Due to popular demand I am writing about the nomination of Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court. I believe all the senate democrats will vote for her and most of the republicans will vote against. How is that for great insight? The nominations have become so political that everything is predictable. Was anyone surprised by Bush nominating Roberts and Alito? Is anyone surprise that a liberal Hispanic woman was nominated by Obama? Of course not. When Roberts was nominated I wrote that it is obvious that he is well qualified and even though I probably will not agree with many of his decisions, I would go listen to him if I had a chance. The same goes with Sotomayor. I am sure I will disagree with her on many decisions, but if I have a chance I would listen to her speak because she is intelligent.
I can see where people think that she is wrong to say that a Hispanic woman can rule more wisely than a white male. But this is taken out of context. She was talking about an immigrant case and being from an immigrant family she would have a different perspective. She certainly can use a better way of phrasing that but I can understand what she meant. I think I would have a better perspective than my American born friends regarding immigration. I don't buy the argument that you make your ruling just based on the law only and not your personal experience. If judges can do that, then why do most of the Supreme Court cases recently ended up 5-4? If personal opinions don't go into the ruling and every justice knows the laws very well, then shouldn't the ruling be 9-0 every time? How one interprets the law depends mostly on one's experience in life and one's core beliefs.
So now we have this charade call confirmation hearing. This is where the minority party tries to make the nominee say something stupid and where the nominee tries to say as little as possible. At the end unless he/she says something really stupid, he/she will be confirmed. I had no problem with Roberts and Alito, and I have no problem with Sotomayor. They are all well qualified. Now Clarence Thomas....
Thursday, June 04, 2009
35 comments:
Use the following html code to make a clickable link in your comment (instructions in the sidebar). You can test the link by previewing your comment.
<a href="http://angryyellowman.blogspot.com">Angry Yellow Man</a>
The above example will display as Angry Yellow Man
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
How do you feel about her role in the New Haven firefighter case?
ReplyDeleteIf we accept your view that decisions are based on personal perspectives (biases?), then the judiciary just becomes another political body ... which is not what was intended in the Constitution. The problem with your casual acceptance of "it all depends on one's perspective" is that we run the risk of abandoning the ideal of blind justice, rule of law, etc. Though such an ideal is never fully attainable, it should be striven for. Otherwise, we just slide further down the path of identity politics. Bringing different perspectives to the court makes sense, but only for the purpose of helping judges see things from a different point of view and thereby overcome their own limited perspectives and prejudicess. By the way, if "empathy" is the new criteria, then tell me how empathetic Sotomayor was to Italian-American Ricci, the firefighter with dyslexia who studied hard to gain a promotion, only to be told he wouldn't get the promotion because he was white. Sotomayor obviously "empathized" with the black firefighters who didn't properly study for the exam; yet the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment clearly prohibits the treatment Ricci received. As an angry yellow man, I would think you would be appalled at such a decision. Are you becoming mellow yellow?
ReplyDeleteMellow Yellow Man takes the little blue pill and his woman yawns. Angry Yellow Man makes own fireworks and his WOMEN beg for mercy. Mellow Yellow drinks Obama Too Cool Aid. Angry Yellow Man smacks Status Quo upside the head.
ReplyDeleteMellow Yellow = Wimpathy. Angry Yellow Man = Creative Destruction.
Wonderful! Now we have a discussion. For the first comment about the firefighter case: My personal opinions is that Sotomayor is wrong in this case. You can't change the rule of the game after it is played. She believes the rules of the promotion is wrong in the first place. I agree with that part. I was appointed chief resident over others in my class but I never took an exam for that. I would say medicine is a much more academic pursuit than firefighting. The written exam should never have been a big factor in selecting a captain in a fire department. Leadership quality is much more important. Having said that, everybody knew going in what would happen. Whites are going to score higher than blacks on standardized exams so if the government does not want zero black captains then the exam should not have been a big factor. Once the exams results are in and the total scores are tabulated then you can't invalidate the results. New Haven deserved to get sued and lose in this case.
