Couldn’t agree more, the double standards have set the bar lower for everyone in this country in terms of education, employment, and physical fitness. God forbid that anyone ever take responsibility for their laziness or stupidity, it always has to be because someone designed a test or product that made them fail. Our military even has loosened it’s stardards to make up for the declining masses…
Double standards that result in LOWER standards for everybody is now the norm. Reverse discrimination is RAMPANT and affirmative action imbicibles hurt themselves and all others and America itself. Extend the logic and it’s terrifying………and we’re going there.
If you take the resident agents license exam and pass you get your license. If you take the bar exam and pass you get to practice law. If you take the state registered nurse exam you get to practice as a nurse…a doctor….instrument rating, etc, etc, etc. If you don’t pass the required tests you don’t get the ticket, regardless of your colour, creed, sex, or political affiliation. Just about everything in this country has an accepted test tied to it. Pretty simple actually. The majority ruling got it right.
“But Kennedy said fear of litigation alone cannot justify reliance on race to the detriment of people who passed the exam and qualified for promotions.”
In other words, irrationality and lack of sound reasoning should never be a ppemise for racial discrimination. Hopefuly, the effect of this ruling will be promote an end of discrimination of all kinds, includng the ‘PC’ Thought Criminalization advocated by the fascist regime currently holding power in DC.
“But Kennedy said fear of litigation alone cannot justify reliance on race to the detriment of people who passed the exam and qualified for promotions.”
In other words, irrationality and lack of sound reasoning should never be a ppemise for racial discrimination. Hopefuly, the effect of this ruling will be promote an end of discrimination of all kinds, includng the ‘PC’ Thought Criminalization advocated by the fascist regime currently holding power in DC.
Martin Luther Kings address did not state “I have a dream that one day blacks will be able to get jobs in the world even though they can’t pass the necessary exams for the job, whether or not they are written or physical, or they are not qualified for the job and if they are unable to pass these tests or they do not have the qualifications to perform the job, I dream that the world will lower the qualifications so that the blacks may get these jobs, perhaps putting others in danger because of their lack of these necessary qualifications.”
If you are unable to perform the job you are applying for, and can not pass the necessary exams for the position, no matter what it is, no matter what the color of your skin, then you can not have that job. Period. No special rules on any side of the race fence.
The race card should not work anymore, for any reason. President Obama is proof of that. They did not change the qualifications for him so he could become president.
This shows that Ms. Sotomayor isn’t qualified to sit on the SCOTUS. She hasn’t earned anything and her entire education and career are all unearned affirmative action events. When she attended undergraduate school at Princeton, her reading level was so low that she was assigned primary grade readers to learn to read. This, notwithstanding that she was the so-called co-class valedictorian or her NYC high school graduating class.
This shows that Ms. Sotomayor isn’t qualified to sit on the SCOTUS. She hasn’t earned anything and her entire education and career are all unearned affirmative action events. When she attended undergraduate school at Princeton, her reading level was so low that she was assigned primary grade readers to learn to read. This, notwithstanding that she was the so-called co-class valedictorian or her NYC high school graduating class.
sotomayor and other liberals think it’s okay for that gal holding the scales out in front of the court house to sometimes take a peek out from under that blindfold
Cant’t take the painful truth, can you Harry. You must be an Obama zombie and a beneficiary of preferential race-based hiring of minorities yourself, or both. Can’t have you working hard like the rest of us, now can we, when you expect to get everything handed to you.
Ah, but “they” did change the standards for Obama to become POTUS. He is not a natural born citizen as defined in Article 2 of the US Constitution. To date, he has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees fighting release of any long-form birth certificate or school records, etc. Judges have dismissed dozens of lawsuits demanding proof, citing that the litigants don’t have standing to sue, etc. 52% of the people in the US have turned a blind eye to this disturbing lack of constitutional qualification to hold the highest office in the US. So sadly, the standards were lowered, even for the mighty Barack, though not because of affirmative action. More like “Anyone but another Bush” or WLG.
Harry, Harry,
so contrary,
Your hate
Will not abate.
But have no fear,
For Joe is here
To train
Your feeble brain.
On a serious note Mr. Never Posts anything of substance, your comment isn’t, as you well know, an inaccurate post on my facts about Ms. Sotomayor’s so-called educational & professional achievements. Please consult further this article from the prestigious publication, Human Events.
(Still trying out monikers, heh? Are you married to Louise? If yes, then you really oppose nationalizing health care. For your next post, use bozo as your moniker.
**************************
Having lost the Congress in 2006 and the White House in 2008, Republicans are looking to redefine themselves for a nation that still leans conservative but is less Republican that it has been in decades.
The nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the U.S. Supreme Court presents just such an opportunity. For, even if the party loses the battle and Sotomayor sits on the court, it can win the war, as Ronald Reagan won the Panama Canal debate, even as Senate Republicans committed collective suicide by voting to give away the canal.
What are the grounds for rejecting Sonia Sotomayor?
No one has brought forth the slightest evidence she has the intellectual candlepower to sit on the Roberts court. By her own admission, Sotomayor is an “affirmative action baby.”
Though the Obama media have been ballyhooing her brilliance — No. 1 in high school, No. 1 at Princeton, editor of Yale Law Review — her academic career appears to have been a fraud from beginning to end, a testament to Ivy League corruption.
