Analysis: Obama's Supreme Court Pick

[QueEx]

Conservatives are going to grill her on the Ricci v. DeStefano decision... I wonder how the SC will handel it since they just heard oral arguments for the case.

I mentioned it in other places and I'll say it again, I think she'll be fine for the SC.

<font size="5"><center>
Supreme Court gives victory
to white firefighters</font size></center>

Ruling backs claim by group charging racial
discrimination, gives fodder to Sonia Sotomayor
critics. Photo: AP


P O L I T I C O
By JOSH GERSTEIN
June 29,, 2009


The Supreme Court handed a victory Monday to a group of white firefighters charging racial discrimination, while also giving some fodder to critics of President Barack Obama’s pending nominee for the high court, Judge Sonia Sotomayor.


Justice Anthony Kennedy, writing for a court split 5-4 along ideological lines, reversed an appeals court ruling Sotomayor joined last year that <SPAN style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffff00">rejected a claim that the City of New Haven, Conn. discriminated against white firefighters by throwing out a promotional exam after all the African-American firefighters who took it scored too poorly to be promoted</span>.


“Whatever the City’s ultimate aim—however well intentioned or benevolent it might have seemed—the City made its employment decision because of race. The City rejected the test results solely because the higher scoring candidates were white,” Kennedy wrote on behalf of Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito.


“Courts often confront cases in which statutes and principles point in different directions,” the Kennedy opinion noted.


However, Kennedy said that <SPAN style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffff00">allowing the city’s conduct would establish “a de facto quota system” where test results could be discarded whenever a particular racial group didn’t achieve the average score</span>.


<SPAN style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffff00">Kennedy and the justices in the majority appeared to join those critics who considered Sotomayor’s panel unduly dismissive of the case. He noted that the appeals court initially rejected the white firefighters’ appeal with “a one-paragraph, unpublished summary order” and later replaced the order with a “nearly-identical, one-paragraph per curiam opinion.”


The ruling will be portrayed as a snub to Sotomayor, but the fact that four judges agreed with her position suggests that her assessment of the case was hardly outside the mainstream. </span>


The case stems from a lieutenants’ promotion exam administered to New Haven, Conn. firefighters in 2003. After no African American firefighters ranked highly, the city’s Civil Service Board threw out the results and decided not to make any immediate promotions.


Eighteen white firefighters, including one Hispanic, sued, claiming racial discrimination. The city countered that it was simply trying to avoid being sued by black firefighters argued that the test was unfairly skewed.


A district court judge sided with the city and tossed the suit out before trial. Last year, a three-judge Second Circuit panel, including Sotomayor, backed that decision.


Critics said Sotomayor’s ruling amounted to judicial activism and indicated her penchant for “identity politics.” Others, including her supporters, said she was simply following established rules. Several states entered the case arguing that local officials should have the flexibility to discard such an exam without court intervention.


<font size="3">The White House has sought to defend Sotomayor’s ruling</font size> in the case, but the task has been made more complicated by the fact that in April, before Sotomayor was nominated, the Justice Department asked the Supreme Court to set aside the ruling she joined in and return the case to the district court. The Obama Administration said the white firefighters should have been granted a trial to try to prove that the city’s motivation for canceling the exam included racial favoritism.


Nevertheless, allies of Sotomayor have been arguing for weeks that a reversal of the Second Circuit decision she backed could not be seen as a clear-cut verdict on her legal acumen.


“A decision reversing the Second Circuit would be no ill reflection on” Sotomayor and the judges who agreed with her, University of Michigan Professor Richard Primus wrote in a letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee earlier this month. “Lower courts do not have the duty to anticipate the Supreme Court’s new legal interpretations. Their responsibility is to apply the law as it stands when cases are before them.”

Sotomayor critics contend the Supreme Court’s ruling amounted to a 9-0 shutout for the nominee. The critics note that a footnote in Ginsburg’s opinion suggests that the dissenters would have returned the case to the district court for further proceedings. “Ordinarily, a remand for fresh consideration would be in order,” she wrote.


However, the dissenters seem to dance around their view of Sotomayor’s ruling, never saying explicitly that they would set it aside.



However, other analysts described Sotomayor’s ruling as deeply troubling.


“The unmistakable logic of Sotomayor's position would encourage employers to discriminate against high-scoring groups based on race -- no matter how valid and lawful the qualifying test -- in any case in which disproportionate numbers of protected minorities have low scores, as is the norm,” a legal commentator for National Journal, Stuart Taylor, wrote. “Such logic would convert disparate-impact law into an engine of overt discrimination against high-scoring groups across the country and allow racial politics and racial quotas to masquerade as voluntary compliance with the law.”

The controversy over Sotomayor’s handling of the Ricci case was fueled not only by her decision, but also by the cursory fashion in which it was delivered. The initial Second Circuit ruling upholding dismissal of the case consisted of roughly nine lines on a single page.


The so-called summary order the three-judge panel filed in February 2008 in lieu of a more formal opinion was issued by Sotomayor, along with Judges Rosemary Pooler and Robert Sack.


“We affirm, substantially for the reasons stated in the thorough, thoughtful, and well-reasoned opinion of the court below,” the three judges wrote. “In this case, the Civil Service Board found itself in the unfortunate position of having no good alternatives. We are not unsympathetic to the plaintiffs' expression of frustration. Mr. Ricci, for example, who is dyslexic, made intensive efforts that appear to have resulted in his scoring highly on one of the exams, only to have it invalidated. But it simply does not follow that he has a viable Title VII [racial discrimination] claim. To the contrary, because the Board, in refusing to validate the exams, was simply trying to fulfill its obligations under Title VII when confronted with test results that had a disproportionate racial impact, its actions were protected.”


As is customary with such orders, no judge was publicly identified as the author. However, Sotomayor may have hinted at her own views on the dispute during oral arguments in the case. “We’re not suggesting that unqualified people be hired, the city’s not suggesting that,” she told a lawyer for the white firefighters. But “if your test is going to always put a certain group at the bottom of the pass rate so they’re never, ever going to be promoted, and there is a fair test that could be devised that measures knowledge in a more substantive way, then why shouldn’t the city have an opportunity to try to look and see if it can develop that?”





http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0609/24322.html

 

[Gunner]

Using her logic, let's say your child needs open heart surgery; being the parent it is your choice which doctor performs the procedure. Would you choose the doctor who was admistered the "fair test" or a doctor like Dr. Ben Carson who earned it tested like all other physicians and who is a world respected physician perform the procedure? One of the white guys even had a learning disability and failed the test several times before finally passing the exam. So should we accept the lowering of the bar? Buckle down and study harder!!

 

[QueEx]

What part of "her logic" are you relying upon ??? Quote it.

QueEx

 

[Gunner]

As is customary with such orders, no judge was publicly identified as the author. However, Sotomayor may have hinted at her own views on the dispute during oral arguments in the case. “We’re not suggesting that unqualified people be hired, the city’s not suggesting that,” she told a lawyer for the white firefighters. But “if your test is going to always put a certain group at the bottom of the pass rate so they’re never, ever going to be promoted, and there is a fair test that could be devised that measures knowledge in a more substantive way, then why shouldn’t the city have an opportunity to try to look and see if it can develop that?”

