• 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'

vendur said:
I don't know if you are a little slow or just lack basic reading comprehension, but he is saying he has to take account of those things personally, and that they do not impact his decisions as a judge. He's saying: yes, I have empathy but it does not effect my rulings.

The question posed to him was basically "You have been branded here as an uncaring azzhole who doesn't care about anyone but rich white people, what can you tell us to contradict that?"
Click to expand...

Read the quote again. Here, I will quote the important part:

Judge Alito said:
And I do take that into account.
Click to expand...

He does take his experiences into account. In other words, you are wrong. In fact, if you where to read his full comments, and read the full lecture that Sotomayer gave, you would see a remarkable similarity.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
I've read some stuff from them in the past that could definitely be considered bigoted.

I hate the word racist, most people don't even use it correctly.
Its almost lost its whole meaning from improper usage.
Click to expand...

Still not meaning much. Some people find the ACLU and NRA as offensive, but both serve a function in today's society. Without evidence, the La Raza accusation is even weaker than the yearbook quote accusation.
 
The fact that Newt, Rush and the other doomsdayers are crying about Sotomayer proves that they are in fact the one's that are Racists.

More of the same old "SORE LOSER" whining...
 
Redress said:
Read the quote again. Here, I will quote the important part:



He does take his experiences into account. In other words, you are wrong. In fact, if you where to read his full comments, and read the full lecture that Sotomayer gave, you would see a remarkable similarity.
Click to expand...

There is a similary in that they are polar opposites when it comes to the laying down the law. Alito says he has empathy for people in certain situations, that while those things may affect him personally, they do not affect his judgments. While Sotomayor says it's more or less impossible for it not to affect her judgments.

Bolded for the thinking impaired.
 
Redress said:
Still not meaning much. Some people find the ACLU and NRA as offensive, but both serve a function in today's society. Without evidence, the La Raza accusation is even weaker than the yearbook quote accusation.
Click to expand...

Ok for one thing, I know La Raza supports or at least gives coverage to the Aztlan movement. That has been documented already, and at this very moment I'm trying to find a link that you will accept as non biased.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
Ok for one thing, I know La Raza supports or at least gives coverage to the Aztlan movement. That has been documented already, and at this very moment I'm trying to find a link that you will accept as non biased.
Click to expand...

Any link would do to start. I can expand and help you look for more if I don't fall asleep first.
 
vendur said:
There is a similary in that they are polar opposites when it comes to the laying down the law. Alito says he has empathy for people in certain situations, that while those things may affect him personally, they do not affect his judgments. While Sotomayor says it's more or less impossible for it not to affect her judgments.

Bolded for the thinking impaired.
Click to expand...

That is not what he said, and you are misrepresenting what Sotomayer said. Sorry, try again.
 
Redress said:
That is not what he said, and you are misrepresenting what Sotomayer said. Sorry, try again.
Click to expand...

That is what he said when you look at the question he was asked and his statement as a whole. And I'm not misrepresenting anything. You seem to be, however.
 
Ok, I got this quote from the American Bar Association:

In addition to her work on the bench, Judge Sotomayor is an adjunct professor at New York University School of Law and a lecturer-in-law at Columbia Law School. She is a member of the American Bar Association, the New York Women’s Bar Association, the Puerto Rican Bar Association, the Hispanic National Bar Association, the Association of Judges of Hispanic Heritage, and the National Council of La Raza. She has received many honors including, most recently, an award from the National Association of Women Lawyers.
Click to expand...

Source: Division for Public Education: National Hispanic Heritage Month -- Sonia Sotomayor

I read that as she belongs to a whole bunch of legal and advocacy groups, probably not real actively involved in any. Brief scan looks like La Raza does soem good stuff, and goes overboard with some stuff, so very like the ACLU or NRA.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
Actually many of the things she lists are facts, however, I am terrible at finding old stories which would prove them true.

He wanted something to start with and that is all I have at the moment.
Click to expand...

Yes I have looked myself and there is not much info on La Raza..nice try though..
 