Two weeks ago, The New York Times reported that, to get up to speed on her English skills at Princeton, Sotomayor was advised to read children’s classics and study basic grammar books during her summers. How do you graduate first in your class at Princeton if your summer reading consists of “Chicken Little” and “The Troll Under the Bridge”?
In video clips dating back 25 years, and now provided to the Senate Judiciary Committee, Sotomayor, according to the Times, even calls herself an “affirmative action product.”
“The clips include lengthy remarks about her experiences as an ‘affirmative action baby,’ whose lower test scores were overlooked by admissions committees at Princeton University and Yale Law School because, she said, she is Hispanic and had grown up in poor circumstance.”
“If we had gone through the traditional numbers route of those institutions,” says Sotomayor, “it would have been highly questionable if I would have been accepted. … My test scores were not comparable to that of my classmates.”
Thus, Sotomayor got into Princeton, got her No. 1 ranking, was whisked into Yale Law School and made editor of the Yale Law Review — all because she was a Hispanic woman. And those two Ivy League institutions cheated more deserving students of what they had worked a lifetime to achieve, for reasons of race, gender or ethnicity.
This is bigotry pure and simple. To salve their consciences for past societal sins, the Ivy League is deep into discrimination again, this time with white males as victims rather than as beneficiaries.
One prefers the old bigotry. At least it was honest, and not, as Abraham Lincoln observed, adulterated “with the base alloy of hypocrisy.”
As the Times reports, on the tapes, Sotomayor rejects “the proposition that minorities must become advocates of ‘selection by merit alone.’ She said diversity improved the legal system.”
“‘Since I have difficultly defining merit and what merit alone means, and … whether it’s judicial or otherwise, I accept that different experiences, in and of itself, bring merit to the system,’ she said, adding, ‘I think it brings to the system more of a sense of fairness when these litigants see people like myself on the bench.”
What does the latest Times revelation tell us?
That were it not for Ivy League dishonesty, Sotomayor would not have gotten into Princeton, would never have been ranked first in her class, would not have gotten into Yale Law, nor been named editor of Yale Law Review, and thus would not be a U.S. appellate court judge today or a nominee to the Supreme Court.
Indeed, the White House itself leaked that the final four court candidates were all women and Sotomayor was picked because she was a Latina. One wonders how many superior students and judges have been passed over to advance Sonia Sotomayor’s career?
From college days to court days, that career reflects, in word and deed, a determination to use any power she achieves to create a society where the demands of diversity triumph over the ideal of equal justice under law. For Sotomayor, the advancement of people of color over white males is justice.
Republican senators should use this Sotomayor nomination to put affirmative action in the dock for what it is — race-based bigotry against white males so that persons of color can receive the rewards of society that they could not win in free and fair competition.
Lay out the Sotomayor record — SAT scores, LSAT scores, bar exam score, law review articles and her opinions — so that we can see up close what those who eviscerated Robert Bork regard as academic and judicial excellence.
No need for name-calling.
Just lay out the lady’s opinions and record, so that, if she is elevated, Americans can say: Barack Obama voted against Chief Justice Roberts because Roberts could not measure up to Sonia Sotomayor, his ideal of what a justice ought to be.
Joe
Human Events, prestigious? Only if you’re a right wingnut marching in step and regurgitating the daily talking points.
Why don’t you take a deep breath… spend more time studying history and less time stealing extremists’ ideas just to trash other Americans and their accomplishments … to which you could never hold a candle.
Please go find a political Web site to post your rants. This is an insurance site.
Best wishes.
Now Remus—or should I say wanna be genus, this comment was out of order and it’s obvious that we are an undeserving beneficiary of slavery…but I digress. Being an authority on diversity I have to say that this was the correct ruling. Discrimination of any kind is wrong, even if it is reverse-discrimination. Affirmative action was a quick fix to employment discrimination (yes people it still exists) because some American’s can’t be trusted to govern themselves ethically. Hopefully we as Americans wake up and realize that diversity is the ke to competing in a global economy.
Claimsguy I think it is my turn to educate you my friend. You just stated that Harry was the “beneficiary of preferential race-based hiring of minorities.” I am sorry but most of “majority”, for lack of better terminology, has been living off of preferential raced-based treatment for centuries. Do you know the history of this country Claimsguy? How did America become so wealty & powerful? Read a freaking book. Without the extermination of the Native American, the exploitation of Africans, Asians and Eastern & Southern Europeans, we would not have gained the wealth and power that we have today. So if Harry is the “beneficiary of preferential race-based hiring of minorities” then he probably deserves just a little bit of it!
Isn’t the phrase “reverse-discrimination” an oxy-moron? It doesn’t make any sense. Discrimination is discrimination, no matter who is being discriminated.
No, you’re wrong, Harry and you’re also an idiotic fool.
“Which,” as used in your sentence, can only and must refer to Americans, because your email refers to me with the word “you” and not my accomplishments. If it were to be as you claim, then you should’ve written ‘to which your accomplishments do not hold a candle.’ Of course, it’s clear to all that you’re too stupid to know this.
You’re a typical liberal; you try to present yourself as an erudite person, but, in reality, you’re just a faux intellectual. In other words, I’m writing that I consider you a phoney.
Also, IRO your post under the moniker Authority, it’s not diversity that will make America competitive in global trade, but rather, it will be the qualities of competence, productivity, and expertise that will make America as such. Affirmative action (“AA”) undermines these three qualities.
