Page 21 of 41 FirstFirst ... 11192021222331 ... LastLast
Results 201 to 210 of 409

Thread: W.H. to Sotomayor critics: Be 'careful'

  1. #201
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Tiamat's better half
    Last Seen
    10-28-11 @ 01:41 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    15,998

    Re: W.H. to Sotomayor critics: Be 'careful'

    Quote Originally Posted by azura28 View Post
    Of course they do - they have since the beginning of the supreme court -they are not robotic. Sotomayor is just being honest - which I think is quite refreshing!
    Good luck to her.
    I think it's a dangerous attitude and changes the face of what it means to be a judge. Willingly accepting that your prejudices are going to effect your ruling is accepting that you're not going to be impartial and being damn near smug about it.

    Eventually our judges will just be select representatives seated to serve special interests or select groups and everyone will have forgotten that justice is supposed to be blind.

  2. #202
    Professor
    Marilyn Monroe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Tennessee
    Last Seen
    03-06-14 @ 03:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    2,137

    Re: W.H. to Sotomayor critics: Be 'careful'

    Quote Originally Posted by WillRockwell View Post
    Sotomayer's quote about Latina women and white men was taken out of context. Here is the context:
    It is easy to take issue with a quote that you misrepresent. Tell me now what issue you have with Sotomayer's actual statement.
    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/15/us...l?pagewanted=5
    Justice O'Connor has often been cited as saying that a wise old man and wise old woman will reach the same conclusion in deciding cases. I am not so sure that I agree with the statement. First, there can never be a universal definition of wise. Second, 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.
    She didn't say the white male was wise. If he was, he could have empathy for any group, and it's possible the Latina woman wouldn't have it for someone who came from a background different from her own. That's actually a dumb statement, and somebody who makes these kinds of statements probably is a bigot.

    I, like Professor Carter, believe that we should not be so myopic as to believe that others of different experiences or backgrounds are incapable of understanding the values and needs of people from a different group.
    This contradicts the first paragraph. She's saying anybody can understand the values and needs of people from a different group, but in the first paragraph she's saying a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would come to a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life. I smell a bigot.

    She'll be confirmed because everybody is wanting the Hispanic votes, but still they need to give her a hard time like they did Alito and Roberts.
    "It's not that I'm afraid to die, I just don't want to be there when it happens." Woody Allen.

  3. #203
    Educator azura28's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    landlocked U.S.A.
    Last Seen
    11-29-11 @ 08:53 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    729

    Re: W.H. to Sotomayor critics: Be 'careful'

    Quote Originally Posted by talloulou View Post
    I think it's a dangerous attitude and changes the face of what it means to be a judge. Willingly accepting that your prejudices are going to effect your ruling is accepting that you're not going to be impartial and being damn near smug about it.

    Eventually our judges will just be select representatives seated to serve special interests or select groups and everyone will have forgotten that justice is supposed to be blind.
    That's not what she's saying at all - her past rulings have been taken in account, and show her to give impartial rulings as well. She probably shouldn't have said it -because obviously,, she is going to going to keep getting grief about it, however, all of them let their life experiences affect them to some extent, that's why there are liberal and conservative judges.

  4. #204
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:50 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,268
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: W.H. to Sotomayor critics: Be 'careful'

    Quote Originally Posted by talloulou View Post
    I didn't say it never happens. I said it may occasionally happen. But it is not the desired goal. You don't go into judging happily accepting that your going to bring you're prejudices with you.

    There is a difference between acknowledging something might happen to effect levels of impartiality with different judges vs embracing that, bragging about it, and not giving a piss about flat out stating you don't mind not being impartial at all.
    If it does happen, then diversity should be desirable, and she is right that in that case, her gender/ethnicity is of value. Just saying "well, it shouldn't" does not help anything. Our whole court system is based around the idea that judges cannot agree on anything, and with that being the case, and since judges of different sex and ethnic groups do rule differently, diversity is important.

