From Shakespeare's Sister - who apparently doesn't have even an infinitesimal shred of the brains of the bard:
Lest you think that Steele was actually motivated by principle, he justified his admonishment by noting that the "liberal media" isn't on Republicans' side, so they'll "get painted as a party that's against the first Hispanic woman" nominated to the Supreme Court. See, it's not problematic that they are against her on the basis that she's a Latina woman, but it is problematic when the media actually frames it that way.
Yes, she's serious.
Sotomayor: "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."Like the "wise" decision to deny a dyslexic firefighter who worked his ass off to learn to read so he could study and pass his test his promotion, because no black men passed the test and he was white.
Prima facie - not fit to be a supreme court justice. I don't give a fuck what color she is or what her story is.
Rewind to Clarence Thomas and we hear the reporter Julianne dumbass saying right on the McLaughlin Group (NOT in blog comments, hello, but right on television) that "This man is on the court...I hope his wife feeds him a lot of butter and eggs and he dies, like so many black men do, of a heart attack." Could you picture if anyone said anything like that? Actually one person did - IN BLOG COMMENTS, about her diabetes. You can dig up any filth online, right? Though even his comment wasn't racist like the one about Thomas. But I'm talking about a reporter on a serious news show on television saying this right out loud. Could you IMAGINE?
People had no problem when it was Thomas, being racists on the left, because Thomas is a black man who refuses to be treated or behave as a token, or a pet - and that is how far leftists like Shakes view their people of color. Like pampered pets. It's disgusting. And it is racist as hell. See below for another black woman who would NOT be treated like a pet - for how the left treated her in print.
No, almost no one is against this woman because she's Spanish - who gives a shit about that? But we are against her because she's unfit for the office - she does not understand the division of powers and believes legislation should be made from the bench - which is not the purpose of judges, it's the purpose of legislators. Prima facie - not fit for the position.
Oddly, even her supporters have acknowledged that she is not the brightest bulb in the tanning bed - apparently when circuit judges pass around decisions for debate, she corrects their grammar and spelling instead of addressing the issues at hand, or, you know, THE LAW. But she's got a great story! That one I got from someone who LIKES her - but, you know, as Ace referenced the other day, I suppose dumb people need representation too, right? God help us.