Harry, Harry,
so contrary,
Your hate
Will not abate.
But have no fear,
For Joe is here
To train
Your feeble brain.
On a serious note Mr. Never Posts anything of substance, your comment isn’t, as you well know, an inaccurate post on my facts about Ms. Sotomayor’s so-called educational & professional achievements. Please consult further this article from the prestigious publication, Human Events.
(Still trying out monikers, heh? Are you married to Louise? If yes, then you really oppose nationalizing health care. For your next post, use bozo as your moniker.
**************************
Having lost the Congress in 2006 and the White House in 2008, Republicans are looking to redefine themselves for a nation that still leans conservative but is less Republican that it has been in decades.
The nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the U.S. Supreme Court presents just such an opportunity. For, even if the party loses the battle and Sotomayor sits on the court, it can win the war, as Ronald Reagan won the Panama Canal debate, even as Senate Republicans committed collective suicide by voting to give away the canal.
What are the grounds for rejecting Sonia Sotomayor?
No one has brought forth the slightest evidence she has the intellectual candlepower to sit on the Roberts court. By her own admission, Sotomayor is an “affirmative action baby.”
Though the Obama media have been ballyhooing her brilliance — No. 1 in high school, No. 1 at Princeton, editor of Yale Law Review — her academic career appears to have been a fraud from beginning to end, a testament to Ivy League corruption.
Two weeks ago, The New York Times reported that, to get up to speed on her English skills at Princeton, Sotomayor was advised to read children’s classics and study basic grammar books during her summers. How do you graduate first in your class at Princeton if your summer reading consists of “Chicken Little” and “The Troll Under the Bridge”?
In video clips dating back 25 years, and now provided to the Senate Judiciary Committee, Sotomayor, according to the Times, even calls herself an “affirmative action product.”
“The clips include lengthy remarks about her experiences as an ‘affirmative action baby,’ whose lower test scores were overlooked by admissions committees at Princeton University and Yale Law School because, she said, she is Hispanic and had grown up in poor circumstance.”
“If we had gone through the traditional numbers route of those institutions,” says Sotomayor, “it would have been highly questionable if I would have been accepted. … My test scores were not comparable to that of my classmates.”
Thus, Sotomayor got into Princeton, got her No. 1 ranking, was whisked into Yale Law School and made editor of the Yale Law Review — all because she was a Hispanic woman. And those two Ivy League institutions cheated more deserving students of what they had worked a lifetime to achieve, for reasons of race, gender or ethnicity.
This is bigotry pure and simple. To salve their consciences for past societal sins, the Ivy League is deep into discrimination again, this time with white males as victims rather than as beneficiaries.
One prefers the old bigotry. At least it was honest, and not, as Abraham Lincoln observed, adulterated “with the base alloy of hypocrisy.”
As the Times reports, on the tapes, Sotomayor rejects “the proposition that minorities must become advocates of ‘selection by merit alone.’ She said diversity improved the legal system.”
“‘Since I have difficultly defining merit and what merit alone means, and … whether it’s judicial or otherwise, I accept that different experiences, in and of itself, bring merit to the system,’ she said, adding, ‘I think it brings to the system more of a sense of fairness when these litigants see people like myself on the bench.”
What does the latest Times revelation tell us?
That were it not for Ivy League dishonesty, Sotomayor would not have gotten into Princeton, would never have been ranked first in her class, would not have gotten into Yale Law, nor been named editor of Yale Law Review, and thus would not be a U.S. appellate court judge today or a nominee to the Supreme Court.
Indeed, the White House itself leaked that the final four court candidates were all women and Sotomayor was picked because she was a Latina. One wonders how many superior students and judges have been passed over to advance Sonia Sotomayor’s career?
From college days to court days, that career reflects, in word and deed, a determination to use any power she achieves to create a society where the demands of diversity triumph over the ideal of equal justice under law. For Sotomayor, the advancement of people of color over white males is justice.
Republican senators should use this Sotomayor nomination to put affirmative action in the dock for what it is — race-based bigotry against white males so that persons of color can receive the rewards of society that they could not win in free and fair competition.
