Conservatives Prepping for Race War Against Sotomayor
I knew that the Republicans were planning the stunt of having Frank Ricci testify at Sonia Sotomayor’s confirmation hearings. Ricci is, of course, not any kind of legal expert. But having him appear in person might help tug at the audience’s heart-strings and inspire a certain level of empathy of his situation. But Kate Klonick writes that beyond Ricci there’s going to be lots more affirmative action at the hearing:
In 2005, when Justices Samuel Alito and John Roberts were confirmed by the Senate, affirmative action seemed almost an after-thought. In Alito’s case, only two of his 33 witnesses in his hearings had obvious ties to affirmative action groups, one from each side of the aisle. For Roberts, Democrats called only two witnesses to speak to his record on civil rights.
In contrast, more than one-third of the witnesses on the Republican’s list for Judge Sonia Sotomayor’s confirmation hearing are lawyers and academics who’ve based their careers on opposing affirmative action, and activists who have become symbols of the anti-affirmative action movement. The conservative side of the debate over Sotomayor has revolved, so far, around her decision to uphold a lower court ruling in a reverse-discrimination case she heard while on the Second Circuit, Ricci v. DeStafano, and her comments about how her experiences as a Latina woman have shaped her judicial conclusions. With five out of fourteen anti-affirmative action advocates on the minority’s witness list, it’s clear that these focal points are not going away.
It would be one thing if Sotomayor had some kind of unusual record on affirmative action. But she doesn’t. What she did in the Ricci case, whether one likes it or not, was simply apply the existing precedent. Conservative judges didn’t like the existing precedent, and since there are now many more conservatives on the Supreme Court than there used to be, they overturned the precedent in a 5-4 vote. But it would have been very strange for a Circuit Court judge to decide on her own to overrule existing precedents in a way that sharply split the Supreme Court. But of course Sotomayor is a Latina woman, so now this unremarkable decision becomes the center of their argument.
71 Responses to “Conservatives Prepping for Race War Against Sotomayor”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
July 10th, 2009 at 4:53 pm
What she did in the Ricci case, whether one likes it or not, was simply apply the existing precedent.
This is, of course, an outright lie. As many of her fellow judges on the 2nd Circuit noted. And as is made clear by the discussion in the Supreme Court decision.
July 10th, 2009 at 4:57 pm
I fear it is more than that. In GOP mind, she’s a Latina and they will begrudingly admit that she is accomplished. Therefore, it must have been because of affirmative action in her life. Affirmative action is bad because it produces justices like her. See, it makes perfect sense to them.
July 10th, 2009 at 4:58 pm
“But it would have been very strange for a Circuit Court judge to decide on her own to overrule existing precedents”
in fact, it would have made her an activist judge.
instead, she simply respected the clear meaning of the law, as passed by the legislative branch.
but conservatives hated that law, and so they are quite happy to have their own activist judges undermine it from the bench.
July 10th, 2009 at 4:58 pm
Much of what MattY post is an outright lie or misleading or illogical. For instance, here’s video of SS discussing how she was an “affirmative action baby”.
And, regarding MattY’s “race war”, the only place that’s coming from is his side, the side that engages in the “good” kind of racism through AffAction. Regarding actual race wars, for six years SS was a member of a group that gave an award to someone who’d proposed genocide.
July 10th, 2009 at 5:00 pm
Shut the fuck up, LoneWacko.
July 10th, 2009 at 5:02 pm
Well Al, let’s see. The trial court upheld existing precedent. That’s one. The three judge panel upheld existing precedent: 2, 3, 4. There were not enough votes for an en banc decision so Ricci appealed. Four of the nine justices upheld existing precedent: 5, 6, 7, 8. Five supreme court justices decided to say the hell with precedent and changed the standard. Well, that’s our system. I’ll, in the words of a conservative justice, “get over it.” But don’t act like she was way off the reservation on this one. If you want to disagree with her decision do so on the merits but don’t make this more than it actually was.
July 10th, 2009 at 5:04 pm
#5 is yet another example of the fascistic streak that many liberals and libertarians have. Rather than engaging me in debate (and losing) or even just trying (and failing) to show how I’m wrong, they tell me to shut up. That’s not exactly grown-up, and it isn’t exactly liberal either, wouldn’t you agree?
P.S. Apropos of nothing in particular, someone who used an IP address in Knoxville and another from the University of Tennessee has said similar things. And, Dave Weigel wrote about me on his site and then refused to print my reply.
