• 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'

No..now we are going to have more of a level playing field..
We?

Unless you're a charter member of the Klan with the tan, there's nothing here for any "we".
 
We?

Unless you're a charter member of the Klan with the tan, there's nothing here for any "we".

"WE" as in we the people who actually give a crap that the supreme court has Judges who represent the ENTIRE scope of America across the board.

Tell me who do you think the President should have nominated that would more support the views you want represented in the Supreme Court?
 
Last edited:
Doeas anyone have a link to those 2001 remarks of hers so that we can reaqd them IN CONTEXT and possibly not OUT OF CONTEXT.

Why don't you find them... are you talking about the one where she said a latino female is wiser then a white man?

In a speech published in the Berkeley La Raza Law Journal in 2002, Judge Sotomayor offered her own interpretation of this jurisprudence. "Justice [Sandra Day] 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," she declared. "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."
The 'Empathy' Nominee - WSJ.com

In April, the Supreme Court overturned 6-3 her 2007 ruling in Riverkeeper v. EPA in which she found that the EPA could not consider cost-benefit analysis in judging whether companies need to upgrade to the best technology available, even when the costs were wholly disproportionate to the benefits. And in the 2006 case of Merrill Lynch v. Dabit, the Court ruled 8-0 to overturn her position that a state class-action lawsuit against Merrill Lynch was not pre-empted by federal law.
 
A intelligent latino woman would be just the change this country needs on the Supreme Court..

The chances are really good that the will act in more of a responsible manner than any of the old white farts that have been in Washington over the last eight years who were only concerned about their party. That's why they had no problems with dragging our country into the sewer before they got booted out.

Bye Bye old white fart politics.....good riddance..
 
A intelligent latino woman would be just the change this country needs on the Supreme Court..

The chances are really good that the will act in more of a responsible manner than any of the old white farts that have been in Washington over the last eight years who were only concerned about their party. That's why they had no problems with dragging our country into the sewer before they got booted out.

Bye Bye old white fart politics.....good riddance..

Yeah, cause the constitution should be judged based on ones personal race.
 
Why don't you find them... are you talking about the one where she said a latino female is wiser then a white man?


The 'Empathy' Nominee - WSJ.com

I am not upset with that quote because reaching a better "conclusion" does not mean that she is calling the old white men less wise but possibly that her conclusion could be better becasuse of her experiences which are diferent than the old white men.

So it's not a take away from the old white men but an additive by her experiences.

Isn't that possible !!!!!
 
A intelligent latino woman would be just the change this country needs on the Supreme Court..

The chances are really good that the will act in more of a responsible manner than any of the old white farts that have been in Washington over the last eight years who were only concerned about their party. That's why they had no problems with dragging our country into the sewer before they got booted out.

Bye Bye old white fart politics.....good riddance..

"old white fart politics" is not a racist statement because a liberal said it, and it is about white people, and yet there is no double standard and no hypocrisy or shame.
 
"old white fart politics" is not a racist statement because a liberal said it, and it is about white people, and yet there is no double standard and no hypocrisy or shame.

It's about the way our nation has been run for the last 200 plus years..

It's about time we wake up and change..
 
I am not upset with that quote because reaching a better "conclusion" does not mean that she is calling the old white men less wise but possibly that her conclusion could be better becasuse of her experiences which are diferent than the old white men.

So it's not a take away from the old white men but an additive by her experiences.

Isn't that possible !!!!!

I think when you read her speech in its entirety the whole thing only becomes more worrisome. Blah blah blahing on about everything from pig intestines to beaming with pride that inevitably her being a woman and a Hispanic will absolutely effect her ruling on the bench. She's overcome with elation about this, has zero shame, and makes no apologies from what I can tell. Her biggest concern seems to be limited to getting more people of color and women on the bench so that together they can exact change and measure that change with the acuity with which they proudly measure skin color I suppose.

She's all about being Latino. Beaming with her Latino-ness and her femaleness and how she can't wait for that to have it's effect on the bench and her rulings.