Lay out the Sotomayor record — SAT scores, LSAT scores, bar exam score, law review articles and her opinions — so that we can see up close what those who eviscerated Robert Bork regard as academic and judicial excellence.
No need for name-calling.
Just lay out the lady’s opinions and record, so that, if she is elevated, Americans can say: Barack Obama voted against Chief Justice Roberts because Roberts could not measure up to Sonia Sotomayor, his ideal of what a justice ought to be.
Now Remus—or should I say wanna be genus, this comment was out of order and it’s obvious that we are an undeserving beneficiary of slavery…but I digress. Being an authority on diversity I have to say that this was the correct ruling. Discrimination of any kind is wrong, even if it is reverse-discrimination. Affirmative action was a quick fix to employment discrimination (yes people it still exists) because some American’s can’t be trusted to govern themselves ethically. Hopefully we as Americans wake up and realize that diversity is the ke to competing in a global economy.
Claimsguy I think it is my turn to educate you my friend. You just stated that Harry was the “beneficiary of preferential race-based hiring of minorities.” I am sorry but most of “majority”, for lack of better terminology, has been living off of preferential raced-based treatment for centuries. Do you know the history of this country Claimsguy? How did America become so wealty & powerful? Read a freaking book. Without the extermination of the Native American, the exploitation of Africans, Asians and Eastern & Southern Europeans, we would not have gained the wealth and power that we have today. So if Harry is the “beneficiary of preferential race-based hiring of minorities” then he probably deserves just a little bit of it!
Isn’t the phrase “reverse-discrimination” an oxy-moron? It doesn’t make any sense. Discrimination is discrimination, no matter who is being discriminated.
No, you’re wrong, Harry and you’re also an idiotic fool.
“Which,” as used in your sentence, can only and must refer to Americans, because your email refers to me with the word “you” and not my accomplishments. If it were to be as you claim, then you should’ve written ‘to which your accomplishments do not hold a candle.’ Of course, it’s clear to all that you’re too stupid to know this.
You’re a typical liberal; you try to present yourself as an erudite person, but, in reality, you’re just a faux intellectual. In other words, I’m writing that I consider you a phoney.
Also, IRO your post under the moniker Authority, it’s not diversity that will make America competitive in global trade, but rather, it will be the qualities of competence, productivity, and expertise that will make America as such. Affirmative action (“AA”) undermines these three qualities.
Facts speak for themselves, because since the advent of AA, America has become less competitive in the global market. Of course, as a liberal, you hate facts.
You’re truly a very simple, control freak. Hencey, your new moniker, Authority.
You’re a joke and a phoney.
Go back to your cubicle and fume at the world for not concurring with your inflated view of yourself.
I look forward to your next ranting post; maybe you can frighten some other woman as you did with your posts IRO the June 15 article about Obama’s health plan. Of course, I won’t respond to it; I’ve toyed with you enough the last two days.
Even though you’re a freak, Jesus loves you; albeit, He may be the only One who loves you.
Come on Joe, don’t sound so angry. I can tell that some buttons must have been pushed. You also have a narrow-minded view of diversity my friend but I will not penalize you for your lack of research and ignorance. Do you really know the reason why AA was established? It was established because mental migits like yourself lacked the self-esteem and confidence to honestly allow yourself to be intellectually challenged by the people you used to oppress. I agree, as you said “qualities of competence, productivity, and expertise” will make America competitive but we should not oppress our own citizens to make it so. Wake up, it’s not 1955. Look at the auto industry. Outside of the extreme financial issues why did they fail…..? It was their lack of diversity. No genus, not race, sex, age or ethnicity but their inability to embrace diverse ideas which ultimately led to their demise (Chrysler & GM respectively). Remember how the big 3 laughed at the Japanese vehicles around 30 years ago? Now Fiat is buying Chrysler and GM is in court trying to figure it out. Educate yourself, step your game up and then get into the ring with Ali.