July 10th, 2009 at 5:08 pm
If you start with
1. Obama’s stated position on affirmative action: that it does less good than its supporters suggest, and less harm than its opponents fear.
and then add
2. The evidence contained in this post: The GOP thinks affirmative action is a powerful wedge issue in their favor.
you should end up with this conclusion:
3. Affirmative action at the federal level may well be more expensive, politically, than it is worthwhile socially. I don’t see any point in repealing it — that would divide the Democratic coalition. But I also don’t think we should waste much breath defending it.
July 10th, 2009 at 5:09 pm
Yeah, like the National Review used to say, we need more haoles in the senior positions to keep the unwashed, increasingly swarthy masses in line.
I’m sure the Founding Fathers planned it this way, on the off chance we’d slip a hapa into the Executive.
It looks like I’m gonna have to kick my wife off of the Slingbox so I can watch this confirmation mess play out in real-time.
July 10th, 2009 at 5:11 pm
With two major groups in the US, the far right and progressive left, absolutely obsessed with race, we will never be able to fulfill the goal of moving into a post-racial society. It’s a shame, and ironic since each groups slams the other for it while not realizing that they could be describing themselves at the same time.
-AM
July 10th, 2009 at 5:12 pm
#7 is another example of LoneWacko whining because no-one will follow his spammy links to his racist blog. That’s not exactly grown-up, wouldn’t you agree?
P.S. Apropos of nothing in particular, STFU, LoneWacko.
P.P.S. In case LoneWacko reponds to this, its response will almost assuredly be ad homs, thereby conceding my points and showing the childish, anti-intellectual nature of LoneWacko.
July 10th, 2009 at 5:17 pm
And now it turns out that Frank Ricci got his job with the New Haven fire department by claiming that he was a victim of discrimination . . . for dyslexia.
July 10th, 2009 at 5:18 pm
I don’t run a “racist blog”, and it looks like the person who’s coming here and making liberals look bad is actually coming from Reason Magazine, because the last is derived from the usual disclaimer I provide at the end of comments there. It might even be one of their contributors since, as I do with MattY, I’ve repeatedly shown how they’re wrong.
If anyone can find anything false, misleading, or illogical in anything I’ve written, I’ve got a corrections thread linked from every page. It’s been up there for six weeks and so far no requests have come in.
Rather than engaging me in debate or trying to find even a single thing over thousands of posts I’ve gotten wrong, all libertarians can do is engage in childish ad homs that degrade MattY’s site.
July 10th, 2009 at 5:19 pm
It pretty much eludes everyone, especially in the press, but Ricci wasn’t an affirmative action case. One side claimed racism, then the other side claimed racism. No timetables, quotas, preferences, or anything traditionally AA, just two competing virtually identical Title VII claims.
I think Obama’s stated preference that Ted mentions is probably the general consensus of the Democrats, although obviously there’s disagreement on both sides. But the fact that the Republicans see this as a great wedge issue isn’t something to fear politically as much as the continued dwindling of the Republican brand into their tea-party core.
July 10th, 2009 at 5:19 pm
I’m surprised nobody picked up on Colbert’s bit of looking at the firefighters’ exam. The practice test has a section on vocabulary (not firefighting-type words), spelling and grammar (e.g., “what is the phonetic ‘G’ sound ?” — like that is essential for promotion as a firefighter) that was 12% of the questions (additional snark — the word “spatial” was misspelled in a section title).
Since the “elite” are used to standardized tests and perform well on them, they unconsciously accept the unproven notion that standardized test results evidence intelligence, knowledge, ability, etc. — it’s a particularly dubious proposition for a situation like firefighting.
July 10th, 2009 at 5:20 pm
“regarding MattY’s “race war”, the only place that’s coming from is his side”
Let’s look at the past few days. Your conservative friends kicked a group of black and Hispanic kids from a pool in Philadelphia because they weren’t white. Your conservative friends at FOX news were arguing for racial purity and implying that brown skinned people were another species. And liberals are the ones inciting racial conflict? Get real.
July 10th, 2009 at 5:23 pm
When you are a racist, everything is about race. Welcome to your coming out party, Mr. Yglesias! You ARE A RACIST!
Yes, it’s true. You put race above anything with this ‘qualified’ but not ‘well qualified’ judge (even by the liberal ABA standards). You put race ahead of ANYTHING other than maybe Roe V Wade (suddenly liberals understand the term ’stare decisis’ after 30 years).
Check yourself into a mental hospital. You are not well. It’s not all the other people out there who are crazy – it’s YOU.
July 10th, 2009 at 5:24 pm
Matt says:
I knew that the Republicans were planning the stunt of having Frank Ricci testify at Sonia Sotomayor’s confirmation hearings. Ricci is, of course, not any kind of legal expert.
In contrast to the Democrats’ pro-Sotomayor witness, retired pitcher David Cone. Presumably, Cone is a legal expert from back when he got sued for $1.8 million by three women fans in the stands to whom he exposed himself while in the bullpen.
July 10th, 2009 at 5:29 pm
BTW, ‘24aheaddotcome’, the reason that nobody is coming to ‘correct’ your blog in the past six weeks is that NOBODY IS READING IT!!!!! Why bother to ‘correct’ the trash? Just throw it out!
Sotomayor got spanked 9-0 by the current Supreme Court (made up of 4 1/2 liberals). Not 5-4 like the media would like you to believe. But if you actually can READ a legal opinion, you’d know that they ruled 9-0 that she was wrong in denying the case certiorari and after than ruling the political divide occurred as always happens (since the Supreme Court is a political body and that is why Sonia has been nominated – replace one liberal with another more activist liberal).
Sotomayor believes that she is the latina version of Justice Blackmun who wrote Roe v Wade out of his own ‘research’ into abortion and ‘medical practices’ by talking to doctors he knew. Just more evidence that there is no interest in interpreting the Constitution as much as there is interest in creating new law by which to govern the populace. Most ‘justice’ for the ‘people’. God help you if you are not one of the ‘people’ who are being provided ‘justice’ like those firefighters in CT. You Are Screwed!!
July 10th, 2009 at 5:34 pm
Matt is absolutely correct. If you look at how Sonia Sotomayor has spent her spare time over the years, she has never spent one moment trying to get a leg up for her ethnicity (or herself).
July 10th, 2009 at 5:37 pm
Oddly ENOUGH, sitemeter SHOWS that I’ve GOTTEN!!!! over 30,000 page views so far this MONTH!!!!! And, a good part of my not-as-much-as-I’d-like traffic comes from INSIDE THE BELTWAY!!!!!!! You’d think that even just one of the public figures or journalists I’ve discussed would be able to point out something I’ve gotten wrong.
July 10th, 2009 at 5:38 pm
Maybe the GOP folks could get Justice Thomas to testify. Now that would be a coup!
July 10th, 2009 at 5:48 pm
You put race above anything with this ‘qualified’ but not ‘well qualified’ judge (even by the liberal ABA standards).
Uh, the ABA unanimously said that Sotomayor was well-qualified, just like they did with Roberts and Alito. You don’t get to make up your own facts.
July 10th, 2009 at 5:49 pm
You’d think that even just one of the public figures or journalists I’ve discussed would be able to point out something I’ve gotten wrong.
I’m sure they could. But it’s far more hilarious to not do so and see you get more and more unhinged as you become more and more convinced that you’re correct. And with dealing with people like you, what’s more amusing is generally the correct call.
July 10th, 2009 at 5:50 pm
Where did this new troll come from? It’s a little frightening.
July 10th, 2009 at 5:50 pm
Sotomayor got spanked 9-0 by the current Supreme Court (made up of 4 1/2 liberals). Not 5-4 like the media would like you to believe
A torturous if not flatly incorrect interpretation of a small footnote in Ginsburg’s brief. Not that that hasn’t stopped Fox and the right to bleat this mischaracterization over and over again, like they always do. Suffice it to say we’re well aware of what the brief does and doesn’t say.
July 10th, 2009 at 5:52 pm
Right, a race war. That’s rich – this is the woman who’s made the phrase “wise latina woman” her catchphrase, and has admitted that her grades didn’t line up with the jobs she’s gotten.
Would it be too hard to find a qualified liberal?
July 10th, 2009 at 5:54 pm
“You don’t get to make up your own facts.”
If you’re Republican, yes you do.
July 10th, 2009 at 6:04 pm
Judge Sotomayor is obviously completely colorblind. For example, if the City of New Haven had thrown out the test after they had found out that not enough whites had done well on it, she also would have voted to uphold New Haven’s actions.
If you don’t believe me, just ask her!
July 10th, 2009 at 6:12 pm
cmholm Says:
July 10th, 2009 at 5:09 pm
Yeah, like the National Review used to say, we need more haoles in the senior positions to keep the unwashed, increasingly swarthy masses in line.
I’m sure the Founding Fathers planned it this way, on the off chance we’d slip a hapa into the Executive.
It looks like I’m gonna have to kick my wife off of the Slingbox so I can watch this confirmation mess play out in real-time.
=============================================================
Obviously that’s why the hapas have Kill Haole Day
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kill_Haole_Day
July 10th, 2009 at 6:17 pm
Let’s look at the past few days. Your conservative friends kicked a group of black and Hispanic kids from a pool in Philadelphia because they weren’t white. Your conservative friends at FOX news were arguing for racial purity and implying that brown skinned people were another species. And liberals are the ones inciting racial conflict? Get real.
Yeah, ignore actual violence and define access to a pool as “war” (the pool claims that it was a safety issue, but for the sake of argument let’s assume that every time a black person cries “racism” they’re telling the truth).
Groups of blacks have made a past time out of finding random whites and beating them.
For rape, the rate is thousands of black on white crimes for every white on black one.
Who are the victims here?
July 10th, 2009 at 6:19 pm
Your conservative friends kicked a group of black and Hispanic kids from a pool in Philadelphia because they weren’t white.
Haha, but no.
The President of the Swim Club that kicked out those poor minority kids turns out to be an Obama supporter.
So, it turns out that racists just looooove Obama. You’ve got this racist who kicked out those poor minority kids from his ritzy swim club. And you’ve got Sonia Sotomayor. Both racists and big Obama supporters.
July 10th, 2009 at 6:19 pm
I’m actually quite surprised that the incident on Fox News with the pundit talking about Americans marrying “other species” hasn’t received more run in the MSM. Pat Buchanan had a column in WND today where he talked about how “ethnonationalism” was going to be the ruin of America, claiming that America was great when the majority of the population was of “European” descent.
The whole “minority-majority” thing scares conservatives more than Al-Queda, commies, and Mayan prophecies combined. I am afraid that white supremecist philosophies are going to be more front and center in the GOP as the years progress. I am frankly stunned that Fox doesn’t appear to have issued even a half-hearted apology for what happened on their network (as for Pat, I can’t imagine just what would have to occur for him to get fired from MSNBC)
In the short term, it is a phenomenally stupid tactic of the Republicans to go after a qualified Latino with the ferocity we’re witnessing. Remember, guys, the GOP has a severe image problem among Latinos, and they happen to represent a large swing vote in places like Florida, North Carolina, Indiana, Nevada, Colorado, New Mexico, etc.
July 10th, 2009 at 6:25 pm
31. Wow, were you bored at Stormfront, dude? Tell me something, were you sad when apartheid was dismantled in 1989?
32. Al, my guess is that the Philly pool manager was more spineless than racist, and caved to the racists who freaked out that someone black was swimming in their pool. I’m sure a cursory examination of the pool’s records would show lots of predominantly white kids’ groups enjoyed the use of the facility with nary a complaint.
I remain fascinated how the Latino firefighter is ignored by the race-baiting GOP. How exactly is Sotomayor a “racist” if her decision (based on 25 years of civil rights legal precedent) adversely affected a Latino man?
Either way, screaming “oh, the poor oppressed white man” is not a recipie for long term electoral success. Have you seen how badly the conservative brand of envy, hatred, intolerance, and outright racism is playing with first time voters? Hell, the likely new head of the YOUNG Republicans is thirty eight (and embroiled in a scandal involving racist comments on her Facebook page to boot).
July 10th, 2009 at 6:26 pm
“the pool claims that it was a safety issue”
If there were too many people in the pool, then why kick out only the black kids? Why not kick out some black kids and some white kids? Of course, their excuse is bogus. White parents were telling black kids that it was a white-only pool. And they were apparently correct.
As for the crime stats, that’s unfortunate, but crime is not something that nobody advocates. Segregation, racial purity, and discrimination are things that conservatives advocate. And not just on small blogs, they do it on FOX News, the countries most popular cable news channel.
July 10th, 2009 at 6:30 pm
Not that it matters so much – but she’s not connecting with most of the country
http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2009/07/americans_divid_1.html
New poll results out today suggest that public support for Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor may have dipped, just before her confirmation hearings begin Monday.
