Obama nominates racist to Supreme Court - she believes Hispanics are better than white people

[scandal 951]

Huge debate going on right now about this one. Whether Sotomayor is the first Hispanic in this case, or if it was Cardoso. A lot of peepz are getting their panties in a wad over this. I personally don't care, since I think the whole "Hispanic-Latino-whatever" label is a piece of #######. And I luvz my Portuguese and Brazilian peepz

I'm not so crazy about my Brazilian ex-wife.

[Chica Yeyé 41]

Huge debate going on right now about this one. Whether Sotomayor is the first Hispanic in this case, or if it was Cardoso. A lot of peepz are getting their panties in a wad over this. I personally don't care, since I think the whole "Hispanic-Latino-whatever" label is a piece of #######. And I luvz my Portuguese and Brazilian peepz

I'm not so crazy about my Brazilian ex-wife.

I know brother --- she is a BFC.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Huge debate going on right now about this one.

people need to get lives.

Yiou mean this ain't living?

[Chica Yeyé 41]

Huge debate going on right now about this one.

people need to get lives.

Yiou mean this ain't living?

I know, wth!!!

[Caladan 19]

With all the evidence in Soto's background pretty much proving she's a left-wing radical "i hate whitey" type.. is it possible Obama's putting this out there knowing full well she can not (maybe even should not?) be confirmed?

She's a centrist, she's pro-business enough to be confirmed easily. And here's the full context for that quote. In context, it's the shocking, shocking claim that someone having different experiences may give them a different perspective on the law and its effects, but that any judge who puts in the time and effort can do so regardless of race:

"....Whether born from experience or inherent physiological or cultural differences, a possibility I abhor less or discount less than my colleague Judge Cedarbaum, our gender and national origins may and will make a difference in our judging. 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 Justice O’Connor is the author of that line since Professor Resnik attributes that line to Supreme Court Justice Coyle. I am also not so sure that I agree with the statement. First, as Professor Martha Minnow has noted, 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.

Let us not forget that wise men like Oliver Wendell Holmes and Justice Cardozo voted on cases which upheld both sex and race discrimination in our society. Until 1972, no Supreme Court case ever upheld the claim of a woman in a gender discrimination case. 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. Many are so capable. As Judge Cedarbaum pointed out to me, nine white men on the Supreme Court in the past have done so on many occasions and on many issues including Brown.

However, to understand takes time and effort, something that not all people are willing to give. For others, their experiences limit their ability to understand the experiences of others. Other simply do not care. Hence, one must accept the proposition that a difference there will be by the presence of women and people of color on the bench. Personal experiences affect the facts that judges choose to see. My hope is that I will take the good from my experiences and extrapolate them further into areas with which I am unfamiliar. I simply do not know exactly what that difference will be in my judging. But I accept there will be some based on my gender and my Latina heritage.”

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

The news media aren't interested in context - certainly not when it robs them of a salacious headline.

Making the mundane into the outrageous is sort of a stock trade - and people fall for it every time (after all, its easier to read a soundbite rather than a full transcript of a court ruling). Laziness continues to breed ignorance - and the talking heads love that $hit - as it gets their books off the shelves.

Edited May 27, 2009 by Private Pike

[spookyturtle 9,465]

The news media aren't interested in context -

Neither is VJ

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

The news media aren't interested in context -

Neither is VJ

Yeah not really.

LAHGAH LAHTAY sippin' Marc might disagree however.

[spookyturtle 9,465]

The news media aren't interested in context -

Neither is VJ

Yeah not really.

LAHGAH LAHTAY sippin' Marc might disagree however.

You better be careful or he won't be your pal anymore.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Yeah no more quick-witted silver tongued reamings for me. That would be a shame

[_Simpson_ 250]

doesnt sound racist to me. I dont get why she didnt just say male instead of white male. The next paragraph talks about Wendell Holmes and Justice Cardozo and how they voted to upheld both sex and race discrimination in our society. Both white males, that was probably her frame of mind at the time.

What is the context of this entire statement, is she one of those I am woman hear me roar types?

Edited May 27, 2009 by looking_up

[Caladan 19]

The speech was given to a group who was discussing issues of diversity in the legal profession. It's not like she just decided to talk about it! It was the subject of a panel discussion, iirc.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

... is she one of those I am woman hear me roar types?

those bichez are annoying.

[Chica Yeyé 41]

... is she one of those I am woman hear me roar types?

those bichez are annoying.

[_Simpson_ 250]

... is she one of those I am woman hear me roar types?

those bichez are annoying.

They are annoying especially in this day and age when woman have equal rights.