Off Topic- Sotomayor Hearings

[Veritas]

I could not resist posting this and before you all go off on me, note that this is classified as gossip, not gospel:

Second Circuit gossip: Sotomayor “deeply-closeted” lesbian/cougar
Internet Powerhouse Andy Martin on the “Secret Life of Sonia Sotomayor”

http://www.contrariancommentary.com/community/Home/tabid/36/mid/363/newsid363/432/Default.aspx

[briansd1]

At the Appellate Court level, in the Ricci case, the primary issue was whether cities could throw out tests if they believed those tests weren’t in compliance with Title VII.

The firefighters claimed that throwing out the test disadvantaged White and Hispanic firefighters and therefore was discrimination.

The Trial Court found no discrimination.

The Appellate Court does not hear evidence to determine facts but is limited to considering whether the District Court made the right legal decision based on the law and the facts determined at the Trial Court level.

The Supreme Court has the power to review everything. The Supreme Court was “legislating from the bench” here. It went further and found that the City of New Haven engaged in discrimination and created a new precedent (policy) for the whole country.

If the conservatives want to blame anyone, they should fault the Trial Court judge, not Sotomayor.

I agree with the Supreme Court’s decision. But vilifying Sotomoyor in this case simply isn’t appropriate.

The Ricci case has become a cause célèbre for “a dwindling white nonurban America that is aflame with grievances and awash in self-pity as the country hurtles into the 21st century and leaves it behind.”

I think that just like Black America, the non-urban White America needs to “get over” it and concentrate on building its intellectual capital rather than dwelling on its grievances.

[briansd1]

At the Appellate Court level, in the Ricci case, the primary issue was whether cities could throw out tests if they believed those tests weren’t in compliance with Title VII.

The firefighters claimed that throwing out the test disadvantaged White and Hispanic firefighters and therefore was discrimination.

The Trial Court found no discrimination.

The Appellate Court does not hear evidence to determine facts but is limited to considering whether the District Court made the right legal decision based on the law and the facts determined at the Trial Court level.

The Supreme Court has the power to review everything. The Supreme Court was “legislating from the bench” here. It went further and found that the City of New Haven engaged in discrimination and created a new precedent (policy) for the whole country.

If the conservatives want to blame anyone, they should fault the Trial Court judge, not Sotomayor.

I agree with the Supreme Court’s decision. But vilifying Sotomoyor in this case simply isn’t appropriate.

The Ricci case has become a cause célèbre for “a dwindling white nonurban America that is aflame with grievances and awash in self-pity as the country hurtles into the 21st century and leaves it behind.”

I think that just like Black America, the non-urban White America needs to “get over” it and concentrate on building its intellectual capital rather than dwelling on its grievances.

[briansd1]

At the Appellate Court level, in the Ricci case, the primary issue was whether cities could throw out tests if they believed those tests weren’t in compliance with Title VII.

The firefighters claimed that throwing out the test disadvantaged White and Hispanic firefighters and therefore was discrimination.

The Trial Court found no discrimination.

The Appellate Court does not hear evidence to determine facts but is limited to considering whether the District Court made the right legal decision based on the law and the facts determined at the Trial Court level.

The Supreme Court has the power to review everything. The Supreme Court was “legislating from the bench” here. It went further and found that the City of New Haven engaged in discrimination and created a new precedent (policy) for the whole country.

If the conservatives want to blame anyone, they should fault the Trial Court judge, not Sotomayor.

I agree with the Supreme Court’s decision. But vilifying Sotomoyor in this case simply isn’t appropriate.

The Ricci case has become a cause célèbre for “a dwindling white nonurban America that is aflame with grievances and awash in self-pity as the country hurtles into the 21st century and leaves it behind.”

I think that just like Black America, the non-urban White America needs to “get over” it and concentrate on building its intellectual capital rather than dwelling on its grievances.

[briansd1]

At the Appellate Court level, in the Ricci case, the primary issue was whether cities could throw out tests if they believed those tests weren’t in compliance with Title VII.

The firefighters claimed that throwing out the test disadvantaged White and Hispanic firefighters and therefore was discrimination.

The Trial Court found no discrimination.

The Appellate Court does not hear evidence to determine facts but is limited to considering whether the District Court made the right legal decision based on the law and the facts determined at the Trial Court level.

The Supreme Court has the power to review everything. The Supreme Court was “legislating from the bench” here. It went further and found that the City of New Haven engaged in discrimination and created a new precedent (policy) for the whole country.

If the conservatives want to blame anyone, they should fault the Trial Court judge, not Sotomayor.