The final paraghaph!! Also the author of the op-ed mentions her logic. Is it ok to discriminate based on race alone. If you were trapped in a burning building would you want the most qualified or someone who hasn't earned the title? Her notion of lowering the bar is rather condesending. What's wrong with expecting quality? Jobs should be merit based. You pass the test you move up.

 

[QueEx]

As is customary with such orders, no judge was publicly identified as the author. However, Sotomayor may have hinted at her own views on the dispute during oral arguments in the case. “We’re not suggesting that unqualified people be hired, the city’s not suggesting that,” she told a lawyer for the white firefighters. But<SPAN style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffff00"> “if your test is going to always put a certain group at the bottom of the pass rate so they’re never, ever going to be promoted, and there is a fair test that could be devised that measures knowledge in a more substantive way, then why shouldn’t the city have an opportunity to try to look and see if it can develop that?” </span>

Whats wrong with her logic ???

If there is a test that places some groups at the bottom of the pass rate; AND, there is a "Fair Test" that could be used or devised for use that measures the requisite knowledge in such a way that doesn't have that result, why not develop or use that test ??? WHY ???

Isn't it implicit in the former that there may be a bias, flaw or some mechanism that yields the disproportionate result ???

QueEx

 

[Gunner]

Again my question to you, your child is in need of a life threating surgery it's your call. Mr. Que I was faced with that decision several times being that I have a child with special needs. As head of my household it was my duty to seek the most qualified staff to care for my child. Throughout the process we ran into SEVERAL accomplished black and white health care professionals who just by talking to them you know they didn't take the easy way out. I've had doctors tell me they were afraid to touch my child. That doesn't mean he was incompetent. He told me that he wasn't certified to do the procedure. I've sat in hospitals and watch cluless doctors as well. Certainly if I didn't know, I wasn't going to put my child life in the hands of someone who is not experienced.

Do you know what it's like for many black students to sit in upper tiered universities and have their counterparts assume they are there by way of some set aside program rather than their own intellectual abilities. A while back you posted a topic centering on the accomplishments of notable blacks. I'm certain long ago they had to EARN that degree back in the day, and you know how substandard the schools were for us then. Now we are complaining even though we have acces to what they didn't have. A few years ago we were right to voice our opinion about not having the opportunity to even take the test. Now we have access to run the race and we ask for a head start because we are black. Who will determine what is fair? If we are expected to perform on the football field, why not the science lab.

 

[Gunner]

Whats wrong with her logic ???

If there is a test that places some groups at the bottom of the pass rate; AND, there is a "Fair Test" that could be used or devised for use that measures the requisite knowledge in such a way that doesn't have that result, why not develop or use that test ??? WHY ???

Isn't it implicit in the former that there may be a bias, flaw or some mechanism that yields the disproportionate result ???

QueEx

Black People achieving without lowering the bar!!! What I like about Dubois is he set out to prove to the world that the Negro is capable. This is a brief synopsis.

THE AMERICAN NEGRO AT PARIS


BY W. E. BURGHARDT DU BOIS

[1] On the banks of the Seine, opposite the Rue des Nations, stands a large, plain white building, where the promoters of the Paris Exposition have housed the world's ideas of sociology. As a matter of fact, any one who takes his sociology from theoretical treatises would be rather disappointed at the exhibit; for there is little here of the "science of society." On the other hand, those who have followed historically the development, out of the old Political Economy, of a miscellaneous body of knowing chiefly connected with the larger aspects of human benevolence, will here find much of interest: the building and mutual-aid societies of France; the working-man's circles of Belgium; the city governments of Sweden; the Red Cross Society; the state insurance of Germany,--are all here strikingly exhibited by charts, statistics, models, and photographs.
[2] The United States section of this building is small, and not, at first glance, particularly striking. There are, in the center, well-made tenement-house models; in one corner a small exhibit of the American Library Association, and elsewhere sets of interesting maps and photographs showing the work of factory inspectors and typical industrial plants. All these exhibits, are, unfortunately, rather fragmentary, and do scant justice to the wonderful social and economic development of America.
[3] In the right-hand corner, however, as one enters, is an exhibit which, more than most others in the building, is sociological in the larger sense of the term--that is, is an attempt to give, in as systematic and compact a form as possible, the history and present condition of a large group of human beings. This is the exhibit of American Negroes, planned and executed by Negroes, and collected and installed under the direction of a Negro special agent, Mr. Thomas J. Calloway. On p.576 (upper right) there is a large photograph with the caption "Exhibit of American Negroes at the Paris Exposition". This photo can be viewed in another browser window (and afterwards, click the BackSpace key to return to the essay).
[4] In this exhibit there are, of course, the usual paraphernalia for catching the eye-- photographs, models, industrial work, and pictures. But it does not stop here; beneath all this is a carefully thought-out plan, according to which the exhibitors have tried to show:
(a) The history of the American Negro.
(b) His present condition.
(c) His education.
(d) His literature.

[5] The history of the Negro is illustrated by charts and photographs; there is, for instance, a series of striking models of the progress of the colored people, beginning with the homeless freedman and ending with the modern brick schoolhouse and its teachers. There are charts of the increase of Negro population, the routes of the African slave-trade, the progress of emancipation, and the decreasing illiteracy. There are pictures of the old cabins, and, in three great manuscript volumes, the complete black code of Georgia, from colonial times to the end of the nineteenth century. Not the least interesting contribution to history is the case given to Negro medal-of-honor men in the army and navy -- from the man who "seized the colors after two color-bearers had been shot down and bore them nobly through the fight" to the black men in the Spanish War who "voluntarily went ashore in the face of the enemy and aided in the rescue of their wounded comrades." It was a Massachusetts lawyer who replied to the Patent Office inquiry, "I never knew a negro to invent anything but lies;" and yet here is a record of 350 patents granted to black men since 1834. The "voluntarily went ashore" quotation is from General Orders No. 15, published by the Headquaters of the Army, Adjutant General's Office (February 13, 1900). It refers to the heroic acts done during the Spanish American War that won four African American soldiers the Medal of Honor: William H. Thompkins, Fitz Lee, Dennis Bell, and George H. Wanton [Page of G.O. # 15 on Google Books].

Although published later, let us note that Henry E. Baker, Assistant Examiner of the U.S. Patent Office, wrote The Colored Inventor, A Record of Fifty Years (NY: The Crisis Publishing Co., 1913) [Download page at Project Gutenberg].
[6] The bulk of the exhibit, is naturally, an attempt to picture present conditions. Thirty-two charts, 500 photographs, and numerous maps and plans form the basis of this exhibit. The charts are in two sets, one illustrating conditions in the entire United States and the other conditions in the typical State of Georgia. At a glance one can see the successive steps by which the 220,000 Negroes of 1750 had increased to 7,500,000 in 1890; their distribution throughout the different States; a comparison of the size of the Negro population with European countries bringing out the striking fact that there are nearly half as many Negroes in the United States as Spaniards in Spain. The striking movement by which the 4 2/5 per cent. of Negroes living in the cities in 1860 has increased to 12 per cent. in 1890 is shown, as is also the fact that recognized mulattoes have increased 50 per cent. in 30 years, even in the defective census returns. Twenty per cent. of the Negroes are shown to be home-owners, 60 per cent. of their children are in school, and their illiteracy is less than that of Russia, and only equal to that of Hungary.








