> you had the sense with the Clinton,
> Reagan, and George W. Bush nominees
> (yes, I leave Souter off the list)
> that there was good reason to put
> them on the Court.

Harriett Miers has been forgotten already?

Not only that, but Miers got canned because of pressure from the President's own party. Remember Laura Bush calling us sexists for opposing her? She got told what for too.

I can't say that I'm surprised though. The first Affirmative Action President gives us our first Affirmative Action Supreme Court Justice.

If this dingleberry gets approved, she'll be out of her depth almost immediately. She'll play the race card as soon as it becomes obvious, and Clarence Thomas will smack her down.

What's the over/under on her resignation?

Dear God, we have no hope. Is this the change all those stupid fuckers hoped for?

A judicial activist and openly racist Supreme court justice.

I feel so good about my country.

No naked women on your blog today?

Internet full of porn and snoopy wants here and so do I

Also if anyone knows the name of the one not wearing the boa in this pic
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2009/07/15/cagedgirls.html

I'd appreciate it

I believe that Sotomayor is Obama's Janet Reno: incompetent for the job and thus utterly beholden to the President who put her there.

On a positive note... did you see the NY times article about the speech Obama made at the NAACP gala telling people to be responsible for their kids and to stop blaming poverty for their bad grades?

Whether she's "wise" or not, there are two other presidents who found her completely competent. At this point, there's nothing Congress can do. The likelihood of her resigning any time in the near future is nil.

Don't we have other things to worry about, like the budget? Or the President's and Congress' pressing "need" to get health care reform done, even though we have no money. Living in California (for now), I can't afford any more taxes.

Nicole -

Two other presidents found her competent enough for the positions she was put in. Her performance on the second circuit is disappointing to say the least. It certainly doesn't warrant a promotion.

The Supreme Court is not the place for the Peter Principle.

In the long run it doesn't matter. This country is about to get fucked good and hard. The triumvirate (Obama, Pelosi, Reid) are about to completely destroy our economy, and they are happy about this. They know what's going to happen, and they Do. Not. Give. A. Fuck.

There is the possibility that Sotomayor will be a beacon for 30 years, reminding people about what happens when a mega-liberal is elected President.

Practice the phrase: "Sotomayor, (ex-) President Obama's selection for the Supreme Court".

"Judge Robert Bork refused to lie about his views"

The most destructive thing about Sotomayor is her obvious lies about what her past positions were and what her speeches meant. She should have affirmed her past views and not lied about them. If she could say what she believes and be confirmed, so be it.

Surely the Senate has the right to demand better From Sotomayor

If she had to lie, and if lying made the difference to be confirmed, then senators should vote against her. The entire idea of law and justice is based on telling and discovering the truth. Voting for a lying judge is too horrible.

This cannot be treated as a political position, where we sophisticates say "of course she/he is lying. He is a politician". That is bad enough when applied to politics.

She is lying her way into a position of power and trust, where she will judge others on their adherence to the truth. That is enough to vote NO.

I am sure there are instances in which a wise Latina judge is better than a white guy. I'm sure there are instances when a wise white guy is better than a Latina. That's about the dumbest and overhyped remark I've heard in ages.

I am sure there are instances in which a wise Latina judge is better than a white guy. I'm sure there are instances when a wise white guy is better than a Latina. That's about the dumbest and overhyped remark I've heard in ages.

Posted by: NicoleK at July 17, 2009 11:37 AM
------------------
I think as judges they are all supposed to be wise and objective. That's where she goes off the rails.
Also as citizens, it shouldn't matter what judge you go before they should be looking at the laws on the books, so you get the same outcome. They shouldn't be legislating from the bench.

I am sure there are instances in which a wise Latina judge is better than a white guy. I'm sure there are instances when a wise white guy is better than a Latina. That's about the dumbest and overhyped remark I've heard in ages.

Posted by: NicoleK

Sure there are - but an unbiased impartial despense of justice is not such a place

I don't think life experience should just be thrown out. Sometimes it really it a judgement call, and that call is going to made in reflection of the type of person you are, but not in anyway infringing or changing the laws already set in place.

Justice Alito during his nomination hearing:
"Because when a case comes before me involving, let's say, someone who is an immigrant -- and we get an awful lot of immigration cases and naturalization cases -- I can't help but think of my own ancestors, because it wasn't that long ago when they were in that position.

And so it's my job to apply the law. It's not my job to change the law or to bend the law to achieve any result.

But when I look at those cases, I have to say to myself, and I do say to myself, "You know, this could be your grandfather, this could be your grandmother. They were not citizens at one time, and they were people who came to this country."

When I have cases involving children, I can't help but think of my own children and think about my children being treated in the way that children may be treated in the case that's before me.

And that goes down the line. When I get a case about discrimination, I have to think about people in my own family who suffered discrimination because of their ethnic background or because of religion or because of gender. And I do take that into account. When I have a case involving someone who's been subjected to discrimination because of disability, I have to think of people who I've known and admire very greatly who've had disabilities, and I've watched them struggle to overcome the barriers that society puts up often just because it doesn't think of what it's doing -- the barriers that it puts up to them."

Her repeated public comments confirm that she is a racist and a sexist.

Of course, she's entitled. She's a woman, and she's non-white. Talk about "privilege."

Calling Soto a racist or a sexist is a mischaracterization. Privilege is only available to the dominant group in society. Non-whites and women do not hold either of these two positions. So she is not in a position to *be* either.

Her statements, however, ARE racist and sexist - her *statements*. Both are the product of internalized self-hate.

All things aside, she is definitely a bigoted moron who uses a racist sexual agenda to retaliate against those in the dominant group (the same dominant group who put her in the very bench she wags her finger about shaming). That makes her somewhat of a hypocrite too. Abuse of power, ethics, and authority.

The hag is action packed with issues….

Calling Soto a racist or a sexist is a mischaracterization. Privilege is only available to the dominant group in society. Non-whites and women do not hold either of these two positions. So she is not in a position to *be* either.

And to think I was starting to like you. Respect your intellect, even.

And then you fall for this line of shit.

Racism and sexism are not reserved only for the privileged or dominant in society. To believe so is naive in the extreme.

Brian…cupcake. Seriously. Like me or don't like me because of my opinion. I could give a rip. It is a fairly complex subject, which I have found of interest, so I read, listen and ask lots of questions. I have only posted what I believe to be an important point in distinguishing what constitutes being in a position to be a racist and what is not.

Racism is a specific system of power and control where people receive or are denied *legitimate access* to resources for accumulating wealth, power, status, and prestige within the economic system which facilitates culture and the institutions that conserve it. Sotomayor’s race and sex was not involved in the building of either system in this country. Call it what you will, that is a fact. (e.g. people of dominant groups had a HUGE head start in this country to build wealth and pass it down to their heirs by having the privilege of owning property, voting, getting certain jobs unavailable to blacks and Natives, having credit…long before these groups were allowed to).

There is a difference between being racist, sexist, heterosexist or classist in our thinking and behavior when we are members of a dominant group and actually being a racist, sexist, heterosexist, or classist. Do you see where I am going here?

What is also important is how we internalize the value systems of the dominant group (the non-dominants have just as much responsibility here as the dominants because they play the victim card, which is necessary for the system to work, just ask Jesse “Slimebag” Jackson… so it’s not like I am saying they are off the hook) for instance:

Sexist Victim Mentality: As a woman, I *could* internalize sexism and be eaten alive by the deep sense of inferiority or the sexist values of a so-called "hottie" type (all bod, no brains stereotype – see what they did to Sarah Palin) that has internalized the values men use to control my body and my sense of self-worth. That internalizing can keep me from standing up in my own life and making something of it. BUT THAT IS MY DOING, AND MY CHOICE (You see how Amy doesn’t play into that shit either, she says THANK YOU, and doesn’t internalize it into some little pity fest that men don’t take her “seriously” if they think she has a hot ass…but some women do!). And if I chose to play the victim, I have no fucking right to blame or skewer anyone else for it (e.g. taking it out on some male fireman). Still, it does not make me a sexist. I can’t be a sexist. I can say sexist things. I can have a sexist ideology, I can hand down a sexist ruling if I were a judge… but I can’t be a sexist because I didn’t set the value system…capice?

All I did was make a clarification.

Racial prejudice, and sexism is common to all people of ALL colors and cultures. *Racism* is unique to America.

Privilege is available to whomever is believed to warrant special consideration. This need not include the "dominant group" Indeed the dominant group in question, though not relinquishing its own personal comforts, will give all it can from others in order to assuage their own feelings of guilt over their prosperity or the prosperity of those who are in some way similar to them.

Privilege comes in many forms, in this case, social promotion for the purposes of the promotion of a specific group of the population. Similarly, special protections against failure within a group, a la the infamous fire fighter exam, enacted to specifically damage a successful group, are not only common now, but well established to the point that absent these privileges, a minority group may suffer badly even absent deliberate harm by the "dominant group".

If we might suspend the definitions of impossible, and right at this moment eliminate every racist thought from the minds of the "dominant group" a phrase usually meant to refer to white men, every feeling of superiority or every urge from any person with the desire to "keep down" one minority or another...will anyone truly argue that the present struggling members of the various minorities would suddenly prosper as never before?

Will anyone presume that the institutional poverty, indeed the glorification and cultural institution of poorer segments of society, which have become at this point generational rather than incidental to individuals, would suddenly vanish, and prosperity would flourish across all segments of the country, and produce in precise proportional quantities, the same percentage of college graduates, honorees, judges, lawyers, doctors, and elected political figures?

Few to none would be so foolish to assert that, even with the hypothetical wave of the magic wand that eliminates any vestiges of racism from the "dominant group" however small.

The truth of the matter is that this is because the problems are often caused by the methods meant to solve the problems observed by a previous generation, moreover because these problems have been perpetuated in no small part because of these well meaning solutions, the problem has become institutionalized within cultural boundaries of specific groups. We see the unfortunate truth of this with immigrant populations that come to the U.S. without those cultural hamstrings, and prosper enormously, while those born to the U.S. with every advantage in government programs, legal precedence, and protection imaginable, struggle and cast about for someone to blame.

The search for success fades away from such peoples quickly, binding them to poverty that they themselves do not escape, because they are brought up to believe it not only impossible, but a cultural betrayal, to do so or to look to do so. What then are their children taught, if they are taught anything at all?

Dominant group privilege comes from the fruits of its labors, not least because success, while it might be expected, is certainly not given, nor are special protections provided to ensure no negative impacts occur against the "dominant group", as are provided to others. The "privilege" in question that is provided in the form of special protections and special presumptions, ARE a form of privilege, but they are a self destructing thing at best, providing both an inferiority complex AND a sense of entitlement that crushes the individual work ethic that would otherwise breed success.

That racism & sexism should follow in those who feel so entitled, is no more unnatural than a river bed being carved deep by water that flows the same way for many years.

Robert, you ROCK!

You said that MUCH better than I did. Thanks.

"Racism is unique to America"

You have GOT to be kidding me.

Only someone who has never traveled outside the country could believe that.

The Egyptian word used to refer to blacks literally translates to the word "Slave".

The massacres in the Sudan against blacks are accompanied by cries in Arabic of "Kill the slaves!"

The antisemitism that was so endemic in Europe for centuries upon centuries was not only based on misunderstanding or dislike for the Jewish faith, but in the Spanish Inquisition ones ethnic heritage was important, this also applied to moors by the way.

Few people will hate each other more than a Greek & a Turk, and the massacres between Hutus & Tutsis is race based, no they did not count themselves members of the same group. And that wasn't the first genocide attempt by one against the other.

In Panama there was racism between blacks who were of different shades.

I don't think I even need to mention the racial divisions between Kurds and Turks or Kurds and Iraqi Arabs.

Nor should I have to mention the Aryan superman notions of WWII Germany, and NO those notions are not entirely dead, there or here, much improved though things are compared to 70 years ago.

The British feelings of superiority are as easy to find as your own high school history books, and were perpetuated as policy well into the 19th century.

Oh and Australia, they held openly racist public policies for a ridiculously long time, look up the movie "Rabbit Proof Fence" for the true story of one such policy.

Oh and before I forget more about the Aussies, other groups of natives which visited Australia openly looked down on the natives of Australia, and held them in racial contempt.

Racism, ethnocentrism, call it what you will, but these things are NOT uniquely American, indeed if ANYTHING about it is uniquely American, it is that we some how THINK we're unique in having a record of it.

Racism is NOT unique to America, nor anything close to unique.

Hmmm, rereading the response to which I responded second, I wonder if I might have misunderstood the intended meaning?

What I mean when i say racism is an American phenomenon, primarily where it has become refined and reinforced to the point that entire classes of people are being eliminated from existence through social, political, legislative, public policy and political correctness, health policies (healthcare) and so on.

In the circumstances you just mentioned, everyone knew to some extent what was going on. It was substantive. Here, in America, it is invisible.

Allow me to explain:

The elimination of certain classes was necessary to sustain the greatest economy in the world because it means the land and labor never had to be paid for. (Land is still being taken from Indians in the Southwest by uranium strip mining, bogus govt land leases etc...see Peabody Energy Company and Al Gore - backed by liberal elites, "Global Warming").

Huge head start in the world for a country.
Although each class of immigrant that came to this country by nationality had its "place" in the cast system, and were discriminated against by owning class people during the 18th and 19th centuries none of them had been legislated as less than human. Blacks couldnt vote with any safety until the 1960s.

Indian genocide was still going on through shooting wars until 1915. Pregnant Navajo Women starved to death during military invasions. The immigrant classes (germans, italians, irish, jewish), even asians, were already owning property, paying taxes and educating their kids by then. Blacks were being burned alive on the rope.

These types of "discrimination" are based on something other than ethnocentric prejudice against or for one's own people. Every class of immigrant has been treated badly and sometimes even murdered--- but these have not been systematic policies enforced by the various levels of government in this country.

Social engineering, Multi-culturalism and diversity programs (racist systems currently in place) does more to reinforce the previous racist model (slavery) by playing off the intergenerational grief handed down generation after generation. These programs keep it going, hidden, subversively, reinforcing the victimhood mentality by tapping into that very grief and "less than" insecurities of the non-dominant class.

Right now, it just creates a vicious cycle of dependency, victim mentality, hate, class envy....and so on.

This is why I believe America to be unique in its approach to this very ancient model - they've made it invisible and they've made the very people who believe they are the do-gooders (Liberal Elites) the Plantation owners, and you couldn't even TRY to tell them otherwise. All the while they are pointing at the big bad rich capitalist conservatives (the very model which would provide them their freedom) and so the saga continues. It's twisted as shit.

I did my best to explain my perspective.

Hmmm, that makes sense yes.

"Privilege is only available to the dominant group in society. Non-whites and women do not hold either of these two positions."

That's funny. Go up-ladder from my position and you'll find a Filipino woman running the group. Up-ladder from her is a woman. In fact, 80% of my work group is women, run by women, managed by women, directed by women, senior directed by women - parallel to us are three groups that are VP'd by women. My entire company is full of Indians, Chinese, blacks and Mexican-Americans, female and male, in a variety of jobs up and down the ladder.

So I have to wonder what the hell you're talking about when I'm watching an Indian female executive driving a $75,000 Mercedes to work, and responsible for millions of dollars in corporate budget and the efforts of dozens of people.

Feebie -

Do me a favor. Take your Women's Studies, Gender Studies, and any other "social" studies books from university, and burn them.

Your mind has been filled with gibberish.

Racism is no more an expression of power than rape is. Racism is bigotry about race. Bigotry flows both ways.

You can try to argue that segregation and slavery are absolute proof of white racism. You might be right to a degree. But they were, more than anything, an attempt to impose the old class structures from Europe in America. Please bear in mind that the bulk of the people who wound up in this country were NOT of the upper classes in Europe. Most were the dregs, peasant farmers, Catholics. Once they got here, they found themselves in charge. They had slaves, property, prosperity, respect.

You really think that someone coming from a rigid class structure that suddenly finds themselves on top is going to give that up?

There has always been a strong cultural divide in America between the North and South. The North (in colonial times, anyhow) was mostly run by people trying to eliminate the concept of class. The South was run by people who never gave up holding grudges, and they finally had a vehicle to be the upper class.

There are true racists in this world. Those who believe that blacks, arabs, whites, whatever are genetically predisposed to certain behaviors or abilities that make them inherently inferior to the "race" of the racist. They are not, however, in charge. Never have been.

If you look at all the laws meant to keep "blacks" down in this country, they always applied to emancipated slaves. Why? Fear of retribution. Gun control, miscegenation laws, segregation -- all of it from fear of retribution.

Read Thomas Sowell's "Black Rednecks and White Liberals". It will change your perspective.

A person is racist if they hold that one race or another is superior or inferior based only on race. Ditto for sexist. Period. You don't have to be in a position of power to enforce your beliefs. Having them fulfills it.

I'm white, so is my dad. So you find him in the priviledged dominant group, no? Yet his family was-until him-subsistence-class farmers and laborers. His parents were dirt poor. He worked through a local college, and the marines during vietnam, and law school, and is now rich. You tell me why others can't do that. Because their parents or grandparents or great-grandparents were poor and disadvantaged? Bullshit. The oneous is on them now, not the dominant group.

Brian - I've been studying this after college...because I wanted to understand this system. I was tought in school that if you weren't for things such as Affirmative Action, Diversity, Multiculturalism that you were a racist...and something about that stunk.

What I have laid out (between you and Momof4, I am not sure who or what you are reading) is both sides of the puzzle as I see them, and as they've been shown to me. This system does not work in a vaccuum. And inevitably, when you talk about these things (showing both sides, you know, balance, you get people who get butt sore...not my problem).

Mom - good for your Father. Where did i say the oneous is on the dominant group? Where ever did I say that? I didnt. Did you read my posts?

Please refrain from twisting my words. I did NOT say that. In fact, I said anything BUT that.

Don't know, doesn't matter. I Still stand behind my posts.

Feebie - you can stand behind them all you want, but they're transparent.

I don't know if you noticed, but there's a black man in the most powerful position in the world.

At this point, any claim of white privilege is wasted on me. At some point we have to say that we've given people an equal shot and leave it at that. You aren't going to make people like each other, it just ain't gonna happen.

>>"I don't know if you noticed, but there's a black man in the most powerful position in >>the world."

This. This right here is the EXACT problem.

He was raised in an affluent, white, family. He had access to privilege AND he had affirmative action! This is precisely what I am talking about. He is a fucking showcase.

"We have a black president now, so racism doesn't exist".

And that huckster in an empty suit who exercised his "blackness" to get elected is sitting there implementing the very racist policies that are keeping that group down. He is the very proof racism DOES exists. He is the embodiment of a racist system that produces an ill solution.

He was measured NOT by the content of his character but by the color of his skin. He is a flipping college professor…could that possibly get any worse? You couldn’t make this shit up if you tried.

Make people like each other? Well hells bells! Where did I say that? Why do you and Momof4 keep making shit up around my posts. I never said that.

Respect each other yes. Respect. Like each other? (un-fucking- unreal).

