Obama, 2012-2016, and retiring Supreme Court Justices

[fskimospy]

Well, regarding Kagan, from what I've heard there's little evidence to go on, certainly not as large a body of evidence as there might be against sitting SCJ's.

Personally, I think the wise latina comment from Sotomayor is enough to give me a bad taste in my mouth.

You might find this humorous.

http://althouse.blogspot.com/2010/10/asked-to-name-supreme-court-justice-he.html

Also, a counter argument to the Scalia torture thing:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T72vgAEX66M

I'd articulate it myself, but my unemployed ass is sitting in a library where I can't listen to the video. When I find a job, I'll articulate it.

As I mentioned in my post there is a counter argument, but I personally still find the idea reprehensible. There are plenty of other issues on which I also find Scalia to be a horrible human being. I don't really feel like debating the lack of Constitutional protections against torture right now.

You're free to dislike Sotomayor if you want, as is anyone else. The thing is that while I find Scalia to be a bad person, he's not crazy. I would imagine you don't consider Sotomayor to be insane either. My only point was that if you're going to talk trash about them, back it up. Most people on here never even bother, they just know that the person wasn't nominated by their political sports team, so they have to hate them. It's really stupid.

 

[Thump553]

Obama replacing Scalia? What a delight that would be, but it only will happen over Scalia's dead body-and he's young/middle age for a Supreme Court justice.

 

[fskimospy]

Obama replacing Scalia? What a delight that would be, but it only will happen over Scalia's dead body-and he's young/middle age for a Supreme Court justice.

Actually Scalia is 74, which is not very young for a USSC justice. (tied for second oldest on the current court) He seems pretty spry though, so I agree that he's probably not going anywhere soon.

 

[spidey07]

Actually Scalia is 74, which is not very young for a USSC justice. (tied for second oldest on the current court) He seems pretty spry though, so I agree that he's probably not going anywhere soon.

The remains of live babies, puppies and kittens aids his longevity.

 

[Dr. Zaus]

I think that a lot of racists are just making up the scenario.

Either you think that people are making up what she said?

It probably says a lot about you.

It does; I know that Mexican nationals are taught to be racist and think of the mestizo as the master race. Its disgusting, Latino pride is disgusting.

"Puerto Rican Latino pride is OK" must be your argument.

It's like saying that it's OK to be pro white-pride because I'm from Texas and the white-pride-neo-nazi movement started in Alabama.

Your example is nothing remotely similar to what she said.

She said that the fact that someone is a female Latino will mean that she will make better decisions. This is the opposite of the diversity argument. I posited a racist, sexist, statement that too was the opposite of being pro-diversity.

That you can't see it only proves that you have an intellectual blind spot when it comes to this situation.

Also, what she states is based on experiences rather than something innate in her because of race.

Right... except the 'rich' experiences of a wise Latino woman are entirely out of the reach of anyone who isn't Latino and woman.

This means it is based on ethnicity and is the very basis of bigotry.


Why do you defend someone that proclaims loudly that she is a bigot?

 

[mrkun]

Yeah, umm she's not Mexican.

 

[Dr. Zaus]

Yeah, umm she's not Mexican.

Even if someone isn't from neo-nazi Alabama they are sacks of crap for being pro white-pride; same goes for Latino-pride, even if they don't come from where the stupid originate.

 

[CanOWorms]

Either you think that people are making up what she said?

I think that people are interpreting what she said or taking it out of context to fit their racist agendas.

It does; I know that Mexican nationals are taught to be racist and think of the mestizo as the master race. Its disgusting, Latino pride is disgusting.

That's nice, but she's not a Mexican national.

"Puerto Rican Latino pride is OK" must be your argument.

No, my argument is that she's not of Mexican descent.

It's like saying that it's OK to be pro white-pride because I'm from Texas and the white-pride-neo-nazi movement started in Alabama.

A lot of Texans take pride that they're Texan. Lots of Italians, Greeks, Irish, Polish, etc. also have a lot of pride in their cultural heritage or backgrounds.

There's a difference between taking pride in race and something like culture.

She said that the fact that someone is a female Latino will mean that she will make better decisions. This is the opposite of the diversity argument. I posited a racist, sexist, statement that too was the opposite of being pro-diversity.

No, she said that she hoped those experiences would help her make a better decision than someone who has not had those experiences. And it doesn't seem like an insane argument if talking about several social and legal issues.

That you can't see it only proves that you have an intellectual blind spot when it comes to this situation.

I think what you make of the situation exposes you.

Right... except the 'rich' experiences of a wise Latino woman are entirely out of the reach of anyone who isn't Latino and woman.

This means it is based on ethnicity and is the very basis of bigotry.

I think that it's more of a cultural argument and talking about the issues minorities deal with on an everyday basis.

Why do you defend someone that proclaims loudly that she is a bigot?

She didn't proclaim herself to be a bigot.

 

[werepossum]

I think that people are interpreting what she said or taking it out of context to fit their racist agendas.

That's nice, but she's not a Mexican national.

No, my argument is that she's not of Mexican descent.