ReplyDeleteThe second comment that the constitution did not intend personal bias to be used is of course correct. But it is not me who casually accept such bias. It is the way American justice works in reality. Take the firefighter case above. I am sure the Supreme court will overturn Sotomayor and the vote will be 5-4 regardless of the merits of the case. You can predict how 8 of the justices will vote almost every time. So you tell me there is no personal bias now? As much as your idealistic mind want to believe that the U.S. justice system can attain near perfection, it will never happen. Neither can it happen in any other country. This is because human beings are not perfect and we all have our personal biases. As fair minded as we want to be, our judgments are products of our personal experiences, culture, and education and so will always be biased. Sotomayor is not first to have personal biases in her rulings and will not be the last. When a president picks a nominee, he picks someone who has similar biases as him so why would the nominee not have biases? You can strive for your ideal but it ain't going to happen.
As I said before I disagree with Sotomayor on the firefighters and I think empathy should not enter into the equation. But I am not sure that race is the reason for her ruling. By ruling against the white firefighters, she also ruled against a Latino firefighter who passed the exam. I would not think that she has more empathy for blacks than Latinos. Sotomayor is wrong in this case but if the nominee is a white male, he would have the same view as Sotomayor because Obama would have nominated a liberal and that is the way a liberal, regardless of gender or race or empathy, would have voted.
Who the hell reads my blog at 1 a.m.?
Mellow Yellow Man Logic: Because bias seeps into judicial decisions, we should just accept that rather than work to overcome it. Any clear thinking person, of any judicial philosophy, of any color, should understand that the New Haven case violated the equal protection clause. The New Haven case is a perfect example of liberal orthodoxy perverting judicial decisionmaking, just as Gore v. Bush is an example of conservative ideology perverting judicial precedent. This is what happens when we cynically accept, as Mellow Yellow Man does, identity judges. And Mellow Yellow's argument re the Hispanic man also suffering is specious: Sotomayor knows her ruling would, in the long run, help Hispanics much more than hurt. Again, she is willing to sacrifice the one for the many, and more importantly, sacrifice the rule of law for liberal orthodoxy. Mellow yellow man's assertion that Anonymous believes we can reach near perfect objectivity is a distortion. Anonymous only said it should be the goal, and that it does make sense to have different perspectives on the court to help each other see different points of views and help overcome narrow perspectives/biases. Mellow Yellow analogous logic: none of us is perfect so none of us should strive to be good. Angry Yellow Man is a Samurai who fights injustice. Mellow Yellow man sucks blue pills by the bushel.
ReplyDeleteMellow Yellow Man makes assumptions about Angry Yellow Man's time zone.
One more thing: Mellow Yellow Man is Bigot? He says everyone knew whites would score higher on standardized exam. Angry Yellow Man never stoops to stereotypes. Angry Yellow Man believes if Black firefighers had studied like Ricci, who suffers from dyslexia, some would also have passed. Angry Yellow Man says you do not become Samurai by coddling.
ReplyDeleteMellow yellow man says, "Wonderful. Now we have a discussion." Angry Yellow Man says, "Discussion? That's for Oprah." Samurais enter battles, not discussions.
ReplyDeleteInteresting thread I stumbled upon.
ReplyDeleteYellow man, whether angry or mellow, had best be careful of racial preferences of any kind. Through hard work and perseverance, Asians have come to a time when they also are the targets of quotas. How many more Asians would be accepted to prestigious academic institutions if there wasn't a bias against them? Do we really want a country where hard work and dedication are punished and not rewarded?
To put it bluntly, Sotomayor is a racist. She implicitly believes blacks, and maybe even latinos, are so inferior as to need the force of government to make them equal. This is abhorrent to me. Look what more than 40 years of telling blacks they must have a helping hand in order to succeed has done to their culture.
To the man who believes that he is a samurai: Apparently you have more time to spend on this blog than myself. Yes, I made an assumption about your time zone. If you are writing from west of the west coast from say Hawaii or Japan, then I stand corrected about the appropriateness of the time you write. If you are from a time zone in the continental U.S. other than the west, then I will just thank you for liking the blog so much that you would write at 2, 3 or 4 a.m.
