Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: michael97123 who wrote (484859)	6/1/2009 1:34:30 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574998

Michael, > Did you agree that Satamayor is a racist for taking one comment she made, perhaps out of context and perhaps out of jest? Conservatives are only giving liberals a taste of their own medicine. They don't realize that even pointing out the hypocrisy of the left isn't going to work, for liberals hardly ever suffer when called out as such. > Your point should be for young repubs is to remake the party and not follow rush down the dark road. Young Republican clubs tend to be very conservative, almost extreme in their views. They certainly don't buy this faux moderate act that Colin Powell is pushing in the mainstream media. By the way, back at my alma mater, the Cornell College Republicans was founded by Ann Coulter. Tenchusatsu

To: michael97123 who wrote (484859)	6/1/2009 1:39:12 PM
From: longnshort	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574998

When the dems attack Estrada did they throw the Hispanic vote under the Bus ?? When they attacked Clarance Thomas did the dems throw the black vote under the Bus? When they attacked Palin did they throw the women vote under the bus ?

To: michael97123 who wrote (484859)	6/1/2009 1:43:29 PM
From: longnshort	Respond to of 1574998

IN CONTEXT "The chief blot on Sonia Sotomayor's otherwise stellar professional record is a comment she made deprecating the capabilities of any judge lacking a Y chromosome and Iberian ancestry," Chicago Tribune columnist Steve Chapman writes. " 'I would hope,' she said in a 2001 lecture on law and multicultural diversity, '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.' "The question for her supporters is: How do we spin that? It's not sufficient grounds to reject her nomination, given her excellent credentials. But it's still an embarrassment. "One possible way to handle it is a mea culpa by the nominee. She could say, 'Let me explain what I meant to say,' or 'I used to believe that, but I now realize I was mistaken,' or 'Oh, man - what was I thinking?' Any of those tactics would defuse the controversy and allow the debate to proceed to a topic more advantageous to her. "Maybe when she gets to her confirmation hearing, Sotomayor will disavow the remark. But her supporters are taking another tack. They say this criticism is unfair, because critics have taken the quotation out of context and grossly distorted her meaning. "Sotomayor, they point out, also said judges 'must not deny the differences resulting from experience and heritage but attempt, as the Supreme Court suggests, continuously to judge when those opinions, sympathies and prejudices are appropriate.' "Her allies have a point. Anyone who reads the whole speech will indeed find that her comment wasn't as bad as it sounds. It was worse. "What is clear from the full text is that her claim to superior insight was not a casual aside or an exercise in devil's advocacy. On the contrary, it fit neatly into her overall argument, which was that the law can only benefit from the experiences and biases that female and minority judges bring with them. "She clearly thinks impartiality is overrated."