Since being announced Tuesday, Judge Sonia Sotomayor has come under attack by conservatives and Republicans for being racist. At the crux of the argument is this statement:“I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life,”
Judge Sotomayor made this statement while giving a speech at the Judge Mario G. Olmos Memorial Lecture at Berkeley School of Law, back in 2001 (the full text of that speech can be found here). Newt Gingrich, Rep. Tom Tancredo, Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter have all labeled the statement racist (click links for their individual statements).
OK, here is my take on it. When the statement is taken out of the whole speech, it is racist. A white person would be hung out to dry in five seconds flat for saying anything like it. If our goal is truly to become a color blind society, then the rules must apply across the board, no exceptions. Far too many minorities today get away with saying some of the most racist things against white people. I find this hypocritical in the extreme. How can minorities complain about racism from whites and then totally turn a blind eye when one of their own is caught out there being a racist. Sooner or later this behavior has to stop or we can forget about ever being a color blind society.
Now, when you read the entire speech, you get a different picture of Sotomayor. The picture that emerges is not one of a racist, but a picture of someone who seems to admit that her race and gender colors her legal opinions. This is not a good thing. Our Constitutional Republic demands rule of law. It demands clearly defined laws with clearly definited out comes. How can any of us have faith in our legal system, if we all need to be latinas in order to understand the decisions rendered by it?
Clearly Obama got what he wanted here when he went shopping for empathy. Now the question to ask is why does Obama feel that our highest court requires the uncertainty that empathy brings?
Posts
6 comments:
Nice post Clifton-
A "color blind" society is the only sensible goal... and that means no reverse racism or the kinds of things that seem to effect Sotomayer's troubling views.
And it's not just for moral reasons- it's because that's the only way it will work. If whites feel they are victims of a double standard, there will be a backlash. And all Americans will suffer for it.
A lot of us are already wondering what the "thinking" was behind all kinds of people voting for Obama based on skin color- when he refused to answer questions, hid his past, and was completely unqualified for the challenges that we face.
When Obamamania collapses in a cloud of dust, it could set back causes like affirmative action for decades. If this wasn't a case of a grossly unqualified individual being promoted for all the wrong reasons... what is?
. these trolls spend all their time on popular conservative blogs and jump on every thread early and often with a bunch of snarky drivel.
Steer the topic. Change the subject. Deflect and divert. It's sure hard to avoid the conclusion that there are organized efforts that attempt to hijack and control all internet debate to maintain momentum for The One as he rams-through an ultra-liberal agenda while also focused on 2010... and 2012. With this narcissist control-freak's interest in the internet, who would be surprised?
Explains all the facsination with Palin and Jindal... if they're so silly and irrelevant, why the obsession?
And it's not difficult to see why the Democrats might prefer to banter playfully about made-up GOP "scandals" and irrelevancies like Meghan McCain's latest irrelevancies than debate Obama's ongoing destruction of the country.
They likely have assignments, like a crew on Politico, one on Topix, and solos attached to specific blogs... I've noticed this on mine and others.
It's not like it's not obvious... why else would they spend so much time on a "con" blog... and try to dominate it? And they stick to DNC talking-points 99% of the time.
Obama campaign manager David Plouffe has even admitted that there is such a web-based effort in support of Obama... he runs it... and it's funded by the DNC:
"David Plouffe, who ran Obama's campaign, now runs "Organizing for America" out of the DNC. It uses the same Web-based tactics that won the presidency to mobilize public opinion behind Obama's initiatives."
It is well known that this strategy involves trolls who attempt to disrupt any constructive debate on conservative boards. But employing such manipulation on blogs and message-boards serepticiously is really not clever, slick, or anything to be proud of... rather, it's underhanded, cowardly, and ethically dubious.
If Obama's wisdom and moral supremacy are so self-evident, then what's up with all this thought-control and propaganda?
http://reaganiterepublicanresistance.blogspot.com/
So your saying that using her gender and ethnicity doesn't make her sexist and racist? Of course it does. If she decides against a person of another race and tries to stack the deck against them by burying their suit and trying to hide information favorable to their case, as she did in at least one case, she seems pretty racist to me.
It shouldn't matter the color of someone's skin when deciding innocence. This should be done by using factual evidence. This is where Sotomayor fails the sniff test with not only that one case, but her allegiances to left-wing Puerto-Rican extremist groups and La Raza.
obama clearly got what he wanted, as you say. I think it goes a step further when obama says she mirrors him. He knows what she stands for and is attempting to 'remake America' in his own words with radicals that have no business even working in the telephone sanitation industry, let alone the Judicial Branch.
How can liberals be racist and yet not be precieved as racist? Well, because in their little minds, a self-proclaimed victim cannot be racist. Once has to have power to be racist,hence why only mean white rich repubilicans are racist, and their poor white red neck gun clingers are too.
Worst yet, if you are black and a conservative republican, like yourself, then you must be a traitor to your race. Yet, this isn't racism to the liberals.
Yep, it must be good to live in a fantasy world of the liberals mind. Where you can meliegn Christians,whites,men,the rich and anybody who doesn't agree with you,and get away with it.
RRR:
Yes reverse racism is every bit as bad as straight up racism. We cannot have the double standard. You are correct that many voted for Obama because of race and all other facts be damned. It wasn't just blacks voting like that either, many white also voted for him because he was black.
As far as the internet trolls go, it is 100% true that there are professional Obama trolls. It is one reason why, I started to moderate the comment section, I refuse to give them an audience.
Their goal is to derail constructive debate, sew seeds of doubt in the party and create a faux impression that everyone supports Obama.
Get SiteMeter on your blog, you will be able to see where they come from.
Bluepitbull:
I was going by the speech she gave. Yes she did reference her gender and race, but it fit within the venue of the speech. What I got as the impression from the whole speech was her willingness to color her opions. That means she could do so on gender, color or even economics.
Whatever the reason, coloring your opions due to empathy, makes her wrong. There is a reason why the oath for a Supreme Court justice makes clear that they should not use empathy in their decisions.
Conservative Scalawag:
For the liberals it is all about the victimhood. Angry and discontent people are exactly what the community organizers seek, just ask Saul Alinsky!
Post a Comment