Update: Note to my favorite blog-stalker, Tom Hansen. I did not write this. This is from The Political Cesspool. Please attribute it to the right person. And the citation was fine (see below where it says “cross-posted from”? Learn to read, blog-stalker!).
Finally, I post things I agree with and disagree with. You will know what I think by what I myself say. I know that’s going to be a problem for you, Tom-Tom: you’re going to have to learn to read.
First via Focus on the Family:
Conservatives are concerned that Sonia Sotomayor - President Barack Obama's nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court - will indulge her Left-wing policy preferences instead of neutrally interpreting the law.
"From what we know about her, Judge Sotomayor considers policy-making to be among a judge's roles, no matter what the law says," said Bruce Hausknecht, judicial analyst at Focus on the Family Action. "She disregards the notion of judicial impartiality."
Sotomayor admits that she applies her feelings and personal politics when deciding cases. In a 2001 speech at Berkeley, she said she believes it is appropriate for judges to consider their "experiences as women and people of color," which she believes should "affect our decisions." She went on to say in that same speech: "I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experience would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life."
Cross-posted from The Political Cesspool:
Sotomayor hates white people
Which is why Obama wants her on the Supreme Court. You know those white firefighters who have been in the news lately because they passed the promotions test, only to have the city throw the test scores out because no blacks passed? Their case is before the Supreme Court right now.
Guess who ruled against the white men in a lower court? Yep, Sonia Sotomayor. She didn’t just rule against them. She displayed her sheer contempt for them by writing a one paragraph opinion dismissing their claims without even addressing their arguments or the facts of the case. This sort of thing is unheard of, and even a fellow judge criticized her for her contemptuous treatment of the white firefighters.
But according to dissenting Judge Jose Cabranes, the single-paragraph order issued by Sotomayor and her colleagues ignored over 1,800 pages of testimony and more than an hour of argument–ignoring the facts of the case.
“(T)he parties submitted briefs of 86 pages each and a six-volume joint appendix of over 1,800 pages; plaintiffs’ reply brief was over thirty pages long,” Cabranes wrote.
“(O)ral argument, on December 10, 2007, lasted over an hour,” Cabranes explained, adding that more than two months after oral arguments, Sotomayor and the majority panel upheld the lower court in a summary order “containing a single substantive paragraph.”
Cabranes criticized Sotomayor and the majority for not explaining why they had sided with the city in their new opinion.
Of course Sotomayor sided with the city, and opposed the white men who had been mistreated because of their race. The city was violating their rights on behalf of blacks. Case closed.
When you hate white people, the laws, arguments and facts of the case are of no import whatsoever. It was non-whites vs. whites, and Sotomayor didn’t need any “facts” to decide how to rule. The non-whites get what they want, and white people get screwed. That’s what Equality and Diversity are all about - hating white people. And Sotomayor made it clear with this and other rulings that she believes the white man has no rights the law is bound to respect. That’s why Obama wants her on the Supreme Court, because she has “empathy” for minorities, which means hatred of whites.