want nine people of my ideology on the Court, because I think it is important for it to fulfill its role for there to be differing interpretations of the Constitution and the law in general on that body.
I wholeheartedly oppose textualism, but like there being textualists on the Court. I think Alito was a step too far in the number of textualists, but there you go. There should be influence by Legal Realism, which is why I find a lot of opposition to Sotomayor disturbing - essentially the focus on the "wise Latina" remark, and claiming that it is a disqualifyer for her is, to me, a statement that Legal Realism has no place as a philosophy on the Court.
It is perfectly possible to have one legal philosophy and to think it is in the best interests of the country that the final arbiter of constitutionality is not made up by that philosophy entirely.
OrByte
Diamond Member
- Jul 21, 2000
- 9,303
- 144
- 106
I agree but I actually think it is simpler than that.
People like Lindsay Graham know EXACTLY that her comment about race isn't racist. But they will use it to their political advantage nonetheless. The message gets circulated and pretty soon you have people like posters in this very thread spouting off about "racism" even though they don't understand the definition of the word.
As a white male I can assure you that my life experience provides me with much better intellect than latino or black people. I have real empathy for white people and that is why I'll be a good judge.
Nope, not racist at all.
Nope, not racist at all.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter