America, I do not send you alone on this quest. I'll send someone with you.
Posted on 06/03/2009 2:17:19 AM PDT by JohnHuang2
It's no secret that the U.S. Supreme Court often shows a deep philosophical divide, 5-to-4, on cases of the greatest magnitude. It thus should raise eyebrows to know that the high court's justices once voted unanimously to slap down an opinion written by the very judge, Sonia Sotomayor, who has been nominated to join their ranks. Continues...
===========================================================
Leave no racial or gender quotas behind
Now that "wise Latina woman" Sotomayor has been outed as a racist pinhead, hysterical liberals are desperately trying to "explain" away her racist ruling in the soon-to-be-overruled case of Ricci v. DeStefano, insisting it's not really racist because [insert lame-o excuse here], as they stupidly try to repackage her as non-racist. (The first sign of trouble should have been when Sotomayor called herself "wise".)
The Sotomayor nomination has gotten so controversial, the news media are calling it "controversial". Media outlets spent all last week insisting that Sotomayor would make a swell judge because she (unlike some stodgy white male) would decide cases relying on the emanations from the penumbras of her 'rich personal heritage' -- consisting of being divorced and childless, having a screwed-up childhood and loads of personal problems and hang-ups about white males.
Even the Kool-Aid impaired press now suspects that the mediocre Sotomayor was picked over more qualified candidates solely based on 'race' -- just like that obscure McCain v. Obama case was decided last November 4th. You might have heard of it.
Sensing a problem that one of Sotomayor's key appellate rulings is about to be overruled by the Supremes, the Los Angeles Times paused momentarily from its jabberwocky about her awesome background to note that if SCOTUS overrules her racist ruling, it "could fuel controversy" against her and give critics even more ammo (technically known as "facts").
In her now-famously balanced, even-handed ruling in Ricci v. DeStefano, Sotomayor and two other Second Circuit Court judges ruled that the city of New Haven's decision to discriminate against a group of 'white firefighters' because of race was in keeping with the Civil Rights Act, which says no employee may be discriminated against because of race. Suggesting the media are on the ball, the group of 18 "white firefighters" in the case consist of 17 whites and one wise Latino.
The firefighters who passed the test were denied promotion by city officials because they passed the test, in fairness to the losers who flunked because they didn't study. Astonishingly, only firefighters qualified for a promotion could pass the test, so the city concluded the test must be flawed. Or worse -- that the test they formulated was deliberately racist!
That the test didn't yield any qualified black candidates is the whole basis for the lunatic claim that the test was flawed. So, in a brilliant stroke, the results were disregarded out of fear that New Haven would be subjected to having qualified firefighters in senior positions. I have a dream of a city where firefighters will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their test scores for once.
Libbies claim Sotomayor was merely obeying another provision of the Civil Rights Act, which bars employers from using tests in hiring or promotions that have a "disparate impact" on racial minorities. The problem with that idiotic excuse is that the law allows it if there's a "business necessity," such as promoting qualified firefighters to supervisory gigs who can actually pass a basic test for supervisory gigs.
The Sotomayor standard of 'racial neutrality' consists of promoting unqualified firefighters because of race, that way fires won't be so hot anymore.
With La Razista Sotomayor, libbies have given up any attempt at hiding their lunatic devotion to race-preferences, gender-preferences and quotas, insisting that putting an unqualified hack judge on the high court because of her race and gender is what makes America great. Sotomayor humbly claims her decision-making process is inherently far superior to those of lumbering lower life forms called 'white male judges', one of whom recently laid into her ruling in the firefighters case, saying it "lacks a clear statement of either the claims raised by the plaintiffs or the issues on appeal. Indeed, the opinion contains no reference whatsoever to the constitutional claims at the core of this case, and a casual reader of the opinion could be excused for wondering whether a learning disability played at least as much of a role in this case as the alleged racial discrimination. This perfunctory disposition rests uneasily with the weighty issues presented by this appeal."
