To: Starman417
"I of course do not mean to suggest that Michigans voters acted with anything like the invidious intent of those who historically stymied the rights of racial minorities,"
Sure she did.
2 posted on
04/24/2014 1:35:21 PM PDT by
cripplecreek
(REMEMBER THE RIVER RAISIN!)
To: Starman417
To: Starman417
was their any doubt she wouldn’t? Not a question of “if” but when
4 posted on
04/24/2014 1:39:53 PM PDT by
12th_Monkey
(One man one vote is a big fail, when the "one" man is an idiot.)
To: Starman417
If she were a white guy, she’d never have been accepted into any law school.
5 posted on
04/24/2014 1:45:15 PM PDT by
dead
(I've got my eye out for Mullah Omar.)
To: Starman417
In short, she is willing to lie to gain power, after which she will do as she pleases. In short, HE is willing to lie to gain power, after which HE will do as HE pleases.
Birds of a feather ...
6 posted on
04/24/2014 1:45:52 PM PDT by
oh8eleven
(RVN '67-'68)
To: Starman417
Remember the Connecticut fire fighters who passed the promotion exam and then were told nobody would get promotions because no minorities passed? Sonya Sotomayor voted against giving them promotions...and then didn’t publish an opinion in order to make it harder to overturn...she is disgusting.
7 posted on
04/24/2014 1:46:55 PM PDT by
Tulane
To: Starman417
It has long been a belief of "minorities" like Sotomayor that the heavy boot of white, male oppression is still pressing down heavily on their necks. The facts, minorities are exactly where they should be given their levels of education and intelligence, are too horrible for them to contemplate. So they still have to believe in the fiction of white supremacy to justify their unconstitutional grabs for positions and bennies they don't deserve.
These people always whine that "the playing field is not level." The playing field is not level? When has the playing field ever been level in the history of the world? By that standard, I, who grew up with considerably less bennies than the Kennedys and Rockefellers, should be granted all sorts of undeserved bennies like the minorities. I don't deserve them, and neither do they.
To: Starman417
9 posted on
04/24/2014 2:00:07 PM PDT by
GOP Poet
To: Starman417
We still have a bunch of folks, (to use a Haaaaaavud educated Obama phrase), that desperately hang onto the racial hatreds of the 1960s: for example, Revs. Sharpton and Jackson.
For them, nothing has changed since the pre 1960s, and so they make a living by race-baiting with speeches, accusations, and of course, arm in arm marches.
To them, they receive with deaf ears the statement: If you accuse someone of being a racist, and do NOT back it up with facts, - - - - - - - - - - - then you just might be a racist.
10 posted on
04/24/2014 2:02:10 PM PDT by
Graewoulf
(Democrats' Obamacare Socialist Health Insur. Tax violates U.S. Constitution AND Anti-Trust Law.)
To: Starman417
RE: Sotomayor shows her true colors
Only those who are deliberately blind or ignorant would not have known her true colors when Obama first recommended her.
The same can be said of those who voted for or ignored Obama’s background when he first ran in 2008.
11 posted on
04/24/2014 2:03:14 PM PDT by
SeekAndFind
(If at first you don't succeed, put it out for beta test.)
To: Starman417
Her true colors are toilet bowl green?
12 posted on
04/24/2014 2:05:13 PM PDT by
Veto!
(OpInions freely dispensed as advice)
To: Starman417
Sonia can show whatever colors she wants. She has a lifetime appointment. Elections have consequences. Remember that when you see a Rino running for reelection this primary season.
To: Starman417
what... MUD???
16 posted on
04/24/2014 3:09:45 PM PDT by
Chode
(Stand UP and Be Counted, or line up and be numbered - *DTOM* -vvv- NO Pity for the LAZY - 86-44)
To: Starman417
Sotomayor is a racist, liberal piglet.
19 posted on
04/24/2014 4:32:13 PM PDT by
FlingWingFlyer
(Obama's smidgens are coming home to roost.)
To: Starman417
The rationale for affirmative action was to guarantee that minorities can have equal opportunities. However, I point out that this same rationale could have been used to justify racial segregation in public schools. After all, when minorities had their own schools, that meant there was a guarantee of a minority being a valedictorian or cheerleading captain. It could have been further argued that segregating minorities in their own schools protected them from racial discrimination. After all, as the argument would go, if there were no white students, then there is zero possibility of a minority being passed over for cheerleading captain for a less-qualified white candidate. If schools were integrated, the racist administrators would make sure that the valedictorians and cheerleading captains were white, even if they were not the most qualified. In fact, i would not be surprised if such arguments were used by the Brown v. Board of Education appellees and supporting amici. And yet, even though segregation guaranteed that minorities have a chance at being valedictorians, cheerleading captains, and other high status positions in schools, on the basis that there would be zero possibility that a less-qualified white person would be given these honors and stati, somehow the Supreme Court found that segregation stamps a badge of inferiority. I wonder why they thought that.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson