Quote:
Originally Posted by deepimpact2
I don't recall her actually saying that. It seems to me as if you are taking her words out of context and twisting them.
|
She said it, but in context it doesn't seem like it's exactly what she meant. MC and others have quoted it earlier in the thread.
Quote:
Originally Posted by UGAalum94
Well, I'm not sure the situations are comparable: Lott said, "I want to say this about my state: When Strom Thurmond ran for president, we voted for him. We're proud of it. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn't have had all these problems over all these years, either,"
He was taking about a race when Thurmond ran as a segregationist; I'd say that Lott's comments were considerably less acceptable. He basically was saying that the country would have been better off had we not integrated.
I think Sotomayor's comment is problematic because she seemed to assert the idea that an individual would come to a better decision based on that individual's ethnicity and culture. That's troubling to me, no matter what racial or cultural identity that person has.
I'm less troubled, but not completely convinced, by an argument that asserts a nine justice court made up of people of different races, ethnicities, and cultures, assuming that they are all well-qualified jurists as well, will make better decisions, and I suspect that's really the broader argument.
It's not worth getting or pretending to be outraged over.
|
Look at the statement that MC posted - again, in the context of the rest of her speech, it doesn't seem like she was saying that at all. She immediately talks about how a bunch of old white guys wrote the opinion in
Brown.
I will agree, though, that it's really not worth getting or pretending to be outraged over.
Threaded Mode
