Buchanan: Sotomayor Must Have Been An ‘Affirmative Action’ Nominee Since No White Men Were Finalists
Buchanan: Sotomayor Must Have Been An ‘Affirmative Action’ Nominee Since No White Men Were Finalists
Today on MSNBC, right-wing pundit Pat Buchanan attacked Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor as an “affirmative action candidate.” He was unable to cite any evidence that she was unqualified, instead pointing to the fact that President Obama’s top four candidates for the spot were women. Because there were no white men in the final round, Buchanan was convinced that the whole selection process was rigged.
Host Norah O’Donnell pointed out that women have also been left out of serious consideration in the past and maybe “there weren’t any white men who were qualified” who were qualified this time. Buchanan responded that she was being bigoted. When guest Lawrence O’Donnell asked him if he would have been similarly outraged if it had been all men — and no women — as finalists, Buchanan avoided the question:
BUCHANAN: Look, are you going to let me talk, Lawrence? You got down to four women, not a single white male — all women.
NORAH O’DONNELL: Did it ever occur to you, Pat, that maybe there weren’t any white men who were qualified?
BUCHANAN: Yes. No, it did not occur to me. You mean there are no white males qualified? That would be an act of bigotry to make a statement like that. [...]
LAWRENCE O’DONNELL: Well Pat, if it gets down to four, you’re suggesting it’s an absolute outrage if the final four are women. If got down to final four and they were all white men, would that bother you in the least?
BUCHANAN: I don’t say it’s an outrage, I say it’s affirmative action. They were picked because she’s a woman and a Hispanic and you know it as well as I do.
Watch it:
We can always count on Buchanan to advocate in favor of a system that guarantees advantages for white men. With his arguments that slavery was a good thing for black people (“It was here that 600,000 black people, brought from Africa in slave ships, grew into a community of 40 million”), wishing for a country where whites comprise 89 or 90 percent of the population, or saying that Hispanics “do not wish to assimilate,” Buchanan has little credibility left on issues of what is fair on race and gender.
“It’s like watching a dead fish flop around on the deck,” said Lawrence O’Donnell at the end of the segment. “You’re dead on this one, Pat. It’s all over.”
Transcript:
BUCHANAN: Look, are you going to let me talk, Lawrence? You got down to four women, not a single white male — all women.
NORAH O’DONNELL: Did it ever occur to you, Pat, that maybe there weren’t any white men who were qualified?
BUCHANAN: Yes. No, it did not occur to me. You mean there are no white males qualified? That would be an act of bigotry to make a statement like that.
NORAH O’DONNELL: In the past there have been no women that have been qualified.
BUCHANAN: They certainly have been qualified in the past. I don’t doubt that they are. But probably half of the great lawyers and judges are white males in this country. To rule them out, why? Because of sex and because of their race is wrong, I think. At least it’s affirmative action.
NORAH O’DONNELL: I don’t think you have proof that they did that. The President reportedly —
BUCHANAN: How did he come down to four women?
NORAH O’DONNELL: He said that they were the best and met the views that he had, the particular criteria.
BUCHANAN: In other words what were the criteria? One it’s got to be a woman, the other it’s an Hispanic — that’s affirmative action.
NORAH O’DONNELL: Lawrence, do you want to offer a rejoinder to that?
LAWRENCE O’DONNELL: Well Pat, if it gets down to four, you’re suggesting it’s an absolute outrage if the final four are women. If got down to final four and they were all white men, would that bother you in the least?
BUCHANAN: I don’t say it’s an outrage, I say it’s affirmative action. They were picked because she’s a woman and a Hispanic and you know it as well as I do. [...]
LAWRENCE O’DONNELL: Hopeless argument, Pat. It’s like watching a dead fish flop around on the deck. You’re dead on this one, Pat. It’s all over.
BUCHANAN: If we’re held now, we’d be goners. But I’ll tell you this — let me bet, I’ll disagree with Joe, there will be more than 15 votes against her. If more comes up, there will be more votes. This just started.
LAWRENCE O’DONNELL: Wow, wow. Fifteen.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Bachmann got where she is because of affirmative action for dimwits.
It’s true!
May 27th, 2009 at 4:35 pmYes, the top candidates were women. So what. Perhaps President Obama is trying to correct an imbalance on the court. Women consist of over 50% of our population and yet there is only one woman on the Supreme Court. It seems to me that since the Supreme Court makes decisions that affect everyone in this country, it should at least come close to representing the diversity of this country. Right now the court is inhabited by white males and one female. That is not representative of our country. And, please don’t tell me that Clarence Thomas is black because that is only the color of his skin. Who he is and what he represents is white male.
May 27th, 2009 at 4:35 pmGeesh, Pat – RETIRE ALREADY, you obsolete old fart!!
May 27th, 2009 at 4:35 pmAnd we all know that what the world really needs is more old white men rehashing the same ideas.
May 27th, 2009 at 4:37 pmIt’s amazing that all it took to boil over the bubbling cesspool of racism in idiots like Buchanan and Bachmann, was one black President and one potential Hispanic woman on the Supreme Court.
May 27th, 2009 at 4:37 pmHey, it’s not Obama’s fault that white men aren’t good enough. Maybe they should work harder to become qualified in the future, instead of sitting in trailer parks and swigging six packs while stealing my taxes in the form of unemployment checks.
May 27th, 2009 at 4:37 pmPat’s right. The one thing we really need is more white men in all three branches of our government.
PEACE
May 27th, 2009 at 4:38 pmDoesn’t he realize that bloviating, saggy white conservative males over the age of 50 (I am being kind) are the new minority?
May 27th, 2009 at 4:38 pmPresident Obama has demonstrated his commitment to opportunity for all by handing bigots this golden opportunity to shout their bigotry from the rooftops.
May 27th, 2009 at 4:40 pmWhen Pat gets riled up, his voice sounds like air being slowly released from a balloon.
May 27th, 2009 at 4:40 pmAnd the troll Godwins the discussion in the ninth comment!
Is that a new record?
May 27th, 2009 at 4:40 pmFlag the meth-addicted troll.
**eyes rolling**
May 27th, 2009 at 4:40 pmThe fact that obama is closing down dealers that are making a profit based solely on the fact that said stores donated to the RNC during the election makes him WORSE THAN HITLER!
May 27th, 2009 at 4:41 pm—-
This begs a citation….
obamawipe$ Says:
What does the judicial nominee think about being used a pawn to wipe the Chrysler story off the front page?
Probably something like “I’m going to get to be a Supreme Court Justice! Awesome!”
.
obamawipe$ Says:
The fact that obama is closing down dealers that are making a profit based solely on the fact that said stores donated to the RNC during the election makes him WORSE THAN HITLER!
Excellent fail there, Mr. Godwin. Also – citation please?
May 27th, 2009 at 4:43 pmHey Pat. Kiss the Latino vote away for a LONG time…
And I don’t think women are moving your direction either.
great move–play the racist card.
These guys make choices like C. Thomas based only on race — not seeing what affirmative action really represents. As if it were a bad thing to be explicit about factors like race that are ALWAYS considered. It just can’t be the only thing. Clearly Sotomayor’s race is not the only (or even primary) consideration.
The right should be happy Obama didn’t push a hard leftie at them — like they did with Alito and Scalia.
May 27th, 2009 at 4:45 pmralph the wonder locust Says:
Is that a new record?
I don’t know, but I’m going to give it extra style points for the all-caps detour through the guardrails right at the end of saying something potentially interesting.
.
dbadass Says:
This begs a citation….
