Obama picks Sotomayor for Supreme Court
-
Steve, this isn't therapy. You don't answer a question with another question. If you want to get my feelings on affirmative action programs in general we can do that later, or in another thread.
I'm asking you to reconcile your inconsistencies, or at least get you to agree that you have them. On one hand, you don't mind the race-based hiring of a less qualified black judge, and on the other hand you do mind the race/gender-based hiring of a obviously qualified Hispanic judge. Your only response has been to deny the premise that Thomas lacked qualifications, which is a ridiculous argument. And even then that doesn't make your position consistent. You'd still favor race-based hiring in one instance, and not in the next. And I quoted back to you your own reasoning, which is clearly ad hoc and partisan, and basically amounts to "When Republicans appoint someone who doesn't whine about race, it's okay."
Why the two positions? Don't you oppose race-based hiring?
And give me an example of my "hateful attacks on Thomas"! What are you talking about? I don't hate the man, and haven't said anything about him that's even controversial.
Or should I point out how this is yet another ad hominem attack?
A: Thomas lacks qualifications.
B. You're just saying that because you hate Thomas personally.
A. How does that prove that Thomas was qualified?
B. Because I don't agree, and you hate him.
-
Steve, this isn't therapy. You don't answer a question with another question. If you want to get my feelings on affirmative action programs in general we can do that later, or in another thread.
I'm asking you to reconcile your inconsistencies, or at least get you to agree that you have them. On one hand, you don't mind the race-based hiring of a less qualified black judge, and on the other hand you do mind the race/gender-based hiring of a obviously qualified Hispanic judge. Your only response has been to deny the premise that Thomas lacked qualifications, which is a ridiculous argument. And even then that doesn't make your position consistent. You'd still favor race-based hiring in one instance, and not in the next. And I quoted back to you your own reasoning, which is clearly ad hoc and partisan, and basically amounts to "When Republicans appoint someone who doesn't whine about race, it's okay."
Why the two positions? Don't you oppose race-based hiring?
And give me an example of my "hateful attacks on Thomas"! What are you talking about? I don't hate the man, and haven't said anything about him that's even controversial.
Or should I point out how this is yet another ad hominem attack?
A: Thomas lacks qualifications.
B. You're just saying that because you hate Thomas personally.
A. How does that prove that Thomas was qualified?
B. Because I don't agree, and you hate him.
Steve, this isn't therapy. You don't answer a question with another question. If you want to get my feelings on affirmative action programs in general we can do that later, or in another thread.
Lets say I don't believe you.
I'm asking you to reconcile your inconsistencies, or at least get you to agree that you have them.
Though you're merely in deny and bicker and plead the fifth mode maybe this will help.
You want me to address two different situations and tough shit foy ya there.
Thomas and Sodomayer are both perfectly qualified to serve. I like his politics better than hers. You don't.
If in fac t there were an objective test every jurist had to take it one might have a higher score.
Then we can address your desire for prejudice to take over.
Simple as that.
Why the two positions? Don't you oppose race-based hiring?
Have someone read the above to you again.
And give me an example of my "hateful attacks on Thomas"! What are you talking about? I don't hate the man, and haven't said anything about him that's even controversial.
Hey you used the word "hate" so I assumed you liked it.
Or should I point out how this is yet another ad hominem attack?
A: Thomas lacks qualifications.
He does not.
B. You're just saying that because you hate Thomas personally.
You seem to.
A. How does that prove that Thomas was qualified?
YOu said he wasn't not me. Prove it .
B. Because I don't agree, and you hate him.
You seem to.
Do you "hate" him because he isn't qualified according to the Heck yardstick or is he unqualified because you "hate" him?
And just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you.
WSS
-
For the record, here are Thomas' qualifications when he was nominated. In short, he had assistant jobs until he was chairman of the EEOC for eight years. Then he was a district judge for one year before being nominated.
1971: Graduates Holy Cross
1794: J.D. from Yale Law School
1974-1977: Assistant Attorney General of Missouri, 2 1/2 years
1977-1979: Private practice in Missouri
1979-1981: legislative assistant to Missouri Senator John Danforth
1981-1982: Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights at the U.S. Department of Education.
1982-1990: Chairman of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
1990-1991: Judge, US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
Here's Sotomayor:
1976: graduates summa cum laude from Princeton, recipient of the Pyne Prize, the top award for undergraduates
1979: J.D. from Yale Law School, editor at the Yale Law Journal
1979-1984: Assistant District Attorney in Manhattan
1984-1992: private practice, made partner in 1988
1992-1998: appointed to the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
1998-2009: appointed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
1998-2007: Adjunct Professor at New York University School of Law
1999-2009: Lecturer-in-law at Columbia Law School
She's served at every level of our judicial system, and been a judge for 17 years, both at the district and appellate levels.
-
That was a real sorry answer.
It's okay, Steve. I get it. I think we all do. But you should probably stop the bitching about how other people only follow the party line, because you're really just projecting. It's clear you apply two different standards here.
Though just for shits and giggles, you said when Republicans use affirmative action it's "to get African Americans to start joining and thinking of themselves as Americans."
Let's leave aside that you think African-Americans don't see themselves as Americans for now.
What about when Democrats use affirmative action? What's the reason they use it?
-
And again, your evidence for me "hating Thomas" is what?
It's all right there. All of my posts. Quote me.
-
For the record, here are Thomas' qualifications when he was nominated. In short, he had assistant jobs until he was chairman of the EEOC for eight years. Then he was a district judge for one year before being nominated.
1971: Graduates Holy Cross
1794: J.D. from Yale Law School
1974-1977: Assistant Attorney General of Missouri, 2 1/2 years
1977-1979: Private practice in Missouri
1979-1981: legislative assistant to Missouri Senator John Danforth
1981-1982: Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights at the U.S. Department of Education.
1982-1990: Chairman of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
1990-1991: Judge, US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
Here's Sotomayor:
1976: graduates summa cum laude from Princeton, recipient of the Pyne Prize, the top award for undergraduates
1979: J.D. from Yale Law School, editor at the Yale Law Journal
1979-1984: Assistant District Attorney in Manhattan
1984-1992: private practice, made partner in 1988
1992-1998: appointed to the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
1998-2009: appointed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
1998-2007: Adjunct Professor at New York University School of Law
1999-2009: Lecturer-in-law at Columbia Law School
She's served at every level of our judicial system, and been a judge for 17 years, both at the district and appellate levels.
She's served at every level of our judicial system, and been a judge for 17 years, both at the district and appellate levels.
And barney was a policeman for how many years? would that make him qualified to be a sheriff.
-
Heck must feel pretty uncomfortable to have T, Steve and myself kicking his butt.
So, Heck says that Thomas was unqualified for the Court, because Sotomayor has
more experience? "DOH"
Sotomayor also was a MARXIST out of Princeton, Heck. Go check her yearbook entries.
Marxist adoptees in these colleges get outstanding grades from Marxist profs..
Independent thinkers, not so much. Just a general rule I noticed years ago...
-
Haha. I love you guys.
-
And again, your evidence for me "hating Thomas" is what?
It's all right there. All of my posts. Quote me.
And again, your evidence for me "hating Thomas" is what?
It's all right there. All of my posts. Quote me.
Golly Heck.
You were tossing the word "hate" around like you knew what it meant.
I figured you liked it.
WSS
-
That was a real sorry answer.
It's okay, Steve. I get it. I think we all do. But you should probably stop the bitching about how other people only follow the party line, because you're really just projecting. It's clear you apply two different standards here.
Though just for shits and giggles, you said when Republicans use affirmative action it's "to get African Americans to start joining and thinking of themselves as Americans."
Let's leave aside that you think African-Americans don't see themselves as Americans for now.
What about when Democrats use affirmative action? What's the reason they use it?
That was a real sorry answer.
It's okay, Steve. I get it. But you should probably stop it with the bitching about how other people only follow the party line.
I report. You decide.
Though just for shits and giggles, you said when Republicans use affirmative action it's "to get African Americans to start joining and thinking of themselves as Americans."
That's a better reason than most no matter who does it.
Let's leave aside that you think African-Americans don't see themselves as Americans for now.
Actually Heck I recently saw a poll (I can't post it so feel free to just say I made it up and huff and puff) that had a remarkably high number of black respondents say they thought of themselves first in terms of color.
Lots more than Christians and wayyy more than white.
I don't think even you would pretend that doesn't happen. But who knows, you're loath to admit anything.
And shall we notethat you did ust the terms "African Americans" and "Americans" so there must be a line somewhere in even your colorblind head.
What about when Democrats use affirmative action? What's the reason they use it?
Pandering to that voting bloc?
Plus we'ere off course on the judicial topic maybe a new header is in order.
WSS
-
I'm just glad we've confirmed the love you have for the benevolent form of Republican-sponsored race-based hiring.
-
I'm just glad we've confirmed the love you have for the benevolent form of Republican-sponsored race-based hiring.
