It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Sotomayor's 'Wise Latina' Line Maybe Not So Wise

page: 1
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 12:43 PM
link   

Sotomayor's 'Wise Latina' Line Maybe Not So Wise


www.npr.org

If she's really the wise Latina she seems to think, she's probably wishing right about now that she had never uttered those words since they give her political opponents a very exploitable angle of attack they otherwise wouldn't have.
(visit the link for the full news article)



[edit on 14-7-2009 by Rockstrongo37]



 

Mod Edit: Review This Link: Instructions for the Breaking News Forums: Copy The Exact Headline


[edit on 14-7-2009 by DontTreadOnMe]




posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 12:43 PM
link   
This morning watching the Sotomayor hearings on the news really got me thinking about her attitude and predispositions towards males, the “white male” in particular.

• She said in 2001 that, “I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life.”

What does that statement mean?

Not only does she think a wise “Latina” would come to a better conclusion than a white male, but that she “hopes” a wise “Latina” would make a better decisions as well.
Her “hope” is the indicator of her prejudices feelings. Her preconceived opinion that a “white male” is then inferior to the superior wisdom of a Latina cannot be over looked when considering her placement on the highest court of the land. Remember justice must be blind to issues such as “color” or “richness of experiences” in order to be able to fairly rule in legal matters.

As much as we would hope she truly doesn’t feel this way, this statement clearly makes the case that she does.

• She said in 2005 at Duke University Law School that, "All of the legal defense funds out there, they are looking for people with court of appeals experience because the court of appeals is where policy is made," she said, laughing a bit through the next part: "And I know this is on tape and I should never say that because we don't make law.”

What does this statement mean?

We understand that it is the Legislative branch of the government that creates laws and the judicial branch that enforces them. This was clearly taught to us in civics class or US government class growing up. Though I’m not sure this is taught anymore, sadly. The clear danger of this statement shows us a judge who personally feels it’s her responsibility to create policy that is then applied to the entire community or country based on her decisions. This is dangerous because in her own words before the committee in Capital Hill this morning she made it clear that judges don’t always agree with one another’s decisions. It’s logical that then without continuity, if we were to have a judicial system that would set new policy with each new judgment from the bench, our country would never be able to have true stability, for policy could theoretically change from ruling to ruling or case to case.

This is why the founding fathers intended for congress to create the laws and policies and the judges to enforce them and not change them.

I do believe Sotomayor is sincere in her efforts but I also believe that her sincerity is birthed out of prejudices and hurts over the past and if she is unwilling to put those aside then she will not be able to be an effective and impartial judge.


www.npr.org
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 01:30 PM
link   
why turn this into a race/gender issue?
isnt it enough taht shes a politician and cant you jsut hate her for that alone?



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 01:31 PM
link   
reply to post by STFUPPERCUTTER
 


Are you kidding? It isn't me who has turned this into a race issue, read her words...she's the person here with a clear bias toward one's race and gender.



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 01:35 PM
link   
reply to post by STFUPPERCUTTER
 


I believe she is a judge, not a politican.



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 02:03 PM
link   
post removed for serious violation of ATS Terms & Conditions



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 02:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Rockstrongo37
 


This is simply coming from the "Whatever you can do I can do better" camp. That has been fed to all of the children growing up in her age.

It doesn't mean anything else than that to be honest.

Well other than a tough time in the senate hearings :-)



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 03:07 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 04:40 PM
link   
Probably all of the white males on the Supreme Court have, at one time or another, probably without consciously recognizing it, made unfair assumptions about race, gender, nationality or sexual orientation. These assumptions would pass over the heads of most white people, because they take their prejudices and preferences for granted and don't recognize them for what they are.

Not even the NAACP has been as vigilant as conservative white men in dissecting every comment, insinuation or action of a minority that might, even by a long stretch, be interpreted as prejudicial to white males.

White people have been the dominant majority in this country since the beginning. White men have held the vast majority of positions of power and/or privilege in all aspects of American life. Of course there have been abundant cases of prejudice against minorities and women.

But let one minority woman make the slightest insinuation that white men are not perfect and all hell breaks loose.

[edit on 14-7-2009 by Sestias]



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 05:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Sestias
 


I hate to say this but your statement of, "These assumptions would pass over the heads of most white people.." is racist in itself and you don't see this because you and so many like you unfortunately feel that racist remarks only come from white people, and when those kind of remarks come from people of "color" then its not racist, but instead its "insightful".