Thankfully, many seem to be getting the point, and hopefully those who haven’t will: our rules and laws should be based on sound reason and logic, not some manipulated trickery designed to give some segment of society an advantage over another. That is UNFAIR discrimination. Now, to use a myopic view of history (I shall coin the phrase, and you can say you saw it here first: twistory) to justify reverse discrimination is wrong. To say that the wealth of our nation was based entirely, or even mostly, on slavery and oppression is incorrect. I’m certain that quite a bit of our nation’s prosperity and wealth has been the result of hard work, innovation and creativity – which history teaches us flourishes in a free and just society. I’m equally certain that to suggest otherwise would be considered deeply offensive by, and to, the previous generations who made great sacrifices to lay the foundations of our great nation, where even those with whom we disagree may live and breath free. History must be viewed in its entirety, and in context – much like reading an insurance policy. The fact of the matter, and the truth is, that slavery and oppression was practiced by many ALL OVER the world (and sadly, still is in some parts): black people enslaving black people; white people enslaving white people; indentured servitude; oppression by one group of people over another, etc, etc… and all of these things we should consider backwards and unjust in our modern society….but were at one time considered the accepted norm, in many cases even by the oppressed, who if given half a chance would gladly have become the oppressor!
So, let us not move backward to where oppression or favoritism by any group over any other is acceptable, but forward to where a level playing field is guaranteed for ALL! Not everyone will fail, not everyone will succeed, but at least we should all be playing by the same rules…now that’s the basis of a civil society and THAT’S equal justice under the law!
Bravo JB, I can applaud when the other person stars. Just to clarify I did not say that all or most of the wealth and prosperity was based on the oppression or extintion of certain cultures. But, we would not have prospered the way that we have if it weren’t for slavery, manifest-destiny, or the exploitation of other cultures. This history of this country is great but we do have dirty little secrets, like most properous civilizations in history. Unfortunately, we often fail to acknowledge them in order to move forward. Not asking for reparations but yes, an even playing field would be nice but you have to admit that we are not there yet. We have come a long way as a country but have a long way to go. Hopefully we walk that path hand in hand and not as adversaries.
Just FYI, Joe, I am not Authority. But guess that won’t stop your pointless triades. Please go to another site and leave the insurance people here alone.
We have updated our privacy policy to be more clear and meet the new requirements of the GDPR. By continuing to use our site, you accept our revised Privacy Policy.
Harry, Harry,
so contrary,
Your hate
Will not abate.
But have no fear,
For Joe is here
To train
Your feeble brain.
On a serious note Mr. Never Posts anything of substance, your comment isn’t, as you well know, an inaccurate post on my facts about Ms. Sotomayor’s so-called educational & professional achievements. Please consult further this article from the prestigious publication, Human Events.
(Still trying out monikers, heh? Are you married to Louise? If yes, then you really oppose nationalizing health care. For your next post, use bozo as your moniker.
**************************
Having lost the Congress in 2006 and the White House in 2008, Republicans are looking to redefine themselves for a nation that still leans conservative but is less Republican that it has been in decades.
The nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the U.S. Supreme Court presents just such an opportunity. For, even if the party loses the battle and Sotomayor sits on the court, it can win the war, as Ronald Reagan won the Panama Canal debate, even as Senate Republicans committed collective suicide by voting to give away the canal.
What are the grounds for rejecting Sonia Sotomayor?
No one has brought forth the slightest evidence she has the intellectual candlepower to sit on the Roberts court. By her own admission, Sotomayor is an “affirmative action baby.”
Though the Obama media have been ballyhooing her brilliance — No. 1 in high school, No. 1 at Princeton, editor of Yale Law Review — her academic career appears to have been a fraud from beginning to end, a testament to Ivy League corruption.
Two weeks ago, The New York Times reported that, to get up to speed on her English skills at Princeton, Sotomayor was advised to read children’s classics and study basic grammar books during her summers. How do you graduate first in your class at Princeton if your summer reading consists of “Chicken Little” and “The Troll Under the Bridge”?
In video clips dating back 25 years, and now provided to the Senate Judiciary Committee, Sotomayor, according to the Times, even calls herself an “affirmative action product.”
“The clips include lengthy remarks about her experiences as an ‘affirmative action baby,’ whose lower test scores were overlooked by admissions committees at Princeton University and Yale Law School because, she said, she is Hispanic and had grown up in poor circumstance.”
