• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

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

Zyphlin said:
More than happy to do this if many leftists, including some on this forum such as aps, aren't sitting here telling us its a good confirmation and a needed one because she's female and hispanic.

You can't say "racial issues are a benefit to her being nominated" and then turn around and go "you can't talk about racial issues".
Click to expand...

That is true and perhaps for that argument to hold any weight, they need to lay off the fact it is a female and hispanic and concentrate on her qualifications.
 
Laila said:
Beats having no experience or education, so in that sense she is qualified for SC.
Click to expand...

I agree.


Laila said:
Whether you agree with her is another issue.
No one must have seriously expected a Democrat president to nominate a strict constructionist, conservative justice right?
Click to expand...

I know I didn't expect it.


My question was more along the lines of, assuming what she said was racist, and that she herself is racist, does her resume make that okay?

Note to the peanut gallery: I am not saying that Sotomayor is a racist, so chill.
 
Zyphlin said:
More than happy to do this if many leftists, including some on this forum such as aps, aren't sitting here telling us its a good confirmation and a needed one because she's female and hispanic.

You can't say "racial issues are a benefit to her being nominated" and then turn around and go "you can't talk about racial issues".
Click to expand...

I think this is a misrepresentation. I don't think any one is saying she is a good choice because she is a latino female, but that being a latino female is a bonus to a qualified candidate in this case.

I also took the comment from the white house to be to tone down the rhetoric on racism, not that race could not be discussed. I admit to partisanship, and may be seeing what I want to...but I don't think that is the case this time.
 
Redress said:
I think this is a misrepresentation. I don't think any one is saying she is a good choice because she is a latino female, but that being a latino female is a bonus to a qualified candidate in this case.
Click to expand...

6 of one, half dozen of the other. You can't expect to call on her race and gender to bolster her qualifications without expecting a rebuttal to race and gender.:doh
 
FlappyTheKinkajou said:
When was this?
Click to expand...
Last November, when the mental midget Dear Leader was elected to an office considerably above the pay grade he deserves flipping burgers at the local Golden Arches in a display of national idiocy.
 
celticlord said:
Last November, when the mental midget Dear Leader was elected to an office considerably above the pay grade he deserves flipping burgers at the local Golden Arches in a display of national idiocy.
Click to expand...

That was not a revolution.
 
FlappyTheKinkajou said:
The fact that my contribution to the debate doesn't matter because it disagrees with the guys in power.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry what?
When did i say your view didn't matter ... :doh
 
jallman said:
6 of one, half dozen of the other. You can't expect to call on her race and gender to bolster her qualifications without expecting a rebuttal to race and gender.:doh
Click to expand...

I dunno. If she is qualified, her gender/race is irrelevant. If she is not, her gender/race are irrelevant.

if there are 10 qualified candidates all equal, and diversity is a goal, then promoting the one who best increases diversity is fine, but she is still qualified.
 
FlappyTheKinkajou said:
You said that it bore no wieght.
Click to expand...

... No i didn't.
I said the power over SC is in the hands of the Senate and President.

Just re read the thread and save us both time
 
"Be careful" or what????


...at this point (though it may be early yet) I feel like 'bring it on.' :roll:
 
Redress said:
I dunno. If she is qualified, her gender/race is irrelevant. If she is not, her gender/race are irrelevant.

if there are 10 qualified candidates all equal, and diversity is a goal, then promoting the one who best increases diversity is fine, but she is still qualified.
Click to expand...

I dunno. I think that the whole tone of this confirmation is already taking a bad turn and smacks of another affirmative action appointment. But what the hell, we already have an affirmative action president. Why not a justice too?
 
tlmorg02 said:
Here: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/15/us/15judge.html?_r=1

Same end result though, cherry picking, partisan garbage is what is being spewed. Sorry to shine light into the dark.
Click to expand...

Sounds more like you want to turn off any light that looks at her comments. Some of her comments are disturbing, but we'll see what happens. I don't think she'll have any trouble being confirmed. She's not a conservative, after all, so her comments will be mostly ignored.
 
jallman said:
I dunno. I think that the whole tone of this confirmation is already taking a bad turn and smacks of another affirmative action appointment. But what the hell, we already have an affirmative action president. Why not a justice too?
Click to expand...

Affirmative action will not get you the presidency. Sorry to disappoint you, but that is not how President Obama got the office. Your comment also does not disprove or even suggest that somehow Sotomayor is unqualified. The constitution says that the president picks, it does not tell him how to make the decision.
 
Redress said:
Affirmative action will not get you the presidency. Sorry to disappoint you, but that is not how President Obama got the office. Your comment also does not disprove or even suggest that somehow Sotomayor is unqualified. The constitution says that the president picks, it does not tell him how to make the decision.
Click to expand...

Obama won the presidency because the guy in office before him screwed up. He didn't win it on merit. He didn't win it on skill or policy. He won it because America was ripe for making an historic move in voting a black man into office because we were sick of old white men.

If he had to do it on merit, he wouldn't have made it out of the primaries.
 
jallman said:
Obama won the presidency because the guy in office before him screwed up. He didn't win it on merit. He didn't win it on skill or policy. He won it because America was ripe for making an historic move in voting a black man into office because we were sick of old white men.

If he had to do it on merit, he wouldn't have made it out of the primaries.
Click to expand...

The person he beat in the primaries was not an old white man either. Let's not go there though, since I was a huge Clinton supporter....
 
FlappyTheKinkajou said:
Yes you did.
Click to expand...

God give me patience :doh

FlappyTheKinkajou said:
The Supreme Court has no room for living constitution ****heads.
Click to expand...

Laila said:
That is for the President and Senate to decide no?
Click to expand...

FlappyTheKinkajou said:
So you admit that they don't care about justice or the constitution?
Click to expand...

Laila said:
What has that got to do with anything?
You don't get to decide what the SC needs or don't. The power is in the hand of the Senate and President.
Click to expand...

Where in that did i say you had no opinion? :roll:
 
jallman said:
6 of one, half dozen of the other. You can't expect to call on her race and gender to bolster her qualifications without expecting a rebuttal to race and gender.:doh
Click to expand...

I think we're supposed to see her as a benefit because she will help minorities get jobs over white folk, just like she got this nomination - by being lucky enough to be a Hispanic woman when a Hispanic woman was wanted. She understands what it is like to be a minority and thus if say some fire fighters have to pass an exam to become lieutenant and only mostly whites pass she can agree that, Yes, the test results should be put in the garbage as they are clearly racist. It's about keeping racism alive by supporting reverse racism. Keep 'em fighting each other so they don't fight the system. This is what she will bring and this is what Obama was looking for. Yippee.
 
Redress said:
The person he beat in the primaries was not an old white man either. Let's not go there though, since I was a huge Clinton supporter....
Click to expand...

Had it been down to Hillary and McCain, I probably would have voted for Hillary, actually.

And no, she wasn't an old white man, but her legacy was tied strongly to one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom