[quote name='elprincipe']I'm not used to seeing something this disingenuous from you, myke. You know as well as I do that the "wise Latina" controversy had nothing to do with being proud of her heritage, but rather the other part of the quote, which included words to the effect that because of being Latina she is a better judge than a white male. Quite rightly, many have noted that if, say, Alito had said the same thing, his nomination would have been withdrawn immediately.[/QUOTE]
It is the strength of the unconscious white privilege in American society that Sotomayor has one of her rulings overturned by the supreme court, and the discussion becomes not one of inherent contradiction of the law (as turns out to be the Supreme Court's decision - but don't let that get in the way of continuing to incorrectly think it's about your beloved "reverse racism"), but of wariness of her jurisprudence. That we cannot trust a minority who ruled in favor of minorities when that ruling is overturned by the Supreme Court. This is a problem, because, we reason, it means that the minority judge only made the ruling on the basis of solidarity and empathy as a member of a minority group, and not on the facts of the case, or of the interpretation of a later-to-be-decided-as-inherently-contradictory law as, well, inherently contradictory.
She's siding with minorities, which permits us to be skeptical of her motivations, and question whether she is an arbiter of justice under the law, or liberalism that sees nothing but oppressive whiteness.
We can't, and you don't, consider her on par with other supreme court justices, because of her ethnicity, and because you can't allow her ethnicity to operate separate from her rulings. Though you do this very same thing for the other justices. It is circumstance that Alito is white and Italian, and that this very case that he ruled in favor of...a man by the name of Frank Ricci?
That's your white privilege. Alito can rule how he pleases and you do not consider it to have any racial bias, motivation, empathy, or hint whatsoever. Sotomayor is considered, on the other hand, to be antithetical to the rule of law when she rules in favor of interpreting a law to support a minority group - DESPITE plenty of case examples where she did not rule in such a manner, because she is a minority and they a minority.
This is your racism. You're surely appalled, and think I'm full of it. But you know for a fact inside yourself that you never considered Alito's ethnicity relevant to his rulings, never saw that an Italian man ruling in favor of an Italian man to suggest corroboration or bias, and never considered the following statement to have any relevance, bias, or racial support to it:
"But when I look at those cases, I have to say to myself, and I do say to myself, "You know, this could be your grandfather, this could be your grandmother. They were not citizens at one time, and they were people who came to this country" . . . .
When I get a case about discrimination, I have to think about people in my own family who suffered discrimination because of their ethnic background or because of religion or because of gender. And I do take that into account."
Can you IMAGINE if this is something Sotomayor said during her confirmation hearing? Can you IMAGINE how outraged, and appalled, and sickened you would be were she confirmed?
This came from Samuel Alito's remarks during his own confirmation hearing.
This is the power of racism of society. Now I'll allow you to call me names and deny all of this, and rationalize away why it's ok to examine Sotomayor in terms of her ethnicity, but not Alito. That will demonstrate the strength of the other half of racism in modern American society.
in' lazy day on the internet?
Or maybe I'm racist because you are accusing me of something I never said, such as something as idiotic as being against courts having anyone who is not a white male for judges. Or maybe you're just being an ass.