“Republicans’ outrage, both real and feigned, at Sotomayor’s musings about how her identity as a ‘wise Latina’ might affect her judicial decisions is based on a flawed assumption: that whiteness and maleness are not themselves facets of a distinct identity,” columnist Eugene Robinson wrote. “Being white and male is seen instead as a neutral condition, the natural order of things. Any ‘identity’ — black, brown, female, gay, whatever — has to be judged against this supposedly ‘objective’ standard. Thus it is irrelevant if Justice Samuel Alito talks about the impact of his background as the son of Italian immigrants on his rulings — as he did at his confirmation hearings — but unforgivable for Sotomayor to mention that her Puerto Rican family history might be relevant to her work.”
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- writerdog on It’s the stupidity about the economy
- writerdog on Let immigrants run
- Regular on It’s the stupidity about the economy
- SolDevVB on Open thread 11/24
- ANTI on Open thread 11/24
- Regular on Open thread 11/24
- DavidB on Open thread 11/24
- donndublin on Open thread 11/24
- writerdog on It’s the stupidity about the economy
- ANTI on Open thread 11/24
34 Comments
First of all, it is crazy to think someone’s background is not going to affect their rulings. However, I don’t recall Alito saying that a wise white male would make a better decision than a black male. No that was the current nominee who mused that being of a particular race and gender made her better than others.
Personally, I think the speech where she made those remarks was just pandering to the audience. Much like in these hearings she is just pandering to the Senate. She is really no different than any other politician.
This is why I think it would be better if appointed judges at all levels had set terms and were not eligible for re-appointment at that level. Thus in every election you could know the impact of the elected officials with the appointments they would make.
Let’s see, how many Supreme Court seats have been held by upper class old white men? And how many by all others combined?
One’s background does influence one’s view of the world and anyone who says it doesn’t influence theirs is a liar. Rich old white men literally don’t live in the same world as poor black women, and don’t even speak the same language. How is a poor black woman expected to plead a case? Or is she expected not to?
Jed – how many “poor old black women” have you seen “pleading a case” versus oh, I don’t know, say a lawyer?
How about just a simple standard for all jobs. The best candidate, whether the requirements be education, temperament, special skill, whatever, but the whole skin color/gender/sexual orientation/etc thing be taken out of the argument altogether? Let the best qualified “win”. Does that require addressing issues in terms of “equal opportunity” for an education, skill development, etc? Of course is does, but it doesn’t require a one size fits all approach of quotas that doesn’t address core societal issues that contribute to disparity. Part of which is the continuation of it being “PC” to promote race as an advantage “to an audience” or using identity politics as a political tool.
Didn’T the first Bush replace Thurgood Marshall with Clarence Thomas precisely because he was black
It’s a shame we evil “libruhls” allow ourselves to get sucked into the Black Hole of right-wing-nuttiness.
The dreaded “…wise Latina…” quote has been truncated beyond all recognition by the CON-spiracy of dunces on talk radio, the Fakes News Channel, and the Repubic Party in Washington.
The key edit for me (although there are plenty of others) was Judge Sotomayor beginning that sentence with the words, “I would like to think that….”
Note that’s a lot different from saying, “I think that….”
I would like to think that for every drop of rain a flower grows, that He keeps is eye on the sparrow, that Kansas City barbecue is diet food, and that CONs wouldn’t resort to personal attacks and name-calling and cut-and-post WE Blog diatribes they haven’t even read.
Hell, I’m so empathetic a “libruhl” I kinda wish Thomas Jefferson actually was President of the United States from January 20, 1777 to January 20, 1781… just so “Boxlock20″ wouldn’t be such an absurd water-carrier for the rest of you CONs.
We evil “libruhls” get in trouble when we let tolerance get in the way of a political cyber knife fight and try to imagine CONs as being sentient, thoughtful human beings.
BFD,
“How about just a simple standard for all jobs. The best candidate”
“The best candidate” always seems to depend on who is choosing. Good ole boys always think good ole boys are the only qualified pool to choose from, etc.
And that poor black woman has pretty much always had to find a rich white male attorney who understands the poor black woman’s world in order to get her case heard, and those are pretty rare birds. What percentage of poor black women with legitimate cases do you suppose actually get their cases heard in court as opposed to rich white males with frivolous claims? There’s a statistic we’ll never see!
BFD,
By the way, if you don’t like “identity politics,” you’ll do your very best to make sure the only “identity” that counts for anything legally, socially or economically is Human Being! Get busy!
There. Fixed!
–In a 1999 speech: “I would hope that a wise man with the richness of his experiences
would, more often than not, reach a better conclusion.”
–In a 2002 speech to the Princeton club: “I would hope that a wise White man with the richness of his experiences would, more often than not, reach a better conclusion.”
–In 2004, in a speech on women judges at Seton Hall Law School: “I would hope that a wise White man with the richness of his experiences would, more often than not, reach a better conclusion.”