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 06:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Rockstrongo37
 



Actually it's not. There are a lot of things that are obvious to one ethnic group which another ethnic group is completely ignorant of. It happens no matter what your race.

Sestia is not being racist at all with that particular statement. It's true. There are things which only those who have gone through the trials of fire that each ethnic group possess, that another does not.

I can honestly say that I have no idea what it is like to have lived in a segregated south and only being able to travel night because there were no black hotels in a particular stretch of highway. But my father-in-law can. He grew up in that.

Then again, there are plenty of scenarios which are unique to me and my cultural leanings as well which he would be oblivious to.

The same goes for gender. No matter how much I try to assume what it's like for my wife to have the great menstrual cycle I can't. I can't assume what it is like to live in a world where we are only a generation away from the completely male dominated business world.

Specifically speaking, are the things which happened during my grandmothers time... she got the right to vote.

memory.loc.gov...





After President Wilson’s reelection, Alice Paul called for members of the National Woman’s Party to picket the White House to convince the president to put pressure on Democratic senators to vote in favor of a constitutional suffrage amendment. Lucy Burns led most of the picket demonstrations. Picketers were not molested and, in fact, the president often waved to them as he left the White House. To maintain interest in the press, Paul and Burns organized groups representing women from different walks of life to picket on different days.

Once the United States entered World War I, things changed. In June 1917, the police began arresting women outside the White House. Undaunted by these arrests, women marched to the White House on Independence Day, carrying banners reading “Governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed;” they were promptly arrested. In a demonstration on August 14, 1917, a melee broke out as women carried banners addressing the president as “Kaiser Wilson.” Servicemen often agitated demonstrators and, in some cases, attacked pickets while policemen did nothing to prevent the confrontation.

In October 1917, police announced that if women continued to picket the White House, they could expect sentences of up to six months in prison. The day following the announcement, Alice Paul marched from party headquarters to the White House carrying a banner with one of Wilson’s slogans, “The time has come to conquer or submit for there is but one choice - we have made it.”

Paul and other picketers were arrested but given suspended sentences. Returning to the picket line, Paul and Rose Winslow were arrested and given seven-month jail sentences for obstructing traffic. First offenders received six-month sentences. Paul and Winslow considered themselves political prisoners and organized a hunger strike. Hunger strikes spread throughout the district jail and to area workhouses, where other women picketers had been incarcerated. Jailers began force-feeding, a painful and humiliating experience that Paul had endured while jailed in England several years earlier.

Arrests at the gates of the White House did nothing to stop the daily gathering of women picketers. More women were arrested and given sentences varying from six days to six months. (See the Gallery for photos of many of the women who served jail time as a result of their participation in suffrage protests.) Lucy Burns received a six-month sentence; Mary Nolan, 73, was sentenced to six days in consideration of her advanced age. Nolan and most others arrested on November 10, 1917, were sent to Occoquan Workhouse in Virginia. On arrival at the workhouse, women refused to put on prison uniforms or work; the guards became violent, kicking and beating the prisoners in what became known in the suffrage movement as “The Night of Terror.” Women again resorted to a hunger strike. Upon their release, many were too weak to walk on their own.


Now tell me what any male knows about that?

This isn't a racist statement sestia makes it's true. There are things we just don't or can't understand about each other, and some of these things are drawn down lines of demographics including religion, race, gender, etc.

This will be the toughest thing for us all to come to understand as we move toward what a world of diversity really means.


[edit on 14-7-2009 by HunkaHunka]



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 06:53 PM
link   
reply to post by HunkaHunka
 


If you read the context and content of what I am trying to say about her remarks you will see my point clearly. I am holding her remarks about "white" people up to the same standards that the "political correct" crowd uses against those who they disagree with. I'm glad your at peace with the world around us...honestly I am not. I don't think those who are not being honest with their intentions deserve the benifit of the doubt when gambling with my freedoms. Sotomayor has been and is clearly racist in her approach with white America. But I do tend to look at something like her statements with a simple eye and try not to read too much into it. Hate is hate, simple and uncomplicated. There are times when we need to give the benifit of the doubt to someone and then there are times when we can come to a conclusion with the evidence at hand...then its time to wake up and smell the coffee and stop trying to live in la la land.