Heaven help us. As a woman I'm embarrassed.

I can only imagine if a man went on about his manliness and his cultural upbringing of steak and potatoes and how he positively can't wait for his dick and pale skin to have an effect on his rulings, an inevitable effect, one he is proud of.

The speech reeks of, "Do not be blind to color. COLOR IS ALL THAT GOD DAMN MATTERS...that and HAVING A VAGINA!

Good freaking lord.
 
Last edited:
I think when you read her speech in its entirety the whole thing only becomes more worrisome. Blah blah blahing on about everything from pig intestines to beaming with pride that inevitably her being a woman and a Hispanic will absolutely effect her ruling on the bench. She's overcome with elation about this, has zero shame, and makes no apologies from what I can tell. Her biggest concern seems to be limited to getting more people of color and women on the bench so that together they can exact change and measure that change with the acuity with which they proudly measure skin color I suppose.

She's all about being Latino. Beaming with her Latino-ness and her femaleness and how she can't wait for that to have it's effect on the bench and her rulings.

Heaven help us. As a woman I'm embarrassed.

I can only imagine if a man went on about his manliness and his cultural upbringing of steak and potatoes and how he positively can't wait for his dick and pale skin to have an effect on his rulings, an inevitable effect, one he is proud of.

The speech reeks of, "Do not be blind to color. COLOR IS ALL THAT GOD DAMN MATTERS...that and HAVING A VAGINA!

Good freaking lord.

Sounds like Palin's qualifications...white and a vagina...like her hero Hillary.
 
I am not upset with that quote because reaching a better "conclusion" does not mean that she is calling the old white men less wise but possibly that her conclusion could be better becasuse of her experiences which are diferent than the old white men.

So it's not a take away from the old white men but an additive by her experiences.

Isn't that possible !!!!!

If it is possible that she's better for being latino and female then it's alternately also possible that a man is better for being white and having a penis. And when we're talking "better" there's usually a winner. Which is why this talk is unprofessional and most certainly doesn't belong anywhere near a bench IMO.

Arguing for equality is one thing. But when judges start talking about how their vajayjay and the fact that they grew up eating pig intestines makes them superior we ought to run screaming from the room. Maybe that's just me though.
 
It's about the way our nation has been run for the last 200 plus years..

It's about time we wake up and change..

Somehow the same policies are different if they are instituted by someone of a different race.
 
It's actually a good read her speech. She literally talks about pig intestines TWICE to drive home the point she's Latino. Who knew? I'm positive all that woofing down of pig intestine will absolutely probably add something to the bench. :doh
 
Somehow the same policies are different if they are instituted by someone of a different race.

Has our society change or evolved in several ways reguarding race and heritage over the last 200 years? Shouldn't everybody in every race and every economic level have equal representation in the Supreme court?

It has nothing to do with race. It has more to do with equal representation of the way our society has evolved and will continue to evolve.

Stuck in the past is not a good place to be.
 
Its stupid to praise someone on race alone but she is not exactly unqualified now is she? But whatever rocks their boat, i am merely clarifying what i think WH was saying 'be careful' on.

Unqualified? No but her racism and sexism should make her disqualified.
 
Has our society change or evolved in several ways reguarding race and heritage over the last 200 years? Shouldn't everybody in every race and every economic level have equal representation in the Supreme court?

It has nothing to do with race. It has more to do with equal representation of the way our society has evolved and will continue to evolve.

Stuck in the past is not a good place to be.

So you feel that ones race and sex should have bearing on how they judge rather than the law itself? Law is objective not subjective, she's disqualified next.
 
It's about the way our nation has been run for the last 200 plus years..

It's about time we wake up and change..

Yeah, time to try that third world approach of socialism and mediocrity.

Instead of changing America, why not move to a country that suits you? I know that's a crazy concept, but really if America sucks being a country of individual freedom, personal liberty and it's up to you whether you succeed or fail isn't your gig..

GTFO.
 
Back
Top Bottom