Regarding the "4 2/5 per cent." amount: this is somewhat illegible on the page image at Google Books (p. 577). It might be "4 1/5 per cent."

Note the comparisons with foreign countries; Du Bois continued the cross-national perspective that he had used in The Philadelphia Negro (1899) and "The Negroes of Farmville, Virginia" (1898).
[7] It was a good idea to supplement these very general figures with a minute social study in a typical Southern State. It would hardly be suggested, in the light of recent history, that conditions in the State of Georgia are such as to give a rose-colored picture of the Negro; and yet Georgia, having the largest Negro population, is an excellent field of study. Here again we have statistics: the increase of the black population in a century from 30,000 to 860,000, the huddling in the Black Belt for self-protection since the war, and a comparison of the age distribution with France showing the wonderful reproductive powers of the blacks. The school enrollment has increased from 10,000 in 1870 to 180,000 in 1897, and the Negroes are distributed among the occupations as follows:

[8] In agriculture, 62 per cent.; in domestic and personal service, 28 per cent.; in manufacturing and mechanical industries, 5 per cent.; in trade and transportation, 4 1/2 per cent.; in the professions, 1/2 per cent.
[9] They own 1,000,000 acres of land and pay taxes on $12,000,000 worth of property--not large, but telling figures; and the charts indicate, from year to year, the struggle they have had to accumulate and hold this property. There are several volumes of photographs of typical Negro faces, which hardly square with conventional American ideas. Several maps show the peculiar distribution of the white and black inhabitants in various towns and counties.
[10] The education of the Negro is illustrated in the work of five great institutions--Fisk, Atlanta, and Howard Universities, and Tuskegee and Hampton Institutes. The exhibit from Fisk illustrates, by photographs and examination papers, the work of secondary and higher education. Atlanta University shows her work in social study and the work of her college and normal graduates; Howard University shows the work of her professional schools, especially in medicine, theology, and law. From Hampton there is an especially excellent series of photographs illustrating the Hampton idea of "teaching by doing," and from Tuskegee there are numerous specimens of work from the manual-training and technical departments.
[11] Perhaps the most unique and striking exhibit is that of American Negro literature. The development of Negro thought--the view of themselves which these millions of freedmen have taken--is of intense psychological and practical interest. There are many who have scarcely heard of a Negro book, much less read one; still here is a bibliography made by the Library of Congress containing 1,400 titles of works written by Negroes; 200 of these books are exhibited on the shelves. The Negroes have 150 periodicals, mostly weekly papers, many of which are exhibited here.

Damn it feel good to see people up on it!!! Biz Markie

 

[Gunner]

Whats wrong with her logic ???

If there is a test that places some groups at the bottom of the pass rate; AND, there is a "Fair Test" that could be used or devised for use that measures the requisite knowledge in such a way that doesn't have that result, why not develop or use that test ??? WHY ???

Isn't it implicit in the former that there may be a bias, flaw or some mechanism that yields the disproportionate result ???

QueEx

Zora Neale Hurston never knew racial preference policies once wrote: " It seems to me that if I say a whole system must be upset for me to win, I am saying that I cannot sit in the game, and that safer rules must be made to give me a chance. I repudiate that. If others are in there, deal me a hand and let me see what I can make of it.




By John H. McWhorter


EMAIL THIS
PRINTER FRIENDLY



The Supreme Court’s legitimization of pursuing “diversity” in composing a university class is the saddest development in civil rights since the Bakke decision of 1978.

That’s no renegade assessment from a “black conservative.” The decision ratifies a practice that black Americans themselves overwhelmingly deplore. Too often lost is that while racial preference advocates coo about the importance of “diverse” perspectives in classrooms, black students tend not to appreciate being singled out this way. In a recent issue of Philadelphia Friends Central School’s newspaper devoted to diversity, a black teen treats this practice as an example of racism: “It makes you become representative of your race. Anything about black culture, they expect you to know.” The undergraduate-written Black Guide to Life at Harvard insists: “We are not here to provide diversity training for Kate or Timmy before they go out to take over the world.”

Meanwhile, in poll after poll, black Americans overwhelmingly disapprove of racial preferences. Typical was a poll by the Washington Post that showed 86 percent of blacks opposed. In Black Pride and Black Prejudice, Paul Sniderman and Thomas Piazza report that 90 percent of 756 blacks rejected admitting a black student over a white student when their difference in SAT scores is 25 points. In the Friends Central newspaper issue, a black teacher writes: “I would like to receive praise and awards and not have others consider them to be hand-outs.” He sees this as an aspect of racism in his life.

Sure, Monday’s decision outlaws quota and point systems, but this is window dressing. Permission to “take race into account” remains, and this phrase is a fig leaf for treating students’ skin color as one reason for admitting them over someone else. But this is what most black people do not approve of.

And the decision gives a stamp of approval to a general-thought culture where whites are comfortable assessing black people as head-count fodder. This leads to episodes like former New York Times reporter Jayson Blair being promoted beyond his capabilities out of a tacit sense that “diversity” was more important than his abilities.

Of course, many insist that racial preferences are about opening doors for people coming up the hard way, as if all but a sliver of black people live hardscrabble existences in 2003. But middle-class students have always benefitted most from preference policies.

“It is necessary that the path to leadership be visibly open to talented and qualified individuals of every race and ethnicity,” Justice Sandra Day O’Connor writes, as if racism somehow blocks even middle-class black students from posting grades and test scores as high as other students.

But it’s hard to see bigotry in the white administrators so elated this week that they will be able to continue jerryrigging classes into a suitable level of “diversity.” O’Connor’s statement tiptoes around the elephant sitting in the middle of the room: Why is it that even well-off black students so rarely hit the highest note in grades and scores?

The answer is a culture-internal tendency, largely tacit but powerful, to associate scholarly endeavor with being “white.” This affects black students’ performance regardless of class, as countless journalistic reports have demonstrated and UC-Berkeley professor of anthropology John Ogbu’s book-length study of the problem now confirms. If we wish to undo that tendency, lowering standards for all black people regardless of life circumstances will only nurture it.

As so often, what passes for civil-rights advocacy today contrasts jarringly with what black thinkers in the past assumed.

Zora Neale Hurston never knew racial preference policies, but once wrote: “It seems to me that if I say a whole system must be upset for me to win, I am saying that I cannot sit in the game, and that safer rules must be made to give me a chance. I repudiate that. If others are in there, deal me a hand and let me see what I can make of it.”

“Taking into account” socioeconomics is just in a society riddled with inequality. But Hurston would have deplored middle-class black students being submitted to lowered standards to assuage white guilt. She would be right, and Monday was a dark day for getting past race in this country.




©2009 The Philadelphia Inquirer

 

[Gunner]

Whats wrong with her logic ???

If there is a test that places some groups at the bottom of the pass rate; AND, there is a "Fair Test" that could be used or devised for use that measures the requisite knowledge in such a way that doesn't have that result, why not develop or use that test ??? WHY ???

Isn't it implicit in the former that there may be a bias, flaw or some mechanism that yields the disproportionate result ???

QueEx

This is what the black community is left with when you lower the bar. This Louisiana house member is presenting a resolution in the name of Hurricane Chris for his achievement of the song Halle Berry. In front of a legislative body for God's sake. I think someone should have tested this representative. Dude actually performed the song in front of a legislative body. RAISE THE STANDARDS!!!!

