Different genders, different conclusions

Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama says Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor “has criticized the idea that a woman and a man would reach the same result. She expects them to reach different results” (7/13, A-1, “Impact of hearings goes beyond bench.”)

According to his biography, Sen. Sessions is 62 years old. If the honorable senator has not figured out by now that men and women often reach different conclusions after looking at the same facts, I seriously question if he has the intelligence to be a senator.

Ross Warnell
Smithville

Comments

[Roger Lambert]

To Hansen, your assessment is rather stark, but assuming that human nature itself guarentees an adversarial system to politics, it should follow that both sides, all sides, would want and demand that our judges apply laws in a race neutral way. After all, no party is in power for very long, so it should be common sense to want equal treatment at all times, both when in and out of power.

Why do liberals not understand this simple point? That fairness is also in their best interest?

PS. Please fill us in on Olbermann and Maddow in a few hours.

[T. Hanson]

This country hates the other side so much it does not matter who Obama had put up. Hell he could have put up Dick Cheney and the republicans would start crying fowl over the CIA incident.

We are a country divided, and we will always be this way. The Reds have Fox News to batter the flames, and the Blues have MSNBC to give us the top 5 worse people this week.

This sucks.

[Jazz-Man]

I can be a bit pushy! Will we ever get away from double standards? Its terrible and one of those lingering factors of racism and idiotism.

[Roger Lambert]

Jazz, I think we understand her point, and yours, perfectly. We just disagree with a system of law that gives one result to one race and a different result to a different race.

Again, again, again, it is in everyone's long-term interest to agree on this point.

[Jazz-Man]

A rhetorical flourish that fell flat, she also said that "It was bad because it left an impression that I believed that life experiences commanded a result in a case, but that's clearly not what I do as a judge,"

Once again people took out of proportion and with the non stop undercutting of her character its almost pointless for her to try and get the republicans to understand her point. She “Sotomayor made the comments that she believed in” not backing away from but helping people understand her point. It all boils down to her record and how she has ruled and there’s nothing to call her out on that cant be compared to others.

[Roger Lambert]

Joe, I'm quite sure Kate was being sarcastic.

It is very, very nice to see a democrat embrace the ideal of a color-blind law. In a multi-racial society, any other option is a disaster waiting to happen. For every race and for every person. It's in NOBODY'S interest to view the world like Sotomayer or Obama.

[Moral City USA]

"Not different - better. We reach better conclusions than you do. Women in general. Latinas in particular. "

Really Kate? Like her saying all that to begin with? How "good" or smart does that look now? If you are serious, then you are as big a bigot as her. Wasn't too smart on your part.

It might cost her the nomination, but probably not because the white male democratic Senators will put politics over principal and vote "yes" anyway.

And this is no different than Republicans Senators would do if if were thier candidate.

[Moral City USA]

I find it odd that former Supreme Court justice Sandra Day O'Conner said "given the same set of facts, a wise old man and a wise old woman will come to the same conclusion"

Sotomayor specifically disagreed saying that a Latino woman would come to a better conclusion.

If she had made this comment once, I would be willing to dismiss it, but she said it many times. That makes it inexcusable.

She says now that the comment "fell flat". Then why did she keep repeating it?

I no longer support her knowing these facts.

[Jim]

"Sotomayor’s credentials are less important than her ethnicity."

To Republicans, yes. They've ignored her credentials and qualifications because she's proven to be a mainstream judge that is hard to credibly attack as a radical. The current lines of attack have fallen apart.

Miguel Estrada was more of a case of ethnicity trumping credentials Than Sotomayor. He didn't have any credentials to speak of, and refused to answer any questions about his judicial philosophy or experience, yet the GOP says he should have been a federal judge and openly talked about him going to the Supreme Court. Their complaints that he wasn't confirmed constantly mention his ethnicity and not his credentials.

[Jazz-Man]

WOW renfro maybe, maybe not let’s hope not but I wouldn’t put anything past a politician that this is about gaining more Hispanic vote!

Sotomayor wasn’t a lone Judge in this Ricci case, it was agreed upon by all none judge took the lead of the case but yet she is singled out?

All judges answer was written and documented by saying that they, repeat THEY were sympathetic to the plaintiffs' expression of frustration.

This case does not prove that she is a "liberal activist" judge, the case was based of another case dated back 30 something yeas ago. Justice Burger wrote: Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act "proscribes not only overt discrimination but also practices that are fair in form but discriminatory in operation" and requires a job-related or business necessity reason to justify such disparate effect (and that there are no better alternatives).

[renfro]

Sotomayor’s credentials are less important than her ethnicity. With a next choice this Administration could further advance and confirm our democratic principles to the world with the possible nomination of an Asian American. New vacancies would produce even more diversity regardless of the nominees past performance or intellect.
Overall competency and decision making will suffer in the process but for the new “Obama” liberals such sacrifices are acceptable! --The court will then be “politically correct” when appearing in those black robed group pictures.

[whispering_to_kc]

The right's new "Stop Sonia Sotomayor" commercial ...

"Sonia Sotomayor is palling around with terrorists!!"

"Sotomayor = Bill Ayers!!"

http://web.committeeforjustice.org/

:)

"Nah, she's not racist ... Ole' Ole'"

No, she's not but you might be though. Ole', ole'.

