Reply With Quote
So, pretty much all of this to say there are no principled Democrats?
"it's generally true that the Democrats have been successful in putting out the public opinion that Republicans are racist."
The Nixon Southern Strategy of courting Dem racists to switch to Repug racists is well known by all policital analysts and historians, and continues to this day, such that the Repugs electoral base is pretty much confined to the racist South.
It's not a Dem opinion or slime, The Repug Southern (Racist) Strategy is a fact and has been very successful.
So, pretty much all of this to say there are no principled Democrats?
Sure there are. I think Feingold is a Democrat who has principles. There're a few others. Not many though. Not many on the Republican side either. If I had to pick one there, it'd be Ron Paul.
Both have their beliefs and tend to stick with them, even when those choices are overwhelmingly unpopular.
Are you seriously now just coming to the conclusion that most politicians are s bags?
The dawn breaks.
I think it was a stupid racist statement that she made but that doesnt necessarily make her a racist.http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/05/...dup/index.html
So board Republicans... was the GOP wrong? Or are they merely cowards and refuse now to speak the truth?
Thats the mentality the left uses to paint everyone racists.
Don't forget to include right wing talk radio using the same statememnt as proof of her racism..
The one thing I have learned from the left over the past 8 years is that it's the allegation that's important, not the proof.
Bill Clinton
Obama is a muslim
Clintons killed 100 people..etc...
Bill Clinton
Obama is a muslim
Clintons killed 100 people..etc...
So, nothing turned out to be true about Bill Clinton?
How many Americans did he politically assassinate again?
Even Limbaugh today was kinda sorta backing off his comments.
He started talking about all of these positive things about her fair view of pro life arguments. Even going as far as to say that she could be a secret weapon for their side.
That's hilarious.
Well we all know Yoni will still consider her a racist
He didn't retract his "racist" statement... rather, he just kinda deflected what the subject was. He did it in a way to where he changed the subject to put a semi positive light on her and saying that she could be of use... while at the same time not retracting at all.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/06/...ich/index.html
More flip flopping from the GOP!
Also Yoni, note the actual case numbers for Sotomayor at the bottom of the article.
So the republicans shouldnt have changed their stance?http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/06/...ich/index.html
More flip flopping from the GOP!
Also Yoni, note the actual case numbers for Sotomayor at the bottom of the article.
Let's just cut to the chase here. Put that comment in the mouth of Samuel Alito or ANY other white male nominee and see how it would've played out. Stop the hypocrisy and admit there would've been total outrage had a white male said he would make better decisions than a latino or latina.
Sotomayor is a racist - but she just might be a pro-life racist. So she could be useful!
I think the intelligent ones will. I think Gingrich is intelligent, which is why he did. I'm surprised he said it in the first place, actually.
Yes, one comment makes her a racist, right? :P Let's not look at her whole record as a judge, the fact that she's mostly overturned plaintiffs who cried discrimination, or anything like that.
Alito did say something similar...
"When I get a case about discrimination, I have to think about people in my own family who suffered discrimination because of their ethnic background or because of religion or because of gender. And I do take that into account. When I have a case involving someone who's been subjected to discrimination because of disability, I have to think of people who I've known and admire very greatly who've had disabilities, and I've watched them struggle to overcome the barriers that society puts up often just because it doesn't think of what it's doing -- the barriers that it puts up to them."
Now, true, he didn't say anything about making a better decision because of his background. But it obviously reflect on his decision making.
It was a stupid comment by Sotomayor true. But aren't you guys the ones who complain when liberals take misstatements by Bush to imply he's stupid? Why is it ok to do the same when the person isn't on your side?
Politics is all double standards and hypocrisy.
Calling it out should be encouraged.
The left (included Media) get to set the rules to the game and the right is expected to follow along? No sir. Often times, they do. However they should not.
The point should be hammered to the people until they trust neither side in this smoke and mirrors game and understand the agenda behind words/actions. That is accomplishment.
Anyone who had to mention race as many times as she does, should not be considered as a judge, especially the highest court. She has race on her mind!
Don't we want to make sure we have someone who will apply the law equally to all parties, and be sure they are not thinking in terms of racial preference?
What if a white judge, in speaking, kept talking about "My white heritage" or similar things. I'm sorry. aren't we all Americans? It's one thing, as an individual, to be proud of our ancestry. However, this should never be applied to professional speaking, especially when one is expected to treat all people as equals.
Are you comfortable with someone who treats cases as affirmative action venues?
I'm not changing my position. Her association with La Raza and that Hispanic Extortion group (legal defense whatever), as well as her action on Ricci, and the statement in her speech all speak to a bias that has affected view of the judiciary.http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/06/...ich/index.html
More flip flopping from the GOP!
Also Yoni, note the actual case numbers for Sotomayor at the bottom of the article.
There's a grand canyon of difference in saying something like "It was tough getting to where I am as a white male" vs. "It was tough getting to where I am as a hispanic female". One statement invokes a roll of the eyes (unless he's talking about being a rapper, or a hotel cleaner), the other invokes, at the very least, an affirmation that it could have actually been tough. Do people REALLY think that the majority of minorities / women have the same path to success as white males? You'd have to be blind, stupid, or completely ignorant to try to pass that bull .
I don't think that any decisions should be made with race in mind. In fact, I'm against almost all forms of affirmative action. If you're better at something than somebody else, then you deserve to be the one doing whatever it is you're better at. But her comments, when looked at in their full context, didn't bother me at all.
Agreed.
refer to Yoni's last post.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