ReplyDeleteNow to analyze your "battle not discussion": 1. We both agree that Sotomayor is wrong on the New Haven case. End of discussion on that.
2. By bring up Gore v Bush you are agreeing with me that all justices bring biases into their decisions. If you believe that Sotomayor should not be on the supreme court then you should also believe that the 5 majority justices in Gore v Bush should not be on the court. The 4 minority justices also should not be on the court because they are going to agree with Sotomayor. So you want to get rid of the whole court and start all over?
3. You have not come up with one idea of how you can strive to improve the system. Assuming you can find someone who is totally unbias (and who determines that person is not bias?), he/she will never be nominated by the president. My main point that improvement is not going to happen is that there is ONLY ONE way a justice is selected. And every president is a politician. He will always select someone with similar biases as himself or someone who is satisfactory to those who helped him get elected. Every president has said that his nominee will rule according to the law. That has been a false statement every time. So how are you going to take the politics out of the justice system? Forgive me if you think I am cynical, I am only telling it the way it is.
I have no problem with you disagreeing with my points of view. But calling me a bigot goes way beyond the line. When I say that whites score higher than blacks on standardized tests, I am stating a fact. Many credible studies have shown such a score gap exists. There are many theories on why this gap occurs. Reasonable people can have different ideas about the merits of such theories. But the gap is a fact. By stating a fact I am not a bigot. You sir, on the other hand said: "if black firefighters had studied like Ricci, who suffers from dyslexia, some would also have passed." There are NO credible studies to show that blacks are lazier than whites. This is a myth put out by racists. By making the assumption that the black firefighters are lazier than white firefighters, you are guilty of promoting such negative stereotype. And you have the audacity to call me a bigot?
Angry yellow man: Sotomayor is the best thing to happen to the America haters he'll bent on destoying the very fabric that cloaked this country from the start. How can you support someone who has said and ruled the way she has? Immagine if a white male said what she did about minority females? Panic and calls for a public beheading (Don Imus). We are lost if this trend toward secular humanism isn't turned back. And I agree with realangryyellowman: go talk to Oprah. Otherwise, join the battle Samurai. Anonymous
ReplyDeleteA Samurai does not sign "Anonymous".
ReplyDeleteI totally agree with WhiteMalcolmX. Anybody who posts a comment on this thread without using some sort of identifiable screen name is a coward and should be completely ignored.
ReplyDeleteSincerely - Anonymous
So I'm supposed to assume your real name is "White Malcolm X"? How is that different than "Anonymous"? Sounds to me like you're just a wannabe brother. Mellow Yellow, White Malcolm X ... sounds like two of the 7 dwarfs. You mental midgets can't stay up with my refutations of your arguments, so I will head off into the blogosphere sunset to find smarter bloggers. This thread is dead. Maybe I'll check back sometime to see if the little blue pills are working.
ReplyDeleteThis blog's giving me a headache only because bloggers aren't using a name to associate themselves with their comments.
ReplyDeleteI'm not even going to comment about Sotomayor's nomination because at this point it's useless. Do you really believe that Obama's going to read this blog and change his mind?
We all knew going in that he was going to select a woman for justice and a Latino woman was a strong possibility.
I agree with Yellow Man that these nominations are part of a political system. Hey, the voters put in Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush, Obama and this is what we get in return. If you don't like it, the real work needs to be done between elections to get a suitable presidential nominee out there.
I am sure if McCain were elected we'd be seeing a conservative judge who would probably be a white male on the court.
In other news, am I to assume that all the unsigned "Anonymous" comments are from the same man/woman?
Either way I haven't read anything about "Anonymous's" viewpoint on who in the Supreme Court does he/she support.
Sounds like "Anonymous" is a Ricci family member. Maybe he/she wants to be "Anonymous" because they're in witness protection?
Who is calling Yellow Man a bigot and yet at the same time calling him out for being or not being a Samurai? The dude's not even Japanese.
"Mellow Yellow, White Malcolm X ... sounds like two of the 7 dwarfs."-LOL, you must be "Sleepy" then since your comments have made me tired and unamused..maybe that make me "Sleepy"?
