 |
|
| Browse | Ask | Answer | Search | Join/Login |
|
|
||||
 Originally Posted by NeedKarma
I don't know why you keep trying to make us look foolish, it always backfires on you. Perhaps you enjoy wearing egg on your face. |
||||
|
||||
|
Originally Posted by ETWolverine
Nahhh, El. You're not just a guy. You're a JEW. I don't know why, but JEWS are endowed with the ability and empathy to understand the law better than any other group. That's just so. You know it, and I know it. So, if JEWS can do it, why not another group? You're a historian. You're going to tell me that JEWS know more about the law because of something that happened in our background. Kind of like we're good with money, because that's what we were relegated to... So, if JEWS can be good with money because of something that JEWS experienced, why can't Latinos be good or better at something than a member of a group who HASN'T experienced the same stuff they have?? excon |
||||
|
||||
|
What a trooper! "Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor broke her ankle Monday morning in an airport stumble, then boarded her flight to Washington as scheduled and made the roughly hourlong trip to Washington to meet with senators who will vote on her confirmation. She even stopped at the White House Monday after her arrival in Washington, before heading to a local medical office for an x-ray. She will keep her six appointments with senators despite the injury." (AP)
|
||||
|
||||
|
Everybody here has been reduced to playground tactics. You lose your leg to stand on when you keep going with this stuff. MY dad can beat up your dad" No my dad can beat up YOUR dad" Let's all take a minute and grow up again. Now, Excon, I am usually in agreement with you but your JEW post was over the line. At least for me, maybe not for you. Painting any group of people with one color is detrimental to any progress to be made. And shouldn't that be the goal? The common interest. It's fun to debate, but we have left the real debate long ago. Now we are just throwing punches. |
||||
|
||||
|
Hello again, c: I wasn't being intentionally offensive and I wasn't hurling stones either. I BELIEVE what I said in my post. What limited knowledge I have about my own history pails in comparison to Elliot. What I DO know, is that in ancient days, the handling of money was considered distasteful. It was left to the underclass to deal with - the JEWS. In those days money was called "filthy lucre" - having to do with the devil, no doubt. Nonetheless, the JEWS learned their craft well. The banking industry was started by and is to this day run by the Jews. The JEWS were relegated to the handling of diamonds too. Today, if you want a diamond in the US, it came through a JEW. Wouldn't a JEW be a better person to interpret banking laws or diamond industry decisions?? He WOULD, indeed. Therefore, a person with Sotomayor's background IS better suited to deal with certain decisions than old white men would be. It cannot be denied, although the right thinks it can, even when their own guy, Samuel Alito said virtually the same stuff, and the righty's didn't bat an eye. excon |
||||
|
||||
|
That is why she needs more scrutiny . Alito never once suggested that he could make "better decisions" than another group because of his experiences or his groups experiences. I think the groups experiences are irrelevant . I think it is the individual making the call that matters and I think their experience should not trump the law. Obama thinks so highly of this empathy thing that Alito is supposed to have. But as a Senator he did not vote to confirm him even though he admitted Alito was qualified . But Obama doesn't think very highly of the Constitution . He addressed this in comments about the Warren Court. He said the Warren Court as liberal as it was did not go far enough because it did not take economic factors like radical redistribution into consideration. |
||||
|
||||
|
Originally Posted by tomder55
Scarborough falsely claimed Obama said the Warren Court was "not, quote, 'radical enough' " | Media Matters for America
Joe Scarborough falsely claimed that, during a 2001 radio interview, Sen. Barack Obama said that "the Warren Court was not, quote, 'radical enough.' " In fact, Obama didn't say the Supreme Court under Chief Justice Earl Warren was not "radical enough." Scarborough also falsely claimed that during the interview Obama said "the Warren Court did not go far enough, that actually one of the great tragedies was there was no redistribution of wealth." In fact, the "traged[y]" Obama identified during the interview was that the civil rights movement relied too much on the courts in its efforts to bring about political and economic justice.
|
||||
Not your question?
Ask your question
View similar questions
| Question Tools | Search this Question |
Add your answer here.
View more questions Search
|
