Comments (11) Jump to Comments Form

1. 

   CoolGuy2000 said, 5 months ago

   love it

2. 

   pschearer said, 5 months ago

   I doubt she’s a bigot or a racist. However, the evidence is strong that she is a collectivist, meaning she thinks of people primarily as members of a group rather than as individuals.

   Further, she thinks that one’s membership in some ethnic group, race, class, etc., is the controlling factor in one’s values and principles, hence her famous and often-repeated statement about a Latina vs. white judge’s ability to reach a just decision.

   It is only individuals that have rights, not groups per se, and the Supreme Court is the final line of defense of individual rights against the other Branches. Having a collectivist on the Court is at odds with its moral and Constitutional duty to protect each and every American equally, regardless of ethnicity, race, or class, one individual at a time.

3. 

   pbarnrob said, 5 months ago

   Guess it’s working…

4. 

   foxglove16 said, 5 months ago

   You’re stretching schearer, what evidence? And do remember the “often repeated” is by the right wingers, not herself. As far as the SC’s duty to protect each and every American equally, tell that to Lilly Ledbetter, or people who have lost to corporations being given the assumption they be treated as an individual.

5. 

   nighthawks said, 5 months ago

   ‘rush limbaugh is a big fat idiot’
   ..
   ..
   ..
   book title, just a book title!..no name calling here!

6. 

   TapiocaHead said, 5 months ago

   Please read the entire content and context of her speech. It will clarify the context of those 32 words amidst the other 4000 that was said.

   But I love the MSM ….how TRUE!

7. 

   SherlockWatson said, 5 months ago

   Candorville: the strip that gets it straight. 8)

8. 

   BrendanR said, 5 months ago

   I think it’s to the mainstream media’s credit that they print a comic like Candorville that’s so critical of the mainstream media.

   It really is like the MSM’s trying their best to amplify the smallest critiques of everyone. They’re like the kid on the playground chanting “fight! fight! fight!” I got the sense the last couple days, when they were camped out at the Holocaust Museum, that they were secretly hoping they could catch some more shooting. I know that’s cynical, but it’s the impression I got.

   As for Sotomayor, the reason this hasn’t become as huge a scandal as the GOP and the Media might hope for is that “there’s no there there.” The GOP’s combed through fifteen years of her rulings, and they’ve come up with exactly ONE ruling that seems to illustrate the “bigot” caricature they’re trying to draw. And even that one ruling, people seem to find understandable.

   She’s so getting confirmed. But the GOP’s going to keep harping on this until they find something else to be fake outraged about (e.g. Letterman telling the world’s 1 millionth “Promiscuous Palin Daughter” joke).

9. 

   pschearer said, 5 months ago

   TapiocaHead:
   Thanks for the recommendation to read the entire speech.

   http://berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2009/05/26_sotomayor.shtml

   I did and I stand by what I said. I won’t clutter up this space with the many quotes that would prove my point, but the famous sound byte (repeated by her on at least three other occasions) is, for a change, an accurate reflection of the whole speech.

   She waffles and hedges, but what her view on jurisprudence comes down to is that try as we might to be objective, we are so affected by our backgrounds that we usually can’t do it, but her “opinions, sympathies and prejudices” are probably going to be better than others.

   She cites Thurgood Marshall. Well, his importance in history was not so much that he was the first black on the Supreme Court but that he won his Brown v. Bd. of Educ. lawsuit that killed “separate but equal”. Based on her argument, I conclude that she should not be on ANY court bench but should be making her case as the appellant attorney.

10. 

    TapiocaHead said, 5 months ago

    Pschearer: There’s so much I can say about your opinion that renders it an obfuscation of ideas, but lets just say that we agree to disagree.
    Judge Sotomayor will be approved but I wonder about those who do not agree with her arguments and where it would leave them. I guess they’ll still be justifying their end to the means.

11. 

    pilotx said, 5 months ago

    She is just more honest than most. As a man of color I have experiences and insight that most Anglo males will never have, appreciate or even understand. If that makes me a “collectivist” then so be it. How is that any different than calling oneself an American? Isn’t that identifying oneself with a group? If one stands for the national anthem isn’t that collectivist behavior? It only seems to be a problem when an individual has the courage to go against the majority.