As far as Yellow Man is concerned, I don't agree with his use of "Whites are going to score higher than blacks on standardized exams."
Though you can use stats to support this, you are using a blanket generalization on all blacks and whites, which I believe is wrong.
-Spartacus (not my real name)
Hey Spartacus - really - that isn't your real name? Glad you called out Anonymous by such a show of courage.
ReplyDeleteI do have a suggestion for a Supreme Court nominee. Like Sotomayor, he's loaded with qualifications - he's a college graduate, has lectured at Yale, Princeton, and many other prestigious universities here and in England, received an honorary doctorate from the University of Kiev in the Ukraine, was elected to a state legislature and served on the Judiciary Committee, and has run for Governor as well as President. Unfortunately, also like Sotomayor, he belongs to a racist organization. Hers is La Raza, and his is the Klan. His name - David Duke, and I don't want him on the Supreme Court either.
Dear Samurai,
ReplyDeleteSorry to see you go. Wanted to ask how you knew male enhancements came in little blue pills.
Maybe Spartacus knows.
Hey if you don't want David Duke to be on the court then you really can't suggest him, Anonymous.
ReplyDeleteBut I see your point. Are we really that scared or threatened of La Raza though? At least the members don't meet secretly in the woods and wear hoods. I don't ever remember La Raza chasing people and stringing them up by the neck.
Though maybe David Carradine wouldn't have minded. Is Yellow Man really David Carradine? Guess not since he's been blogging after the Kung Fu master's death.
C'mon people like I said before, we knew our black, liberal president would nominate a woman candidate. Just be glad it wasn't Oprah.
-Spartacus (Ocho Stinko in Cincinnati)
Hey WhiteMalcomX. I don't use the blue pills yet but I can't wait to get a claw foot tub in my backyard and sit in it with my woman when I get as old as Yellow Man!
ReplyDeleteI keep seeing referrals in this thread to some kind of blue pill implying it is the answer to all problems. Please enlighten me more specifically as to what this is. No flaccid responses please, and I'm really hoping no one stiffs me on this.
ReplyDeleteThe Tumescent One
I think we have pretty much beaten this thing to death. This is not a joke referring to the male enhancement pill discussion that somehow this comments section has deteriorated into. If any of you are still upset about Sotomayor's nomination please write to Laura Bush as she endorsed Sotomayor today.
ReplyDeleteWhen I recover from this blog I am going to write about Obama's speech, something I wanted to do a few days ago but had no time to do so. For those of you who do have time and want to get an idea of my view on the Middle East and religion please read my blogs from Sept. 26, 05 and July 20, 06. For those who only care about the blue pill, thanks for reading so far anyway.
Thought I'd drop by and visit the dwarfs ... and whadda ya know, Dwarf No. 3 (Spartacus).
ReplyDeleteHey, whitemalcolmx, do ya reeeaaaly wanna know how I knew it was blue? I think I saw your boyfriend sucking on one.
And there goes Yellow again, bein' Mellow. Better pick up a case of blues from malcolm's boyfriend.
Aint never comin' back.
Is that really you, Anonymous or should I call you Anonymouse? I see that you're back on again trying to show how big and mighty you are. I am so scared!
ReplyDeleteHmmm, so you saw WhiteMalcomX's boyfriend sucking on some pills? Must have been at that rest stop you frequent.
As far as being the 3rd dwarf, I already admitted to that since you made me "Sleepy". I would rather be a dwarf than a troll.
You=FAIL.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteOff work early and decided to slum it here one more time. Couldn't believe I saw this on Jeopardy this evening:
ReplyDeleteJeopardy Final Question
CATEGORY: Roman Sex Slaves
Answer: Spartapus
Question: What is the name of the Roman slave who forgot to take his blue pill?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHey Anonymouse, they let you out of McDonald's early huh? Haven't been to a Mickey D's in a while, do they still have the McDLT?
ReplyDeleteGee, I guess your promise of "Ain't never comin' back" was another one of your failed life promises.
I don't even believe that you watched Jeopardy last night, I don't think the channels make it to your trailer.