“If we had gone through the traditional numbers route of those institutions,” says Sotomayor, “it would have been highly questionable if I would have been accepted. … My test scores were not comparable to that of my classmates.”
Thus, Sotomayor got into Princeton, got her No. 1 ranking, was whisked into Yale Law School and made editor of the Yale Law Review — all because she was a Hispanic woman. And those two Ivy League institutions cheated more deserving students of what they had worked a lifetime to achieve, for reasons of race, gender or ethnicity.
This is bigotry pure and simple. To salve their consciences for past societal sins, the Ivy League is deep into discrimination again, this time with white males as victims rather than as beneficiaries.
One prefers the old bigotry. At least it was honest, and not, as Abraham Lincoln observed, adulterated “with the base alloy of hypocrisy.”
As the Times reports, on the tapes, Sotomayor rejects “the proposition that minorities must become advocates of ‘selection by merit alone.’ She said diversity improved the legal system.”
“‘Since I have difficultly defining merit and what merit alone means, and … whether it’s judicial or otherwise, I accept that different experiences, in and of itself, bring merit to the system,’ she said, adding, ‘I think it brings to the system more of a sense of fairness when these litigants see people like myself on the bench.”
What does the latest Times revelation tell us?
That were it not for Ivy League dishonesty, Sotomayor would not have gotten into Princeton, would never have been ranked first in her class, would not have gotten into Yale Law, nor been named editor of Yale Law Review, and thus would not be a U.S. appellate court judge today or a nominee to the Supreme Court.
Indeed, the White House itself leaked that the final four court candidates were all women and Sotomayor was picked because she was a Latina. One wonders how many superior students and judges have been passed over to advance Sonia Sotomayor’s career?
From college days to court days, that career reflects, in word and deed, a determination to use any power she achieves to create a society where the demands of diversity triumph over the ideal of equal justice under law. For Sotomayor, the advancement of people of color over white males is justice.
Republican senators should use this Sotomayor nomination to put affirmative action in the dock for what it is — race-based bigotry against white males so that persons of color can receive the rewards of society that they could not win in free and fair competition.
Lay out the Sotomayor record — SAT scores, LSAT scores, bar exam score, law review articles and her opinions — so that we can see up close what those who eviscerated Robert Bork regard as academic and judicial excellence.
No need for name-calling.
Just lay out the lady’s opinions and record, so that, if she is elevated, Americans can say: Barack Obama voted against Chief Justice Roberts because Roberts could not measure up to Sonia Sotomayor, his ideal of what a justice ought to be.
Now Remus—or should I say wanna be genus, this comment was out of order and it’s obvious that we are an undeserving beneficiary of slavery…but I digress. Being an authority on diversity I have to say that this was the correct ruling. Discrimination of any kind is wrong, even if it is reverse-discrimination. Affirmative action was a quick fix to employment discrimination (yes people it still exists) because some American’s can’t be trusted to govern themselves ethically. Hopefully we as Americans wake up and realize that diversity is the ke to competing in a global economy.
Claimsguy I think it is my turn to educate you my friend. You just stated that Harry was the “beneficiary of preferential race-based hiring of minorities.” I am sorry but most of “majority”, for lack of better terminology, has been living off of preferential raced-based treatment for centuries. Do you know the history of this country Claimsguy? How did America become so wealty & powerful? Read a freaking book. Without the extermination of the Native American, the exploitation of Africans, Asians and Eastern & Southern Europeans, we would not have gained the wealth and power that we have today. So if Harry is the “beneficiary of preferential race-based hiring of minorities” then he probably deserves just a little bit of it!
Isn’t the phrase “reverse-discrimination” an oxy-moron? It doesn’t make any sense. Discrimination is discrimination, no matter who is being discriminated.
No, you’re wrong, Harry and you’re also an idiotic fool.
“Which,” as used in your sentence, can only and must refer to Americans, because your email refers to me with the word “you” and not my accomplishments. If it were to be as you claim, then you should’ve written ‘to which your accomplishments do not hold a candle.’ Of course, it’s clear to all that you’re too stupid to know this.
You’re a typical liberal; you try to present yourself as an erudite person, but, in reality, you’re just a faux intellectual. In other words, I’m writing that I consider you a phoney.
