Sotomayor is a fraud and should be ousted from any Supreme Court vetting!!

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Wyldgusechaz, Jun 30, 2009.

  1. Wyldgusechaz

    Wyldgusechaz New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2006
    Messages:
    1,259
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Any reasonable intelligent person has to agree with the above. If you you are an idiot and an apologist for racism. Why?

    Years ago, fire departments and police departments and unions were good ole boy networks with pure despotism. Your grandpa, (likely Irish LOL) had a job as a fire fighter, your dad got a job as FF because his dad greased the wheels, and then you got a job because of the same. A qualified man/woman without an "In" had no chance.

    So what was done? The good ole boy network was dropped in favor of physical and written objective tests. OBJECTIVE TESTING should be seen as the answer for racial minorities. They should be pleading for them. That would be honest. Study hard, get physically fit and you get the job. Instead, as usual, they want a hand out and refuse to compete objectively. Because in written objective tests we know quite well that they mostly always lose out to whites. And Asians.

    If you can't compete and study with the best, you don't deserve a job. If your mom and dad did not teach to study and work hard, tough shit. You lose.
     
  2. Industrialsize

    Staff Member Moderator Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2006
    Messages:
    24,279
    Albums:
    2
    Likes Received:
    2,096
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    United States
    This post shows you know nothing about the Ricci Case. The merits of the test were NOT part of what Sotomayor and the Appelate court ruled on.They were ruling on whether the City of New Haven could throw out the test results becuse of Fear of lawsuits. Their ruling followed precedents set by previous ruling of other courts on the issue. It was the Supreme Court who practiced "Judicial Activism" and created new law. You may want to read the decision for yourself and not rely on the right wing noise machine for your talking points.
     
  3. B_Nick8

    B_Nick8 New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2007
    Messages:
    11,912
    Likes Received:
    43
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    New York City, by way of Marblehead, Boston and Ge
    That would be entirely out of character.
     
  4. cruztbone

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2004
    Messages:
    1,291
    Likes Received:
    2
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Capitola CA USA
    Sotomayor is not a fraud, unlike Clarence Thomas , she is a reasoned, fair woman with a intelligent mind and obvious gifts that suit her to take over for David Souter.

    Isnt it fun to watch Repugnantcans scream moral outrage when their own party is so full of horny hacks and scumbag schills?

    As Lyndon Johnson used to say, "i love small parties. And the GOP is one of my favorite small parties of all time". Amen, Lyndon.
     
  5. dong20

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2006
    Messages:
    6,130
    Likes Received:
    5
    Location:
    The grey country
    The only fraudulent thing in this thread is its author.
     
  6. Industrialsize

    Staff Member Moderator Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2006
    Messages:
    24,279
    Albums:
    2
    Likes Received:
    2,096
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    United States
    In the suit, 20 city firefighters, 19 white and one Hispanic, sued the city for throwing out the results of a promotional test for lieutenants. They said the city violated their rights by not promoting them. The city said it feared a lawsuit under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 if it made promotions based on the test since no African-Americans scored high enough to qualify for immediate promotions. The Supreme Court CHANGED the current interpretation of Title VII. The appelate court did not have the ability to do that.
     
    #6 Industrialsize, Jun 30, 2009
    Last edited: Jun 30, 2009
  7. hud01

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2009
    Messages:
    5,262
    Likes Received:
    23
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    new york city
    I am far from right wing, but the city of New Haven was wrong. They would not even certify the results or the test to find out if it were biased. They found the results and threw them out.

    This was not judicial activism, it was cowardice by the city
     
  8. hud01

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2009
    Messages:
    5,262
    Likes Received:
    23
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    new york city
    She was repremanded informally by a judge who was her mentor, for failing to properly render a decision
     
    #8 hud01, Jun 30, 2009
    Last edited: Jun 30, 2009
  9. Wyldgusechaz

    Wyldgusechaz New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2006
    Messages:
    1,259
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    I stand by what I wrote. I know the case. If she were truly honest, and she isn't, then she would have investigated the case more thoroughly, vetted it with more clarity, and and written clearly that using objective tests is THE ONLY FAIR AND REASONABLE WAY to select employees. She was dismissive of the complaint, which in fact should truly be the rallying cry for all minorities who want a fair shake in objective testing, and not a hand out as most minorities REALLY want. They don't want to compete, but be handed gifts on a silver platter. As usual.


    If you can and I know you won't be able to. give me one good reason why she did not get 4 square behind defending objective testing as the sole criteria for employment. The 10 highest scorers get the 10 top jobs, period.
     
  10. dong20

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2006
    Messages:
    6,130
    Likes Received:
    5
    Location:
    The grey country
    I'll offer two:

    • Because Einstein did poorly at written tests, failed his college entrance exam. One of the greatest minds [perhaps the greatest] of the last century would have been consigned to the scrapheap by your measuring stick. In fact, he nearly was ...
    • Because, formalised testing should only be an element, an aid toward the formulation of an employment decision. Taken in isolation, an exam is a poor foundation for making a balanced decision about an individual, other factors must also be considered.
    How large a part each of the various factors played, would of course depend on nature of the post. I'd have thought that was blindingly obvious - your post is so transparently trollish in nature, it's comical.
     