OK, now this is hilarious:

AG nominee member of La Raza

Alberto Gonzales served with distinction on the board of directors of one of NCLR’s oldest and most respected affiliates, the Association for the Advancement of Mexican Americans in Houston, Texas," she said. "Moreover, during his tenure as White House counsel, he has been one of the most accessible members of the White House staff to NCLR and other Hispanic organizations
Click to expand...
 
Redress said:
Ok, I got this quote from the American Bar Association:



Source: Division for Public Education: National Hispanic Heritage Month -- Sonia Sotomayor

I read that as she belongs to a whole bunch of legal and advocacy groups, probably not real actively involved in any. Brief scan looks like La Raza does soem good stuff, and goes overboard with some stuff, so very like the ACLU or NRA.
Click to expand...

I'm not completely opposed to someone belonging to a group that supports their ideals but at the same time I do believe that some of those ideals are inherently bigoted.

I'd completely support the ACLU if they would change their stance on the 2nd amendment but they won't.

For clarification, the literal translation of "La Raza" mean "The Race", the intended meaning is "The People". So that isn't inherently bad but again I have a lot of reservations about them from previous stories.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
For clarification, the literal translation of "La Raza" mean "The Race", the intended meaning is "The People". So that isn't inherently bad but again I have a lot of reservations about them from previous stories.
Click to expand...

I was just thinking about posting that. the quote I read was this:

"As noted in several online dictionaries, 'La Raza' means 'the people' or 'the community,' " the group says on its Web site. "Translating our name as 'the race' is not only inaccurate, it is factually incorrect."
Click to expand...

Latino organizations' names raise controversy

By the way, did you catch that both Obama and McCain spoke at a La Raza convention July of last year?
 
Redress said:
I was just thinking about posting that. the quote I read was this:



Latino organizations' names raise controversy

By the way, did you catch that both Obama and McCain spoke at a La Raza convention July of last year?
Click to expand...

Seriously, that is one of the many reasons I don't vote.

All they are doing is pandering. Its insulting, at least to me, that someone only snuggles up to you to get a vote.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
Seriously, that is one of the many reasons I don't vote.

All they are doing is pandering. Its insulting, at least to me, that someone only snuggles up to you to get a vote.
Click to expand...

The group is not what the "right" is attempting to portray is as....I'm not suprised.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
Seriously, that is one of the many reasons I don't vote.

All they are doing is pandering. Its insulting, at least to me, that someone only snuggles up to you to get a vote.
Click to expand...

I know what you are saying, but as long as we pick our presidents based on a popularity contest(ie, an election), it's inevitable. And I can't think of a system I would prefer.
 
goldendog said:
The group is not what the "right" is attempting to portray is as....I'm not suprised.
Click to expand...

They are certainly dumbassing themselves into a corner.

You and I probably won't agree on a lot of things but I dislike Sotomayor mainly because she, like many other political picks, implies that she will use emotion when deciding cases.

In deciding law, emotion must be left out. Law exists to separate emotional reactions from rational reactions.

A comparison would be a lynch mob killing someone because they want justice now when they haven't reviewed if that person even did the deed.

Redress said:
I know what you are saying, but as long as we pick our presidents based on a popularity contest(ie, an election), it's inevitable. And I can't think of a system I would prefer.
Click to expand...

I don't agree with universal voting rights. Voting is a privilege that people should earn and it should not be given out so freely.

Since it is handed out for nothing people treat it as such.
They don't research a candidates principals and just take them at their word when it may not even be logically possible.
 
jallman said:
When you actually sit on a court and judge, aps, I'll take your words seriously. :shrug:

This is a discussion forum, not monster.com. We aren't looking for people's resumes here...we're looking for their opinions.
Click to expand...

Well, considering that I have sat on a "court" and judged, I think I can speak from experience. Thank you very much.

It is stunning to me how many of you people THINK you have an understanding of applying facts to laws and think that there's only one way to interpret the law. If that was the case, we wouldn't need a Supreme Court or the Supreme Court rulings would all be 9-0.
 
aps said:
It is stunning to me how many of you people THINK you have an understanding of applying facts to laws and think that there's only one way to interpret the law. If that was the case, we wouldn't need a Supreme Court or the Supreme Court rulings would all be 9-0.
Click to expand...

This is what I have been trying to say, but no one believes me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom