Duros, you know that they can’t keep their memes straight, they are either Ivy League and effet limo liberals or they are stupid hispanics. I can’t keep it straight.

No, I don’t. Because honestly I don’t think that’s what I do. But even acknowledging that all ____ people don’t think alike, you’re more likely to find variety when you gather folks from different groups.

And do you see the irony at all in your say “so many” on this site have a problem seeing that people don’t all think alike?

And this crap about picking someone because of their ethnic makeup is bullshit. It’s along the lines of “they all think alike.”

I think you miss the point. It isn’t “pick a Jew/Hispanic/homosexual because they will have a different view.” Certainly this WASP, that black guy and the gay Muslim over there could all have very similar views. But more often than not they will have different views than three middle-aged white guys.

What? That she’s the kind of person that hangs around the country club making fun of other people?

It’s along the lines of “they all think alike.”

Do you think that she and Roberts might look at a case of racial discrimination a little differently, yes or no?

Yes Sean – *views!* Thank you!!!! But you seem to assume Sean, that people that look alike think alike, which is why so many of you on this site have no problem using race/ethnicity/gender as a qualification. You pidgeonhole people based on their demographic. Do you realize this?

I have no problem with different views. That is real diversity, not a bunch of people that look different but believe in exactly the same thing. And this crap about picking someone because of their ethnic makeup is bullshit. It’s along the lines of “they all think alike.”

Yvette: My problem isn’t whether she’s qualified or not. It appears that she is. I take issue however with some of what she has said, and with the notion that race/gender should ever have anything to do with appointing someone to a position. Most liberals agree wit that, unless of course, the victim of discrimination is a white guy.

At the risk of being accused of being a racist by anyone who reads no further than this first sentence, why not?

It seems to me that any deliberative body benefits from hearing from a variety of views. And if that is the goal then to get a variety, you’re going to have to include a variety of people. Yes, there is some minimum level of qualifications they should have, but once those are met considering other factors would be a good thing.

Sure, you could get yet another white, Protestant male with an Eastern Ivy League education to speak on behalf of whatever other group you wanted (women, Hispanics, Native Americans, Jews, lesbians, 2nd generation children of immigrants, whatever). But wouldn’t it make more sense to actually hear from members of those groups?

The all you’re remembering are your own comments because she never said that. What she did say was that she hoped a Hispanic woman might be able to make better decisions on cases involving racial or sexual discrimination than some people because of her experiences.

Yvette

Looks like Turd Blossom is selling this line of crap by the wagon. My boy Bush= Went to Yale and Havard…Modern day Socrates! Woman Justice= Not everyone who goes to the ivy league is smart. Its also hilarious coming from a person who never finished college. You don’t have to go to college to be smart just don’t talk about other peoples education like you are a Rhode Scholar.

*cough cough* condi rice *cough cough*

“If you’re a white guy looking to vent about how Puerto Rican women growing up poor in the Bronx get unfair advantages in life, the conservative movement has a lot to offer you.”

I noted this on another thread, but it seemed especially apropos here.

Yes, we are remembering. We’re remembering how a supreme court nominee thinks she’s able to make better decisions than some people because of her ethnicity.

Mike

Horrible analogy. People don’t vote for someone based on whether they have a southern accent or not. It’s not a hot button issue. Who has ever said “we need a nominee that has a southern accent!” You haven’t. Because that would be stupid. However, we have had a president actively search out people based *on* their race/gender. And that nominee is a bigot and a hispanic supremacist it would seem, being that she thinks the demographic she belongs has superior decision making skills.

jon

This has nothing to do with history. It has to do with right and wrong. Race/gender should never be a factor in appointing a nominee, hiring an employee, etc. It’s wrong and racist.

Often, the left claims to be against racism, but they’re not. They are only against it it the alleged victim isn’t a white guy. If the victim is white, oh well. You don’t get votes for standing up for “those people.” So who gives a shit. To hell with right and wrong. We’ve seen how anti-racist the left is by seeing some of the slurs and epithets thrown at Michelle Malkin, Clarence Thomas, etc….

If you are ok with what Sotomayor has said, you are a bigot. ‘Nuff said.

Because that’s the first thing right-wingers see, your race. Your qualifications have nothing to do with it. And the people are watching….and remembering.

LOL,
As if a professional propagandista would ever post an inflammatory statement that is completely baseless.

Melanin and a vagina were certainly disqualifications for most of our nation’s history. And racism and sexism certainly were part of that. I’ll start complaining about my white man status as soon as I’m actually oppressed, but until then I choose to shut the fuck up about strawmen, reverse discrimination, and the rest. It just isn’t oppression to not get selected for things, it’s called competition. When someone else succeeds at something I want, I try harder. As a white man, I’ve been shut out of more things because of nepotism than any sort of reverse discrimination. But I’m betting we won’t see legislation to end that now, will we? (And I don’t think we should, either.)