Exactly. No white male is ever treated unfairly, and every minority is fair-minded. To think otherwise, or worse yet claim a slight by an Under-Represented Minority, is pure racism and crimethink. Other races Want to be Treated in an Egalitarian Manner, but whites Protect White Empowerment™.
What kind of crappy society do we live in where someone is bashed upside the head for something they carelessly said a long time ago, while their judicial record,resume, credentials, and yes background are ignored?
Poor people and minority groups are disproportionately represented in the court system. How anyone can just shrug their shoulders and think “No big deal” when almost all of our Supreme Court justices are privledged white men is completely beyond me.
The same people who are calling this woman racist for ONE comment are the exact same ones who jump to the defense of Rush Limbaugh whenever he spews racial shit ALL THE DAMN TIME. I’m sick of conservatives, their hypocrisy, and the faux outrage that functions as political discourse nowadays.
This really rings true to me, as well. I think they have simply gone mad with their lack of power.
To be fair (and balanced), they’ve been travelling down that road for a long time; their mashing the gas pedal to the floorboards now, it seems to me, is merely an inevitable eruption of frustration as they discover that their road map has led them into a ditch running into a ravine.
Power corrupts, absent power corrupts in absentia.
"I would hope that a wise <ethnicity> <gender>, with the richness of <gender> experiences would, more often than not, reach a better conclusion than a <ethnicity> <gender> who hasn’t lived that life.
That’s a very troubling statement from a judge, regardless of which gender or ethnic heritage they are. Its not as if one particular gender or ethnic heritage combination renders that statement palatable, while other combinations make it offensive. It’s racist and sexist no matter what.
Knorf? Miller? Were you able to understand it that time?
And once again, you completely omitted the context. Good job.
I’ve read the speech. Nothing in it, in my opinion, renders her quote non-sexist and non-racist. Inclusion of the entire text of the speech wouldn’t have made a difference.
Now if you would, please, present the context which you believe renders the quote non-sexist and non-racist.
Yes, the suggestion that offering a differing perspective, a different experience, more diversity, might bring a better conclusion, HOW DARE SHE!!!
I’m only mildly interested in the outcome of the proceedings and I see nothing wrong with Sotomayor other than she looks funny (but I think that of many a judge at any level).
Rather than quote many people, I’ll just throw this out there: exactly what context was the purported quote made? And, how accurate is the quote? Neither link shows the quote or its context.
So far, I fail to see (only because I’m not thinking too deeply about it) how Jimmy Joe Meager’s objective rendering (assuming if true) is appropriate in any context. Please enlighten.
Now *that’s *a strawman!
SEXISM! The preferred term is “strawperson”.
I stand humbly corrected.
Here is a discussion of the actual speech and
here is the actual speech.
and here are Alioto and Scalia making the same basic claims, but oriented toward the white boys (or old white men).
No, they don’t.
tomndebb, in the links you provided Scalia doesn’t address the issue at hand at all (that a specific gender/ethnicity combination might result in reaching a “better” decision than another specific gender/ethnicity combination), and Alito simply says that his background (in which I will include his gender and ethnicity) influences him. Specifically “…how my background and my experiences have shaped me and brought me to this point.” and “I have to think about people in my own family who suffered discrimination because of their ethnic background or because of religion or because of gender. And I do take that into account.”
He does not, as Sotomayor specifically does, claim that his gender and ethnicity might allow for him to make a “better” decision than someone of a different gender and ethinicity. If he does and I missed it, can you please point it out?
So no… Alito and Scalia are not “making the same basic claims”.
All things being equal, does taking more of the externalities of a possible ruling into account have a better, worse, or purely neutral effect on the judgment itself?
The problem is not lack of understanding. The problem is that you’re wrong.
Too bad you have reading comprehension problems. You also clearly don’t understand what racism is. Her statement, even out of context, is not racist for any non-useless definition of racism.
But here’s a further comment from Ms. Sotomayor for the reading comprehension-challenged:
Sorry missed the edit window for the previous post.
So let me get this straight, Sotomatyor has the audacity to calim that she mioght have a better perspective and come to amore infomred opinion because in some cases she might have a better understanding of it thatn say a white priviledged male?? The empathy you say!!!
You know what, there are also cses where a white maole could come upon a more infromed, hence better conclusion. Do people honeslty think that judges are som sort of judement rendering robots?? Her case history belies any attempt to paint her as some sort of racist.
Look at the case histroy, please, and find me the evidence.