    I do not see her as "bragging about it", she was giving a speech on that topic, at an annual event, on that topic. Obviously, she is going to talk about it, and talk about it in a positive light when her whole point at being there is to do so.

  5. #205
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:50 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,268
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: W.H. to Sotomayor critics: Be 'careful'

    Quote Originally Posted by Marilyn Monroe View Post


    This contradicts the first paragraph. She's saying anybody can understand the values and needs of people from a different group, but in the first paragraph she's saying a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would come to a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life. I smell a bigot.
    I did not come away from her speech with that impression. She contradicted herself a few times, often enough I felt it was intentional. She is questioning alot of conventional wisdom on both sides, those who think that race/gender is irrelevant, and those who think it is highly relevant. She is saying as I read it that race/gender play a part in how judges rule, but that does not mean that race/gender is a requirement to rule wisely.

  6. #206
    Advisor TheHat's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Last Seen
    01-17-13 @ 06:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    551

    Re: W.H. to Sotomayor critics: Be 'careful'

    Quote Originally Posted by WillRockwell View Post
    Estrada was nominated by George Bush for the DC Court of Appeals despite the fact he had never served as a judge on the local, state or federal level. His race had nothing to do with it, except that Bush probably figured being a Latino would grease the nomination despite a total lack of experience.
    Really? Democrats didnt go after him based on race alone? His race was 1 of the reasons the DNC special interests gave to stonewall his appointment. As DNC memos prove.

    See below:

    Featured Article - WSJ.com

    'He Is Latino'
    Why Dems borked Estrada, in their own words.

    Now that the Senate has concluded its 30-hour talkathon on judicial filibusters, we thought readers might like to peer inside the filibustering Democratic mind, such as it is.

    This plunge into the murky deep comes from staff strategy memos we've obtained from the days when Democrats ran the Senate Judiciary Committee in 2001-02. Or, rather, appeared to run the committee. Their real bosses are the liberal interest groups that more or less tell the Senators when to sit, speak and roll over--and which Bush judges to confirm or not. Here are some excerpts:



    November 6, 2001/To: Senator Dick Durbin
    "You are scheduled to meet with leaders of several civil rights organizations to discuss their serious concerns with the judicial nomination process. The leaders will likely include: Ralph Neas (People For the American Way), Kate Michelman (NARAL), Nan Aron (Alliance for Justice), Wade Henderson (Leadership Conference on Civil Rights), Leslie Proll (NAACP Legal Defense & Education Fund), Nancy Zirkin (American Association of University Women), Marcia Greenberger (National Women's Law Center), and Judy Lichtman (National Partnership). . . .

    ". . . The primary focus will be on identifying the most controversial and/or vulnerable judicial nominees. The groups would like to postpone action on these nominees until next year, when (presumably) the public will be more tolerant of partisan dissent."



    November 7, 2001/To: Senator Durbin
    "The groups singled out three--Jeffrey Sutton (6th Circuit); Priscilla Owen (5th Circuit); and Caroline [sic] Kuhl (9th Circuit)--as a potential nominee for a contentious hearing early next year, with a [sic] eye to voting him or her down in Committee. They also identified Miguel Estrada (D.C. Circuit) as especially dangerous, because he has a minimal paper trail, he is Latino, and the White House seems to be grooming him for a Supreme Court appointment. They want to hold Estrada off as long as possible."



    February 28, 2002/To: SENATOR [Kennedy]
    "Ralph Neas called to let us know that he had lunch with Andy Stern of SEIU. Andy wants to be helpful as we move forward on judges, and he has great contacts with Latino media outlets . . ."



    April 17, 2002/To: SENATOR [Kennedy]
    "Elaine Jones of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund tried to call you today. . . . Elaine would like the Committee to hold off on any 6th Circuit nominees until the University of Michigan case regarding the constitutionality of affirmative action in higher education is decided by the en banc 6th Circuit. . . . The thinking is that the current 6th Circuit will sustain the affirmative action program, but if a new judge with conservative views is confirmed before the case is decided, that new judge will be able, under 6th Circuit rules, to review the case and vote on it."