Facts speak for themselves, because since the advent of AA, America has become less competitive in the global market. Of course, as a liberal, you hate facts.
You’re truly a very simple, control freak. Hencey, your new moniker, Authority.
You’re a joke and a phoney.
Go back to your cubicle and fume at the world for not concurring with your inflated view of yourself.
I look forward to your next ranting post; maybe you can frighten some other woman as you did with your posts IRO the June 15 article about Obama’s health plan. Of course, I won’t respond to it; I’ve toyed with you enough the last two days.
Even though you’re a freak, Jesus loves you; albeit, He may be the only One who loves you.
Come on Joe, don’t sound so angry. I can tell that some buttons must have been pushed. You also have a narrow-minded view of diversity my friend but I will not penalize you for your lack of research and ignorance. Do you really know the reason why AA was established? It was established because mental migits like yourself lacked the self-esteem and confidence to honestly allow yourself to be intellectually challenged by the people you used to oppress. I agree, as you said “qualities of competence, productivity, and expertise” will make America competitive but we should not oppress our own citizens to make it so. Wake up, it’s not 1955. Look at the auto industry. Outside of the extreme financial issues why did they fail…..? It was their lack of diversity. No genus, not race, sex, age or ethnicity but their inability to embrace diverse ideas which ultimately led to their demise (Chrysler & GM respectively). Remember how the big 3 laughed at the Japanese vehicles around 30 years ago? Now Fiat is buying Chrysler and GM is in court trying to figure it out. Educate yourself, step your game up and then get into the ring with Ali.
Thankfully, many seem to be getting the point, and hopefully those who haven’t will: our rules and laws should be based on sound reason and logic, not some manipulated trickery designed to give some segment of society an advantage over another. That is UNFAIR discrimination. Now, to use a myopic view of history (I shall coin the phrase, and you can say you saw it here first: twistory) to justify reverse discrimination is wrong. To say that the wealth of our nation was based entirely, or even mostly, on slavery and oppression is incorrect. I’m certain that quite a bit of our nation’s prosperity and wealth has been the result of hard work, innovation and creativity – which history teaches us flourishes in a free and just society. I’m equally certain that to suggest otherwise would be considered deeply offensive by, and to, the previous generations who made great sacrifices to lay the foundations of our great nation, where even those with whom we disagree may live and breath free. History must be viewed in its entirety, and in context – much like reading an insurance policy. The fact of the matter, and the truth is, that slavery and oppression was practiced by many ALL OVER the world (and sadly, still is in some parts): black people enslaving black people; white people enslaving white people; indentured servitude; oppression by one group of people over another, etc, etc… and all of these things we should consider backwards and unjust in our modern society….but were at one time considered the accepted norm, in many cases even by the oppressed, who if given half a chance would gladly have become the oppressor!
So, let us not move backward to where oppression or favoritism by any group over any other is acceptable, but forward to where a level playing field is guaranteed for ALL! Not everyone will fail, not everyone will succeed, but at least we should all be playing by the same rules…now that’s the basis of a civil society and THAT’S equal justice under the law!
Bravo JB, I can applaud when the other person stars. Just to clarify I did not say that all or most of the wealth and prosperity was based on the oppression or extintion of certain cultures. But, we would not have prospered the way that we have if it weren’t for slavery, manifest-destiny, or the exploitation of other cultures. This history of this country is great but we do have dirty little secrets, like most properous civilizations in history. Unfortunately, we often fail to acknowledge them in order to move forward. Not asking for reparations but yes, an even playing field would be nice but you have to admit that we are not there yet. We have come a long way as a country but have a long way to go. Hopefully we walk that path hand in hand and not as adversaries.
Just FYI, Joe, I am not Authority. But guess that won’t stop your pointless triades. Please go to another site and leave the insurance people here alone.
You’re either an idiot and a liar or just plain too lazy to research or some combintation of these characterizations. Your very liberal NY Times just this Sunday had an article about how the autoworkers in Detroit are mostly black and how this changed the focus of the political activities of the UAW.
You’re so phoney, Harry, Yellow Male, and now, Authority. Even this last moniker of yours is very revealing of your insecurities. Most likely, you’re not even an authority on knowing your age, home address, or phone number.
You never present facts to support your positions. You merely continue with your uniformed, idiotic foaming at the mouth. You don’t even read the articles that I post, because if you were to read them, you’d see that they reveal the sources of facts. You’re even too stupid to know what’s research. To you, research is reaching into your pants when nature calls.
Equality on Trial Thomas Sowell
Wednesday, July 01, 2009
For the fourth time in six cases, the Supreme Court of the United States has reversed a decision for which Judge Sonia Sotomayor voted on the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals. If this nominee were a white male, would this not raise questions about whether he should be elevated to a court that has found his previous decisions wrong two-thirds of the times when those decisions have been reviewed?
Is no one supposed to ask questions about qualifications, simply because this nominee is Hispanic and a woman? Have we become that mindless?
Qualifications are not simply a question of how long you have been doing something, but how well you have done it. Judge Sotomayor has certainly been on the federal bench long enough, but is being reversed four out of six times a sign of a job well done?
Would longevity be equated with qualifications anywhere else? Some sergeants have been in the army longer than some generals but nobody thinks that is a reason to make those sergeants generals.
Performance matters. And Judge Sotomayor’s performance provides no reason for putting her on the Supreme Court.