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/tg7JM-KO7BM&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/tg7JM-KO7BM&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>



Or who could forget this classic. This woman holds a Masters Degree in Public Speaking.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/KgbBP9Em00A&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/KgbBP9Em00A&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

 

[QueEx]

Again my question to you, your child is in need of a life threating surgery it's your call. Mr. Que I was faced with that decision several times being that I have a child with special needs. As head of my household it was my duty to seek the most qualified staff to care for my child. Throughout the process we ran into SEVERAL accomplished black and white health care professionals who just by talking to them you know they didn't take the easy way out. I've had doctors tell me they were afraid to touch my child. That doesn't mean he was incompetent. He told me that he wasn't certified to do the procedure. I've sat in hospitals and watch cluless doctors as well. Certainly if I didn't know, I wasn't going to put my child life in the hands of someone who is not experienced.

I can and do sympathize with your child, but nothing you said here has anything to do with the quote above. You seem to be confused. The quote talks about a "Fair Test" -- you are confusing Fair Test with something, I don't know what -- but its not Fair Test.

Do you know what it's like for many black students to sit in upper tiered universities and have their counterparts assume they are there by way of some set aside program rather than their own intellectual abilities.

Listen. Don't bring that reverse-bleeding heart shit to me.

FIRST, you have no idea what some student sitting in any class room feels. Simply said: You cannot feel what they feel. You can ONLY feel what YOU feel. What someone else feels is PURE SPECULATION, on your part.

SECOND, I attended an upper tier college and university. I didn't have the feelings that you described. Not at All.

THIRD, Did you have such an experience ???

A while back you posted a topic centering on the accomplishments of notable blacks. I'm certain long ago they had to EARN that degree back in the day, and you know how substandard the schools were for us then.

The more you talk, the more you give up your mental operations. That is, the more you type, the more you give up the telltale signs of whats really going on in YOUR mind. The signs tell me:

• You are obssessed with the feeling that some Black people are obtaining things you don't believe they are deservant; or

• You may have some serious self-esteem difficulties.

Check it out: you raised inferiority issues in this thread above where no one was even talking about them (i.e., Sotomayor talked about "Fair Test" -- You converted that to mean, someone (black) obtaining something that they didn't deserve or earn. Its like when you came at me in this thread, -- really weak -- and this statement was really telling, where you said:

You think you're smarter than you really are!!!!!! I challenge you to go to www.tigerdroppings.com and post an article like you normally do. That crap is like chum to them. They would eat you alive. You're in serious denial. You're are a flaming liberal socialist.​

really weenied.

Now we are complaining even though we have acces to what they didn't have. A few years ago we were right to voice our opinion about not having the opportunity to even take the test. Now we have access to run the race and we ask for a head start because we are black. Who will determine what is fair? If we are expected to perform on the football field, why not the science lab.

Is it wrong to want a "Fair Test" ???

What good does giving me the opportunity to take the test do, when the test you're going to give me may be biased in a way that makes my answers, wrong ??? To make it really simple for you:

The instructor shows the a picture of a Black man in overalls to (A) a young white child; and (B) a
young black child. The white child says the man in the picture is a beggar; the black child says the man is going to work. A simple example but there are other ways that tests may have built-in biases.​

The Black child doesn't want a head fucking start; he wants an equal fucking start. Or, do you contend that the Black child should have known that the man in the overalls, was just a beggar ???


QueEx

P.S. PLEASE DO YOUR BEST TO RESPOND TO THE ISSUES/QUESTIONS.

 

[Gunner]

I can and do sympathize with your child, but nothing you said here has anything to do with the quote above. You seem to be confused. The quote talks about a "Fair Test" -- you are confusing Fair Test with something, I don't know what -- but its not Fair Test.



Listen. Don't bring that reverse-bleeding heart shit to me.

FIRST, you have no idea what some student sitting in any class room feels. Simply said: You cannot feel what they feel. You can ONLY feel what YOU feel. What someone else feels is PURE SPECULATION, on your part.

SECOND, I attended an upper tier college and university. I didn't have the feelings that you described. Not at All.

THIRD, Did you have such an experience ???




The more you talk, the more you give up your mental operations. That is, the more you type, the more you give up the telltale signs of whats really going on in YOUR mind. The signs tell me:

• You are obssessed with the feeling that some Black people are obtaining things you don't believe they are deservant; or

• You may have some serious self-esteem difficulties.

Check it out: you raised inferiority issues in this thread above where no one was even talking about them (i.e., Sotomayor talked about "Fair Test" -- You converted that to mean, someone (black) obtaining something that they didn't deserve or earn. Its like when you came at me in this thread, -- really weak -- and this statement was really telling, where you said:

You think you're smarter than you really are!!!!!! I challenge you to go to www.tigerdroppings.com and post an article like you normally do. That crap is like chum to them. They would eat you alive. You're in serious denial. You're are a flaming liberal socialist.​

really weenied.



Is it wrong to want a "Fair Test" ???

What good does giving me the opportunity to take the test do, when the test you're going to give me may be biased in a way that makes my answers, wrong ??? To make it really simple for you:

The instructor shows the a picture of a Black man in overalls to (A) a young white child; and (B) a
young black child. The white child says the man in the picture is a beggar; the black child says the man is going to work. A simple example but there are other ways that tests may have built-in biases.​

The Black child doesn't want a head fucking start; he wants an equal fucking start. Or, do you contend that the Black child should have known that the man in the overalls, was just a beggar ???


QueEx

P.S. PLEASE DO YOUR BEST TO RESPOND TO THE ISSUES/QUESTIONS.

I was falling asleep but now I'm awake. First and foremost let me remind you of your tone and personal attacks like you reprimanded me the other day when I stepped on your toes. I will try my best to not go postal on you and lose my decorum on this board again.

Interrogatory 1: Your op-ed mentions changing the test because of some a large percentage of minorities failed the test. Well Que, you post here everyday have you checked the achievement gap data by numbers pertaining to race we, as a people are falling behind you know. Testing is used as a mechanism to measure cognitive ability. Let focus on small children for a moment. During the sixties these tests were used by the federal government as a variable in devising its War on Poverty. If I follow your way of thinking and lower the bar, these children will be forever left behind as many are now. Just because you lower the bar that doesn't equate to the success rate in the long run. As much as you are abreast to current events dude you see it. Don't be so selective just to prove your point at the expense of a child. I truly understand what she means by Fair Test.
That is why I left the democratic party. As long as we promote the party were in good standing. But the moment we question authority or wording. Then we are uppity negros who don't know our place. Or we are not thankful enough. You say you're in school currently, learn to decipher crap.

Interrogatory 2: I said many not all students. Many large universities have black student unions or diversity department so black scholars can have an outlet to share experiences. Google it !! I will not do your homework for you this time.
No I did not, have such experiences. I guess because I was bookish and on the dean's list. My girlfriend at the time was a bookworm as well so I had to adapt to the environment.

Interrogatory 3: I hope your major is not psychology. Because your assessment of me is quite spurious. I love to see black achievement. Which is why I always attack posts that seem to take the victim mentality. I gave you props on your post regarding black fathers. I love shit like that. Check my postings you'll see. If I disagree with Obama its always regarding policy never personal. Hell I think it sucks my party is suppose to be the party of family values and in 2 weeks its scandal after scandal yet we complain that Obama is taking his wife on a date. You cant have it both ways. In one breath you speak to equality then you want the rules changed because you don't like the results of the test.