    June 12, 2002/To: SENATOR (Kennedy)
    "...Ultimately, if [Chairman Pat] Leahy insists on having an August hearing, it appears that the groups are willing to let [Timothy] Tymkovich [10th Circuit] go through (the core of the coalition made that decision last night, but they are checking with the gay rights groups)."

    Mr. Tymkovich apparently got the gay OK.
    Pretty easy to see, that they went off of race alone as 1 of the qualifiers here on Estrada.

    Now, we have Sotomayor who has basically said she would be better then any white guy simply b/c she is Latino.

  7. #207
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: W.H. to Sotomayor critics: Be 'careful'

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    If it does happen, then diversity should be desirable, and she is right that in that case, her gender/ethnicity is of value. Just saying "well, it shouldn't" does not help anything. Our whole court system is based around the idea that judges cannot agree on anything, and with that being the case, and since judges of different sex and ethnic groups do rule differently, diversity is important.

    I do not see her as "bragging about it", she was giving a speech on that topic, at an annual event, on that topic. Obviously, she is going to talk about it, and talk about it in a positive light when her whole point at being there is to do so.
    Sotomayor gives an annual speech on her latina vagina's superior decision making abilities over that of old white penises?

  8. #208
    Advisor TheHat's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Last Seen
    01-17-13 @ 06:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    551

    Re: W.H. to Sotomayor critics: Be 'careful'

    [quote=Birdzeye;1058047739]
    Quote Originally Posted by FlappyTheKinkajou View Post

    I certainly do.

    Here's one example that I got from a quick google search (Senator Leahy was accused of bigotry for opposing the confirmation of Miguel Estrada):

    CommonConservative.com: The Archive of Tom Adkins - the Modern Conservative 03/16/03
    Well that is b/c of this:

    Featured Article - WSJ.com

    Memos from inside the DNC machine, stating that they wanted to stonewall Estrada b/c "he is latino".

  9. #209
    Advisor TheHat's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Last Seen
    01-17-13 @ 06:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    551

    Re: W.H. to Sotomayor critics: Be 'careful'

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    If it does happen, then diversity should be desirable, and she is right that in that case, her gender/ethnicity is of value. Just saying "well, it shouldn't" does not help anything. Our whole court system is based around the idea that judges cannot agree on anything, and with that being the case, and since judges of different sex and ethnic groups do rule differently, diversity is important.

    I do not see her as "bragging about it", she was giving a speech on that topic, at an annual event, on that topic. Obviously, she is going to talk about it, and talk about it in a positive light when her whole point at being there is to do so.
    Gender and ethnicity have no greater value then the other gender or ethnic group in the eyes of the law, unless, UNLESS, Congress passes legislation making it so, like AA or giving illegal aliens in state tuition. The eyes of justice should be blind to all genders and ethnic groups, neither of those should be in play when deciding the outcome.

    Its that simple.

  10. #210
    Professor
    WillRockwell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    07-10-10 @ 09:48 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,950

    Re: W.H. to Sotomayor critics: Be 'careful'

    Quote Originally Posted by TheHat View Post
    Really? Democrats didnt go after him based on race alone? His race was 1 of the reasons the DNC special interests gave to stonewall his appointment. As DNC memos prove.

    See below:

    Featured Article - WSJ.com



    Pretty easy to see, that they went off of race alone as 1 of the qualifiers here on Estrada.

    Now, we have Sotomayor who has basically said she would be better then any white guy simply b/c she is Latino.
    for all the reprints of the WSJ story, I have yet to see who wrote "he is Latino". It seems to have been a nameless lobbyist, and as such, can safely be ignored.

Page 21 of 41 FirstFirst ... 11192021222331 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •