Posted on 06/30/2009 10:41:58 PM PDT by Bob017
At the ultra-liberal Daily Kos website, a “Kossite” writes a diary condemning Ginsburg’s dissent in Ricci v. DeStefano:
Now, this diary came out of a comment to another diarist, who said:
I agree with Ginsburg's logic. No one is entitled to a promotion. All firefighers were treated the same because none were promoted. Where's the discrimination?
That is indeed an accurate summary of Ginsburg's position, which is precisely why it's ludicrous. Suppose a private company promised -- in writing -- to promote someone to Public Relations Director based upon a written exam, and then after the test was done, it turns out a black guy had the highest score. Then the company bigwigs said "well... we really don't want a black guy as our public face... so we're going to rescind our agreement and invalidate the test." The company in question freely admits that, if the guy had been white, he would have gotten the PR position. Do you really think this wouldn't be a Title VII violation? Would "hey, we were so opposed to having a black guy in the position, that we decided not to promote anyone" been "non-discriminatory" under Ginsburg's tortured logic as well?
OF COURSE the city's actions were in clear violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Ginsburg's dissent borders on racist garbage. I read it twice and was disgusted both times. Shorter Ginsburg: "Screw Title VII. Firefighting has a history of racial discrimination against blacks, so now it's the white guy's turn to suffer." It is a spectacularly offensive opinion that left me sick to my stomach.
Oh brother. The firefighters who took the tests and passed were the ones discriminated against.
And ask yourself one question you pillars of imbecilic idiocy. If the people that passed the test were all Blacks or Hispanics, would we even be discussing this right now?
That was the statement someone made on the site - the rest of the post is the reply.
And of course you are correct. I think Roberts asked in oral argument whether the City would have junked the test if no whites had been in the top 10. The only reason people are upset is because the wrong skin colors came out on top.
Apparently Justice Ginsburg isn’t familiar with that simple yet true old phrase “two wrongs don’t make a right”.
I thought she was dead? Oh! I remember now, she just looks dead.
Heck, at least Ginsburg offered a complete opinion on the merits of the case. Sotomayor put out a one paragraph blurb to dismiss, and she’s supposedly healthy.
Does it appear in the Communist Manifesto? Did the World Court over in the Hague write a comment on it? If not, no, I doubt she's familiar with it. Well, that and the Constitution of the United States of America.
Like many liberals she is terribly misguided, but is oblivious to this fact. I would bet she thinks of herself as a compassionate and caring champion of the downtrodden. Unfortunately, she is not. Interestingly, liberals like her often criticize the right for not getting the ‘nuances’ in life, including nuances in the interpretation of the constitution and the determination of what is ‘Just’. In reality, it is she and her ilk who don’t get the nuance. They see the world in Black and White. Literally.
Nice one.
Or course we wouldn't be having this conversation if it were Blacks or Hispanics being promoted by passing a written exam. The lone Hispanic involved in the lawsuit commented, “just study hard”. What a concept.
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.