Interrogatory 4: I apologized to the board regarding my tirade and calling you a socialist. I was responding to how quick you want to enforce the rules on righties and not lefties. I digress

Interrogatory 5: Simple answer: Go to your professor and ask for a fair test due to the racial bias that is so widespread in America. If you attend a large institution of higher learning as you say, do you think your fellow pupils would be okay with that. Furthermore, did racial bias keep you from being afforded the opportunity to get pass the admission department.

It's like your mixing words like Bill Clinton being questioned about cum stains. She said fair test. Would you be happy if you busted your ass to get decent grades to get into your college and you were denied due in part to quotas would you be pissed? Come on Que!!!

 

[thoughtone]

I was falling asleep but now I'm awake. First and foremost let me remind you of your tone and personal attacks like you reprimanded me the other day when I stepped on your toes. I will try my best to not go postal on you and lose my decorum on this board again.

Interrogatory 1: Your op-ed mentions changing the test because of some a large percentage of minorities failed the test. Well Que, you post here everyday have you checked the achievement gap data by numbers pertaining to race we, as a people are falling behind you know. Testing is used as a mechanism to measure cognitive ability. Let focus on small children for a moment. During the sixties these tests were used by the federal government as a variable in devising its War on Poverty. If I follow your way of thinking and lower the bar, these children will be forever left behind as many are now. Just because you lower the bar that doesn't equate to the success rate in the long run. As much as you are abreast to current events dude you see it. Don't be so selective just to prove your point at the expense of a child. I truly understand what she means by Fair Test.
That is why I left the democratic party. As long as we promote the party were in good standing. But the moment we question authority or wording. Then we are uppity negros who don't know our place. Or we are not thankful enough. You say you're in school currently, learn to decipher crap.

Interrogatory 2: I said many not all students. Many large universities have black student unions or diversity department so black scholars can have an outlet to share experiences. Google it !! I will not do your homework for you this time.
No I did not, have such experiences. I guess because I was bookish and on the dean's list. My girlfriend at the time was a bookworm as well so I had to adapt to the environment.

Interrogatory 3: I hope your major is not psychology. Because your assessment of me is quite spurious. I love to see black achievement. Which is why I always attack posts that seem to take the victim mentality. I gave you props on your post regarding black fathers. I love shit like that. Check my postings you'll see. If I disagree with Obama its always regarding policy never personal. Hell I think it sucks my party is suppose to be the party of family values and in 2 weeks its scandal after scandal yet we complain that Obama is taking his wife on a date. You cant have it both ways. In one breath you speak to equality then you want the rules changed because you don't like the results of the test.

Interrogatory 4: I apologized to the board regarding my tirade and calling you a socialist. I was responding to how quick you want to enforce the rules on righties and not lefties. I digress

Interrogatory 5: Simple answer: Go to your professor and ask for a fair test due to the racial bias that is so widespread in America. If you attend a large institution of higher learning as you say, do you think your fellow pupils would be okay with that. Furthermore, did racial bias keep you from being afforded the opportunity to get pass the admission department.

It's like your mixing words like Bill Clinton being questioned about cum stains. She said fair test. Would you be happy if you busted your ass to get decent grades to get into your college and you were denied due in part to quotas would you be pissed? Come on Que!!!

 

[QueEx]

I was falling asleep but now I'm awake. First and foremost let me remind you of your tone and personal attacks like you reprimanded me the other day when I stepped on your toes. I will try my best to not go postal on you and lose my decorum on this board again.

You may go postal anytime you like; just remember, if it violates the rules of the board, I will mail you and your username to the recycle bin.

Interrogatory 1: Your op-ed mentions changing the test because of some a large percentage of minorities failed the test.

No, Senorita Sotomayor mentioned that; you quoted her; and you jumped off topic from the quote. Stand yourself, corrected.

Well Que, you post here everyday have you checked the achievement gap data by numbers pertaining to race we, as a people are falling behind you know.

What are the "Achievement gap data by the numbers" on this board ???
Please post those numbers and post the citation of the source from which you obtained those numbers.

I also see that you have a difficult time STAYING ON POINT. The question isn't "who is falling behind" -- the question is "Whether or not the fucking test is fair, or not" -- STAY ON POINT, if you can.

Testing is used as a mechanism to measure cognitive ability. Let focus on small children for a moment. During the sixties these tests were used by the federal government as a variable in devising its War on Poverty. If I follow your way of thinking and lower the bar, these children will be forever left behind as many are now.

Maybe I need to "lower the bar" FOR YOU ???

I never mentioned and Judge Sotomayor never mentioned: lowering any damn bars. You alone did that. Its called "Being Presumptive". You are presuming that making the test fair, is somehow making it easier. You assumed, wrong. This is cognitive you know. Show it!

Just because you lower the bar that doesn't equate to the success rate in the long run.

Can you "raise your bar" to understand the issue? -- and stop presuming this is about lowering something.

As much as you are abreast to current events dude you see it. Don't be so selective just to prove your point at the expense of a child. I truly understand what she means by Fair Test.

If you understand, why is that all you have said and continue to say is: lowering the bar ??? Enough already.

That is why I left the democratic party. As long as we promote the party were in good standing. But the moment we question authority or wording. Then we are uppity negros who don't know our place. Or we are not thankful enough. You say you're in school currently, learn to decipher crap.

ONE: I don't give a shit about the democratic party. I don't give a shit about the republican party. I don't give a shit about the librarian party. ONCE AGAIN, you are assuming shit, and you're assuming WRONG.

TWO: I never called nor assumed you were an "uppity negro"; in fact, you're not displaying the attributes of the uppity negro. You may be displaying signs of something else, but I won't go there.

THREE: I didn't say I was currently in school. You need to take your focus off of me and see if you can focus on the issues, without rambling. THIS THREAD is about Sotomayor: keep it there.

Interrogatory 2: I said many not all students. Many large universities have black student unions or diversity department so black scholars can have an outlet to share experiences. Google it !! I will not do your homework for you this time.

Listen, you don't know what the fuck you're talking about. I'm not googling shit because that methodology would not produce scientifically reliable results. Nah mean ???

It would simply give me more of your type answers; and you've admitted (in your next quote) that you didn't have such an experience, THEREFORE, you don't know shit about the subject.

No I did not, have such experiences.

Interrogatory 3: I hope your major is not psychology. Because your assessment of me is quite spurious.

When you have no facts to argue; just argue bullshit.

If I disagree with Obama its always regarding policy never personal.

BULLSHIT. You can't wait to come negative as soon as the man opens his damn mouth. Its waaaaay too late for you to plead innocent now. You've got so much <s>Love</s> <u>Hate</u> in you, you start threads referring to the President derogatorily as, the "Messiah". I told you, everytime you type, a little piece of you, leaks out with it.

Hell I think it sucks my party is suppose to be the party of family values and in 2 weeks its scandal after scandal yet we complain that Obama is taking his wife on a date. You cant have it both ways. In one breath you speak to equality then you want the rules changed because you don't like the results of the test.

BOOKMARKED, for later reference.

Interrogatory 4: I apologized to the board regarding my tirade and calling you a socialist. I was responding to how quick you want to enforce the rules on righties and not lefties. I digress

I warned you privately. If you want to insist on this, you're soon going to learn that its not worth it.