I got five bucks says it’s freepers.
May 27th, 2009 at 4:46 pm“…not a single white male — all women”
That says it all for the GOP doesn’t it? They’re all upset because the President didn’t pick a WHITE MALE. Like enough of them haven’t already screwed up our country royally, over the last few decades, but, by all means, let’s throw a few more into the mix, shall we?
Oh, how I wish MSNBC would show Pat Buchanan the door.
May 27th, 2009 at 4:46 pmobamawipe$ Says:
The fact that obama is closing down dealers that are making a profit based solely on the fact that said stores donated to the RNC during the election makes him WORSE THAN HITLER!
May 27th, 2009 at 4:39 pm
____________
Well, that’s a given – Germany’s auto industry flourished under Hitler thanks to massive wartime government investment. Of course Obama is going to look worse by comparison at a time when the auto industry is struggling. Duh!
May 27th, 2009 at 4:46 pmPat took the same position yesterday and Joan slap his dumbass around on just like Lawrence did.
May 27th, 2009 at 4:47 pmUgh, sorry about the Bachmann references — I have a migraine. I must be seeing double. So weird…
May 27th, 2009 at 4:47 pmCalling Rachel,
Pat “Grumpy Pants” Buchanan needs a spanking and his mouth washed out with soap – again.
May 27th, 2009 at 4:47 pmobamawipe$ Says:
What does the judicial nominee think about being used a pawn to wipe the Chrysler story off the front page? The fact that obama is closing down dealers that are making a profit based solely on the fact that said stores donated to the RNC during the election makes him WORSE THAN HITLER!
Actually, the dealerships closed by Chrysler were mostly those where the physical plant was not owned by Chrysler. Many dealerships with good sales records were closed. And the President had nothing to do with any of the closings. It was all corporate Chrysler. The decision on closing the non-corporate owned dealerships was based on how much of the profit was directed back to Chrysler.
But a really nifty talking point.
May 27th, 2009 at 4:49 pmI don’t mean to nitpick but I have some experience in this area. Dead fish don’t flop around on the deck. Mostly they just lay there until you pick them up…
May 27th, 2009 at 4:49 pmZooey Says:
Ugh, sorry about the Bachmann references — I have a migraine. I must be seeing double. So weird…
May 27th, 2009 at 4:47 pm
__________
Don’t feel bad. These idiots are all reading from the same sheet of talking points – it’s no wonder we can’t tell them apart.
May 27th, 2009 at 4:49 pm“BUCHANAN: Yes. No, it did not occur to me. You mean there are no white males qualified? That would be an act of bigotry to make a statement like that.”
Poor Pat – Living in the past and terrified of the future. Maybe it’s time to retire or at least not be invited back to CNBC or any reputable network.
May 27th, 2009 at 4:51 pmRegarding this fascinating notion that the White House was behind not only the decision to close Chrysler dealerships but the selection of them – here’s a link. They can tell because there’s exactly zero evidence of it, which must mean somebody’s hiding something.
I saw a Republican get in a car accident yesterday. Obama was obviously behind that too.
May 27th, 2009 at 4:51 pm- candidate Ronald Reagan, 10/14/1980
May 27th, 2009 at 4:51 pmBut but but Palin was a woman!!
May 27th, 2009 at 4:52 pmShe’s probably having too much fun kicking your flat, pasty ass all over this country that isn’t yours anymore.
May 27th, 2009 at 4:53 pmDon’t really care what type of nominee, so long as it makes loony Republicans say and do even dumber-than-imaginable things.
I’ll drink to that.
Besides, she ended the baseball strike in 1995.
Again, cheers!
May 27th, 2009 at 4:53 pmSotomayor has been nominated for the post by the President of the United States of America. He can pick whoever he damn well pleases. Buchanan is calling for affirmative action for white men here.
May 27th, 2009 at 4:54 pmNew reports suggest TP’s trolls all get together twice a week to compare urine stains in their tighty-whities. The one with the biggest stain gets to choose whether they’ll splurge on regular Cheetos, crunchy style or Flamin’ Hot.
May 27th, 2009 at 4:56 pm…probably thinking of shrubs frogs and firecrackers..
May 27th, 2009 at 4:56 pmnews reports? What kind of lame ass citation is that?
May 27th, 2009 at 4:56 pmGeeze, another old while guy complaining about not having another old white guy up for the SC. What a surprise!
May 27th, 2009 at 4:57 pmobamawipe$ Says:
New reports suggest the Chrysler dealerships that were closed down by the Obama administration were all big donors to the Republican Party.
May 27th, 2009 at 4:51 pm
____________
New reports suggest that you are a complete moron.
I just said it on a blog therefore it must be true.
May 27th, 2009 at 4:58 pmHoodathunktick Says:
Actually, the dealerships closed by Chrysler were mostly those where the physical plant was not owned by Chrysler. Many dealerships with good sales records were closed. And the President had nothing to do with any of the closings. It was all corporate Chrysler. The decision on closing the non-corporate owned dealerships was based on how much of the profit was directed back to Chrysler.
Well, one Chrysler exec when put on the spot by a reporter about how he could be doing something so horrible to those poor dealers responded that he was personally against the decision. Of course. So that means it must be Obama!
.
obamawipe$ Says:
New reports suggest…
It’s kind of funny how broadly you use the word “report.” I usually flush my “reports” right after producing them. You spread yours all around the interwebz.
May 27th, 2009 at 4:59 pmOkay, were gonna use some logic here.
How many Chrysler dealerships would have closed if they didnt get a bailout from the government? [go bankrupt]
May 27th, 2009 at 5:00 pmdbadass Says:
news reports? What kind of lame ass citation is that?
Not “news,” “new.” So it’s even lamer than you thought.
May 27th, 2009 at 5:01 pmLook, this is not just any nomination. This is a nomination for the Attorney General of the United States of America. This is the first Hispanic ever nominated for that position, or for any of the big four positions in the Cabinet of any President. … We work with Hispanic people all over America who are every bit as devoted to our country as any citizen who has ever been in this country. I personally love Hispanic people. Frankly, I know my friends in the Hispanic community, and Hispanic people all over America, are watching this debate, and they are sensing something very unfair going on here.
And to have this man come from the most humble of circumstances, which typifies the struggle every immigrant family in this country has gone through, and to not give him this opportunity when he is fully qualified for it, I think, would be a travesty.
When I talk to people around the country, I sometimes tell them that within the Hispanic community there is a shared hope for an opportunity to succeed. Just give me a chance to prove myself — that is a common prayer for those in my community. I ask my colleagues to do exactly that — give Judge Gonzales a chance to prove himself. He will not let you down.
– Orrin Hatch on Alberto Gonzales, Feb 1 2005
May 27th, 2009 at 5:03 pmYa know, Obuttwipe, I was never for Geithner…I also dont think he is a democrat.
May 27th, 2009 at 5:03 pmWow. I don’t know if I’ve ever seen a troll spin this far off course, this quickly.
It’s quite a thing to behold. Judge Sotomayor really has these clowns in a tizzy.
May 27th, 2009 at 5:04 pmOuch. Thats gonna leave a mark.
May 27th, 2009 at 5:04 pmDidn’t Ronald Reagan promise early on to nominate a woman to the SCOTUS? So, didn’t he make his choice based upon the first qualification being gender?
May 27th, 2009 at 5:05 pmAnd just look how well we “Good ‘ol white boys” have been running thing.
I had the good fortune of have dated a Feminist for a while back in the early ’70’s and she told me something that has stuck with me right up till day. She was right then, and what she told me wis still correct today.
She said “Where do you think our civilization would be today if we hadn’t been evolving using only half our brainpower?”
For millenniums it was the male that made the majority on the decisions and women were shut out. We as a civilization are now the weaker for it.
Given the chance, women are the intellectual equal of men. It is way past the time for the “Good ‘ol white boys” to get out of the way.
May 27th, 2009 at 5:05 pmBuchanan is a racist, but then again so is Sotomayor.
May 27th, 2009 at 5:06 pmWow. That really does say “new reports”! I am not sure it is fair to even belittle obamawipe$…
May 27th, 2009 at 5:08 pmBut but but we are all descendants of Noah…
May 27th, 2009 at 5:08 pmJohn “BoltCutter” M Says:
Buchanan is a racist, but then again so is Sotomayor.
May 27th, 2009 at 5:06 pm
___________
A guy like you who would chop the fingers off his own daughter to keep from getting wet is really not qualified to call anyone a racist.
May 27th, 2009 at 5:09 pmPoor Patsy – he just can’t stand it, that in a few years, white males will be a minority in this country.
Notice Buchanan-the-Bigot didn’t answer O’Donnell’s question as to whether he would be upset by a “finals” list of four white males. That’s because the answer would have been “no.”
Re=Thugs pick SC nominees because they’re WHITE and MALE. And that includes Uncle Thomas.
May 27th, 2009 at 5:09 pm*
JohnM:
May 27th, 2009 at 5:09 pmI think I already pointed out this racism canard. You know back when we talked about the invention of the internet and the trashing of the WH….
Lawrence always gets so pissed at Pat; I love it.
May 27th, 2009 at 5:10 pmAnyone that thinks Sotomayor is a racist doesn’t understand racism.
May 27th, 2009 at 5:11 pm*
Well we’re in the Chicago area and three dealers in a 5 mile radius closed. We bought parts from all of them. They’re closing dealers that make profits on used cars and are only keeping the dealers open that maintain a profit on NEW CARS. But you go ahead and run with your story nutbag.
May 27th, 2009 at 5:11 pm
May 27th, 2009 at 5:12 pmLINK?
I don’t recall whether Pat had any objections to this report three years ago:
In recent days, Bush has focused on women candidates in search of a replacement for Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, the first woman on the Supreme Court. The leading contenders, say GOP strategists, are Judges Edith Hollan Jones, Edith Brown Clement and Owen, all of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit; Janice Rogers Brown of the D.C. Circuit; and Karen Williams of the 4th Circuit.
May 27th, 2009 at 5:12 pmFYI
May 27th, 2009 at 5:13 pmOHMYGOD!
You mean that President Obama is allowing America to represent Americans!!
How dare he!!!
May 27th, 2009 at 5:13 pmGood catch Ralph!
May 27th, 2009 at 5:14 pmAnd so it’s my job to apply the law. It’s not my job to change the law or to bend the law to achieve any result.
But when I look at those cases, I have to say to myself, and I do say to myself, “You know, this could be your grandfather, this could be your grandmother. They were not citizens at one time, and they were people who came to this country.”
When I have cases involving children, I can’t help but think of my own children and think about my children being treated in the way that children may be treated in the case that’s before me.
And that goes down the line. When I get a case about discrimination, 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.
- Justice Sam Alito
May 27th, 2009 at 5:15 pmI gotta go install a water heater…
[Happy Happy Joy Joy =[
Laterz
May 27th, 2009 at 5:16 pmPat must hate it when he’s out on a date and has to keep a straight face when it comes to respecting a woman’s thoughts and all.
Are we sure “Buchanan” isn’t an ancient word meaning self-loathing, repressed Log Cabin Republican?
May 27th, 2009 at 5:17 pmEmpathist!
/snark
May 27th, 2009 at 5:17 pmJOhnM, are you still leaning on your deliberate misinterpretation of Judge Sotomayor’s speech titled “A Latina Judge’s Voice” in order to support your contention that she’s a racist?
If so, I’d like to redirect your attention to the little discussion we had earlier today.
You left without commenting on it, and now you’re here trying to sell the same crap, so I assume you didn’t see my response.
May 27th, 2009 at 5:18 pmOMG! I didn’t realize that white men were being discriminated against because they were white men!
May 27th, 2009 at 5:18 pmobamawipe$, I think you’d get more attention if you brought this information to RedState. We’re just not that into you.
Look, by pointing out that there were no white males in the “final four”, Buchanan’s pretty much dismissing the idea that this job can be done by a woman or a minority. Why shouldn’t there be four candidates who are all women? Wouldn’t you want someone to reflect society in your SCOTUS?
Of course not. Buchanan won’t be happy unless it’s HIM in the Supreme Court.
May 27th, 2009 at 5:19 pmSince Pat Buchanan is a Nazi sympathizer, maybe it’s time for ole Pat to take a trip to the death camps? Hey, he loves torture, so he’ll be in his glory! Spit.
Here’s Sotomayor’s 2002 speech in it’s entirety where she’s quoted as saying, “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”:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/15/us/politics/15judge.text.html?_r=2&pagewanted=all
May 27th, 2009 at 5:19 pmI bet Condi Rice was an affirmative action candidate as Sec. of State too. Spit.
May 27th, 2009 at 5:21 pmcaught a snippet of limpbone earlier… ‘affirmative action’ -
the latest meme evidently…
he blubbered about an emailer who wrote that he’d never heard any of the people who benefit from any affirmative action, welfare, public aid, etc, offer any thanks, any gratitude for those things… they always credit the hard work and stick-to-it-ivness, which are conservative values…
gaaah… i can barely think with that voice in my head…
but he was so sure that she and any other minority person who had status got there because of affirmative action, and those people were ungrateful… or something like that…
gaaahhh… i had to turn it off…
May 27th, 2009 at 5:21 pmJohnM
My GOD you are ignorant. Sotomayer is NOT a racist but you ARE a MORON. I really cant belive how stupid you are
May 27th, 2009 at 5:22 pmPat is a disgrace. I don’t agree with any of his beliefs but I feel ashamed for his stuck in the mud bigotry. He never ends a comment without mentioning Reagan Democrats (whatever the hell that is), or Nixon and the Southern Strategy. His is old and still mad over Watergate. Buchanan is nearly as bad as Joe Scarface.
May 27th, 2009 at 5:22 pmralph the wonder locust Says:
JOhnM, are you still leaning on your deliberate misinterpretation of Judge Sotomayor’s speech titled “A Latina Judge’s Voice” in order to support your contention that she’s a racist?
May 27th, 2009 at 5:18 pm
____________
Of course he is. That’s his usual MO – make a ridiculous argument and stick by it, no matter how much the facts disagree.
I’m sure we all remember this lovely statement of his from last week when he was justifying torture:
Sick bastard.
May 27th, 2009 at 5:22 pmIs Mr. Buchanan trying to imply that Bush made all of his appointments based on selecting only those individuals who were most qualified to do the job? Brown, Miers, Gonzales, Rice, Goss, Bolton, Yoo, Schlozman, Paulson, Goodling, Jackson, Doan, Spakovsky……….
May 27th, 2009 at 5:25 pmThe nomination of Ms Sotomayor certainly has accomplished one thing.
May 27th, 2009 at 5:26 pmThe trolls are looking more like Bush’s firecracker froggy hourly…
osage Says:
Is Mr. Buchanan trying to imply that Bush made all of his appointments based on selecting only those individuals who were most qualified to do the job? Brown
May 27th, 2009 at 5:25 pm
__________
Are you suggesting that Michael Brown was not qualified to head FEMA?