Although the case of the Connecticut firefighters is the latest and best-known of Judge Sotomayor’s reversals by the Supreme Court, an even more revealing case was Didden v. Village of Port Chester, where the Supreme Court openly rebuked the unanimous three-judge panel that included Judge Sotomayor for “an evident denial of the most elementary forms of procedural due process.”
Longevity is not the only false argument for putting Sonia Sotomayor on the Supreme Court. Another is the argument that “elections have consequences,” so that the fact that Barack Obama won last year’s elections means that his choice for the Supreme Court should be confirmed. This is a political talking point rather than a serious argument.
Of course elections have consequences. But Senators were also elected, and the Constitution of the United States gives them both the right and the duty to say “yes” or “no” to any president’s judicial nominees.
It is painfully appropriate that the case which finally took the Sotomayor nomination beyond the realm of personal biography is one where the key question is how far this country is going to go on the question of racial representation versus individual qualifications.
Too much that Sonia Sotomayor has said and done over the years places her squarely in the camp of those supporting a racial spoils system instead of equal treatment for all. The organizations she has belonged to, as well as the statements she has made repeatedly — not just an isolated slip of the tongue taken “out of context”– as well as her dismissing the white firefighters’ case that the Supreme Court heard and heeded, all point in the same direction.
Within living memory, there was a time when someone who was black could not get certain jobs, regardless of how high that individual’s qualifications might be. It outraged the conscience of a nation and aroused people of various races and social backgrounds to rise up against it, sometimes at the risk of their lives.
Many, if not most, thought that they were fighting for equal treatment for all. But, today, too many people seem to think it is just a question of whose ox is gored– or for whom one has “empathy,” which amounts to the same thing in practice.
Clever people say that none of this matters because Republican Senators don’t have enough votes to stop this nominee from being confirmed. But that assumes that every Democrats will vote for her, regardless of what the public thinks. It also assumes that alerting the public doesn’t matter, now or for the future.
The standards for judging the nomination of Sonia Sotomayor are not the standards of either the criminal law or the civil law. That is, nothing has to be proven against her “beyond a reasonable doubt” or even by “a preponderance of the evidence.”
Judge Sotomayor is not in any jeopardy that would entitle her to the benefit of the doubt. It is 300 million Americans and their posterity who are entitled to the benefit of the doubt when the enormous power of determining what their rights are is put into anyone’s hands as a Supreme Court justice for life.
Joe, once again you show your ignorance by posting nonsense on this website. You shouldn’t attempt to post & watch Jerry Springer at the same time genus. So quick question? How many of those black Detroit autoworkers are decision-makers for the Big 3? Once again your anger, frustration & low self-esteem shine through. Joe it’s 2009, stop trying to plant the seed of facism on this website. Also, do you honestly believe that a cut & paste job of a biased article is research? I see there is some ROI on that basket-weaving degree. Have a great Independence Day if you live in the states, hopefully you will find your intellectual independence!
Here’s what would be an intelligent exchange. I post something; rather than you commenting on the fact that it was an article or research obtained from another source, you’d, instead, try to find another article or source to refute either the facts, opinions, or conclusions in what was posted by me.
For example, I posted opinions by the Canadian SC, several Canadians newspapers, and several Canadian physicians about why nationalized health care is bad in Canada.
I’ll do your research for you as to what would be an intelligent response. He should’ve responded that, “Well, those comments and opinions by the Canadians quoted by you are correct, but in polls, 54% of Canadians are satisfied with their health care.” Then, you’d site the source of this poll. I have the source, but won’t provide to you the source, because you need to learn how to do research instead of spouting uneducated, opinions.
Then, I sur-reply to your site of the poll by writing that I’m familiar with the poll, but when the poll is broken down by age and people who’ve had to access Canadian national health care for major health problems, then the disapproval of Canada’s national health care among such users of it is 75%.
You’re incapable of such an exchange, because you’re an idiot. And by the way, please learn to spell. It’s fascism, not “facism”, you ignorant fool.
Go back to daydreaming that you’re someone who knows something about anything. You likely still need assistance tying your shoes.
You must be a fool of many a**holes, because opinions are like a**holes, everyone has one; however, you’ve many opinions (all unsupported by anything resembling a fact). Hence, you’re a boy of many a**holes. As a native-American, I have the authority to name you. From hereon in, I always will refer to you “Many A**holes;” this is your native-American name; you’ve earned this name by exhibiting stupidity and arrogance above and beyond what could be imagined by anyone.
Joe, you are just plain rude. And I believe you truly like to read your own posts. Also, as you call other posters idiots and a*****s, remember, it takes one to know one. You are an enigma, smart but so crude.
From a fellow Native-American descendent let me say that you are a disgrace. Bottom line. You have raw intelligence but you are ignorant and it is your ignorance that sullies your being. By reading your postings I can tell you are an individual with potential but your negativity imprisons you. Hopefully the Creator relieves you of your professional frustration.
Couldn’t agree more, the double standards have set the bar lower for everyone in this country in terms of education, employment, and physical fitness. God forbid that anyone ever take responsibility for their laziness or stupidity, it always has to be because someone designed a test or product that made them fail. Our military even has loosened it’s stardards to make up for the declining masses…
Well then, Harry, at least you know that I’ve never trashed you, because you’ve never accomplished anything in your life.
By the way, Mr. Illiterate, it’s ‘to whom’, not “to which…”. GAM, you’re so simple.