"...decided to slum it here one more time". You say you're gone, but you'll be back. I guarantee it. Please, I don't want you to go. I'm having too much fun. Maybe you can call me "Happy the dwarf".
Sorry to Yellow Man for using up his blog to answer to Anonymouse. But trolls like her are all over the internet and they don't know their place. They have to hide behind their keyboards and talk like they're tough to make themselves feel better.
One more thing, Anonymouse, what is your obsession with the blue pills? You either are a salesman for Pfizer or in need of some but don't have the means to get any. Since we already know you work at McDonald's...
Wow. A guy doesn't read posts for a few days, and look how things have degenerated. (Actually, the posts weren't all that high-brow right from the get-go).
ReplyDeleteI think Spartacus and Anonymouse should meet somewhere in person to hash things out. An appropriate location would be a rest stop parking lot, I'm thinking, and right around midnight.
Concerning Laura Bush's approval of Sotomayor - Laura is a very nice lady, so, you know, maybe I'll change my mind, because.......wait a minute, didn't she voluntarily agree to spend the rest of her life with W? So much for her judgement.
It seems like there are a lot of Anonymouses on this board, so from now on, I'll put a name so I'll differentiate myself from the others. Keeping in mind the high level we're all at now, I'll be -
Homo Erectus
Hey Homo Erectus, even though I like your name, we all know that your another dwarf in this blog. Go take your blue pills and get chummy with Mellow Yellow, Whitemalcomxxx and Spartapus.
ReplyDeleteYou dwarfs keep trying to call me out and calling me a homo and for living in a trailer? You don't know me. I ride a frickin' Harley and I have a Trans Am. Does that sound like someone who works at McDonald's?!
Speaking of Spartapus, I would be willing to meat him anytime he wants and anywhere he wants. I'm outta here and ain't never coming back!
Dear Sparapus,
ReplyDeleteThank you for your inquiry concerning your application for reparation payments under the "Barack Obama Reparations Act". Although you are correct that your status as a Roman sex slave more than 2,000 years ago does fall within the Act, unfortunately you fail on one of the important criteria: servitude must be involuntary.
As consolation, enclosed is a case of blue pills.
Signed,
President Barack Obama
Dear Mr. President,
ReplyDeleteThank you for your gift of blue pills. I unfortunately don't need them but I know of this troll named Anonymouse who could use them. With your permission, I would like to have UPS forward the case to Anonymouse's trailer.
I will admit to you sir that at times my servitude was not volunary contrary to belief, but when the queen summons you to (cough) come, you do so.
-Spartacus (not Sparapus)
Man, this keeps gettin' better and better! I think I'll forego watching all the episodes of "Bitch Housewives of New York" I've got waiting for me that I've DVRed for viewing tonight just so I can keep an eye on this thread!
ReplyDeleteHey Anonymouse and Sparapus - if you two do decide to meat somewhere to resolve your differences, would you mind posting the place and time here? I for one would love to be there. Don't worry, I'll hide in the bushes so you can't see me.
I just realized - that's where you two would be - in the bushes. OK, I'll stay in the parking lot with the other weary travelers and try to blend in so you don't feel intimidated.
Yours truly
Homo Erectus
Dear Spare Pus,
ReplyDeleteSo that's how Freddie Mercury got AIDS. Thank you for your honesty.
LOL. Nice job using the Queen reference! Is that you Anonymouse? Probably not, it was too witty of a comeback. I think we may have run Yellow Man off his own blog!
ReplyDeleteSpartacus doesn't answer the bell for the 12th round. Winner by technical knockout - ANONYMOUSE!!
ReplyDeleteTurns out the "Bitch Housewife" episodes were more exciting after all.
Homo Erectus
Homo Erectus, I thought I liked you! I might have spoke to soon. You are not a dwarf. Anytime you want to go out and get a bite to eat...it's on me! I know this great sushi place in San Francisco that serves this small role called eel nivek that is to dye for.
ReplyDeleteAs for Spartapus I guess you've gone and run away. Go have some more blue pills. TKO baybee!