A lot of Texans take pride that they're Texan. Lots of Italians, Greeks, Irish, Polish, etc. also have a lot of pride in their cultural heritage or backgrounds.

There's a difference between taking pride in race and something like culture.

No, she said that she hoped those experiences would help her make a better decision than someone who has not had those experiences. And it doesn't seem like an insane argument if talking about several social and legal issues.

I think what you make of the situation exposes you.

I think that it's more of a cultural argument and talking about the issues minorities deal with on an everyday basis.

She didn't proclaim herself to be a bigot.

She proclaimed that a "wise Latina woman" would make better judgments than others, so she proclaimed herself both a bigot and a racist (believing her race is inherently superior to others.)

 

[CanOWorms]

She proclaimed that a "wise Latina woman" would make better judgments than others, so she proclaimed herself both a bigot and a racist (believing her race is inherently superior to others.)

No, she didn't. She said "I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life." I think everyone hopes that a wise person would come to a better decision than a normal person. In addition, she said "a white male who hasn't lived that life" which doesn't mean that other experiences would not provide the same viewpoint. A quadriplegic white man would surely have interesting experiences and may reach a better decision on disability issues than a black lesbian.

She also said that it was in the context of encouraging women and minorities to enter the legal profession (something that is dearly needed). It's obvious that many are afraid of minorities gaining power, so they'll just make stuff up to fulfill their agendas.

Also, Latino isn't a race. Latinos consist of many races.

 

[chucky2]

The problem with that though is that a normal person (in her example a white male) would not be considered for the position she's talking about a wise female latina being better for: It'd be a wise white male, be default.

Given that, her strawman to cover her bigotry is invalidated, which reveals her bigotry for what it is: Bigotry.

Stop trying to defend her statement, it's indefensible. Which is why it's such an amazing statement for someone to make who's running for public office. It clearly shows exactly what type of person she is.

The bigger question is: Why, knowing that statement, did the people backing her back her? Why not find a female, of whatever race, who hasn't made bigoted statements, to replace her? Interesting isn't it?

Chuck

 

[Dr. Zaus]

That's nice, but she's not a Mexican national.

And I'm not from Alabama, but white pride is still fucking disgusting, just as is Latino pride.

There's a difference between taking pride in race and something like culture.

It's bigoted, no matter how you turn it, to say that you hope someone is more qualified because they share your gender and cultural background.

I hope wise white men, with their wealth of experience, would make better choices than any black or Hispanic who doesn't have those experiences.

Why am I bringing up race if I'm talking about wisdom?

"I would hope that wise a Latino woman would offer some diversity of thought that would help a group of individuals think of things differently and come to a better conclusion."

THAT isn't bigoted, it is simply arguing for diversity. What she said was the Latino was superior, which is some bullshit bigotry.

 

[CanOWorms]

The problem with that though is that a normal person (in her example a white male) would not be considered for the position she's talking about a wise female latina being better for: It'd be a wise white male, be default.

No. You are assuming that wise people are always considered for the positions. That is not always true. Judges have been impeached and removed, including one federal judge just a week or two ago.

Given that, her strawman to cover her bigotry is invalidated, which reveals her bigotry for what it is: Bigotry.

Given that, it seems that many bigots are creating a fancy scenario in their head revealing their bigotry for what it is: Bigotry.

Stop trying to defend her statement, it's indefensible. Which is why it's such an amazing statement for someone to make who's running for public office. It clearly shows exactly what type of person she is.

Stop trying to twist it to fit your agenda, it's indefensible. It clearly doesn't show what you're claiming it to be. Also, her actions outside of the statement clearly do not support the bigot scenario.

The bigger question is: Why, knowing that statement, did the people backing her back her? Why not find a female, of whatever race, who hasn't made bigoted statements, to replace her? Interesting isn't it?

Chuck

The interesting thing is knowing that statement, why did people not oppose her before but now oppose her when she was nominated for the Supreme Court? Is it because people are scared of a minority in the White House and don't want minorities invading other branches of government? Is it because previously she was nominated by white men? Interesting isn't it?

 

[CanOWorms]

And I'm not from Alabama, but white pride is still fucking disgusting, just as is Latino pride.

No, it's not bigoted. It's completely different.

It's bigoted, no matter how you turn it, to say that you hope someone is more qualified because they share your gender and cultural background.

It's more about the experiences. As I've stated, you can have those experiences, too.

I hope wise white men, with their wealth of experience, would make better choices than any black or Hispanic who doesn't have those experiences.

Being experienced about privileges of the majority of powermakers doesn't seem like it would be too useful. It's the default already.

Why am I bringing up race if I'm talking about wisdom?

"I would hope that wise a Latino woman would offer some diversity of thought that would help a group of individuals think of things differently and come to a better conclusion."

THAT isn't bigoted, it is simply arguing for diversity. What she said was the Latino was superior, which is some bullshit bigotry.

No, she didn't say anything that concrete. When I read her statement I see an argument for diversity, something that is lacking in the legal profession and hurts minority groups because of the lack of viewpoints in the judicial system.

 

[AznAnarchy99]

How about

Read the opinions in some of the losing cases recently and it leaves no doubt they are nuts.

Whiteys got it easy.