Get back to your cubicle and do some work.
Wrong again, Joe. Which refers to accomplishments.
Lets hear it for the white guys!
Double standards that result in LOWER standards for everybody is now the norm. Reverse discrimination is RAMPANT and affirmative action imbicibles hurt themselves and all others and America itself. Extend the logic and it’s terrifying………and we’re going there.
If you take the resident agents license exam and pass you get your license. If you take the bar exam and pass you get to practice law. If you take the state registered nurse exam you get to practice as a nurse…a doctor….instrument rating, etc, etc, etc. If you don’t pass the required tests you don’t get the ticket, regardless of your colour, creed, sex, or political affiliation. Just about everything in this country has an accepted test tied to it. Pretty simple actually. The majority ruling got it right.
“But Kennedy said fear of litigation alone cannot justify reliance on race to the detriment of people who passed the exam and qualified for promotions.”
In other words, irrationality and lack of sound reasoning should never be a ppemise for racial discrimination. Hopefuly, the effect of this ruling will be promote an end of discrimination of all kinds, includng the ‘PC’ Thought Criminalization advocated by the fascist regime currently holding power in DC.
“But Kennedy said fear of litigation alone cannot justify reliance on race to the detriment of people who passed the exam and qualified for promotions.”
In other words, irrationality and lack of sound reasoning should never be a ppemise for racial discrimination. Hopefuly, the effect of this ruling will be promote an end of discrimination of all kinds, includng the ‘PC’ Thought Criminalization advocated by the fascist regime currently holding power in DC.
Martin Luther Kings address did not state “I have a dream that one day blacks will be able to get jobs in the world even though they can’t pass the necessary exams for the job, whether or not they are written or physical, or they are not qualified for the job and if they are unable to pass these tests or they do not have the qualifications to perform the job, I dream that the world will lower the qualifications so that the blacks may get these jobs, perhaps putting others in danger because of their lack of these necessary qualifications.”
If you are unable to perform the job you are applying for, and can not pass the necessary exams for the position, no matter what it is, no matter what the color of your skin, then you can not have that job. Period. No special rules on any side of the race fence.
The race card should not work anymore, for any reason. President Obama is proof of that. They did not change the qualifications for him so he could become president.
Following the recent apology which set the stage
This shows that Ms. Sotomayor isn’t qualified to sit on the SCOTUS. She hasn’t earned anything and her entire education and career are all unearned affirmative action events. When she attended undergraduate school at Princeton, her reading level was so low that she was assigned primary grade readers to learn to read. This, notwithstanding that she was the so-called co-class valedictorian or her NYC high school graduating class.
This shows that Ms. Sotomayor isn’t qualified to sit on the SCOTUS. She hasn’t earned anything and her entire education and career are all unearned affirmative action events. When she attended undergraduate school at Princeton, her reading level was so low that she was assigned primary grade readers to learn to read. This, notwithstanding that she was the so-called co-class valedictorian or her NYC high school graduating class.
sotomayor and other liberals think it’s okay for that gal holding the scales out in front of the court house to sometimes take a peek out from under that blindfold
Joe– your postings are more often than not irresponsible and inaccurate. Please go terrorize another Web site.
Cant’t take the painful truth, can you Harry. You must be an Obama zombie and a beneficiary of preferential race-based hiring of minorities yourself, or both. Can’t have you working hard like the rest of us, now can we, when you expect to get everything handed to you.
Joe should’nt dis Sotomayer since he has posted the same comment twice…….Twelve minutes apart….what’s with that????
Good question, Hummer. It just came out that way although I only hit send once.
Ah, but “they” did change the standards for Obama to become POTUS. He is not a natural born citizen as defined in Article 2 of the US Constitution. To date, he has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees fighting release of any long-form birth certificate or school records, etc. Judges have dismissed dozens of lawsuits demanding proof, citing that the litigants don’t have standing to sue, etc. 52% of the people in the US have turned a blind eye to this disturbing lack of constitutional qualification to hold the highest office in the US. So sadly, the standards were lowered, even for the mighty Barack, though not because of affirmative action. More like “Anyone but another Bush” or WLG.
For more info on the question of constitutional eligiblity of Mr. Obama to serve as POTUS, please read this article: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=102569
Harry, Harry,
so contrary,
Your hate
Will not abate.
But have no fear,
For Joe is here
To train
Your feeble brain.
On a serious note Mr. Never Posts anything of substance, your comment isn’t, as you well know, an inaccurate post on my facts about Ms. Sotomayor’s so-called educational & professional achievements. Please consult further this article from the prestigious publication, Human Events.
(Still trying out monikers, heh? Are you married to Louise? If yes, then you really oppose nationalizing health care. For your next post, use bozo as your moniker.
**************************
Having lost the Congress in 2006 and the White House in 2008, Republicans are looking to redefine themselves for a nation that still leans conservative but is less Republican that it has been in decades.
The nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the U.S. Supreme Court presents just such an opportunity. For, even if the party loses the battle and Sotomayor sits on the court, it can win the war, as Ronald Reagan won the Panama Canal debate, even as Senate Republicans committed collective suicide by voting to give away the canal.
What are the grounds for rejecting Sonia Sotomayor?
No one has brought forth the slightest evidence she has the intellectual candlepower to sit on the Roberts court. By her own admission, Sotomayor is an “affirmative action baby.”
Though the Obama media have been ballyhooing her brilliance — No. 1 in high school, No. 1 at Princeton, editor of Yale Law Review — her academic career appears to have been a fraud from beginning to end, a testament to Ivy League corruption.
Two weeks ago, The New York Times reported that, to get up to speed on her English skills at Princeton, Sotomayor was advised to read children’s classics and study basic grammar books during her summers. How do you graduate first in your class at Princeton if your summer reading consists of “Chicken Little” and “The Troll Under the Bridge”?
In video clips dating back 25 years, and now provided to the Senate Judiciary Committee, Sotomayor, according to the Times, even calls herself an “affirmative action product.”
“The clips include lengthy remarks about her experiences as an ‘affirmative action baby,’ whose lower test scores were overlooked by admissions committees at Princeton University and Yale Law School because, she said, she is Hispanic and had grown up in poor circumstance.”
“If we had gone through the traditional numbers route of those institutions,” says Sotomayor, “it would have been highly questionable if I would have been accepted. … My test scores were not comparable to that of my classmates.”
Thus, Sotomayor got into Princeton, got her No. 1 ranking, was whisked into Yale Law School and made editor of the Yale Law Review — all because she was a Hispanic woman. And those two Ivy League institutions cheated more deserving students of what they had worked a lifetime to achieve, for reasons of race, gender or ethnicity.
This is bigotry pure and simple. To salve their consciences for past societal sins, the Ivy League is deep into discrimination again, this time with white males as victims rather than as beneficiaries.
One prefers the old bigotry. At least it was honest, and not, as Abraham Lincoln observed, adulterated “with the base alloy of hypocrisy.”
As the Times reports, on the tapes, Sotomayor rejects “the proposition that minorities must become advocates of ‘selection by merit alone.’ She said diversity improved the legal system.”
“‘Since I have difficultly defining merit and what merit alone means, and … whether it’s judicial or otherwise, I accept that different experiences, in and of itself, bring merit to the system,’ she said, adding, ‘I think it brings to the system more of a sense of fairness when these litigants see people like myself on the bench.”
What does the latest Times revelation tell us?
That were it not for Ivy League dishonesty, Sotomayor would not have gotten into Princeton, would never have been ranked first in her class, would not have gotten into Yale Law, nor been named editor of Yale Law Review, and thus would not be a U.S. appellate court judge today or a nominee to the Supreme Court.
Indeed, the White House itself leaked that the final four court candidates were all women and Sotomayor was picked because she was a Latina. One wonders how many superior students and judges have been passed over to advance Sonia Sotomayor’s career?
From college days to court days, that career reflects, in word and deed, a determination to use any power she achieves to create a society where the demands of diversity triumph over the ideal of equal justice under law. For Sotomayor, the advancement of people of color over white males is justice.
Republican senators should use this Sotomayor nomination to put affirmative action in the dock for what it is — race-based bigotry against white males so that persons of color can receive the rewards of society that they could not win in free and fair competition.
Lay out the Sotomayor record — SAT scores, LSAT scores, bar exam score, law review articles and her opinions — so that we can see up close what those who eviscerated Robert Bork regard as academic and judicial excellence.
No need for name-calling.
Just lay out the lady’s opinions and record, so that, if she is elevated, Americans can say: Barack Obama voted against Chief Justice Roberts because Roberts could not measure up to Sonia Sotomayor, his ideal of what a justice ought to be.
Joe
Human Events, prestigious? Only if you’re a right wingnut marching in step and regurgitating the daily talking points.
Why don’t you take a deep breath… spend more time studying history and less time stealing extremists’ ideas just to trash other Americans and their accomplishments … to which you could never hold a candle.
Please go find a political Web site to post your rants. This is an insurance site.
Best wishes.
Now Remus—or should I say wanna be genus, this comment was out of order and it’s obvious that we are an undeserving beneficiary of slavery…but I digress. Being an authority on diversity I have to say that this was the correct ruling. Discrimination of any kind is wrong, even if it is reverse-discrimination. Affirmative action was a quick fix to employment discrimination (yes people it still exists) because some American’s can’t be trusted to govern themselves ethically. Hopefully we as Americans wake up and realize that diversity is the ke to competing in a global economy.
Claimsguy I think it is my turn to educate you my friend. You just stated that Harry was the “beneficiary of preferential race-based hiring of minorities.” I am sorry but most of “majority”, for lack of better terminology, has been living off of preferential raced-based treatment for centuries. Do you know the history of this country Claimsguy? How did America become so wealty & powerful? Read a freaking book. Without the extermination of the Native American, the exploitation of Africans, Asians and Eastern & Southern Europeans, we would not have gained the wealth and power that we have today. So if Harry is the “beneficiary of preferential race-based hiring of minorities” then he probably deserves just a little bit of it!
Isn’t the phrase “reverse-discrimination” an oxy-moron? It doesn’t make any sense. Discrimination is discrimination, no matter who is being discriminated.
No, you’re wrong, Harry and you’re also an idiotic fool.
“Which,” as used in your sentence, can only and must refer to Americans, because your email refers to me with the word “you” and not my accomplishments. If it were to be as you claim, then you should’ve written ‘to which your accomplishments do not hold a candle.’ Of course, it’s clear to all that you’re too stupid to know this.
You’re a typical liberal; you try to present yourself as an erudite person, but, in reality, you’re just a faux intellectual. In other words, I’m writing that I consider you a phoney.
Also, IRO your post under the moniker Authority, it’s not diversity that will make America competitive in global trade, but rather, it will be the qualities of competence, productivity, and expertise that will make America as such. Affirmative action (“AA”) undermines these three qualities.
Facts speak for themselves, because since the advent of AA, America has become less competitive in the global market. Of course, as a liberal, you hate facts.
You’re truly a very simple, control freak. Hencey, your new moniker, Authority.
You’re a joke and a phoney.
Go back to your cubicle and fume at the world for not concurring with your inflated view of yourself.
I look forward to your next ranting post; maybe you can frighten some other woman as you did with your posts IRO the June 15 article about Obama’s health plan. Of course, I won’t respond to it; I’ve toyed with you enough the last two days.
Even though you’re a freak, Jesus loves you; albeit, He may be the only One who loves you.
Come on Joe, don’t sound so angry. I can tell that some buttons must have been pushed. You also have a narrow-minded view of diversity my friend but I will not penalize you for your lack of research and ignorance. Do you really know the reason why AA was established? It was established because mental migits like yourself lacked the self-esteem and confidence to honestly allow yourself to be intellectually challenged by the people you used to oppress. I agree, as you said “qualities of competence, productivity, and expertise” will make America competitive but we should not oppress our own citizens to make it so. Wake up, it’s not 1955. Look at the auto industry. Outside of the extreme financial issues why did they fail…..? It was their lack of diversity. No genus, not race, sex, age or ethnicity but their inability to embrace diverse ideas which ultimately led to their demise (Chrysler & GM respectively). Remember how the big 3 laughed at the Japanese vehicles around 30 years ago? Now Fiat is buying Chrysler and GM is in court trying to figure it out. Educate yourself, step your game up and then get into the ring with Ali.
Thankfully, many seem to be getting the point, and hopefully those who haven’t will: our rules and laws should be based on sound reason and logic, not some manipulated trickery designed to give some segment of society an advantage over another. That is UNFAIR discrimination. Now, to use a myopic view of history (I shall coin the phrase, and you can say you saw it here first: twistory) to justify reverse discrimination is wrong. To say that the wealth of our nation was based entirely, or even mostly, on slavery and oppression is incorrect. I’m certain that quite a bit of our nation’s prosperity and wealth has been the result of hard work, innovation and creativity – which history teaches us flourishes in a free and just society. I’m equally certain that to suggest otherwise would be considered deeply offensive by, and to, the previous generations who made great sacrifices to lay the foundations of our great nation, where even those with whom we disagree may live and breath free. History must be viewed in its entirety, and in context – much like reading an insurance policy. The fact of the matter, and the truth is, that slavery and oppression was practiced by many ALL OVER the world (and sadly, still is in some parts): black people enslaving black people; white people enslaving white people; indentured servitude; oppression by one group of people over another, etc, etc… and all of these things we should consider backwards and unjust in our modern society….but were at one time considered the accepted norm, in many cases even by the oppressed, who if given half a chance would gladly have become the oppressor!
So, let us not move backward to where oppression or favoritism by any group over any other is acceptable, but forward to where a level playing field is guaranteed for ALL! Not everyone will fail, not everyone will succeed, but at least we should all be playing by the same rules…now that’s the basis of a civil society and THAT’S equal justice under the law!
Bravo JB, I can applaud when the other person stars. Just to clarify I did not say that all or most of the wealth and prosperity was based on the oppression or extintion of certain cultures. But, we would not have prospered the way that we have if it weren’t for slavery, manifest-destiny, or the exploitation of other cultures. This history of this country is great but we do have dirty little secrets, like most properous civilizations in history. Unfortunately, we often fail to acknowledge them in order to move forward. Not asking for reparations but yes, an even playing field would be nice but you have to admit that we are not there yet. We have come a long way as a country but have a long way to go. Hopefully we walk that path hand in hand and not as adversaries.
Just FYI, Joe, I am not Authority. But guess that won’t stop your pointless triades. Please go to another site and leave the insurance people here alone.
Harry,
Joe is probably not available anymore today. He went back to his bomb shelter to wait for the Berlin Wall to fall and the Soviet Union to crumble!
You’re either an idiot and a liar or just plain too lazy to research or some combintation of these characterizations. Your very liberal NY Times just this Sunday had an article about how the autoworkers in Detroit are mostly black and how this changed the focus of the political activities of the UAW.
You’re so phoney, Harry, Yellow Male, and now, Authority. Even this last moniker of yours is very revealing of your insecurities. Most likely, you’re not even an authority on knowing your age, home address, or phone number.
You never present facts to support your positions. You merely continue with your uniformed, idiotic foaming at the mouth. You don’t even read the articles that I post, because if you were to read them, you’d see that they reveal the sources of facts. You’re even too stupid to know what’s research. To you, research is reaching into your pants when nature calls.
Get a brain, you moron.
Equality on Trial Thomas Sowell
Wednesday, July 01, 2009
For the fourth time in six cases, the Supreme Court of the United States has reversed a decision for which Judge Sonia Sotomayor voted on the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals. If this nominee were a white male, would this not raise questions about whether he should be elevated to a court that has found his previous decisions wrong two-thirds of the times when those decisions have been reviewed?
Is no one supposed to ask questions about qualifications, simply because this nominee is Hispanic and a woman? Have we become that mindless?