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 07:40 PM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 07:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by HunkaHunka
reply to post by Rockstrongo37
 



Actually it's not. There are a lot of things that are obvious to one ethnic group which another ethnic group is completely ignorant of. It happens no matter what your race.

Sestia is not being racist at all with that particular statement. It's true. There are things which only those who have gone through the trials of fire that each ethnic group possess, that another does not.



What?! How can you assume that one race cannot possibly go through just as many trials and such as another? I'm sorry, but it doesn't take someone from another race to add balance to a jury. It doesn't matter if you are Chinese or Iranian. What matters is having the ability to understand and think! Race has nothing to do with it. If someone is ignorant of others cultures and hardships, then they are a bit too ignorant to be serving on the supreme court. A bit idealistic it may sound, but it's the reality of things in my opinion.

We're all in the same boat, and saying that only a certain race can help others is just making matters worse.



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 08:00 PM
link   
The clearest way to see if a statement is bias/prejudice etc (at least in my opinion) is to reverse the statement and/or put the statement into and out of another's mouth and play it back.


So lets see,

Second, I would hope that a wise white male with the richness of his experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a Latina woman who hasn't lived that life.

Now play this back in the media or where ever and see what happens. Hell you may as well throw in the reverse of all the other comments regarding Latina women and people of color.



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 08:03 PM
link   
Call it what you like but... if someone had nominated a white anglo and referred to him as a 'wise white guy', someone would already have a lw suit and a hord of protestors claiming racism.

We live in a land that claims to be searching for a means to a colorblind society but at the same moment, fomenting racism in the name of equality.



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 08:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Joe1378

Originally posted by HunkaHunka
reply to post by Rockstrongo37
 



Actually it's not. There are a lot of things that are obvious to one ethnic group which another ethnic group is completely ignorant of. It happens no matter what your race.

Sestia is not being racist at all with that particular statement. It's true. There are things which only those who have gone through the trials of fire that each ethnic group possess, that another does not.



What?! How can you assume that one race cannot possibly go through just as many trials and such as another? I'm sorry, but it doesn't take someone from another race to add balance to a jury. It doesn't matter if you are Chinese or Iranian. What matters is having the ability to understand and think! Race has nothing to do with it. If someone is ignorant of others cultures and hardships, then they are a bit too ignorant to be serving on the supreme court. A bit idealistic it may sound, but it's the reality of things in my opinion.

We're all in the same boat, and saying that only a certain race can help others is just making matters worse.


Yes we are all in the same boat. However we males have been leading that boat for quite a while. Sure there are hazards in being male, but a man doesn't know squat about the crap women went through to get the right to vote. I'm sorry, you just can't claim that anyone knows that today.

My Grandmother still tells me stories of how men actually thought women who wanted the right to vote had a mental illness.

In the 50's women were no where near equal. So even though yes, we should all approach things impartially, there are some things that women have had to deal as a demographic that men have not. And of course it goes the other way as well...

Only women know the plight of women. Only black folks know the plight of being black. Only men know the plight of being men. If you want true equality, you have to have representation by demographic.

Otherwise you will simply have a group of people who only understand the human condition from their own perspective. And as much as you'd like to think you can assume all of the possible human conditions which exist... you can't.



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 08:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Rockstrongo37
 


OH NO!


Ok lets try again...

I totally agree with you Op.




[edit on 14-7-2009 by Sundancer]


 

Mod Note: One Line and Short Posts – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 14-7-2009 by DontTreadOnMe]



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 08:50 PM
link   
reply to post by wyleecoyote
 


Ha ha ha. Some people just don't get your humor LOL. That was your bad, not mine. That's what the little faces are for, so people can tell when your making a fool of yourself. Maybe you should use them

IM JOKING
We still love you...

[edit on 14-7-2009 by Sundancer]



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 09:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Rockstrongo37
 


I'm sorry, after you said...



I am holding her remarks about "white" people up to the same standards that the "political correct" crowd uses against those who they disagree with. I'm glad your at peace with the world around us...honestly I am not.


I thought you would understand the joke with me saying...

What makes you think as a straight white male anyone has any interest in what you have to say. It was a joke , I'm on your team



new topics

top topics



 
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join