Interrogatory 5: Simple answer: Go to your professor and ask for a fair test due to the racial bias that is so widespread in America. If you attend a large institution of higher learning as you say, do you think your fellow pupils would be okay with that. Furthermore, did racial bias keep you from being afforded the opportunity to get pass the admission department.

Sir, you continue to display your lack of understanding of the issue. Stop the cry baby shit. I've had enough. Seriously.

It's like your mixing words like Bill Clinton being questioned about cum stains. She said fair test. Would you be happy if you busted your ass to get decent grades to get into your college and you were denied due in part to quotas would you be pissed? Come on Que!!!

<font size="3">I say you just confessed: you are a white guy who didn't get into some school to which you applied -- and you're blaming some black student that got in, AND, you think that black student was less qualified than you.</font size>


QueEx

 

[Gunner]

Give me your interpretation of Fair Test. You can change the name to fit your agenda but in the end your still altering the test due to undesirable results. Pick the name and call it what you like. You call it staying on point I see you like to throw that around if you dont like what I have to say. I'm simply offering my opinion or life experiences. You claim you're non-partisian but you're views learn to the left. Everyone knows I lean to the right and proud of it. It is you who try to hide your true political leanings.If your non-partisan let your readers see more political leanings different from the ones you hold.

No the judge did'nt mention lowering the bar directly. But, she did mention revising the current testing practices. Who will determine what is fair?

You can bookmark that statement if you like, you know me I dont back down.

I never said you called me an uppity negro. I was refering to the democratic party.

If I argue bullshit as you say, why haven't you answered my question regarding revising the test in order to acheieve a desired result.

Lastly, I'm a brother would it discount my argument if I was white. STAY ON POINT!!! I had to throw that in.

We are not going to get anywhere with this. I agree to disagree.

 

[QueEx]

Would you be happy if you busted your ass to get decent grades to get into your college and you were denied <font size="3">due in part</font size> to quotas would you be pissed? Come on Que!!!

Sorry, I had to re-visit the quote above.

• If you were "Denied in Part" because of quotas (that is, the school admitted Black students, whom you believe were lesser qualified, which took up the slot you felt you should have taken); then

• What was the "Other" reason that you were denied entry? That is, if you were "Denied In Part" because of quotas (race), were you also "Denied In Part" because:
  
  
  • Your grades were shit? or
  
  
  • Your ACT or SAT score was shit? or
  
  
  • Your Grades & ACT or SAT score were shit?

<font size="5">

What was the Other Reason

? ? ?

</font size>
QueEx

 

[Gunner]

Boy I must have really struck a nerve. You seem flustered. Regain your composure you are the moderator. Any hoot, I mentioned previously that I was on the deans list. Currently I'm my own boss with three locations, if it really matters to you. Dude this is recreation for me. Poli Sci major who reads books and consume information like insulin. Your post is what it is. She made the inference not me.

Some black men passed the exam a large number didn't. Those who didn't have the opportunity to retest. One of the plantiffs in the case said he couldn't even read the material. His dad and brother had to read it to him. He listened on the way to work. He did what any MAN would do black or white who wants to feed his family.

Your problem with me seems to center on me sharing my opinion on this board that it's ok to leave the plantation mentality. What kind of man with pride in himself would claim a test is biased. You are the total opposite of Dr. King's dream. Libraries are open to the public educate youself and stop making excuses.

Why am I even arguing this point even further???? Study and you will pass period.
The more I engage in to discourse with you I'm convinced that liberalism is a mental disorder!!!!!!

Have a nice day!!!!

 

[QueEx]

<s>Boy I must have really struck a nerve. You seem flustered. Regain your composure you are the moderator. Any hoot, I mentioned previously that I was on the deans list. Currently I'm my own boss with three locations, if it really matters to you. Dude this is recreation for me. Poli Sci major who reads books and consume information like insulin. Your post is what it is. She made the inference not me.

Some black men passed the exam a large number didn't. Those who didn't have the opportunity to retest. One of the plantiffs in the case said he couldn't even read the material. His dad and brother had to read it to him. He listened on the way to work. He did what any MAN would do black or white who wants to feed his family.

Your problem with me seems to center on me sharing my opinion on this board that it's ok to leave the plantation mentality. What kind of man with pride in himself would claim a test is biased. You are the total opposite of Dr. King's dream. Libraries are open to the public educate youself and stop making excuses.

Why am I even arguing this point even further???? Study and you will pass period.
The more I engage in to discourse with you I'm convinced that liberalism is a mental disorder!!!!!!

Have a nice day</s>

Nice try. But you still mad at some Black person that took your supposed place in line.

QueEx

 

[thoughtone]

Nice try. But you still mad at some Black person that took your supposed place in line.

QueEx

He's a hoot, isn't he!

 

[Gunner]

He's a hoot, isn't he!

Source: www.wakeupblackamerica.com

The ruling yesterday by the Supreme Court in favor of the white New Haven Firefighters represents a great day for Civil Rights in America. I can't wrap my mind around how liberals think on the aspects of "equal justice" in America. What they view as "equality" is anything but "equality". In reality, their concept of equality is to discriminate against one group "whites" in favor of another "non whites". It is in essence "robbing from Peter in order to pay Paul". At the end of the day, someone still got robbed. The people that were robbed in the New Haven Fire fighter's exam were white firefighters and one Hispanic firefighter. Yesterday in a five to four ruling, The Supreme Court ruled that the City of New Haven Connecticut was wrong in denying the promotion of white firefighters that scored higher then other black firefighters on the promotional exam. Liberals do not see non whites as "equals" in society, especially white liberals. They see blacks and Hispanics as nothing more then "oppressed victims" that some how can't do for themselves without their help. This is the sole purpose why liberal activists "dumb down" tests to begin with. They want to achieve an "equal outcome" by "lowering the bar". I guess in their delusion of good intentions, they can't see that their actions are actually hurting blacks and Hispanics more so then helping them. When the City of New Haven originally threw out the promotion exam because blacks didn't score high enough, that demonstrated what the officials in New Haven thought about the black firefighters in the first place. From a liberal's perspective, they blame the test for being "racist" or "geared towards whites". Normal people would just say that the black firefighters need to "STUDY HARDER SO THEY CAN GET A HIGHER SCORE ON THE NEXT EXAM", Sorry for yelling, but I wanted to make a contrasting point between the two mindsets. If liberals truly believed in the potential of blacks and Hispanics as "individuals" regardless of their race and economic backgrounds, they would be telling them to study harder and apply themselves, but they don't do that. The white firefighters in the New Haven case played by the rules, and they rightfully deserve their promotions. This is a great day for those that still believe that a person should be "judged on the content of their character and not the color of their skin".

You guys are peas in a pod.

 

[Gunner]

You got 10 minutes. Post a citation or suffer deletion.

Dude you see the source at the top

wake up black america

You're not gonna read it anyway

 

[Gunner]

Nice try. But you still mad at some Black person that took your supposed place in line.

QueEx

This is silly. It really doesn't matter what color I am. I've realized that you're trying to get me to go off on you, so you can wave your authority ban me when you get humiliated in front of your peeps. Any learned person on this board can see through your antics. Throughout the whole debate you never presented anything but an article and an attempt to justify lowering the bar for blacks.

