Posted on 03/21/2022 7:33:52 AM PDT by rktman
On his MSNBC show Sunday morning, after playing a clip of Tucker Carlson calling for the release of the LSAT (Law School Admission Test) score of Ketanji Brown Jackson, Biden's Supreme Court justice nominee, Jonathan Capehart said to his liberal Democrat guest:
"Senator Hirono, I'm not going to curse because it's Sunday and I'd get fired. Can you talk about why what Tucker Carlson just said is so repugnant?"
Hirono failed to answer Capehart's question. She didn't/couldn't venture anything as to why it was "repugnant" to ask for Brown Jackson's LSAT score. The most she could muster was to suggest that there's little Carlson says "that enlightens anybody."
Given Hirono's failure, you might have thought that Capehart would have taken a moment himself to explain what was so repellent about Carlson's request. But like Hirono, Capehart was unwilling, or unable, to do so.
So . . . just exactly what is wrong with asking for her LSAT score? If we were choosing among doctors, would it be "repugnant" to ask for their MCAT scores? Capehart must see this as a suggestion that Jackson is black, therefore she's unqualified. Before Jackson was named, Capehart suggested because she was black, she'd be more qualified and brilliant than anyone who came before her.
Hirono suggested that instead of learning Brown Jackson's LSAT score, we should look at her "experience."
Brown Jackson's LSAT score [like Obama's college transcripts] will probably never be publicly disclosed. It's not usually done in Supreme Court....
(Excerpt) Read more at newsbusters.org ...
So what...
Let them...
When they do, just respond, no they Borked her, and see what happens.
I hate to go with the Leftists here, but the Jackson’s LSAT is no one’s business except Jackson and universities to which she applied.
There is plenty in her judicial records and her published opinions on which to judge her.
There’s long been a sense that affirmative action programs devalue the achievements of those who benefit from those programs. Now, ironically, those programs are devaluing the schools themselves. Ketanji Brown Jackson went to Harvard Law. So what? Now that only tells you that Harvard is woke, not that they provide the best law education.
What did Tucker want...her first, second, third or fourth attempt at the LSAT?
What do they call the person who graduated last in medical school?
Doctor.
_______________
True of any profession.
Never will see the light of day, just like Øbowel’s records.
That would be racisss to expose their inferiority and special handling.
Most likely, the academic work of Judge Thomas was stellar to excellent because, although racial barriers were starting to come down just a little in those days, he still had to be way better than the competition to get in.
Sort of like a new college grad from anywhere in flyover country competing for a job with an Ivy League grad on Wall Street today.
I think there’s a better possibility that her LSATs are low proving she got into law school via Affirmative Action. If Dems can rummage through Kav’s high school year book, it’s not too much to ask for her scores.
Easy solution: demand standardized test scores for all nominees and sitting justices, because such tests are proxies for IQ. By all appearances, Carlson is fishing for evidence that Jackson, despite a relatively low IQ, “achieved” due to racial preferences and politics. Biden put this issue in play when he made it clear that his nominees would be picked on racial, gender, and political criteria rather than intellect or judicial excellence.
Assuming Jackson has a low IQ because she is black is indeed racist. If she turns out to have had stellar SAT and/or LSAT scores, Carlson will look like a horse’s arse (I doubt he is too worried, since if she had high scores, we’d have seen them). Nor is it necessarily true that super high IQ and test scores make for a superior justice.
For the Harvard undergrad Class of 1995, (she was 1992) was 1290 for Blacks, 1400 for whites and 1450 for Asians, Blacks were admitted at almost double the percentage as both whites and blacks that year.
For Harvard Law classes of ‘96-98, (she was ‘96) blacks scored an average of 9.3 points less on the LSAT than whites who scored 2.4 points higher than Asians. The average accepted LSAT during that time was 170-172. It would be interesting how much affirmative action she received.
At that time, blacks scored the lowest on both tests of all groups, whites, Asians, Hispanics and Native Americans yet were accepted in higher percentages to Harvard and Harvard Law than any other group.
Thinking the usual republicrat turn coat suspects will vote yes to CONfirm.
FWIW the LSAT has nothing to do with the law.
I believe it was Sir Humphrey Appleby, of Yes Minister / Yes Prime Minister, who pointed out that with the NIS everyone had a chance to get a bad doctor.
I would point out that the show apparently had help from numerous folks in government helping them get their comedy to align with facts.
Whatsamatter capeheart? Afraid of what it will reveal?
Hirono doesn’t know what “repugnant” means.
We would need to know the average LSAT score of those that Harvard Law admits, and then what KBJ scored on the test. It could possibly reveal whether KBJ was an affirmative action admission at HLS.
I took the LSAT in 1975. It was all multiple-choice questions then. I don’t think I have ever had such a gigantic headache in my life as I experienced upon finishing this test.
The results of the test among my friends who took it were very interesting. The guy who studied the least among my circle (and whose grades showed it) was the top scorer, making 707 (out of 800), which was in the top 3 percentile. One of the hardest studiers, who ultimately became both a CPA and an attorney, only got about 540. I made 608, which was in the top 20 percentile. My roommate, who was in the top 10 people in our graduating class, got around 680.
Non-starter? You want someone who barely passed? Or had to retake the bar? No thank you. I want someone who is ultra intelligent hard working.
In a nutshell, smarter people make better decisions than dumber people. You want smart decisions to come from the Supreme Court. Not “life experiences” and compassion for hair discrimination.
We want the Supreme Court to be making smart decisions, as they affect millions and are difficult to overturn. Yes, she can have clerks that help her out and write all her decisions and cover for lack of experience... but is that really what we want? Or to have people suspect?
I bet they have, but there was nothing bad to report. If they can drag some woman out from a person’s yearbook to smear you with alleged actions at a high schoool party, I imagine that they can get about any info they want. Especially if you are a RAT.
you know it’s nothing or else they’d be waving it around like a flag...
“Senator Hirono, I’m not going to curse because it’s Sunday...”
Is there a religion or religious denomination or subgroup that believes it’s OK to curse on other days besides the day of worship?
If not, why say such a ridiculous thing? Is this the sort of thing that a secular prog thinks will resonate with devout people?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.