Comments on: The polls are turning on Sotomayor

By: LibRick

LibRick — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 17:27:47 +0000

but I would agree with you that the left uses and wears the term “fair” out at orders of magnitude above and beyond what any other groups does.

By: cannedjam

cannedjam — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 15:22:28 +0000

but it is the left that uses it as a basis for their social policy. I believe, and I could be wrong, that the left has a monopoly on invoking “fairness” when it comes to forcing one group of people to make sacrifices for another.

By: LibRick

LibRick — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 10:56:53 +0000

see post below

By: LibRick

LibRick — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 10:56:25 +0000

statement that “the only person who can truly decide what is fair is God himself” (though I’d rather not see the singular term person for used for God … blessed trinity.)

But, to be “fair”, invocation of the term “fairness” is done by the left, right, and everybody in between.

By: cannedjam

cannedjam — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 03:48:15 +0000

my subsequent post was meant to be a reply…

By: cannedjam

cannedjam — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 03:47:04 +0000

with their thought process is that they justify their policies based on “fairness”. How many times have we heard Obama invoke the term? Only problem is, the only person who can truly decide what is fair is God himself, and anyone who proposes to posses that power is falsely professing.

By: Aaron Gardner

Aaron Gardner — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 02:55:17 +0000

heck there are many shades, if you will, of minority status. The statist uses the class warfare in all arguments. Whether it is economic classes or social classes you can bet they are their exploiting it. Black over Hispanics, Asians over Blacks, Hispanics over Blacks. It is inherent of the system the constant choosing in every situation who is the minority most impacted. Situational ethics in action.

By: cannedjam

cannedjam — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 02:47:44 +0000

that the SCOTUS overturning of the Ricci case further chips away at the very system of discrimination that directly lead to her to being in a position to be considered for the same court.

In her mind it is better to lower the bar to achieve racial diversity than focus on the underlying issue of the systematic under-qualification of minorities in the first place. The result of a failing school system/strangle hold of the teachers union, and issues in the respective communities, but hey it’s much harder and takes much longer to address those issues, so lets just give people an artificial boost, jumping over qualified non-minorities to “even the playing field”, all in the name of the “greater good”.

By: Flagstaff

Flagstaff — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 23:52:31 +0000

It’s evidence of a non-reflective personality, not exactly desirable in a Supreme Court Justice.

In fact, the “wise Latina woman” is as unsuitable for the Court as Bush’s personal counsel was. A difference between Dems and Pubs is that the Pubs were willing to stand up against an unsuitable appointment. The Dems won’t do that, because they see the characteristic that makes her unsuitable as a positive one.

By: evanm

evanm — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 19:25:48 +0000

I am so glad somebody else pointed that out.

That is my rallying cry against Sotomayor from here on out.