Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Thoughts precipitated by Sonia Sotomayor's nomination to the US Supreme Court: I admire Sonia Sotomayor for her accomplishments. For what she overcame (poverty, broken family etc.), how hard she worked and how high she rose. A true success story. However, what gets highlighted first are not her accomplishments, but her ethnicity and gender - the first Hispanic; the 3rd (sic.) woman. Shouldn't her strength, resolve and character trump her ethnicity? Would the same adulation be accorded to Mary-Jane Smith who may have to overcome the same difficulties to rise to this position one day? I noticed the same thing when Barack Obama was elected President. The man grew up without a father. The man overcame a tough childhood to rise to his position. A true political success story. But, nossir, it is all about "the first Black President." I understand that African-Americans were truly suppressed for a long time. But, if one really thinks about it, does Obama represent African-American people who descended from African slaves - ones who were tortured in the plantations? Or African-Americans who have seen their parents and grandparents suffer and give their lives for civil rights? Does he share their heritage or only the color of their skin? And now the nauseating discussion on 6 Catholics in the Supreme Court. Why is all this relevant? Why has it come to this? How is it any different from caste politics, which Westerners are quick to decry? It appears that America has distorted MLK's message: "judge me by the content of my character, not the color of my skin." Bottom line: Identity politics have taken over, and it is wrong.

Posted

Yep I find it deeply disturbing as well. She should be elected purely on her credentials. Anything extra is pure gravy. However it is quite sad to see gravy outscoring the actual mashed potatoe!

Posted
Yep I find it deeply disturbing as well. She should be elected purely on her credentials. Anything extra is pure gravy. However it is quite sad to see gravy outscoring the actual mashed potatoe!
That's Dan Quaylisms at it's best !:winky:
Posted
That's Dan Quaylisms at it's best !:winky:
:hysterical::hysterical: man o' man did a spelling mistake settle a US President election? Potato it is, my bad :--D
Posted

Agreed that Sonia Sotomayor is entitled to be judged on the merits against a very strong pool of prospective nominees free from both political and ideological baggage. Having said , her being first hispanic women to be nominated in 200 years is surely gonna weigh in on the nomination process. So that's quite natural. Having said that , I would rather have her judicial record be reviewed and judged whether it passes judicial mainstream muster. Does she determine whether binding precedent controls the outcome of any case, is she meticulous in seeking to follow precedent, doe she legislate from the bench and various other factors . I could care less about her personal opinions on social issues as long as she separates them when interpreting and rendering the law. One thing that does concern me though, is the speech she gave at Duke University wherein she was confused with the role judiciary , She was of the opinion that Judges make law in addition to interpreting them ! That's far from true and the conservatives are gonna go ballistic about it. After all they claim to be opposed to judicial activism...

Posted

Yes, Identity politics is all too rampant, but its not all evil though. Many times, its highlighted to put forward a society’s plural credentials. So, when a liberal news network proclaims Barack Obama to be America’s first African-American President, they do it out of pride, not out of derision. On the other hand, when a right-wing news network like Fox highlights the same fact, it is done to create a sense of fear among the majority.

×
×
  • Create New...