DEJ – “What percentage of poor black women with legitimate cases do you suppose actually get their cases heard in court as opposed to rich white males with frivolous claims? There’s a statistic we’ll never see!”
__________________
So from this statement I can only assume that you’re fully in favor of tort reform to stop frivolous lawsuits from ALL frivolously litigious claimants..rich white guys, poor black women, middle class hispanics..all. But knowing you, you’re just against the frivolous suits filed by rich white guys, or just white guys in general..unless they’re poor, then it’s ok again.
As for you second post…sorry, have no idea what you’re trying to say/ask/suggest whatever it is you’re trying to do. Can you rephrase. If I read your comments literally, the only thing I can glean from it is you’re suggesting something other than “Human Being” deserves special identity classifications too so they can be “legally, socially, economically”? Like animals, plant life, rock…not sure what your point is so I know what it is that I’m supposed to “Get busy” doing…
Being white and male in the middle of China also provides different context.
Of course, the ‘Soda Mare’ was ‘fer’ what she said, until she was ‘agin’ it.
Difference, white males on the Court (Alioto an example) have not stated they believe their background leads to being more fit for the job.
It would be helpful if Sonchmayo had a firm grasp on the English language.
How is a poor black woman expected to plead a case? -Jed
======================================
Jed,
There are plenty of poor black women that are quite familiar with the court system.
BFD,
Some cases are obviously frivolous, and are usually tossed out unless presented by an $800hr. attorney. Some cases are obviously serious no matter who is presenting them. Most fall somewhere in between, and even some frivolous cases result in meaningful rulings. Tort reform in actuality usually means that frivolous cases need more money behind them to get heard. Unfortunately, justice is a very expensive commodity in this country, and all tort reform as it has been presented so far does, is make it more expensive. For all of us! If you can find a way to equitably fix that, let us all know.
In regards to your second question, you already know the answer; you just won’t accept it. First you have to purge all those subconscious reactions to skin color, gender, sexual orientation, generationality, ethnicity and culture that have been a subtext of many of your posts, and learn to accept the equal humanity of all people. One example of a first step might be learning not to give a wider berth on the street to a black guy with cornrows and baggy pants, or an obviously gay man than you do to a white guy in an Armani suit. Then learn to talk to them with exactly the same tone, temper and kindness in your voice you exhibit with your friends. It’ll take a while, but you’ll get there. Then you have to find your most effective means to further that acceptance in the society in which you live. When you’ve accomplished that, we’ll talk some more.
Ant,
“Jed,
There are plenty of poor black women that are quite familiar with the court system.”
There are plenty of poor black women who have been screwed over by the court system, if that’s what you mean.
Jed swipes the victim card from another group and plays it for them.
This isn’t the 1940’s Jed, get over it.
The Blacks can quit blaming Whites for everything.
They are responsible for themselves now, someone should have told them that decades ago.
Mr_Kia
Posted July 16, 2009 at 2:29 pm | Permalink
Difference, white males on the Court (Alioto an example) have not stated they believe their background leads to being more fit for the job.
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2009/07/whiteness-and-maleness-are-identities-too/comment-page-1/#comment-620886
And what alternate/parallel universe are you living in?? Alito’s quote(almost the same kind of quote as Sotomayor) has been played since you and your ilk have been bi*ching about it!! Open your little ears!
DEJ – you’re off on the deep end, my senile friend. It ain’t “subtext”, those are just voices in your head.
“In regards to your second question, you already know the answer; you just won’t accept it. First you have to purge all those subconscious reactions to skin color, gender, sexual orientation, generationality, ethnicity and culture that have been a subtext of many of your posts, and learn to accept the equal humanity of all people. ”
_________________
I literally couldn’t understand your first rambling rant, which is why I asked you to rephrase. Now that you have…cheese and rice, what the H makes you think you know a single damn thing about me? I played softball on an all black softball team, went to Detroit to play in “Black World” with them, I’m in the Big Brothers program and have a black Lil’ Brother. My college roommate was Hispanic. I’ve got close friends of all races. I adore the elderly and think it’s a shame how they’re treated. Just because your lib goggles don’t allow you see anything but lame-azzed partisan ignorance, you can try to lay it on someone who gives a damn what you think instead of trying to paint me with your idiocy.
I think Chas is available and looking for someone to agree with him, you might try him.
Ant,
I’m assuming you are attempting to argue that racism is no more, or something to that effect. Believe me, I’ve hung around enough white people and heard the jokes and snide comments to know that Jim Crow has just been dressed up in a nice suit and goes by the name James Crow Esq.
Jed
Posted July 16, 2009 at 3:25 pm | Permalink
Ant,
I’m assuming you are attempting to argue that racism is no more
——————————-
No.
BFD,
Yeah, I know, and some of my best friends are rich white republicans too (but gay).
Ant,
No? then why “This isn’t the 1940’s Jed, get over it.
“The Blacks can quit blaming Whites for everything.”
The Blacks can quit blaming Whites for everything.
——————
Because Jed, the biggest enemy to the Black community is themselves.