The CNN/Opinion Research Corp. survey found that 47 percent of Americans want the Senate to confirm Sotomayor, while 40 percent do not and the remaining 13 percent have no opinion.
Those numbers are far more divided than the most recent justices to join the court — Samuel Alito (54 percent in favor, 30 against) and John Roberts (60 percent versus 26 percent) — just before their confirmation hearings. But they’re better than for Harriet Miers (42 percent for, 43 percent against), whose nomination was withdrawn before hearings began.
July 10th, 2009 at 6:32 pm
Of course, if the pool manager had been smart, he would have immediately apologized for what he did, and let the kid’s camp use the facility for no charge.
Think about how this affects those kids. They’re now exposed to the fact that no matter how they live their lives, that some white people will ALWAYS view them as unwelcome in America, or even a “threat”. But, of course, since conservatives claim that racism towards blacks isn’t even worth the time to discuss it, you won’t really think about this, now wil you?
July 10th, 2009 at 6:38 pm
31. Wow, were you bored at Stormfront, dude?
“Dude,” can you tell me what kind of mind ignores rape/murder statistics and goes by insensitive comments and one case about access to swimming pools to determine who to assign victim/oppressor status to?
As for the crime stats, that’s unfortunate, but crime is not something that nobody advocates. Segregation, racial purity, and discrimination are things that conservatives advocate. And not just on small blogs, they do it on FOX News, the countries most popular cable news channel.
If whites were attacking black people at the rates that blacks attack whites nobody would worry about whether anybody was actually advocating it or not. We’d hear nothing from the elites but lectures on how racists whites are, how oppressed black people are and it would be a front page story until the crime rate dropped. And nobody would hesitate to call it “race war” either.
July 10th, 2009 at 6:40 pm
this is the woman who’s made the phrase “wise latina woman” her catchphrase
I shouldn’t even bother to respond, but this is hilarious? She’s made it her catchphrase? She’s the one who’s been citing her speech in major conservative media outlet, over and over for months, in an attempt to get that speech to stick to here?
LOL. I mean, smear if you’re gonna smear, more power to you, but don’t go all Walter Sobchek on us and claim that she smeared herself. There’s still the matter of the toe here, dude.
and has admitted that her grades didn’t line up with the jobs she’s gotten.
Citation, please? Everything I’ve read on Sotomayor has her at the top of her class.
July 10th, 2009 at 6:46 pm
38. Put your cards on the table. You clearly appear to have some issues with black people. What, pray tell, would be your “solution” to the problems you are wringing your hands about?
No one here is saying “all whites are racist”, mein herr. I do not understand why conservatives are so reluctant to even discuss that racism towards African-Americans still exists. Moreover, I really do not understand why conservatives are so willing to identify with the politics of David Duke, Stormfront, and the like.
July 10th, 2009 at 6:48 pm
Does anyone else find it troubling that a Fox News reporter complained that our genes aren’t a “pure” as Scandinavians and that Americans married “other species” and the nationwide reaction has been a collective yawn?
July 10th, 2009 at 6:50 pm
We got people in police uniforms to beat on them for us.
I can’t believe anyone could be churlish enough to bitch about being white in this country. It’s pathetic.
July 10th, 2009 at 6:56 pm
I do not understand why conservatives are so reluctant to even discuss that racism towards African-Americans still exists. Moreover, I really do not understand why conservatives are so willing to identify with the politics of David Duke, Stormfront, and the like.
What a great paragraph. Here, let me simplify it for you. “Why don’t you racist fuck conservatives ever want to talk about race?” Hillarious if it wasn’t so sad. You, sir, are a joke.
July 10th, 2009 at 6:56 pm
scythia Says:
July 10th, 2009 at 6:40 pm
this is the woman who’s made the phrase “wise latina woman” her catchphrase
I shouldn’t even bother to respond, but this is hilarious? She’s made it her catchphrase? She’s the one who’s been citing her speech in major conservative media outlet, over and over for months, in an attempt to get that speech to stick to here?
===========================================================
Be fair now, not *A* speech. Not to mention that she’s repudiated it herself
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/06/05/sotomayor.speeches/
Sotomayor’s ‘wise Latina’ comment a staple of her speeches
Judge Sonia Sotomayor has spoken for years about how her experiences as a Latina woman have influenced her public and private life.
In her speeches, she often discussed her “Latina soul” and explained how even the traditional dishes of her Puerto Rican family shaped her views.
And she often said that she hoped those experiences would help her reach better judicial conclusions than someone without such a varied background might reach.
