Where do you stand on this issue? I think what irks me the most is people like Pat Robertson who claim "reverse discrimination." Seriously, he thinks white people are not fairly treated. Where is "REALLY? with Seth and Amy" on this issue when I need it? White people have been getting theirs since the beginning of time. Please, don't worry about me. I'll be OKAY without the minority scholarship.
Should race or gender have any influence in the nomination something like of a supreme court justice or employee of the month? Obviously anyone would be accused of playing the race card if they chose the one Hispanic out of a group of white people. But that accusation itself smacks of racism.
Whoever is best for the job should get the job. I think she will be a fine supreme court justice. Its just sad that race has to be involved.
ReplyDeleteIt goes to show how far our country still needs to go when such a high percentage of our country isn't white or male, yet all during the presidential campaigns and now, all we talk about are the race and gender issues. Is this 2010ish or 1950?!?!?
ReplyDeleteWhat I'm sick of is individuals that critize her for nothing in regards to race, are called racist.
ReplyDeleteie her dismissal of the New Haven firefighters.
It doesnt' matter what her race is- I take issue with the dismissal of that case, which will soon be brought before the supreme court.
"individuals that criticize her for nothing in regards to race"
ReplyDeleteI agree Salty, that is lame-o. I am interested (sincerely) though, who criticized her in a way that had nothing to do with race, and was called racist?
For starters, discrimination is discrimination, no matter who the target or the perpetrator is. Furthermore, discrimination is not by definition bad. We discriminate all the time, every time we make a decision. Do you want Coke or Pepsi? The only time discrimination matters is when it denies someone equal protection of the law. To prevent that "bad" discrimination, you have to make decisions based on merit, not on obvious or declared attributes (skin color, ethnic origin, sexual orientation, preference of actors to play Batman). Discussion of race in this instance, as in the presidential race (pun intended) is a red herring. It distracts from discussion of actual issues like whether or not a Supreme Court Justice nominee will adhere to the Constitution and will uphold the principle of rule of law. None of that has to do with race, but with the nominee's actual actions.
ReplyDeleteIn short, let's try to fulfill Martin Luther King, Jr.'s dream and let people be judge not upon the color of their skin but on the content of their character.
My problem with her has nothing to do with the color of her skin, but the product of her mouth. She is racist to the core, and has contempt for people because of the color of their skin and their gender. She has no place on the supreme court.
ReplyDeleteDurt - Good points. I do think someone's background should be taken into account however, i.e. where they came from/SES/life experiences. Although, perhaps all of that would come through in the "content of their character."
ReplyDeleteAnonymous - I have been out of the loop for a while (just graduated)--what are some things she has said that make her "racist to the core?" (Other than her 2001 comment about being a latina woman which I have heard.) Let me know, thanks.