Qualifications are not simply a question of how long you have been doing something, but how well you have done it. Judge Sotomayor has certainly been on the federal bench long enough, but is being reversed four out of six times a sign of a job well done?
Would longevity be equated with qualifications anywhere else? Some sergeants have been in the army longer than some generals but nobody thinks that is a reason to make those sergeants generals.
Performance matters. And Judge Sotomayor’s performance provides no reason for putting her on the Supreme Court.
Although the case of the Connecticut firefighters is the latest and best-known of Judge Sotomayor’s reversals by the Supreme Court, an even more revealing case was Didden v. Village of Port Chester, where the Supreme Court openly rebuked the unanimous three-judge panel that included Judge Sotomayor for “an evident denial of the most elementary forms of procedural due process.”
Longevity is not the only false argument for putting Sonia Sotomayor on the Supreme Court. Another is the argument that “elections have consequences,” so that the fact that Barack Obama won last year’s elections means that his choice for the Supreme Court should be confirmed. This is a political talking point rather than a serious argument.
Of course elections have consequences. But Senators were also elected, and the Constitution of the United States gives them both the right and the duty to say “yes” or “no” to any president’s judicial nominees.
It is painfully appropriate that the case which finally took the Sotomayor nomination beyond the realm of personal biography is one where the key question is how far this country is going to go on the question of racial representation versus individual qualifications.
Too much that Sonia Sotomayor has said and done over the years places her squarely in the camp of those supporting a racial spoils system instead of equal treatment for all. The organizations she has belonged to, as well as the statements she has made repeatedly — not just an isolated slip of the tongue taken “out of context”– as well as her dismissing the white firefighters’ case that the Supreme Court heard and heeded, all point in the same direction.
Within living memory, there was a time when someone who was black could not get certain jobs, regardless of how high that individual’s qualifications might be. It outraged the conscience of a nation and aroused people of various races and social backgrounds to rise up against it, sometimes at the risk of their lives.
Many, if not most, thought that they were fighting for equal treatment for all. But, today, too many people seem to think it is just a question of whose ox is gored– or for whom one has “empathy,” which amounts to the same thing in practice.
Clever people say that none of this matters because Republican Senators don’t have enough votes to stop this nominee from being confirmed. But that assumes that every Democrats will vote for her, regardless of what the public thinks. It also assumes that alerting the public doesn’t matter, now or for the future.
The standards for judging the nomination of Sonia Sotomayor are not the standards of either the criminal law or the civil law. That is, nothing has to be proven against her “beyond a reasonable doubt” or even by “a preponderance of the evidence.”
Judge Sotomayor is not in any jeopardy that would entitle her to the benefit of the doubt. It is 300 million Americans and their posterity who are entitled to the benefit of the doubt when the enormous power of determining what their rights are is put into anyone’s hands as a Supreme Court justice for life.
Joe, once again you show your ignorance by posting nonsense on this website. You shouldn’t attempt to post & watch Jerry Springer at the same time genus. So quick question? How many of those black Detroit autoworkers are decision-makers for the Big 3? Once again your anger, frustration & low self-esteem shine through. Joe it’s 2009, stop trying to plant the seed of facism on this website. Also, do you honestly believe that a cut & paste job of a biased article is research? I see there is some ROI on that basket-weaving degree. Have a great Independence Day if you live in the states, hopefully you will find your intellectual independence!
Dear Fool:
Here’s what would be an intelligent exchange. I post something; rather than you commenting on the fact that it was an article or research obtained from another source, you’d, instead, try to find another article or source to refute either the facts, opinions, or conclusions in what was posted by me.
For example, I posted opinions by the Canadian SC, several Canadians newspapers, and several Canadian physicians about why nationalized health care is bad in Canada.
I’ll do your research for you as to what would be an intelligent response. He should’ve responded that, “Well, those comments and opinions by the Canadians quoted by you are correct, but in polls, 54% of Canadians are satisfied with their health care.” Then, you’d site the source of this poll. I have the source, but won’t provide to you the source, because you need to learn how to do research instead of spouting uneducated, opinions.
Then, I sur-reply to your site of the poll by writing that I’m familiar with the poll, but when the poll is broken down by age and people who’ve had to access Canadian national health care for major health problems, then the disapproval of Canada’s national health care among such users of it is 75%.
You’re incapable of such an exchange, because you’re an idiot. And by the way, please learn to spell. It’s fascism, not “facism”, you ignorant fool.
Go back to daydreaming that you’re someone who knows something about anything. You likely still need assistance tying your shoes.
You must be a fool of many a**holes, because opinions are like a**holes, everyone has one; however, you’ve many opinions (all unsupported by anything resembling a fact). Hence, you’re a boy of many a**holes. As a native-American, I have the authority to name you. From hereon in, I always will refer to you “Many A**holes;” this is your native-American name; you’ve earned this name by exhibiting stupidity and arrogance above and beyond what could be imagined by anyone.
Have a happy 4th of July, Many A**holes.
Joe, you are just plain rude. And I believe you truly like to read your own posts. Also, as you call other posters idiots and a*****s, remember, it takes one to know one. You are an enigma, smart but so crude.
Joe,
From a fellow Native-American descendent let me say that you are a disgrace. Bottom line. You have raw intelligence but you are ignorant and it is your ignorance that sullies your being. By reading your postings I can tell you are an individual with potential but your negativity imprisons you. Hopefully the Creator relieves you of your professional frustration.