I’ll remind you that not ONE Arabian horse died during Hurricane Katrina. Not one.
May 27th, 2009 at 5:28 pmHave the trolls laid out yet why affirmative action is a bad thing? Oh, let me guess…they’re saying whites are being passed over so black/Latino Americans can have a job or go to college? That is such a bunch of bullpucky I can’t even stand it, because if you add up all the jobs/college-attendance-records in the history of our nation held by whites and compare it to the jobs/college-attendance-records of blacks and Latinos over the same course of time, we would find that the whites (especially the males!) outnumber all of them. Case closed.
May 27th, 2009 at 5:32 pmKayInMaine Says:
——————————————————————————–
Have the trolls laid out yet why affirmative action is a bad thing? Oh, let me guess…they’re saying whites are being passed over so black/Latino Americans can have a job or go to college? That is such a bunch of bullpucky I can’t even stand it, because if you add up all the jobs/college-attendance-records in the history of our nation held by whites and compare it to the jobs/college-attendance-records of blacks and Latinos over the same course of time, we would find that the whites (especially the males!) outnumber all of them. Case closed.
You cannot fix racism with more racism. That is why affirmitave action horrible idea.
May 27th, 2009 at 5:34 pmThe reason why not ONE Arabian horse died during Katrina is because most Arabian horses are white:
http://www.myhorse.ca/images/arabian-horse-head.jpg
Hey, wait a minute….this would be a clear case of ‘reverse racism’ according to Limp Buckets of right wing radio fame! Oh wait. No it wouldn’t. Nevermind.
May 27th, 2009 at 5:34 pmwait – at the risk of embarrassing myself –
you mean it’s not permissible to state that the criteria is “woman” …?
really?
May 27th, 2009 at 5:37 pmJohnM…?
The Judge’s speech?
Your insistence on generalizing a comment made in reference to a specific case?
No?
Nothing?
May 27th, 2009 at 5:39 pmralph the wonder locust Says:
——————————————————————————–
JOhnM, are you still leaning on your deliberate misinterpretation of Judge Sotomayor’s speech titled “A Latina Judge’s Voice” in order to support your contention that she’s a racist?
If so, I’d like to redirect your attention to the little discussion we had earlier today.
You left without commenting on it, and now you’re here trying to sell the same crap, so I assume you didn’t see my response.
Your rationalization did not change the fact that her comments were indeed racist. Stating a cerain gender or race is more equipped to be a judge in any case is racism or sexism. Racism rings truer in this case because race had nothing to do with the case she was speaking about. She felt compelled to say that since she is hispanic she is better equipped to come to the correct conclusion than somebody who is white. Yes, I am sorry to say is clear racism. You know when you support racism the way you do, nobody is better off.
May 27th, 2009 at 5:40 pmJohnM Says:
You cannot fix racism with more racism. That is why affirmitave action horrible idea.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
You cannot fix a problem by pretending it doesnt exist and that no actions need be taken to redress wrongs. Not recognizing this is why you are so stupid. There are still risidual effects of racism and they need addressed. Pretending this isnt so is just an excuse to continue the advantages of that racial discrimination.
May 27th, 2009 at 5:41 pmI wonder what quota Buchanan has in mind for the minimum number of white guys who would be required to be on the short list…
.
JohnM Says:
Buchanan is a racist, but then again so is Sotomayor.
I refer you to this fine instructional video on the subject.
May 27th, 2009 at 5:44 pmSo, without affirmative action, you’d be fine with blacks, women, and Latinos CONTINUING TO BE PASSED OVER FOR JOBS & EDUCATION AS THEY HAVE THROUGHOUT THE HISTORY OF OUR COUNTRY? You’d rather go back to the good ole white days?
May 27th, 2009 at 5:45 pmJohnM Says:
You are stupid. Being stubborn, continuing to regurgitate pure idiocy may be your style but all you are doing is embarassing yourself. See YOU are a moron. Most arent. They see the intellectual vacuity of your posts. Your stubborn conformity to what you were TOLD to think no matter WHAT the facts are. You have been given the facts which you ignore because you dont CARE about them. Facts, honesty, reality. NONE of those things mean anything to you. Just your lies and stupidity. Pushing the talking point no matter how utterly ignorant they are. You are truly pathetic
May 27th, 2009 at 5:45 pmYou cannot fix stupid with more dumbass. That is why conservative procreation is a horrible idea.
May 27th, 2009 at 5:48 pmThey were picked because she’s a woman and a Hispanic and you know it as well as I do.
To quote Pat’s hero and fellow blowhard, “So?”
May 27th, 2009 at 5:50 pmAnd exactly how do they (plural) get picked because she (singular)’s a woman?..??
Got grammar?
May 27th, 2009 at 5:53 pmThe idea that every time someone hires a woman or a minority it’s affirmative action is really tired. Eat sh*t, Pat.
May 27th, 2009 at 5:53 pmCan we get a “schoolmarm” in here. JohnM’s paper needs that red pen…
May 27th, 2009 at 5:54 pmKayInMaine Says:
So, without affirmative action, you’d be fine with blacks, women, and Latinos CONTINUING TO BE PASSED OVER FOR JOBS & EDUCATION AS THEY HAVE THROUGHOUT THE HISTORY OF OUR COUNTRY? You’d rather go back to the good ole white days?
Precisely so. He’s pulling out that old civil-rights-era saw that “everything will be just fine if all them uppity folks just shut up and know their place.”
May 27th, 2009 at 5:54 pmBilbo says: And, please don’t tell me that Clarence Thomas is black because that is only the color of his skin. Who he is and what he represents is white male.
I knew there was a reason I didn’t like that dude………he’s white!!!
May 27th, 2009 at 5:56 pmMy “rationalization”?
How is citing the full context of a speech given on a specific topic a “rationalization”? Is it because it makes it necessary for you to alter a position you don’t want to alter?
Allow me to use the research of jaimymoore and quote Sam Alito:
Because when a case comes before me involving, let’s say, someone who is an immigrant — and we get an awful lot of immigration cases and naturalization cases — I can’t help but think of my own ancestors, because it wasn’t that long ago when they were in that position.
Some people will naturally be better able to assess certain cases than others by virtue of their own expertise or experience in the environment from which those cases spring.
Anyone who doesn’t recognize that is an idiot. Oh — look who I’m talking to.
Once again, JohnM — the passage comes from a speech entitled “A Latina Judge’s Voice”. Did you miss that part? It was specifically written and tailored to address the specific nature of the experience of a Latina in the federal judiciary. She addressed the specific case as an illustration of the inherent differences between the way a woman might judge a case and a man might. She then related this point to the larger topic of her speech.
When you insist that she was making a kind of general statement of judicial philosophy, you reveal that you’re not interested in what the Judge actually believes or how she thinks; you’re only interested in finding some way to smear her, no matter how desperate you appear.
Why do you continue to obsess about her race, when the comment that upsets you so was clearly focused on her gender? Her race only came into it because it was, y’know, the topic of the speech.
I would be sorry if I had to keep repeating falsehoods, too, so your sorrow is understandable. But you clearly either don’t understand what “racism” is or you don’t care.
You pretend that acknowledging that racial characteristics play a part in who we are and the experiences we live is “racism”. This is wrong.
Again, if you knew what “racism” really was, then I’d worry about my own values. But you have clearly shown that you have no idea what “racism” means, and your only goal is to dilute its meaning and so render it ineffective as a weapon against the Right.