[Jazz-Man]

I personally would rather have someone rule over a case that the particular Judge has a better understanding of my upbringing/life style. I work within the Juvenile system as well as with adult inmates and within my foundation I see more often than not opportunity given to those in the inner-city to not just punish them for their wrong doings but aid them in healing their iniquities. I’ve seen white Judges that have allowed me or someone help them have a better understanding of situations; and it has made a difference in how they rule but remember it doesn’t take away from the punishment but adds to the rehabilitation. I’m not saying if I was in your shoes I wouldn’t feel the same way about what she said but maybe look for better understanding; its one of those I see this guy through the glass talking with his hands flaming all over the place and thinking he’s mad but all he’s doing is using sign language.

[Kansasdog]

"The Supremes overruled her biased and unexplained decision." - Kee

... interesting how a decision can be both unexplained and biased. Wouldn't one need to explain it in order to determine if it is biased?

"Ms. Sotomayor's history suggests that she revels in her personal biases and happily uses them on the bench." - Gary

... and yet the ABA unanimously rates her 'well qualified', the same rating given to Alito and Roberts.

[Jazz-Man]

????

[Roger Lambert]

"It explains itself, a conclusion of a verdict can be better concluded with a inside look of lifestyle and experiences. Does that take away from a non-bias judgment? No it adds more insight of what’s going on in more depth."

I would seriously question whether anyone, minorities especially, should want to so brazenly disregard a color-blind or non-biased judiciary. This is surely the stupidest and most short-sighted part of Obama's liberalism.

Hope and change, yes, but not the change anyone should really want.

[Jazz-Man]

Then Newt said on a twitter post;

In a Twitter post Wednesday afternoon, Gingrich wrote, "Imagine a judicial nominee said 'my experience as a white man makes me better than a Latina woman”

Newt that is way off from what she said and meant. Typical! A white mail can better in most cases make reach a more thought out decision than LATIN OR BLACK MAN THAT DIDN’T GROW UP IN A PARTICULAR ENVIROMENT. Then when Ann Coulter echoes Him then you know it was a fluke argument; talk about racist.

[Jazz-Man]

"I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life," Sotomayor said.

Should she have said:

"I would hope that a dumb Latina woman with the poorness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a male who hasn't lived that life," Sotomayor said.

It explains itself, a conclusion of a verdict can be better concluded with a inside look of lifestyle and experiences. Does that take away from a non-bias judgment? No it adds more insight of what’s going on in more depth. While making a non-bias judgment, judges also make rulings that can heal, teach, and create a better outcome for someone life.

[Jim]

*yawn*

Sad that these few words twisted out of context is all you guys can muster against her.

I was hoping Sotomayor would ask Sessions if she should "watch how she talks to white folks," but it's probably best she didn't. He probably would've said yes.

It was hilarious to see poor Jeff's Rosenbaum moment blow up in his face on live TV though.

[Gary]

The question is not whether Supreme Court justices have their own individual predilictions (they all do), but whether they attempt to put those aside when they decide cases. Ms. Sotomayor's history suggests that she revels in her personal biases and happily uses them on the bench.

[Kee]

Come on Jazzy. I know that 17 white firefighters passed the promotion test alond with one Hispanic, and the District denied them the promotion they had earned because no blacks had passed the test. Huh?

The white firefighters sued and lost because of Sotomayor's "summary judgement" (where the court does not even have to explain the basis for the ruling). The Supremes overruled her biased and unexplained decision.

I admit I am "on the outside looking in", but the facts seem to pretty dammed clear to any thinking person.

She has a racist ax to grind and soon she may have the opportunity to do so.

[Jazz-Man]

I challenge anyone who thinks that any of the Supreme Justices never had any type of prejudice, not in ruling but prejudice? She is not a racist she is a realist and has said in the hearings that she understands the law and from her record it seems that she does. You have to take into account all aspects of a case/Fire fighter’s case. When you are on the outside looking in you don’t know all the facts.

[Kee]

Nah, she's not racist, just screw those white fire fighters! Screw 'em! Ole' Ole'

(Makes about as much sense as the dipstick Horsey's post about Sessions.....foil hat that he/she is...)

[T. Hanson]

"According to his biography, Sen. Sessions is 62 years old. If the honorable senator has not figured out by now that men and women often reach different conclusions after looking at the same facts, I seriously question if he has the intelligence to be a senator."

Or married.

[whispering_to_kc]

Sessions is also convinced Sotomayor is a racist.

Senator Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III of Alabama.

As in Jefferson Davis, President of the Confederate States of America and General P.G.T. Beauregard, Confederate States Army and liberator of Fort Sumter.

******

In 1986, Sessions was only the second judicial nominee in 48 years whose nomination was killed by the Senate Judiciary Committee — which refused even to let the nomination come to the Senate floor for a vote.

Sessions was serving as chief prosecutor for the Southern District of Alabama and making a name for himself through his prosecution of drug dealers when President Reagan nominated him to be a federal judge.

But according to sworn statements by Justice Department lawyers, Sessions called the NAACP and the American Civil Liberties Union “communist inspired” and said they tried to “force civil rights down the throats of people.”

Sessions reportedly said of the Ku Klux Klan that he “used to think they’re OK” until he learned that some Klan members were “pot smokers.”

******

http://www.cqpress.com/ls/pia/pdfs/107/aljr-2000.pdf

The South shall RISE again!! Long live the CSA!! Yeehaw!!