What have they been doing to help themselves in the last 30 years, other than blame White people for all of their problems.
It’s getting old, time for them to work on their community. I am sure they don’t need their hand held anymore.
“ANTI” contributes –
“What have they been doing to help themselves in the last 30 years, other than blame White people for all of their problems.”
Help elect a President of the United States?
At no time in history were white males deprived of their right to vote, to speak, to hold office, own property — they’ve not been deprived of anything on a long list of things females and minority races were deprived of. In fact, they set the standard and today most women and most other races strive to be accepted by that standard. Whiteness and maleness have always been the accepted identity of human being.
I am encouraged there will be another woman on our country’s highest court. I am inspired by her competency, her education and experience. I respect her as a human being who happens to be female. I know for my daughters and granddaughters the world looks to have a more even playing field than was available in most of my years.
Progress.
DEJ – yeah, I’m confident all of your “rich white friends” would love to know what you actually thought of them. Hypocrite. Or in your mind, does their sexuality make them immune to your normal “greedy, making their money on the backs of the poor, blah, blah, blah” rants?
Nope, they got rich ripping off rich people. In my book, that’s fair game, given that “Behind every great fortune is a great crime!” -Balzac-
lindainks55
Posted July 16, 2009 at 4:57 pm | Permalink
At no time in history were white males deprived of their right to vote, to speak, to hold office, own property…
—————————–
That’s incorrect.
In colonial times, white, indentured servants were not allowed to vote and clergy could not hold political office. :)
“Jed” –
That’s the most intriguing facet of the Madoff Affair.
His “victims” were people with lots and lots of money who just needed to believe they could earn 30% per annum.
I’ve written before on what I call the “Tinkerbell Effect,” that capitalism survives as long as the kids in the audience and clap their hands to believe in in fairies. Capitalism replaced Mercantilism which replaced Feudalism… and is likely dying today.
I don’t know what will replace capitalism. But I suspect it will be something new and not a throwback to what CONs lose sleep over. Not Marxism, not Stalinism, not Maoism, not unfettered free-marketism; something new. Something different. Something, perhaps, better for all of us here on Spaceship Earth.
(We’re not passengers, mind you. We’re the crew.)
MH – geez, how long did it take you to copy the theory of so many progressives and their precious “third way”? Better yet, can you name one since the early 20th century that didn’t use some form of “third way” rhetoric?
But what’s new…SSDD, call it “hope & change” and it’s “new”, not like that old stuff that never works, this time it’ll be different….
deJ – you’re story about your rich friends is getting more lame by the minute…so which is it, because if your ilk is “ripping off rich guys”, earlier you were crying about how only “rich guys” can afford lawyers…so “rich guys” would hire lawyers and own your friends if there was a shred of truth in your story.
But while I’m thinking of it, how many $800/hr (since that was your standard fee proposal) do the personal injury attorneys get…or how many of them run purely on contingency fees? Yeah, the Pistotniks of the world are turning away “poor black women” because they can’t afford the contingency fee right? Funny, you don’t seem to have any venom for those freaks, who take 40-60% of settlements of those same “poor black women” in your story…huh…lawyers donate 95%+ to Dems…oh well, I’m sure that’s no reason for your duplicitous stances…
Chas
Posted July 16, 2009 at 3:12 pm | Permalink
Mr_Kia
Posted July 16, 2009 at 2:29 pm | Permalink
Difference, white males on the Court (Alioto an example) have not stated they believe their background leads to being more fit for the job.
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2009/07/whiteness-and-maleness-are-identities-too/comment-page-1/#comment-620886
And what alternate/parallel universe are you living in?? Alito’s quote(almost the same kind of quote as Sotomayor) has been played since you and your ilk have been bi*ching about it!! Open your little ears!
==================================================
Charlie,
Alito’s
“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.”
Is no where close to Sotomayor’s “Will reach a better conclusion.”
Not surprised you can’t see the difference, reading comprehension has never been your strong suit.
I don’t care about Robinson, whose writing is predictable. As a conservative Republican I do support Sotomayor’s confirmation for the following reasons:
1) Obama won the election and he has the right to name people to the Supreme Court.
2) Sotomayor has the requisite experience and intellect to serve on the Court.
(I agree that Democrats do NOT give Republicans the courtesy of the first two points, but no need to stoop to their level this time.)
3) Sotomayor was nominated more for her gender and ethnicity than her ideology. If she weren’t confirmed, Obama’s second choice would probably be ideologically to the left of her. There is no chance of a conservative nominee under this president.
4) But Sotomayor’s answers to questions are surprisingly conservative, and wouldn’t need to be that way, given that Democrats have 60 votes to confirm her and there would be no need to appease
anyone. Could she really be less of a leftist ideologue than one would expect?
5) She can’t be worse than the man she’ll replace, David Suter.
6) By voting to confirm her, Republicans establish a track record of being reasonable to Obama’s nominees, which gives credibility to any future confirmation fight that might be necessary.