May 27th, 2009 at 5:57 pmI guess the old, tired, white males aren’t represented enough in US politics.
May 27th, 2009 at 5:59 pmBuchanan carries a family legacy from the days of slavery in the South. His great-grandfather fought in the American Civil War on the Confederate side. Buchanan himself is a member of the Sons of Confederate Veterans and he admires Robert E. Lee. Considering his statements over the years regarding minority groups (and that includes women, in his mind), I’m quite sure he hates Jews as well. Both he and his sister, Bay, are vipers in the first degree.
May 27th, 2009 at 6:01 pmSomeone check me on this — isn’t Pat’s insistence on the inclusion of white males among the finalists kind of a quota?
May 27th, 2009 at 6:02 pmPretty sad when the supposedly most advanced society in the world to date is still throwing racism around.
May 27th, 2009 at 6:06 pmBuchanan: Sotomayor Must Have Been An ‘Affirmative Action’ Nominee Since No White Men Were Finalists
Well,someone has to steer the racist bobsled…
May 27th, 2009 at 6:06 pmI hate him.
May 27th, 2009 at 6:07 pmPat is exhibiting reverse racism/pro-affirmative-action on himself, Ralph. LOL
May 27th, 2009 at 6:08 pmI think it’s part of the price we pay for Freedom of Speech. There will always be racists and bigots around, and as long as we tolerate their right to speak freely, they will be able to voice their bigotry.
You know how bigots are; if they hear the sound of their own voice, they think that makes them right.
May 27th, 2009 at 6:08 pmHere’s what Pat Buchanan thinks of black women:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8r09eEMWDu4
May 27th, 2009 at 6:12 pmbarfly Says:
Buchanan: Sotomayor Must Have Been An ‘Affirmative Action’ Nominee Since No White Men Were Finalists
Well,someone has to steer the racist bobsled…
Apparently on the day they were taking applications, there was free golf and wonderbread – they couldn’t find any white dudes.
May 27th, 2009 at 6:12 pmRight– she got in because no white men were finalists. (according to Buchanan).
Buchanan could not be more blatantly racist & sexist. He is an antique, a throwback to the 50s or before. And Good Lord Almighty- what makes Buchanan think that sexist white men are better than women? better than African-Americans? better than Hispanics? better than gay people? I would love to hear him respond with actual facts. But, of course, like other radical right-wing liars, he has no truth to offer.
May 27th, 2009 at 6:19 pmAs an over 50, white male I should probably be living in fear that the world might actually be growing and changing like my contemporaries.
Truth is, I hope the yonkers have some better ideas since us old, white guys have screwed things up pretty badly.
May 27th, 2009 at 6:20 pmBuchanan should do Geico commercials.
May 27th, 2009 at 6:23 pmPresident Obama brilliantly chose and presented Sonia Sotomayor in such a way the white old fogy has beens continue to dig their grave politically while crying about her.
This is getting more humorous by the day.
May 27th, 2009 at 6:26 pmIs Mr. Buchanan trying to imply that Bush made all of his appointments based on selecting only those individuals who were most qualified to do the job? Brown, Miers, Gonzales, Rice, Goss, Bolton, Yoo, Schlozman, Paulson, Goodling, Jackson, Doan, Spakovsky……….
clearly it’s only Affirmative Action when a Dem does it :(
Buchanan is a racist, but then again so is Sotomayor.
Buchanan is also an idiot, but then again so are you. Explain to me how pointing out that being a Latina offers her a different experience from that of a white man is racist?
May 27th, 2009 at 6:31 pmHoodathunktick Says:
As an over 50, white….
You and the majority on this board.
Maybe the Native American Indians before the days Columbus came over and tortured them, had it right. They successfully lived of the land for thousands of years as compared to what we, white man, have done to it in the past 400 to 500 years.
May 27th, 2009 at 6:38 pmralph the wonder locust Says:
Once again, JohnM — the passage comes from a speech entitled “A Latina Judge’s Voice”. Did you miss that part? It was specifically written and tailored to address the specific nature of the experience of a Latina in the federal judiciary. She addressed the specific case as an illustration of the inherent differences between the way a woman might judge a case and a man might. She then related this point to the larger topic of her speech.
So you justify racism because her speech was written and tailored to talk about her experiences as a Latina and thus how she is able to come to a better decision than a white person? You clearly will not see anything that is right in front of your face because it would show your obvious subjectivity in the matter.
racism n. The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others.
hmmm, let’s look at this. She thinks that because she is Latina she is superior to other judges without accounting for human character or ability??? No, that couldn’t be racism.
May 27th, 2009 at 6:39 pmKayInMaine Says:
So, without affirmative action, you’d be fine with blacks, women, and Latinos CONTINUING TO BE PASSED OVER FOR JOBS & EDUCATION AS THEY HAVE THROUGHOUT THE HISTORY OF OUR COUNTRY? You’d rather go back to the good ole white days?
em>
Again, your method of fixing discrimination is through government sponsored discrimination? Nice method there.
May 27th, 2009 at 6:41 pmJohnM
There was no racism. You wont create any with your magical thinking that it will become true if you repeat it often enough. The FACT you are too stupid to understand simple concepts wont change reality. You are a moron. You will always BE a moron. Keep parading your ignorance though I love to laugh at people as stupid as you
May 27th, 2009 at 6:43 pmWhy isn’t Racist Buchanan in a nursing home, yet? Or a One Flew Over the Cookies Nest “mansion”.
Thank goodness his kind is a dying race!
May 27th, 2009 at 6:49 pmMy God you have a serious learning disability.
Let me go over this again:
Judge Sotomayor was engaged to speak on her experiences as a Latina sitting on the federal bench (hence her speech entitled “A Latina Judge’s Voice”).
Her statement about “better conclusions” referred to the type of case she spoke of earlier in her speech. She was not saying that her status as a Latina enabled her to come to better conclusions in general than white male judges, as you keep trying to claim. Do you understand the difference between “specific” and “general”? If not, you really should learn it. Could come in handy down the road.
If the Judge’s comments reflected the belief that you describe, yes, that would be racism. Unfortunately for you, it has been demonstrated repeatedly that your characterization is in error. The fact that you keep returning to a bad premise even after being shown its falsity really reflects badly on your intellect.
May 27th, 2009 at 6:50 pmAnyone who sees justice in an all male, or all anglo, or all white anglo court is the wrong kind of blind.
May 27th, 2009 at 6:51 pmBuckie Boy Says: Your comment is awaiting moderation.
Awwww, too bad guys, my Buchanan O’Donnell rewrite of the debate was extremely funny…you would have loved it.
it seems you can’t type small p.e.n.i.s
May 27th, 2009 at 6:52 pmmale anglo
May 27th, 2009 at 6:52 pmBUCHANAN: Look, are you going to let me spew crap, Lawrence? You got down to four women, not a single racist white male — all women, whom I am afraid of.
NORAH O’DONNELL: Did it ever occur to you, Pat, that maybe there weren’t any racist white men with small p.e.n.i.s’ who were qualified?
BUCHANAN: Yes. No, yes, maybe. You mean there are no white males with extremely small p.e.n.i.s.’ qualified? That would certainly leave me out.
LAWRENCE O’DONNELL: Well Pat, if it gets down to four inches or less, you’re suggesting it’s an absolute outrage if the women like something bigger. If got down to four or less inches and they were all white men, would that bother you in the least?
