Quote:
Originally Posted by spence
Actually it's intended to mean "the people" and is a non-profit, bi-partisan group that works for Hispanic advocacy.
Probably modeled after the Black Panthers.
At least Sotomayor is honest about how she was able to benefit from Affirmative Action. Thomas's by contrast is quite contradictory.
-spence
|
"it's intended to mean "the people"...
If that's what it was intended to mean, I wonder why they didn't call it "los pueblos", which means "the people". SInce you know all about it, I'm sure you can explain it? I presume there is a reason why they chose to call it "the race", and not "the people".
"Probably modeled after the Black Panthers."
I agree 100%. And no one who belongs to either one of those groups, deserves to be anywhere near the Supreme Court.
"At least Sotomayor is honest about how she was able to benefit from Affirmative Action"
Spence, no one denies that those on the receiving end of affirmative action, are likely to benefit from it. Obviously, when the government gives a freebie to someone, that person benefits. All that matters here, is whether or not it's
fair to benefit one group at the expense of others, based solely on skin color. Jeez...
I see that you didn't touch the most appalling thing she did, which was to presume that the only possible reason the other justices could disagree with her (including Clarence Thomas!) is that they don't understand racial bias as well as she does. It's not possible that the other 7 justices (including some radical liberals) are just seeing this more clearly than she is, or that she is just flat-out wrong.
What Sotomayor explsitly said, was that none of the other justices understand racial bias as well as her. I guess Clarence Thomas lied about growing up as a black man in the segregated south? Is he actually a white man who grew up in Beverly Hills?
No one on the Supreme Court bench can grasp the concept of racial bias except Sonya Sotomayor and Ruth Ginsburg?