When I think of Canada--and that isn't very often--I just want to know that it's still there. Governmentally, it is stable. And Boring. And mostly cold. On the other border, we have Mexico where the government has been a mess for generations.
I'm sure what the judge was trying to say was, if you don't feed me well- I'm going to convict them ALL. We'll all just live in fear that our own day of judgement will come when God is on a cabbage soup diet. (For more than one reason.)
These conservative wingnuts are such culinary hypocrites. They had no problem with Judge Alito tying a very special part of his white maleness to his fondness for Ball Park franks wrapped in Wonder bread.
I'm a Canadian, and I don't know much about the American Justice System, so please correct me if I'm wrong... but isn't the Supreme Court supposed to represent America? And isn't America made up of all different kinds of people, with different cultures and genders and races and backgrounds and political views and diets? All who have equal rights and equally valid opinions and points of view? And wouldn't a Supreme Court made up of almost entirely straight white conservative men represent only a small segment of America? And wouldn't that be... a failure of the Supreme Court? And isn't there a difference between affirmative action (let's get more Latina women in the workplace!) and putting together a Supreme Court that more accurately reflects the country it serves?
I'm just having a problem seeing the foundation for this kind of criticism. Either the critics are stupid, or I am. Please enlighten whichever of us it is.
@Slovenly Muse: No. That is not the goal of the Court. The goal is to get the best possible jurists on there, regardless of race, religion, or creed, who can do the best job of upholding the constitution.
The great (liberal?) theory is that the best possible jurists come from a wide range of backgrounds and educations, such that there isn't one perspective directing the Court.
There should be no question that she is running with the big bulls. She has the education, experience, and bona fides to run with the best of them. What scares the white guys is that she isn't one of them. Clarence Thomas, for all of his black skin, walked among them, if only in terms of his privilege. Sotomayor not only doesn't share their upbringing, she made it in spit of her own, and even worse, unlike most of them, she isn't a showboater.
This might be the only thing she has in common with Thomas. I don't disrespect a SC jurist who doesn't want to showboat - there are a couple on there who don't - but I am disgusted by those who paint her as lacking in intellect as a result. I mean, shouldn't we sort of value a SC justice who doesn't have fameball aspirations? I think yes.
She'll be confirmed, and the Hispanic and Latin voters of this country will feel vindicated, and the crazy right will denounce her as liberal, and in the end, there will be a female, Latina justice on the court who is just less showboaty than the Chief Justice, and just as analytical and intellectual as the Chief Justice, and the country can get onto the business of fighting about abortions they don't want anyone to have, but would drive their high school daughter to get.
@karion and @momof3wildkids: I agree completely, and yes, I know the ideal is to have the best jurists (and the ideal of that be a diverse selection), and it makes sense to me when these nutballs criticize her based on her education and her record (they're still wrong, but at least they're picking the right thing to be concerned about). But when I hear THIS sort of criticism, her experiences as a Latina will make her terribly biased, her diet will influence her decision-making... that doesn't make sense at all. To me, it sounds exactly like they're saying "She can't be trusted to side with the REAL Americans! She's going to be biased towards those foreigners taking over OUR country!"
It just demonstrates a fundamental rejection of the diversity of the country. It's one thing to smartly work against her because you're privately afraid she won't support your interests, and it's another to blatantly declare out of fear that her race/culture is less "American" than yours, and it somehow disqualifies her from the SC.
It's kind of like picking out the grossest, most revolting crap from your backyard and throwing it vaguely in her direction. It's so far off the mark it doesn't affect her in the slightest, and all you've done is show the whole world just how disgusting your backyard really is.
The fact that people are listening is just downright scary.
I seriously have no clue why people keep harping on racism.
I mean, there's no such thing these days! People are judged by their accomplishments, duh. No one would ever try to use another person's racial background as a means to derail competition! That's just silly.
The key issue here is Judge Sotomayor's stance on amarillos. The brief about patitas and garbanzo is significant, to be sure. However once more data emerges on any statements she has made regarding fried plantains, this battle will have entered Defcon 1 status.
07/06/09
07/06/09
07/06/09
07/06/09
05/28/09
05/28/09
05/28/09
05/28/09
We'll all just live in fear that our own day of judgement will come when God is on a cabbage soup diet. (For more than one reason.)
05/28/09
Well, that and jet lag at being on the East Coast, and waiting on overdue flights. This was so much more fun drunk.
05/28/09
05/28/09
05/28/09
I'm just having a problem seeing the foundation for this kind of criticism. Either the critics are stupid, or I am. Please enlighten whichever of us it is.
05/28/09
The great (liberal?) theory is that the best possible jurists come from a wide range of backgrounds and educations, such that there isn't one perspective directing the Court.
There should be no question that she is running with the big bulls. She has the education, experience, and bona fides to run with the best of them. What scares the white guys is that she isn't one of them. Clarence Thomas, for all of his black skin, walked among them, if only in terms of his privilege. Sotomayor not only doesn't share their upbringing, she made it in spit of her own, and even worse, unlike most of them, she isn't a showboater.
This might be the only thing she has in common with Thomas. I don't disrespect a SC jurist who doesn't want to showboat - there are a couple on there who don't - but I am disgusted by those who paint her as lacking in intellect as a result. I mean, shouldn't we sort of value a SC justice who doesn't have fameball aspirations? I think yes.
She'll be confirmed, and the Hispanic and Latin voters of this country will feel vindicated, and the crazy right will denounce her as liberal, and in the end, there will be a female, Latina justice on the court who is just less showboaty than the Chief Justice, and just as analytical and intellectual as the Chief Justice, and the country can get onto the business of fighting about abortions they don't want anyone to have, but would drive their high school daughter to get.
05/28/09
05/28/09
It just demonstrates a fundamental rejection of the diversity of the country. It's one thing to smartly work against her because you're privately afraid she won't support your interests, and it's another to blatantly declare out of fear that her race/culture is less "American" than yours, and it somehow disqualifies her from the SC.
It's kind of like picking out the grossest, most revolting crap from your backyard and throwing it vaguely in her direction. It's so far off the mark it doesn't affect her in the slightest, and all you've done is show the whole world just how disgusting your backyard really is.
The fact that people are listening is just downright scary.
05/28/09
05/28/09
05/28/09
I mean, there's no such thing these days! People are judged by their accomplishments, duh. No one would ever try to use another person's racial background as a means to derail competition! That's just silly.
/sarcasm.
05/28/09
05/28/09
05/28/09
05/28/09
05/28/09
05/28/09
05/28/09
05/28/09
05/28/09