BUCHANAN: I don’t say it’s an outrage, I say it’s affirmative action. They were picked because she’s a woman and she hates small d.i.c.k.e.d men like me.
What Pat was really saying.
May 27th, 2009 at 6:53 pmHa, that one got thru, enjoy.
May 27th, 2009 at 6:53 pmHow is it that Pat Buchanan, Rush Limbaugh, Newt Gingrich, Tom Tancredo et al., are always so sensitive to signs of “reverse racism” and affirmative action, when they claim to be so free of racism themselves that they are effectively blind to race and gender?
We are seeing the beginnings last hurrah for the ageing white males bigots. I expect it to get even uglier from here.
May 27th, 2009 at 6:57 pmJohnM Says:
So you justify racism because her speech was written and tailored to talk about her experiences as a Latina and thus how she is able to come to a better decision than a white person?
May 27th, 2009 at 6:39 pm
___________
Yes.
What’s wrong with racism?
May 27th, 2009 at 6:59 pmralph the wonder locust Says:
——————————————————————————–
JohnM Says:
So you justify racism because her speech was written and tailored to talk about her experiences as a Latina and thus how she is able to come to a better decision than a white person?
My God you have a serious learning disability.
Let me go over this again:
Judge Sotomayor was engaged to speak on her experiences as a Latina sitting on the federal bench (hence her speech entitled “A Latina Judge’s Voice”).
Her statement about “better conclusions” referred to the type of case she spoke of earlier in her speech. She was not saying that her status as a Latina enabled her to come to better conclusions in general than white male judges, as you keep trying to claim. Do you understand the difference between “specific” and “general”? If not, you really should learn it. Could come in handy down the road.
I will go over this one more time because you are a little slow on the uptake. She was not discussing a case that had anything to do with race, but she was compelled to say that because of her gender and race she would come to a better conclusion. You can’t have it both ways, if somebody’s personal experiences would make them better judges for cases that relate then her gender could be tied, but just because she was speaking about her Latino heritege does not mean that her race would make her more equpipped to sit on a case involving gender. Your justification for this blatant racism is not going to fly.
May 27th, 2009 at 7:03 pmchiroptera toasterhead Says:
——————————————————————————–
JohnM Says:
So you justify racism because her speech was written and tailored to talk about her experiences as a Latina and thus how she is able to come to a better decision than a white person?
May 27th, 2009 at 6:39 pm
___________
Yes.
What’s wrong with racism?
Nothing apparently if the racist person is not white.
May 27th, 2009 at 7:04 pmYou can go over it as many times as you want; repetition won’t make it correct.
Did you read the speech?
Have you ever composed any kind of presentation? (Silly question — never mind.) Do you know what a “theme” is, or hasn’t your English class gotten that far yet?
Judge Sptpmayor was “compelled” to mention her race because the speech was about — all together now, kids — “A Latina Judge’s Voice”.
Why would she deliver a speech on this “racist” topic? Because it was part of a symposium entitled “Raising the Bar: Latino and Latina Presence in the Judiciary and the Struggle for Representation”
Imagine that! A judge speaking on a specific case and how it illustrates the need for diversity in the judicial system, and connecting it back to the actual topic of her discussion! How inappropriate!
Your sad attempts to stretch this little fantasy of yours beyond the bounds of credulity is really looking ragged, JohnM. And claiming that I’m the one who’s slow? You keep trying that. I’ll be glad to let those who read this exchange reach their own conclusions.
May 27th, 2009 at 7:12 pmI’ll be glad to let those who read this exchange reach their own conclusions.
A virtual borking, make no mistake. The long knives are out, and they haven’t been this worked up since Abe Fortas.
May 27th, 2009 at 7:17 pmJohnM babbles:
I will go over this one more time because you are a little slow on the uptake.
You have been proven wrong so many times, JohnM, I’ve actually lost count.
As O’Donnell said: It’s like watching a fish flop all over the deck.
It’s time for you to stop making a complete fool of yourself, apologise for wasting everybody’s time, and leave. Preferably forever.
May 27th, 2009 at 7:18 pmralph the wonder locust Says
Judge Sptpmayor was “compelled” to mention her race because the speech was about — all together now, kids — “A Latina Judge’s Voice”.
How does her race apply to case about gender? You keep repeating that she was giving a speech about A Latina Judge’s Voice, but that does not excuse the racisit comment. She stated that because of her race she was better equipped to sit as a judge on a case about gender and you say that is okay because it was a speech about her being Latina? Do you realize how stupid that sounds?
May 27th, 2009 at 7:20 pmLefty McGillicuddy Says:
We are seeing the beginnings last hurrah for the ageing white males bigots. I expect it to get even uglier from here.
In my experience, crackers fight real dirty just before they go down for good. You just gotta keep kicking.
Fortunately, they’re easily distracted. Just wave a six pack of beer at them, drive a car in a circle for a while, and they totally lose all concentration.
May 27th, 2009 at 7:20 pmI think you’re wasting your time, ralph. The stupid trolls have their talking point and a quote mine to “back it up”. You can’t make them see sense with a hammer at this point.
May 27th, 2009 at 7:20 pmYou keep repeating that she was giving a speech about A Latina Judge’s Voice, but that does not excuse the racisit comment.
“Latina,” not latino, or latin. See the gender now?
May 27th, 2009 at 7:23 pmJohnM Says:
What’s wrong with racism?
Nothing apparently if the racist person is not white.
May 27th, 2009 at 7:04 pm
_____________
So why are you still complaining about it? If it’s such a non issue, why don’t you shut up already?
May 27th, 2009 at 7:26 pmShe stated that because of her race she was better equipped to sit as a judge on a case about gender and you say that is okay because it was a speech about her being Latina? Do you realize how stupid that sounds?
I know how stupid you sound, not knowing latina means female latin…
May 27th, 2009 at 7:27 pmOf course, we must remember, the people who are squawking “racist” also think that empathy is a fatal mental disorder.
May 27th, 2009 at 7:28 pmwhy does pat buchanan care? we all know at his age he’s playing “beat the clock”, living on borrowed time and all
May 27th, 2009 at 7:28 pmJohnM Says:
She stated that because of her race she was better equipped to sit as a judge on a case about gender and you say that is okay because it was a speech about her being Latina? Do you realize how stupid that sounds?
May 27th, 2009 at 7:20 pm
___________
It is. It’s totally moronic. It’s like when an astrophysicist goes before an audience to give a speech on inflationary cosmology and says that he’s more qualified to talk about astrophysics than, say, a plumber or a box welder or something.
What a ridiculous statement! How dare he say that! It’s totally astrophysicistist!
May 27th, 2009 at 7:29 pmOops, squashed another of those pesky little meme’s.
Latina?
Heh.
May 27th, 2009 at 7:30 pmi would like to point out to all the trolls here one fact:
when you win an election, you can appoint supreme court justices too. and in the words of your hero, tub-o-lard limpballs, “shut up! just shut up until you win an election”.
May 27th, 2009 at 7:30 pmastrophysicististic!
May 27th, 2009 at 7:32 pmThat’s how I took it, chiroptera toasterhead. She views her background as having the benefit of wide experience. It’s no different than Peyton Manning saying he had advantages as Archie’s son, of Chimpy saying he had advantages as 41’s son.
May 27th, 2009 at 7:36 pmOkay, I see you need it explained to you in even smaller bites.
The speech was about he experience of a Latina Judge in the federal system, and about the importance of diversity in the judiciary. You with me so far?