The line was almost identical every time:
“I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would, more often than not, reach a better conclusion.”
That sentence, or a similar one, has appeared in speeches Sotomayor delivered in 1994, 1999, 2002, 2004 and 2001. In that speech, she included the phrase “than a white male who hasn’t lived that life” at the end, which sparked cries of racism from some Republicans.
Sotomayor has spent the last three days in meetings with senators on Capitol Hill answering their questions about her judicial record — and defending those comments. While the judge has made no public comments herself about the matter, others have.
She told me she had used the phrase before but that she would not be using it again,” said Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine. “She’s clearly a very bright individual who learns from her past mistakes,” Collins said.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-California, said after meeting with Sotomayor that the judge had told her, ” ‘It was a poor choice of words. If you read on and read the rest of my speech you wouldn’t be concerned with it, but it was a poor choice of words.’ “
July 10th, 2009 at 6:59 pm
Here is a real racist for you.
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=103457
July 10th, 2009 at 7:10 pm
38. Put your cards on the table. You clearly appear to have some issues with black people. What, pray tell, would be your “solution” to the problems you are wringing your hands about?
End affirmative action and allow freedom of association. Neighborhoods, schools, organizations, etc. should be allowed to be all black or all white if they so choose. Government shouldn’t split people up nor bring them together. Since blacks commit more crime, don’t complain that police are “racially profiling,” just as we accept that cops “sexually profile” against men. Stop all attempts at “gap closing” whether it comes to school achievement, home ownership or whatever.
July 10th, 2009 at 7:11 pm
Does anyone else find it troubling that a Fox News reporter complained that our genes aren’t a “pure” as Scandinavians and that Americans married “other species” and the nationwide reaction has been a collective yawn?
It’s Fox News. Are we *supposed* to be shocked?
July 10th, 2009 at 7:40 pm
I think Ricci should be no sweat. She was right about it. Roberts was wrong. There isn’t much more to say. Affirmative action is a band-aid over the scar caused by two hundred solid years of Nazi like injustice that profited whites to the detriment of blacks in the U.S.A. Pretty simple, I would think. When the next justice falls out – and who knows if Thomas is going to hold on for the next seven years – a nice liberal judge will be popped in there, and things will go back to the pre-Roberts stage.
July 10th, 2009 at 7:45 pm
“End affirmative action and allow freedom of association.”
In other words, you favor discrimination and segregation. Back to the good old days of Jim Crow. And you think you aren’t racist? Please.
July 10th, 2009 at 8:05 pm
1. Sotomayor was chosen because she is a capable Hispanic woman.
2. It is the President’s choice. He’s free to choose a Hispanic woman if he thinks it helps the Court.
3. My doubts are not that she’s too liberal, it’s that she may be too conservative in some ways. Too much of a wildcard, maybe? This should be a simple matter of replacing one liberal with another one.
4. I approve of the job the Supreme Court has been doing. I can’t remember the last ruling I disagreed with.
July 10th, 2009 at 9:09 pm
Rather than engaging me in debate (and losing) or even just trying (and failing) to show how I’m wrong, they tell me to shut up. That’s not exactly grown-up, and it isn’t exactly liberal either, wouldn’t you agree?
It’s because we know you and know what kind of relationship you have with the truth, especially when the truth contradicts your racist paranoia, which is to say, always. People who come here and argue in good faith receive nothing less in return.
On the other hand:
End affirmative action and allow freedom of association. Neighborhoods, schools, organizations, etc. should be allowed to be all black or all white if they so choose. Government shouldn’t split people up nor bring them together. Since blacks commit more crime, don’t complain that police are “racially profiling,” just as we accept that cops “sexually profile” against men. Stop all attempts at “gap closing” whether it comes to school achievement, home ownership or whatever.
That tells us all we need to know about you. “Freedom of association” means banning black people from buying a house wherever they please? What other freedoms can you redefine for us? Are you one of those guys who thinks that people contradicting you is “censoring” you and violating your freedom of speech?
Anyone who thinks that racism against African-Americans isn’t a problem just needs to read the comments on any blog post that addresses race.
July 10th, 2009 at 9:10 pm
Oops—the part starting with “End affirmative action…” was supposed to be a quotation from our racist troll.
“That tells us all we need to know…” is where my comment on that quotation started.
Sorry about that.
July 10th, 2009 at 10:09 pm
Whole lot of right-wingers lining up for the race war, I see.
Man, nothing middle America loves better than a race war, right?.
So, Indiana, do you want to be Lonewacko, or do you want to be Barack Obama?
Awesome. I don’t know if Obama picked her for this specific purpose, but it sure is working out that way.
July 10th, 2009 at 10:10 pm
“Sorry about that.”
That’s why I don’t use formatting. As for “freedom of association,” it’s just a Southern code phrase for segregation and discrimination. I lived in a mixed black/Mexican neighborhood in Texas. It was legally zoned so that only blacks and Mexicans could live there until 1969. I moved there in 2001, and I was the second white person to ever live there. My roommate was the first. This is what “freedom of association” means. White people get the right to zone all the brown skinned people into undesirable areas. And then they get the right to not provide any public services in those areas. Except for busting people, of course. As for the neighborhood, it was actually nice and the people were very friendly. Nobody dissed me because I’m white. Our house caught on fire because of something my roommate did. The black woman across the street called the fire department, and the Mexican across the street hosed down the fire to keep it somewhat under control until the fire department arrived. The white firefighters wanted to turn the incident into a racial issue, but I was having none of it. And I was right. The fire was started by my roommate, who was unaware that charcoal ashes are still hot. He dumped the used ashes on a pile of six pack holders in the garbage can. I explained that to the firemen who should understand that such actions are likely to start a fire. But they were a bunch of racist thugs who wanted to spark a racial incident. They were good at putting out fires, though. I’ll give them that. But there was an interesting thing: fifteen firefighters, and they’re all white. Well, except for my neighbor, but he didn’t work for the fire department.
July 10th, 2009 at 11:38 pm
On Ricci, there was controlling Second Circuit precedent which dictated the Second Circuit’s holding, but of course the Supreme Court was under no obligation to follow Second Circuit precedent, and so it didn’t. And that is really as much as you need to know about Sotomayor’s role in the case.
By the way, Justice Sotomayor is a done deal–it was over after the first 48 hours–and at this point the GOP is just trashing its brand with Latino voters.
July 11th, 2009 at 12:09 am
“and at this point the GOP is just trashing its brand with Latino voters”
Not so sure about that. That would imply they had a brand. They did in 2000, but it was long gone before 2008. And 2008 proved it. When you got nothing, you got nothing to lose. So what, they’re scaring away votes they didn’t have anyway? What they are losing is some middle of the road voters who are starting to think the Republicans are just plain psychotic. And don’t get me wrong, I’m a little crazy myself, so I mean no denigration of people with mental disorders. But there’s a difference between people with bipolar disorder and those that are psychotic or borderline. The latter need to be controlled or there will be problems. The Republicans seem to have gone from borderline to psychotic. They need to cool it down before they get sociopathic.
July 11th, 2009 at 12:13 am
Allow racists like Sailer and 24Ahead to establish themselves, and eventually you get card-carrying Nazis like Dick Hoste showing up thinking they’re welcome. Sad.
July 11th, 2009 at 12:29 am
I really really really really want Repubs to keep repeating the following chant “Sotomayer – affirmative action – racist – quotas – not qualified”. Pleeeeze.
July 11th, 2009 at 12:33 am
“fifteen firefighters, and they’re all white.”
I noticed something after that posting. The people who responded where the force that would be the first responders at the Capitol (we wee close by). That’s probably why they were all white. But I noticed another thing. I looked at a map of where the fire stations were. I had to look at it, because there wasn’t a fire station near where I lived then. And there still isn’t. There’s an interesting ring around the area I lived in, but no fire station near me. White guys don’t want their station in that neighborhood.
July 11th, 2009 at 12:51 am
The Republicans seem to have gone from borderline to psychotic. They need to cool it down before they get sociopathic.
It’s too late for that. This insanity is going to lead to mass deaths, and sooner rather than later. I just hope the death toll is only in the hundreds, not thousands or more.
July 11th, 2009 at 12:56 am
“White people get the right to zone all the brown skinned people into undesirable areas. And then they get the right to not provide any public services in those areas.”
If you want a more clearer understanding of this, look at the Ninth Ward in New Orleans. Why did they get flooded more than anyone else? Simple topology. Why did the people living there have a dark skin tone? Simple racist politics. Everyone knew where the flood plains were, and the zoning laws conformed to that understanding. White guys get the high ground, and black folk get the flood-prone areas. When the flood comes, it accomplishes the racists’ goal. And all it takes in zoning.