Mad yeah right I'm smoking a cigar with my favorite adult beverage.

 

[QueEx]

Dude you see the source at the top

wake up black america

You're not gonna read it anyway

So that you'll understand, please post a link to any thing you post on this board that is NOT your own. There is a reason: we can attempt to separate out yours from theirs; and so that one can go-to the story and read it, as it was published, to be sure its there and that it was not edited by the poster.

Silly rule, isn't it?

QueEx




____________________
<font size="3">
P.S.

The link you posted does not work.

Please post the link "to the piece" posted; or
indicate that it is your comment, and not someone else's.

`

 

[QueEx]

This is silly. It really doesn't matter what color I am.

I agree, it doesn't matter. BUT, its relevant to judging your comments when you're using the same rhetorical arguments that whites have used in their almost successful quest to destroy anything that they can remotely characterize as affirmative action.

It ALSO MATTERS when you come onto this board perpetrating.

I've realized that you're trying to get me to go off on you, so you can wave your authority ban me when you get humiliated in front of your peeps.

Struck a Nerve, HUH !

Any learned person on this board can see through your antics. Throughout the whole debate you never presented anything but an article and an attempt to justify lowering the bar for blacks.

Mad yeah right I'm smoking a cigar with my favorite adult beverage.

Actually, it was never a debate. You're bent on defending the concept of whats "Fair to Blacks" -- is inherently "Unfair to Whites". Thats just plain ass ignant, if your Black, and typical, if you're racist. So, like you said, it doesn't matter what color you are, you're ass backwards either way.

QueEx

 

[Gunner]

My bad Mr. Victim.
the blog source is www.wakeupblackamerica.blogspot.com

You're just yapping cause I called you out Dude. Your just throwing out that white boy crap for smoke and mirrors. Now you're throwing around affirmative action. Stay on point Que. You're in attack mode due to your shortcomings. Bring it! Rev Al.

 

[QueEx]

Like I said:

Actually, it was never a debate. You're bent on defending the concept of whats "Fair to Blacks" -- is inherently "Unfair to Whites". Thats just plain ass ignant, if your Black, and typical, if you're racist. So, like you said, it doesn't matter what color you are, you're ass backwards either way.
​

​

 

[QueEx]

Re: WTF is Obama Thinking ?

My bad Mr. Victim.
the blog source is www.wakeupblackamerica.blogspot.com

You're just yapping cause I called you out Dude. Your just throwing out that white boy crap for smoke and mirrors. Now you're throwing around affirmative action. Stay on point Que. You're in attack mode due to your shortcomings. Bring it! Rev Al.

Hey, your boys here from wake up black america thank you:

`

 

[QueEx]

Re: WTF is Obama Thinking ?

<font size="5"><center>
Sotomayor hearings offer lessons
for future nominees</font size><font size="4">

Future Supreme Court nominees will be grilled
about their personal views and examined
thoroughly for any hint of liberal bias</font size></center>


McClatchy Newspapers
By David Lightman
and Michael Doyle
Friday, July 17, 2009


WASHINGTON — Republicans spent four days this week repeating a stern message to President Barack Obama: Your future Supreme Court nominees will be grilled about their personal views and examined thoroughly for any hint of liberal bias.

Sonia Sotomayor, the federal appellate judge seeking to become the high court's first Hispanic justice, however, was sending her own message to presidents and future nominees alike: Keep answers general, stay likable and avoid offering personal views on anything — even including your favorite baseball team.

The jurisprudential reticence can frustrate senators and court watchers alike. That doesn't mean the hearing is useless.

"It's very hard to get specific information about what a nominee thinks; it's scripted," acknowledged Olatunde Johnson, an associate professor at Columbia Law School, "but even with the hearing's shortcomings, it's still worthwhile to see how a nominee comports herself."

Watching a nominee under the lights, answering hundreds of questions, can help viewers glean an understanding of their mental discipline and physical stamina, Johnson said.

When it comes to detailed how-will-you-vote questions, though, reticence has one proven virtue: it apparently works. Sotomayor is considered a shoo-in for confirmation.

"We'll see what your future holds, but I think it's going to be pretty bright," Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina told Sotomayor.

The Senate Judiciary Committee is expected to vote on Sotomayor's nomination by the end of July. A full Senate vote is likely during the week of Aug. 3.

On Friday, Republicans began crossing party lines to announce their support for the 55-year-old Yale Law School graduate, with Sens. Richard Lugar of Indiana, Mel Martinez of Florida and Olympia Snowe of Maine announcing their intentions to vote for Sotomayor. Politically, the only question now is how many GOP votes she will gain. Longer term, the political question becomes what lessons will endure from the Sotomayor nomination.

Some elements are unique to her nomination. As the first Latina nominee, she put in a bind those Republicans who want to oppose Obama but who don't want to alienate Hispanic voters. Part of the message Republicans had to send was respect for the nominee, even as they pressed her hard.

"There are messages being sent," said Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, a senior committee member. "That's part of what these hearings do; they sent messages to the president."

Republican senators say their chief message to Obama was to be careful about sending up nominees who ooze "empathy" — a quality Obama once said he wanted in judges. The much-mocked word has since seemingly dropped from the president's judicial vocabulary.

Beyond the White House, Republican senators were sending messages to their base supporters. The message: We feel your pain. The GOP senators' insistent focus on three issues — abortion, gun rights and affirmative action — to the exclusion of almost all others showed their singular priorities.

For future nominees, the hearings that included Sotomayor's two-and-a-half days on the witness stand offered myriad lessons. These include:

_ Make personal connections. In the weeks before the hearings, Sotomayor visited 89 senators for private meetings of about half an hour each — yet only 19 senators serve on the judiciary panel. She wowed the Democrats and soothed the Republicans.

"I like you," Graham said.

At one point, Sotomayor told Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., who spent two days asking tough questions about abortion and other issues, "I love that you're doing your job, and I love that I'm doing my job as a judge. I like mine better."

Coburn laughed. "I think I would like yours better as well."

_ Have a compelling life story. Sotomayor's rise from the Bronx, her overcoming obstacles such as juvenile diabetes and her professional accomplishments led Rhode Island Democrat Sheldon Whitehouse to enthuse that he had "goose bumps" just thinking about her.

_ No matter how liberal or conservative in general, be able to show you're tough on crime. Sotomayor's five years as a New York prosecutor proved immensely helpful in softening Republican fears. She was able to recount for senators how she prosecuted child pornography dealers and an infamous killer, thereby undermining a traditional conservative attack line.

"She took on every kind of criminal case that comes into an urban courthouse, from turnstile-jumping to homicide," said famed New York County District Attorney Robert Morgenthau, her former boss.

_ Don't predict how you might rule. Republicans tried over and over to pin her down and she refused to budge. On guns rights, business law, voting rights and other crucial issues, as well as on lesser issues such as televising court proceedings, Sotomayor avoided making commitments.

"I don't like making statements about what I think the court can do until I've experienced the process," Sotomayor said at one point.

The lesson for future nominees is clear, said Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz.