The example she used was a Minnesota civil case in which a father who had abused his child was seeking joint custody. Three judges voted against his claim — all women. Two judges voted for him, both men. Still with me?
The Judge drew the conclusion, and backed it up with statistics, that women judges ruled in favor of equal rights for women far more often than did men.
The conclusion was that a judge’s background and personal experience inevitably plays a role in his or her rulings. Since the speech was part of a symposium on “Latino and Latina Presence in the Judiciary and the Struggle for Representation” most students of language and communication would find it reasonable that she then relate this example to her larger theme.
You, apparently find it unreasonable for her to unify her presentation in this way.
It is not a racist comment. I keep repeating the title of the speech because you seem to have a hard time ingesting the information. You keep trying to claim that her comment was a general statement of judicial or personal philosophy, in apparent ignorance of the nature of the speech.
You are confused. She said that her gender makes her better equipped to sit as a judge in some types of cases, and her ethnic background (not her race) plays a similar part in her process of assessing the merits of each case.
and you say that is okay because it was a speech about her being Latina?
I say it was okay because she was addressing a complex subject — the need for diversity in the judiciary, and she was addressing it intelligently. It’s not a surprise that the elements of her message completely escaped you.
I realize how stupid you’re trying to make it sound, but I think everyone here recognizes that the only thing you’ve succeeded in making sound stupid is yourself.
But by all means, keep trying. Maybe repeat “racist comment” a few more times. It really seems to be working for ya.
May 27th, 2009 at 7:44 pmI admire your efforts, ralph, but the troll doesn’t understand “teh complex.”
Or the rational.
Or anything.
May 27th, 2009 at 7:50 pmHmmm… this from a guy who very recently said:
You stay classy, OS!
May 27th, 2009 at 7:54 pmJohn you are just too stupid to understand anything. Obviously ice is to complex a concept for you. You are stupid so take it from those of us capable of higher brain function. YOU are a moron, there was no racism. YOU stupidity does not define reality
A$$WIPE just go kill yourself. You are too stupid to contribute to this world in any other way. Just go into the next room and do the right thing
May 27th, 2009 at 7:54 pmralph the wonder locust Says:
——————————————————————————–
JohnM Says:
ralph the wonder locust Says
Judge Sptpmayor was “compelled” to mention her race because the speech was about — all together now, kids — “A Latina Judge’s Voice”.
How does her race apply to case about gender?
Okay, I see you need it explained to you in even smaller bites.
The speech was about he experience of a Latina Judge in the federal system, and about the importance of diversity in the judiciary. You with me so far?
The example she used was a Minnesota civil case in which a father who had abused his child was seeking joint custody. Three judges voted against his claim — all women. Two judges voted for him, both men. Still with me?
The Judge drew the conclusion, and backed it up with statistics, that women judges ruled in favor of equal rights for women far more often than did men.
The conclusion was that a judge’s background and personal experience inevitably plays a role in his or her rulings. Since the speech was part of a symposium on “Latino and Latina Presence in the Judiciary and the Struggle for Representation” most students of language and communication would find it reasonable that she then relate this example to her larger theme.
You, apparently find it unreasonable for her to unify her presentation in this way.
Your pathetic rationalization has proven that even if she said that Hispanics are naturally better at everything than any other race you would still try and justify it as being okay. I really feel sorry for you as I originally believed that you were trying to look at this ojectively, but you have proven without a doubt that you are unwilling to see the facts that I have shown you as you continue to try justify obvious racism.
May 27th, 2009 at 7:56 pmEugeneDebs Says:
——————————————————————————–
John you are just too stupid to understand anything. Obviously ice is to complex a concept for you. You are stupid so take it from those of us capable of higher brain function. YOU are a moron, there was no racism. YOU stupidity does not define reality
A$$WIPE just go kill yourself. You are too stupid to contribute to this world in any other way. Just go into the next room and do the right thing
Ladies and gentleman a “progressive” mind at work here.
May 27th, 2009 at 7:58 pmJohnM Says:
Ladies and gentleman a “progressive” mind at work here.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
I would announce to the room that a MORON is at work THERE but your posts have already done that. Face it John it is clear to anyone who has been reading your mindnumbingly stupid posts that you are a moron. This is plainly simple. Her words specifically contradict your idiotic posts and you just keep posting them anyway. You dont care what is true, what the facts are you are just going to repeat what you were told to believe no matter how stupid it is. That you are stupid is plain fact and it is on display for everyone to see.
May 27th, 2009 at 8:04 pmJohnM Says:
Your pathetic rationalization has proven that even if she said that Hispanics are naturally better at everything than any other race you would still try and justify it as being okay.
>>>>>>>>
John you are a lair and a fool and stupider than any organic being ought to be.
May 27th, 2009 at 8:05 pmJohnM babbles:
Your pathetic rationalization has proven that even if she said that Hispanics are naturally better at everything than any other race you would still try and justify it as being okay.
1) Hispanic is not a race.
2) The point was -again- lost on you.
The larger context in Sotomayor’s speech was how the experiences of those attorneys who are either women, of color, or both, influence the decisions they make.
In the same speech she mentions -one paragraph earlier, if you are to look- that:
[...] Justice Thurgood Marshall, Judge Connie Baker Motley, the first black woman appointed to the federal bench, and others of the NAACP argued Brown v. Board of Education. Similarly, Justice Ginsburg, with other women attorneys, was instrumental in advocating and convincing the Court that equality of work required equality in terms and conditions of employment.
After that the quote that has so bothered you, she said that:
Until 1972, no Supreme Court case ever upheld the claim of a woman in a gender discrimination case.
In that context (sex and race discrimination), her comment makes perfect sense and is a very valid point.
Why are you so scared of minorities and women? Is it their “otherness” that upsets you?
May 27th, 2009 at 8:11 pmYou still haven’t explained how quoting wider context of a speech is a “rationalization”. I’m looking forward to that.
Ah, yes, the trusted fallback of the troll who’s got nothing left in the tank: imagine how the other side would react to a hypothetical, then criticize them for your own imagined scenario.
Does that mean you feel empathy? Shame on you!
“Facts”? “Facts” like what? You cited her statement, and I went to the source and offered an even more expansive passage. Other than that, all you’ve offered is several repetitions of your opinion that the statement is racist, while actively ignoring the contextual elements that render your assertion that the Judge’s statement was one of general judicial philosophy clearly absurd.
If the statement was racist, I would condemn it as loudly as anyone here. But the Judge’s statement was not racist, for all the reasons I’ve laid out. It was a reasonable and insightful description of the value that diverse backgrounds and experiences bring to a judiciary.
May 27th, 2009 at 8:12 pmJohnM and a$$wipe – you guys are so ignorant that you deserve to get cursed out! You make silly comments, offer nothing of substance to the thread and expect to receive respect. You deserve all of the abuse you get. You’re as rascist and ignorant as Pat Buchanan and Limbaugh all wrapped up in one.
May 27th, 2009 at 8:15 pmJohnM Says:
Ladies and gentleman a “progressive” mind at work here.
He certainly doesn’t speak for every progressive, JohnM.
May 27th, 2009 at 8:16 pmJohnM Says:
Your pathetic rationalization has proven that even if she said that Hispanics are naturally better at everything than any other race you would still try and justify it as being okay.
But that’s what you’re saying she’s saying. Except for she didn’t say that. And no, that wouldn’t be OK. But it doesn’t matter because that’s not what she said.
.
JohnM Says:
Ladies and gentleman a “progressive” mind at work here.