July 11th, 2009 at 3:06 am
“It’s too late for that.”
I don’t think so. They are psychotic now, but that’s manageable if they can stay that way. But we have to stop them before they become pure sociopaths. And strangely enough, if they revert to borderline, they might be more dangerous. The borderlines are really freaky. Their ability to manipulate people against each other is truly amazing. A friend of mine lost a borderline patient. This patient turned up 50 hours later in a Jerusalem hospital. Somehow, he got on an El Al flight with no money, no ticket, no identification, no passport, and no visa. But borderlines have quite the power of persuasion. Seems it worked that time. But I have to give credit for that, he did something that cannot be done. Bless him. But there really are some people who have to be restrained. And I’m happy to pay money to restrain people like that. Someday, I’ll be there as well. In the restraints, of course. If I haven’t shot myself, of course. Hopefully, I can put in some good years before that.
July 11th, 2009 at 3:35 am
“But there really are some people who have to be restrained.”
This is no joke. I spent my time in jail, and I’ve been in psych lockdown, and regular solitary. I have some real insight into this. Most crazy people are easily discernible. You know damn well you have to watch the psychotics. And the psychopaths and sociopaths are pretty easy to tell as well. But the borderlines are way too much for anyone to deal with. The guards have them removed to specialized treatment as quickly as they can. And the prisoners don’t like them either. Prisoners happen to be the one people that borderlines can’t fool. And prison guards are close behind. They only get fooled sometimes. But that’s enough for a borderline.
July 11th, 2009 at 3:51 am
“Somehow, he got on an El Al flight”
For the record, El Al is an Israeli airline that is obviously a big target. And they have never had terrorist incident, ever. Ever. Their security is quite good. Better than the US government can come up with. And even they let a person through. That’s how tough borderline people are. And most of them haven’t been diagnosed yet. They’re just scamming your grandmother out of all her money.
July 11th, 2009 at 8:58 am
“Conservatives Prepping for Race War Against Sotomayor” – a good title. A war it is.
July 11th, 2009 at 9:18 am
As a biracial American, most definitely.
Also, Sotomayor upheld a 1st Amendment case in favor of a white supremacist who was working at a desk job at the NYPD. The NYPD fired him when they found he was anonymously sending racist literature to charities and he sued over getting fired for his beliefs and Sotomayor ruled in his favor. And yet, according to conservatives, she’s somehow the one that hates white people.
The GOP is stuck in the 80’s. They’re like Dee Snider or Tommy Lee at this point. I mean, what’s their big issues? Cutting corporate taxes? De-regulation? Ending affirmative action? What’s next, complaining about the ERA and busing? This is what happens when you base a party on white resentment and in a successful multicultural society. All the GOP pretty much has left are the losers from white society that simply can’t interacts with ethnic or religious minorities, LGBT’s, immigrants, single women, etc.
July 11th, 2009 at 10:32 am
Wow. MY’s comments section, like SCOTUS, has become majority-troll.
It seems like the obvious comeback to Ricci is: Sotomayor voted the same way as the venerated justice she’s replacing.
I think this is the test run for every non-wingnut for the next 20 years: did they agree with the majority-wingnut ruling? Then they’re too liberal.
July 11th, 2009 at 4:43 pm
re #21: 24dotdotdotheaddotcom
http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/thinkprogress.org+24ahead.com+slate.com
Now, how big exactly is that “30,000 page views”?
July 11th, 2009 at 5:42 pm
Can someone please explain to me what on Earth Republicans are thinking? Here they have a clearly moderate, qualified candidate who they have absolutely no chance of stopping and their response is a full blown assault of shrieking anti-Hispanic racism at a time when they desperately need to court Hispanics to avoid demographic suicide.
Please someone tell me, what, in their minds, is the end game to all of this? They will somehow, against all odds, defeat her nomination and a cowed Obama will decide to nominate a right-wing conservative?
July 15th, 2009 at 9:51 pm
[...] amazing. We have circumstances on the ground that make it the headline Conservatives Prepping for Race War Against Sotomayor merely hyperbole, and yet folks on the left are still managing to overshoot into crazy [...]
July 15th, 2009 at 9:55 pm
[...] amazing. We have circumstances on the ground that make it the headline Conservatives Prepping for Race War Against Sotomayor merely hyperbole, and yet folks on the left are still managing to overshoot into crazy [...]