"The message is if you don't say very much, and agree with the questioners, and can wiggle off the main question — and you have the votes," he said, "you'll get confirmed."


http://www.mcclatchydc.com/homepage/story/72057.html

 

[Lamarr]

http://groups.google.com/group/rec....ad/8ca7a53100c13b8d/76bd50c2e43c9e57?lnk=raot

"Is there a constitutional right to self-defense? ... I can't think of one. I could be wrong, but I can't think of one." -- Supreme Court nominee and federal judge Sonia Sotomayor, when asked by Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) whether or not the Constitution guaranteed the right of self-defense. In 2004 Sotomayor signed an opinion stating "the right to possess a gun is clearly not a fundamental right."

Seriously, my main issue: 2nd Amendment. Its as if these people making these rules never experienced "real" life. Bad things happen to good people everyday and now some bureaucrat is gonna tell society, you don't have a right to defend yourself. MAJOR FAIL. I've experienced "gunplay" firsthand, more times than I care to talk about and trust me: you do not wanna be in a situation where you can't protect yourself or your family.

 

[QueEx]

http://groups.google.com/group/rec....ad/8ca7a53100c13b8d/76bd50c2e43c9e57?lnk=raot

"Is there a constitutional right to self-defense? ... I can't think of one. I could be wrong, but I can't think of one." -- Supreme Court nominee and federal judge Sonia Sotomayor, when asked by Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) whether or not the Constitution guaranteed the right of self-defense. In 2004 Sotomayor signed an opinion stating "the right to possess a gun is clearly not a fundamental right."​

Seriously, my main issue: 2nd Amendment. Its as if these people making these rules never experienced "real" life. Bad things happen to good people everyday and now some bureaucrat is gonna tell society, you don't have a right to defend yourself. MAJOR FAIL. I've experienced "gunplay" firsthand, more times than I care to talk about and trust me: you do not wanna be in a situation where you can't protect yourself or your family.

Self defense is <u>not</u> a "Constitutional Right". Self defense is "Judge Made" law, that is, self defense is part of the common law developed through court decisions or case law.

Funny, isn't it; you hear people like your Tom Coburn in the confirmation process who rail against Judge Sotomayor saying that she is an "Activist Judge", that is, one who might "Make Law" instead of, as they say, one who will just interpret the Constitution.

So, in Coburn's view, you really shouldn't have a right to defend yourself.

What do you think of those apples . . .

QueEx

 

[Lamarr]

Self defense is <u>not</u> a "Constitutional Right". Self defense is "Judge Made" law, that is, self defense is part of the common law developed through court decisions or case law.

Funny, isn't it; you hear people like your Tom Coburn in the confirmation process who rail against Judge Sotomayor saying that she is an "Activist Judge", that is, one who might "Make Law" instead of, as they say, one who will just interpret the Constitution.

So, in Coburn's view, you really shouldn't have a right to defend yourself.

What do you think of those apples . . .

QueEx

props, good answer..........don't agree but I get it. While self-defense may not be granted to us in the constitution, I'd strongly argue that our right to bear arms (for self-defense) was a recognized, pre-existing right long before the Bill of Rights. The 2nd Amendment merely recognizes that as 'free' human beings we have that right.

So when I read about her opinion, "the right to possess a gun is clearly not a fundamental right." I strongly disagree as she clearly doesn't understand the intent of the original writers. So, What type of judge will she be, We'll see! But I'm not happy for this one reason.

 

[gonzo8402]

Mitch McConnell Officially Opposes Sotomayor​

LINK

Excerpts from prepared statement:


"From the beginning of this confirmation process, I’ve said that Americans expect one thing when they walk into a court room, whether it’s a traffic court or the Supreme Court — and that’s equal treatment under the law. Over the years, Americans have accepted significant ideological differences in the kinds of men and women that various presidents have nominated to the Supreme Court. But one thing Americans will never tolerate in a nominee is a belief that some groups are more deserving of a fair shake than others. Nothing could be more offensive to the American sensibility than that. Judge Sotomayor is a fine person with an impressive story and a distinguished background. But above all else, a judge must check his or her personal or political agenda at the courtroom door and do justice even-handedly, as the judicial oath requires."

"Judge Sotomayor’s record of written statements suggest an alarming lack of respect for the notion of equal justice, and therefore, in my view, an insufficient willingness to abide by the judicial oath. This is particularly important when considering someone for the Supreme Court since, if she were confirmed, there would be no higher court to deter or prevent her from injecting into the law the various disconcerting principles that recur throughout her public statements. For that reason, I will oppose her nomination."

"In her writings and in her speeches, Judge Sotomayor has repeatedly stated that a judge’s personal experiences affect judicial outcomes. She has said her experiences will affect the facts that she chooses to see as a judge. She has argued that in deciding cases judges should bring their sympathies and prejudices to bear. She has dismissed the ideal of judicial impartiality as an ‘aspiration’ that, in her view, cannot be met even in most cases. Taken together, these statements suggest not just a sense that impartiality is not possible, but that it’s not even worth the effort."

"Judge Sotomayor’s record on the Second Circuit is troubling enough. But, as I said, at least on the Circuit Court, there’s a backstop. Her cases can be reviewed by the Supreme Court. This meant that in the Ricci case, for example, the firefighters whose promotions were unfairly denied could appeal the decision. Fortunately for them, the Supreme Court sided with them over Judge Sotomayor. If, however, Judge Sotomayor were to become a Supreme Court Justice, there would be no backstop. Her rulings would be final. She’d be unencumbered by the obligation of lower court judges to follow precedent. She could act more freely on the kinds of views that animated her troubling and legally incorrect ruling in the Ricci case. That’s not a chance I’m willing to take."

 

[QueEx]

props, good answer..........don't agree but I get it. While self-defense may not be granted to us in the constitution, I'd strongly argue that our right to bear arms (for self-defense) was a recognized, pre-existing right long before the Bill of Rights. The 2nd Amendment merely recognizes that as 'free' human beings we have that right.

So when I read about her opinion, "the right to possess a gun is clearly not a fundamental right." I strongly disagree as she clearly doesn't understand the intent of the original writers. So, What type of judge will she be, We'll see! But I'm not happy for this one reason.

I understand where you're coming from; but I don't think (and understandably so) that you're familiar with the "Fundamental Rights" ("FR") argument. FR is a Constitutional Law concept. In laymens terms, under constitutional analysis, the SCOTUS has held that certain rights are so fundamental such that if Congress, states, cities, or courts want to impose some kind of restriction on the right, the state, city, court or Congress must have a "Compelling Reason" for the restriction -- and there is virtually no other way to accomplish the purpose behind the restriction except by imposing the restriction.

The Supreme Court has said fundamental rights include, the right to: life, property ownership, travel, procreation, think, contract, speech, vote, marry and associate freely.

Even though the right to bear arms contained in the 2nd Amendment, the fact that its in the Constitution necessarily means its hard to impose restrictions upon it. Still, there is NO provision of the Constitution or a "FR" that cannot have some kind of restriction place upon it. In other words, NO RIGHT is ABSOLUTE. For example:

Freedom of Speech is a Fundamental Right.

• So, you have the right to say what you want.

• But, you have no right to yell Fire in a crowded theatre, unless its on fire.

• Hence, your right to speech in this instance can be restricted because the
  state has a compelling interest or reason to restrict your freedom of speech:
  
  
  • to protect people from being trampled by some idiot wanting to see
    people run for their lives, for nothing) to restrict your freedom of speech;
    and, there is virtually no other way the state can save people from being
    hurt in this instance, except by imposing a restriction by prohibiting one
    from yelling out fire.

QueEx