Did the mean liberal say bad words at you? Cry for me. Your tears taste like candy.
May 27th, 2009 at 8:25 pmPurple State / Lavender Boy Says:
JohnM Says:
Ladies and gentleman a “progressive” mind at work here.
He certainly doesn’t speak for every progressive, JohnM.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
You are absolutly right. I do not. I wouldnt want the responsibility besides NO ONE speaks for every progressive. We dont HAVE a Rush Limbaugh. We are not the lemming sheeple the rightwingers are. We think for ourselves and express ourselves.
May 27th, 2009 at 8:32 pmWhile stating that the person who graduated second in her class at Princeton and was Editor of the Yale Law Review got her job because she is a Latina those same numbnutz call her a racist. Teabaggers don’t understand irony whatsoever.
May 27th, 2009 at 8:54 pmYou don’t get to tell anybody what to do around here! You’re an unwelcome intruder. STFU or get the hell out.
May 27th, 2009 at 8:55 pmA$$wipe go kill yourself. You are too stupid to do anything else to make the world a better place. You are a worthless troll piece of filth so just go into your garage and do the right thing
May 27th, 2009 at 8:57 pmA sockpuppet making demands about user names? Priceless!
May 27th, 2009 at 9:09 pmThanks for the feed.
seslisohbet seslichat sesli sohbet sesli chat
May 27th, 2009 at 9:16 pma$$wipe$ Says: Your mammy is an azzzwipe!
YES! This is America, that’s exactly why I’ll continue using my name. You can kiss my a$$ backwards fool. Yeah and go kill yourself too!
May 27th, 2009 at 9:25 pmobamawipe$ Says:
BTW, this is America, use an American name.
That’s about as American as names get, actually.
May 27th, 2009 at 9:31 pmobamawipe$ Says:
hormiga brava chavez Says:
Classy. BTW, this is America, use an American name.
***
JohnM,
you act like an expert on racism,
want to handle this?
:)
May 27th, 2009 at 9:33 pm*Annie giggles at Joe’s snarky smackdown*
May 27th, 2009 at 10:07 pmIt’s so heartwarming to see the likes of Buchanan and JohnM stand up for the rights of the poor, discriminated, and downtrodden white men of the world, who would otherwise not have a shot at getting a decent education -let alone job.
May 27th, 2009 at 10:09 pmWho has been feeding sesli?
May 27th, 2009 at 10:31 pmralph. Can you drop by during my office hours next week? We need to talk….
May 27th, 2009 at 10:33 pmralph the wonder locust Says:
Wow. I don’t know if I’ve ever seen a troll spin this far off course, this quickly.
It’s quite a thing to behold. Judge Sotomayor really has these clowns in a tizzy.
Imagine if Obama appointed a Muslim to the SCOTUS?
May 27th, 2009 at 11:23 pmThe trollturds would be enormous.
May 27th, 2009 at 11:24 pmFascinating discussion – well, except for the illogical trolls who can’t grasp any of these well thought and written points. I applaud you all – but the trolls choose not to get it, they simply can’t. Racism, oh my god! Sexism, oh my god! Poor little boys demanding privelege and respect, for what?
As I also work with the poor and downtrodden, mostly women and mostly women of color – I know all too well what Justice Sotomayor spoke about – I see it everyday. A man beats up a woman, sends her to the hospital and she loses her children for failure to protect — no one does anything about the big bad abuser — why? Because they are just as afraid of him as she is – and in the juvenile justice system (a big friggin joke) they can’t do anything to him. Suck on that JohnM and the other freaking trolls!
May 27th, 2009 at 11:36 pmJustice Sotomayor (I call her that on purpose) knows exactly what I speak about – she has seen it all around her all of her life. So when a mother files for sole custody, and requests supervised visitation or no visitation for a man who has attempted to kill her or threatens to kill her – and a woman judge MAY (and that’s a big may) understand her plight while a male judge will likely side with the rights of the father (and they do all the time), then you can see the unique qualifications that come with the job. A dead mother cannot protect and nurture the children she bore; a man who harms the mother harms the children. Period!!
May 27th, 2009 at 11:55 pmdbadass, are you going to lecture me on indulging the trolls?
I know I shouldn’t. Sometimes I can’t help myself. But you have to admit I did a good job keeping jay on his feet while avoiding his little tar pit traps of faux logic the other day, no?
May 28th, 2009 at 12:39 amdbadass Says:
Who has been feeding sesli?
Sesli is an automated script that spams links to a Turkish website in here once every 24 hours. Recently it’s begun using short phrases randomly selected from a list, along with its links, probably to try better to make people think it’s a person.
May 28th, 2009 at 12:45 amYou idiot. That is American. It just isn’t “United Statesian”.
Did you know that all the other countries on the American continents call themselves Americans too? I didn’t think you did. You know nothing.
Mi amiga hormiga, el a$$wipe es muy guacala …
May 28th, 2009 at 3:24 amevery body knows that it was a woman that started this wh ole sin and suffering thing. ie original sin.
get over it the bible says so.
that is the america you live in folks get over it.
empathy in the supreme court.
are you people nuts
empathy has nothing to do justice, ie ask jesus
signed
just your average wingnut neo con repub
christianity died on the cross
plain as day to see
who supports torture more than christians.
read the polls.
May 28th, 2009 at 4:03 amSo, let’s see, the affirmative action tally for Supreme Court justices is now like:
White male: 110
White woman: 2
African-American male: 2 – 1 sellout (Thomas) = 1
EVERYONE else (Asian, Hispanic, etc….) = 1 pending
Golly geez Pat, if we want to be fair about things we won’t see another white guy become a Supreme Court justice for decades.
May 28th, 2009 at 5:25 amresearcher Says:
empathy has nothing to do justice, ie ask jesus
And yet, isn’t Jesus considered one of the most empathetic figures known to man?
The “empathy” smear doesn’t work. George H.W. Bush nominated Clarence Thomas because of many reasons, one of them being EMPATHY. Thomas would be out of a job if we followed what you had to say.
May 28th, 2009 at 8:31 amBeing part of the ‘baby boomer’ generation I can say with all honesty that the white male has ALWAYS thought like this. As long as they are the “favorite” or they are the ones that get the good jobs or the higher pay, you never hear a peep out of them BUT as soon as they are treated they way they treat others they start complaining.
May 28th, 2009 at 10:37 amTough cookies. Suck it up and move on!! NOW you know how the rest of us feel.
The feeble attempt to cast Sotomayor as a racist is going to backfire on the far right-wing base of the GOP and provide further proof that the Repubigot Party is out of touch with the vast majority of the American public.
Yet another reason why the GOP is rapidly become irrelevant.
May 28th, 2009 at 5:24 pmPat’s world stopped moving in 1992.
What are all these BROWN people doing in power?
They’re supposed to be ‘the help’.
Your world is gone Pat.
May 28th, 2009 at 6:19 pmWhy don’t you take up golf and get your archaic head off my tv?
The only reason why she is where she is now is because she is a female and a minority. That took precedence over qualifications. Obviously when 90% of her decisions sent to the Supreme Court and were subsequently overturned, that means she aint qualified as a federal judge let alone a supreme court justice.
I am going to laugh at how much of an idiot she will look with her decisions she writes.
Long term it will be a lesson learned by the American Sheeple about affirmative action.
Like the first Black affirmative action doctor. He became a terrible surgeon and people died b/c of it lol
Plus she is ugly as sin, face like a catcher’s mitt. Shouldve nominated Megan Kelly
June 3rd, 2009 at 3:46 am