Look, when people talk about racism without delving into the hows, whys and whats it is irresponsible from my perspective. Irresponsible because it’s like the elephant in the middle of the living room that no one wants to talk about, yet they want to bitch about the smell all day.

You cannot talk about racism as it exists here in this country without identifying what it is, what makes it so, how it works, and the participants (usually unconscious of it)...to do so is a maddening exercise in futility and eliminates every avenue of responsible and open discourse.

I am sure we can both agree that govt. programs giving one group preferential treatment over the other is bullshit…but WHYYYYYYY did they do that? And why is it NOT going to fix it? And why do they continue to do it? And why was that the WRONG thing to do? And who benefits from it? Huh?

Without answering these questions, bringing them into full public view we will continue to see Sotomayors and Obamas (unqualified people) get into these positions because people like you, Brian, would just rather bitch and moan about the minutiae, rather than identify the problem for a solution.

I always thought JC Watts would make an excellent VP pick. I saw him speak once. I got to shake his hand and talk to him for a brief moment. Do you think that he would have had a shot at the presidency (him having more experience than Obama)? Not on your life (and it wouldn’t be because conservatives wouldn’t vote for him, or he wasn’t smart enough, of he didn’t go to the right schools)…it would be because he didn’t play the victim, and he ignored the system! He doesn’t agree with affirmative action, or any of it. Think about it. Think about how racist THAT is.

"At this point, any claim of white privilege is wasted on me."

Ya, no shit sherlock.

Respect each other yes. Respect. Like each other? (un-fucking- unreal).

No, you can't even do that. The best you can hope for is to get them to stop hanging each other from trees or shooting at each other from their cars. And even that's been troublesome.

You cannot talk about racism as it exists here in this country without identifying what it is, what makes it so, how it works, and the participants (usually unconscious of it)...to do so is a maddening exercise in futility and eliminates every avenue of responsible and open discourse.

I've tried. The problem is that the people who benefit from the racial grievance industry always shut the argument down. If you argue that maybe there's opportunity there if someone's willing to work for it, you get called a racist and the conversation ends. If racism is so pervasive, can you please explain Walter E. Williams?

I am sure we can both agree that govt. programs giving one group preferential treatment over the other is bullshit…but WHYYYYYYY did they do that? And why is it NOT going to fix it? And why do they continue to do it? And why was that the WRONG thing to do? And who benefits from it? Huh?

One of Limbaugh's iron rules is "follow the money." Who benefits from the present racial animus and its perpetuation? Liberals and race hustlers. There's no way to stop it because they've put in an automatic defense system. Disagree with Reverend Al or Reverend Jesse, and you're a racist. Pay here.

If you can figure out a way around that, I'm all ears. You do understand that blacks in America are the only group that vote nearly monolithically, right? The Democrats and Republicans are always trying to court the "Hispanic" vote, but there isn't one to be had. But blacks vote 90%+ for Democrats in every single election. Figure out why THAT is, and you'll be well on your way to enlightenment, grasshopper.

Without answering these questions, bringing them into full public view we will continue to see Sotomayors and Obamas (unqualified people) get into these positions because people like you, Brian, would just rather bitch and moan about the minutiae, rather than identify the problem for a solution.

I don't need to identify the problem. I don't need to offer a solution. Dr. King already did that. And he was promptly shot for it. There are too many people making too much money off of the racial grievance industry to let something as simple as merit get in the way.

I always thought JC Watts would make an excellent VP pick.

Fuck that, he'd make an excellent president. He's got the temperament for it, he's got the bearing for it. What he doesn't have is the will to put up with being called a race traitor every day of the week for not being a member of the "correct" political party.

Which is why he retired and makes his life as a citizen in Oklahoma (I believe he still lives there) rather than as a senator.

The answer you seek is a simple one. The Democratic Party must go. The simple fact is that the Democratic party and the media act as one to enforce the plantation rules. And anyone who gets "uppity" gets lynched.

And yes, I chose all those loaded words for a very specific reason. Now go and meditate on this.