Oh, wait -- that was wise Latino Judge Jose Cabranes writing for the dissent in Ricci v. DeStefano! Sorry about that.
Anyway, that's...
My Two Cents
"JohnHuang2", a Latino
Wednesday morning ping...
She does give you words print.
Thanks John, right on the mark again. Amen.
She’ll make one helluva judge.
That’s gonna leave a mark!
Ok, so the Washington Times gets it.
Do any of the Republican or Democrat Senators? Or can we expect a big old PC Kissy contest?
ping
“Sotomayor’s anti-white prejudice is also apparent in her judicial decisions. Her summary dismissal of the Ricci v. DeStefano case, which dealt with a clear instance of anti-white discrimination, has caused widespread outrage. While Sotomayor showed no concern over discrimination against whites, she has a record of siding with minorities who alleged discrimination even in trivial and dubious cases, as demonstrated by a number of occasions in which she has dissented from the court’s majority opinion:
Sotomayor declared a school guilty of racial discrimination for transferring a black boy from first grade to kindergarten because of academic difficulties.
Sotomayor found a prison guilty of violating a Muslim prisoner’s first amendment rights on the grounds that, unlike other Muslim prisoners, he did not receive a special meal on a Muslim holiday. The prison’s defense, which the rest of the court accepted, was that this omission was justifiable because the prisoner was in a special detention unit and was not allowed to attend the prison event celebrating the holiday.
Sotomayor sided with plaintiffs who charged that a New York state law denying felons the right to vote was racially discriminatory.
Sotomayor’s opinion in these cases was out of line not only with the rest of the court’s, but also with that of most Americans. It is unjust and humiliating to punish white Americans for racial discrimination where none exists, especially when discrimination against us goes unpunished. Please reject Sotomayor and demand that President Obama choose a candidate with a record of the impartiality that justice requires.
For more on Sotomayor’s judicial record, see here:”
http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/judge-sotomayors-appellate-opinions-in-civil-cases/
http://www.wvwnews.net/story.php?id=7227
The wise latina would easily make mincemeat of any issue here.
1. Ricci was a victim of reverse discrimination. Ruling - Tough ****. He's white so he can be legally discriminated against.
2. Ricci had valid grounds to appeal because he had a learning disability and he was discriminated against because he was legally handicapped. Ruling - Tough ****. He's white so he can be legally discriminated against.
In summation the wise latina decides that because he's white, screw him.
Obama is off on another wonderful adventure, this time to the Middle East, where he is giving away the store to our enemies and pressuring Israel, the only free, prosperous and civilized country in the area. Jewish Americans might finally start to notice that Obama spent his life hanging out with the types like Syrian-American Tony Rezko, Palestinian Khalid Rashidi and another guy, whose name I forget.
The now admitted former Muslim Obama has bowed to the Saudi King as President and hasn't spent much time around Jewish Americans. Hillary's going along for the ride, but will politicians who need votes go along with them?
America, I do not send you alone on this quest. I'll send someone with you.
This is what our country, or more apt, what Dems and liberals have come to. More than forty years since Martin Luther King gave his “I have a dream” speech where he, and purportedly all the people who believed in King’s words, espoused a nation where color and ethnicity would have no role in deciding major issues. The libs have now reached the point where they believe color and ethncity are everything. In short, they have all become racialists. Not necessarily racists, although more than a few of them certainly are, but they are assuredly all racialists. They see and explain everything in terms of “race” and ethnicity. Of all the bankrupt liberal ideas, this one might be the most bereft of common sense and legal justification.
Thank you oh so very much for that excellent wrap-up!
big ol bump
Oh, you wise, wise latino male! Hugs John, spot on the target!
Check it out.
This very unwise latina should be laughed away prior to any confirmation hearing - but, with the loons in charge in DC, I fear they will confirm her after a perfunctory ‘hearing’ where in the first five minutes they will ask every Democrat if they like her, they’ll all say ‘si senor’ - and the vote will be taken.
God help us...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.