I agree with the Supreme Court’s decision. But vilifying Sotomoyor in this case simply isn’t appropriate.

The Ricci case has become a cause célèbre for “a dwindling white nonurban America that is aflame with grievances and awash in self-pity as the country hurtles into the 21st century and leaves it behind.”

I think that just like Black America, the non-urban White America needs to “get over” it and concentrate on building its intellectual capital rather than dwelling on its grievances.

[briansd1]

At the Appellate Court level, in the Ricci case, the primary issue was whether cities could throw out tests if they believed those tests weren’t in compliance with Title VII.

The firefighters claimed that throwing out the test disadvantaged White and Hispanic firefighters and therefore was discrimination.

The Trial Court found no discrimination.

The Appellate Court does not hear evidence to determine facts but is limited to considering whether the District Court made the right legal decision based on the law and the facts determined at the Trial Court level.

The Supreme Court has the power to review everything. The Supreme Court was “legislating from the bench” here. It went further and found that the City of New Haven engaged in discrimination and created a new precedent (policy) for the whole country.

If the conservatives want to blame anyone, they should fault the Trial Court judge, not Sotomayor.

I agree with the Supreme Court’s decision. But vilifying Sotomoyor in this case simply isn’t appropriate.

The Ricci case has become a cause célèbre for “a dwindling white nonurban America that is aflame with grievances and awash in self-pity as the country hurtles into the 21st century and leaves it behind.”

I think that just like Black America, the non-urban White America needs to “get over” it and concentrate on building its intellectual capital rather than dwelling on its grievances.

[Veritas]

I do not think that it is just non-urban White America that is affected. Discrimination is unacceptable, period. Although a meritocracy may well be a lofty pipe dream, I believe in striving for an ideal, not simply accepting mediocrity for the sake of compromise.

[Veritas]

I do not think that it is just non-urban White America that is affected. Discrimination is unacceptable, period. Although a meritocracy may well be a lofty pipe dream, I believe in striving for an ideal, not simply accepting mediocrity for the sake of compromise.

[Veritas]

I do not think that it is just non-urban White America that is affected. Discrimination is unacceptable, period. Although a meritocracy may well be a lofty pipe dream, I believe in striving for an ideal, not simply accepting mediocrity for the sake of compromise.

[Veritas]

I do not think that it is just non-urban White America that is affected. Discrimination is unacceptable, period. Although a meritocracy may well be a lofty pipe dream, I believe in striving for an ideal, not simply accepting mediocrity for the sake of compromise.

[Veritas]

I do not think that it is just non-urban White America that is affected. Discrimination is unacceptable, period. Although a meritocracy may well be a lofty pipe dream, I believe in striving for an ideal, not simply accepting mediocrity for the sake of compromise.

[NotCranky]

[quote=Veritas]I do not think that it is just non-urban White America that is affected. Discrimination is unacceptable, period. Although a meritocracy may well be a lofty pipe dream, I believe in striving for an ideal, not simply accepting mediocrity for the sake of compromise.[/quote]

That’s fine and I am with you 100%. People are getting to have their say one way or the other. I’d love to get beyond “what’s in it for the in crowd” style politics.Seems to be basic to human nature though.

[NotCranky]

[quote=Veritas]I do not think that it is just non-urban White America that is affected. Discrimination is unacceptable, period. Although a meritocracy may well be a lofty pipe dream, I believe in striving for an ideal, not simply accepting mediocrity for the sake of compromise.[/quote]

That’s fine and I am with you 100%. People are getting to have their say one way or the other. I’d love to get beyond “what’s in it for the in crowd” style politics.Seems to be basic to human nature though.

[NotCranky]

[quote=Veritas]I do not think that it is just non-urban White America that is affected. Discrimination is unacceptable, period. Although a meritocracy may well be a lofty pipe dream, I believe in striving for an ideal, not simply accepting mediocrity for the sake of compromise.[/quote]

That’s fine and I am with you 100%. People are getting to have their say one way or the other. I’d love to get beyond “what’s in it for the in crowd” style politics.Seems to be basic to human nature though.

[NotCranky]

[quote=Veritas]I do not think that it is just non-urban White America that is affected. Discrimination is unacceptable, period. Although a meritocracy may well be a lofty pipe dream, I believe in striving for an ideal, not simply accepting mediocrity for the sake of compromise.[/quote]

That’s fine and I am with you 100%. People are getting to have their say one way or the other. I’d love to get beyond “what’s in it for the in crowd” style politics.Seems to be basic to human nature though.

[Author]

Posts