I'm just glad we've confirmed the love you have for the benevolent form of Republican-sponsored race-based hiring.
Good.
Someday you may see that it's more beneficial than the payback method.
Baby steps Heck.
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/coulter032901.asp
just for fun
WSS
-
What's the payback method?
I'm learning so much today.
-
I ask myself this every day.
It is fairly informative, though. Steve is like a window into the Republican base. With cobwebs on it.
I mean, the guy just admitted, after many, many posts on his distaste for affirmative action, that affirmative action hires are okay if Republicans do it, especially if the person getting the gig doesn't believe in affirmative action.
How can you not love that kind of intellectual pretzel?
-
Heck translation:
"Ha hah, I"m getting my butt kicked and I don't have
a leg to stand on, so I'm going to bail or change the subject,
since no one has lowered my chair for me..."
-
I ask myself this every day.
It is fairly informative, though. Steve is like a window into the Republican base. With cobwebs on it.
I mean, the guy just admitted, after many, many posts on his distaste for affirmative action, that affirmative action hires are okay if Republicans do it, especially if the person getting the gig doesn't believe in affirmative action.
How can you not love that kind of intellectual pretzel?
I ask myself this every day.
It is fairly informative, though. Steve is like a window into the Republican base. With cobwebs on it.
I mean, the guy just admitted, after many, many posts on his distaste for affirmative action, that affirmative action hires are okay if Republicans do it, especially if the person getting the gig doesn't believe in affirmative action.
Ray Bolger.
How can you not love that kind of intellectual pretzel?
Yeah Heck you're so smart. Too bad you can't just give a straight answer and expose your bullshit.
Actually you changed the subject so you can drone on about racism again and misrepresent what I say to argue against it.
And unfortunately a reasonable bright guy like Dan sits down to eat your dinner of straw man with a side of red herring.
And yes Heck affirmitive action hasn't been all that great for Thomas as it allows mugs like you to belittle the guy and exercixst the exact racism you bray about.
If you feel guilty I suggest therapy.
WSS
-
How am I belittling the guy by pointing out his qualifications? Those are facts.
Even you agreed that race played a role in his hiring. He wasn't particularly qualified to be a Supreme Court Justice, but got the job because he fit what Bush wanted - a black conservative.
So when you say race played a role in his hiring it's okay. When I say it played a role in his hiring it's belittling the man and racist.
And when Republicans use race to hire someone it's okay because they know what's best for blacks. When Democrats do it it's a crass political move.
You're really having an inconsistent couple of days here.
-
As for me avoiding you, what would you like to ask me?
-
Just reading the board confirms my feeling the divides in this country are too deep to ever be repaired.
I really think we need to return to the idea of a republic of independent states.
The south was right 150 years ago, the states should have a much bigger say in the way things are run and be free to run them the way they want.
If not, you end up in the quagmire we find today.
The best governing takes place every Tuesday down at your local town hall meeting.
Has anybody here ever been to one? I would assume so since we have a board full of political experts.
-
How am I belittling the guy by pointing out his qualifications? Those are facts.
Even you agreed that race played a role in his hiring. He wasn't particularly qualified to be a Supreme Court Justice, but got the job because he fit what Bush wanted - a black conservative.
So when you say race played a role in his hiring it's okay. When I say it played a role in his hiring it's belittling the man and racist.
And when Republicans use race to hire someone it's okay because they know what's best for blacks. When Democrats do it it's a crass political move.
You're really having an inconsistent couple of days here.
How am I belittling the guy by pointing out his qualifications? Those are facts.
What are facts?
Even you agreed that race played a role in his hiring.
That's my guess. I did not hear Bush's people promising to find a black man.
And that's the "proof" you would demand of me.
He wasn't particularly qualified to be a Supreme Court Justice,
Yes, Heckm, he was. That's the poison premise I won't let you slip through as fact.
but got the job because he fit what Bush wanted - a black conservative.
And was attacked by some of your party spokesmen as an uncle Tom.
So when you say race played a role in his hiring it's okay. When I say it played a role in his hiring it's belittling the man and racist.
Again with the bullshit premise.
There is no set of standards he fell short of. You're confusing it with the Ricci case.
And when Republicans use race to hire someone it's okay because they know what's best for blacks. When Democrats do it it's a crass political move.
And I didn't say that. I say that a justice should represent the American people regardless of race. You don't.
You're really having an inconsistent couple of days here.
Not at all.
Unless you count the stuff you make up.
WSS
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login