Tweet
So we have Obama's nominee for the Supreme Court, Sotomayor. She has been known to be biased towards Hispanics in general and is now receiving backlash for recent and dated comments. She has been known to say that she believes a "wise Latina" would make a better decision than a "white man." In the liberal media the part with the "white man" is commonly removed for something less provoking, as to not make people mad or notice the fact that she had said it.
Now, I have read a few of her rulings and found that she doesn't always base her judgments off of what is right or legal, but more over a lean towards what she believes. Judges are supposed to follow the law as the law is written and give their aspect in the outside chance that the law doesn't have explicit rules dictating. In the bigger case, the fire fighters examination, I believe that she made a bad call. But under her judgment it should be that if someone of a group of people does bad on a standard test to all employees that the test results can be thrown out. SAT's for example, if say 1000 students take the SAT's and 200 of them are black and another 200 are Hispanic and the other 600 are white, and the scores come back that a fair majority of the minority groups came in with a sub standard score that the scores for all would be thrown out. That this means the test is biased.
I seem to remember in school we had to study for tests to get a good grade, that being white didn't make it any easier for me to pass a test. I was horrible at math and did lousy with D's or F's a lot of the time. With history and English I always scored well, A's and B's, because I would study them *I enjoyed them* and I was naturally better with English. So when a black student did better than me on a math test I didn't raise a stink because I knew I didnt study enough.
Tests are not designed according to race, so if the minorities of the fire fighter test failed to get adequate scores it means that they just didn't study hard enough. And that the whites did. Is that hard to believe? That if you study for a test you will pass? Doesn't seem like it.
So now shes a nominee for the Supreme Court, she is already shown she is biased towards Hispanics, and she has mad lousy calls before. But nope, shes Hispanic and a woman so we shouldn't scrutinize her at all. We should heed the president's wish to move fast and get her in. I don't think so. The reason for seperation of power is that the President cannot tell the others what to do, he wants them to move fast....that makes people make mistakes and just make an answer to finish things. I would prefer that someone who will be in the high court of the land to have major scrutiny and for the deciders to make a fair, just, and well thought out decision.
She is in debt, she is biased, she has said she believes she makes better choices than white men. How is she a good choice?
Now, I have read a few of her rulings and found that she doesn't always base her judgments off of what is right or legal, but more over a lean towards what she believes. Judges are supposed to follow the law as the law is written and give their aspect in the outside chance that the law doesn't have explicit rules dictating. In the bigger case, the fire fighters examination, I believe that she made a bad call. But under her judgment it should be that if someone of a group of people does bad on a standard test to all employees that the test results can be thrown out. SAT's for example, if say 1000 students take the SAT's and 200 of them are black and another 200 are Hispanic and the other 600 are white, and the scores come back that a fair majority of the minority groups came in with a sub standard score that the scores for all would be thrown out. That this means the test is biased.
I seem to remember in school we had to study for tests to get a good grade, that being white didn't make it any easier for me to pass a test. I was horrible at math and did lousy with D's or F's a lot of the time. With history and English I always scored well, A's and B's, because I would study them *I enjoyed them* and I was naturally better with English. So when a black student did better than me on a math test I didn't raise a stink because I knew I didnt study enough.
Tests are not designed according to race, so if the minorities of the fire fighter test failed to get adequate scores it means that they just didn't study hard enough. And that the whites did. Is that hard to believe? That if you study for a test you will pass? Doesn't seem like it.
So now shes a nominee for the Supreme Court, she is already shown she is biased towards Hispanics, and she has mad lousy calls before. But nope, shes Hispanic and a woman so we shouldn't scrutinize her at all. We should heed the president's wish to move fast and get her in. I don't think so. The reason for seperation of power is that the President cannot tell the others what to do, he wants them to move fast....that makes people make mistakes and just make an answer to finish things. I would prefer that someone who will be in the high court of the land to have major scrutiny and for the deciders to make a fair, just, and well thought out decision.
She is in debt, she is biased, she has said she believes she makes better choices than white men. How is she a good choice?
Comment