    #10 dong20, Jun 30, 2009
    Last edited: Jun 30, 2009
  11. karldergrosse

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2009
    Messages:
    1,898
    Likes Received:
    42
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Near the Great Smoky Mountains
    I take no side in this dispute--only interest. But it ceases to be an informative debate when it degenerates into simple ad hominem name-calling..... :frown1:
     
  12. dong20

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2006
    Messages:
    6,130
    Likes Received:
    5
    Location:
    The grey country
    Name calling? Get over yourself, what do you think this is ... kindergarten?

    Look at the OP's history, my post above and the situation in context. Then, come back when you do have something to offer other than barracking from the sidelines.
     
  13. mikeyh9in

    mikeyh9in Active Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Messages:
    321
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    48
    Gender:
    Male
    If you have any experience in education (the SAT, or ACT tests for college entrance) or have studied "objective" testing, you would understand that there is no such thing as an unbiased test. The creators of the test introduce their own biases (intentional or not). Standardized testing in schools have also taken a lot of criticism due to inherit biases.

    So ONE good reason is a potentially racially biased test.

    It is also important to note that Sotomayer was not the judge that actually wrote the ruling.
     
  14. karldergrosse

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2009
    Messages:
    1,898
    Likes Received:
    42
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Near the Great Smoky Mountains

    Your arrogance, intemperance, and name-calling have just proved my point..... Thanks--glad we agree.....
     
    #14 karldergrosse, Jun 30, 2009
    Last edited: Jun 30, 2009
  15. SEXXXX

    SEXXXX New Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2009
    Messages:
    312
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    1
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    NYC
    This one is, too bad since it is pointless to argue with argumentative kind with zero knowledge and understanding
     
    #15 SEXXXX, Jun 30, 2009
    Last edited: Jun 30, 2009
  16. dong20

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2006
    Messages:
    6,130
    Likes Received:
    5
    Location:
    The grey country
    Really, and exactly what 'name' did I call you?

    According to most definitions, it's only arrogance where I believe I'm right and you're wrong - and/or I consider you inferior. Since you have expressed no opinion (cogent or otherwise) on the subject matter of the thread, and I merely observed that you appeared overly sensitive to robust debate in an adult forum, yet felt it necessary to critique another, that epithet wouldn't seem to apply.

    Might I suggest you either express an opinion on the thread topic, or continue to wring your hands about how beastly I am ... the latter [preferably] in private. The choice being entirely your own to make.

    I'm assuming you have an opinion of course.
     
  17. b.c.

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2005
    Messages:
    9,252
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    1,666
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    at home
    Besides the incongruity of your blatantly racist remarks with your sig in which you quote Thoreau, a noted abolitionists, I find your simplistic characterizations of "minorities" at once tiresome, amusing, and almost insulting, if one were not to consider the source.

    But thanks anyway for making it quite clear where you're "comin' from". That way, one can avoid making the mistake of taking your comments as having any basis in rationale.
     
  18. B_VinylBoy

    B_VinylBoy New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Messages:
    10,516
    Likes Received:
    7
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Boston, MA / New York, NY
    It's the reason why I don't like engaging him in any reasonable discussion. Because you go into it knowing that the more you probe and challenge his beliefs, it always falls back to the ol' "supreme race" argument.

    Dem "damn negro boys" are the reason why everything in America is screwed up! :rolleyes:

    The more he bastardizes certain races of people, the more he doesn't even realize how many are the exact opposite of his own twisted beliefs. Yes, even the "gangsta rappers". Film at 11. :cool:
     
  19. Phil Ayesho

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2008
    Messages:
    5,581
    Likes Received:
    872
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    San Diego
    Bullshit.

    She interpreted the LAW correctly...

    The Supreme Court, in overturning this decision actually stated categorically that they realized that their decision would significantly complicate title nine enforcement.

    The dissenting opinion was that this ruling made title nine unenforceable.

    Ergo- the republican appointed imbeciles and fuckwads on the Supreme Court- y'know- the ones like Thomas and the asshole who said torture wasn't technically "punishment"... well those 5 incredibly unqualified paragons of poor reasoning decided to OVERTURN a law, without actually overturning the law.



    But then, what do you expect from Republicans, who see no conflict in demanding resignation from philandering democrats, while demanding understanding for philandering republicans.

    Seriously... anyone considering themselves to be republican at this point really ought to be too embarrassed to admit to it.


    ETA- surprise surprise these were the same five dipshits who named Bush president... and stated in their opinion that their own opinion in that case was not to be used as precedent...

    Essentially naming GW president without actually invoking ANY legal reasoning whatsoever?

    Let's just all hope that 3 more of these republican nincompoops on the Court retire so we can hopefully get some genuine legal scholars who can reason their way out of a paper bag.
     
    #19 Phil Ayesho, Jun 30, 2009
    Last edited: Jun 30, 2009
  20. seterwind

    seterwind New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2005
    Messages:
    216
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    1
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Edmonton, AB, Canada
    *hugs Phil Ayesho*
     
Draft saved Draft deleted