Also, IRO your post under the moniker Authority, it’s not diversity that will make America competitive in global trade, but rather, it will be the qualities of competence, productivity, and expertise that will make America as such. Affirmative action (“AA”) undermines these three qualities.
Facts speak for themselves, because since the advent of AA, America has become less competitive in the global market. Of course, as a liberal, you hate facts.
You’re truly a very simple, control freak. Hencey, your new moniker, Authority.
You’re a joke and a phoney.
Go back to your cubicle and fume at the world for not concurring with your inflated view of yourself.
I look forward to your next ranting post; maybe you can frighten some other woman as you did with your posts IRO the June 15 article about Obama’s health plan. Of course, I won’t respond to it; I’ve toyed with you enough the last two days.
Even though you’re a freak, Jesus loves you; albeit, He may be the only One who loves you.
Come on Joe, don’t sound so angry. I can tell that some buttons must have been pushed. You also have a narrow-minded view of diversity my friend but I will not penalize you for your lack of research and ignorance. Do you really know the reason why AA was established? It was established because mental migits like yourself lacked the self-esteem and confidence to honestly allow yourself to be intellectually challenged by the people you used to oppress. I agree, as you said “qualities of competence, productivity, and expertise” will make America competitive but we should not oppress our own citizens to make it so. Wake up, it’s not 1955. Look at the auto industry. Outside of the extreme financial issues why did they fail…..? It was their lack of diversity. No genus, not race, sex, age or ethnicity but their inability to embrace diverse ideas which ultimately led to their demise (Chrysler & GM respectively). Remember how the big 3 laughed at the Japanese vehicles around 30 years ago? Now Fiat is buying Chrysler and GM is in court trying to figure it out. Educate yourself, step your game up and then get into the ring with Ali.
Thankfully, many seem to be getting the point, and hopefully those who haven’t will: our rules and laws should be based on sound reason and logic, not some manipulated trickery designed to give some segment of society an advantage over another. That is UNFAIR discrimination. Now, to use a myopic view of history (I shall coin the phrase, and you can say you saw it here first: twistory) to justify reverse discrimination is wrong. To say that the wealth of our nation was based entirely, or even mostly, on slavery and oppression is incorrect. I’m certain that quite a bit of our nation’s prosperity and wealth has been the result of hard work, innovation and creativity – which history teaches us flourishes in a free and just society. I’m equally certain that to suggest otherwise would be considered deeply offensive by, and to, the previous generations who made great sacrifices to lay the foundations of our great nation, where even those with whom we disagree may live and breath free. History must be viewed in its entirety, and in context – much like reading an insurance policy. The fact of the matter, and the truth is, that slavery and oppression was practiced by many ALL OVER the world (and sadly, still is in some parts): black people enslaving black people; white people enslaving white people; indentured servitude; oppression by one group of people over another, etc, etc… and all of these things we should consider backwards and unjust in our modern society….but were at one time considered the accepted norm, in many cases even by the oppressed, who if given half a chance would gladly have become the oppressor!
So, let us not move backward to where oppression or favoritism by any group over any other is acceptable, but forward to where a level playing field is guaranteed for ALL! Not everyone will fail, not everyone will succeed, but at least we should all be playing by the same rules…now that’s the basis of a civil society and THAT’S equal justice under the law!
Bravo JB, I can applaud when the other person stars. Just to clarify I did not say that all or most of the wealth and prosperity was based on the oppression or extintion of certain cultures. But, we would not have prospered the way that we have if it weren’t for slavery, manifest-destiny, or the exploitation of other cultures. This history of this country is great but we do have dirty little secrets, like most properous civilizations in history. Unfortunately, we often fail to acknowledge them in order to move forward. Not asking for reparations but yes, an even playing field would be nice but you have to admit that we are not there yet. We have come a long way as a country but have a long way to go. Hopefully we walk that path hand in hand and not as adversaries.
Just FYI, Joe, I am not Authority. But guess that won’t stop your pointless triades. Please go to another site and leave the insurance people here alone.
Harry,
Joe is probably not available anymore today. He went back to his bomb shelter to wait for the Berlin Wall to fall and the Soviet Union to crumble!