Comments on: Taking Off The Blindfold http://www.ohiomm.com/blogs/da_kings_men/2009/05/27/taking-off-the-blindfold/ Tue, 16 Mar 2010 19:16:38 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: The Reverend http://www.ohiomm.com/blogs/da_kings_men/2009/05/27/taking-off-the-blindfold/comment-page-1/#comment-7194 The Reverend Sun, 31 May 2009 15:23:50 +0000 http://www.ohiomm.com/blogs/da_kings_men/?p=4235#comment-7194 Are 7 white men on the Supreme Court a result of identity politics? Just wondering. larry, most likely it was because she was just lazy.....I mean aren't all Latinos lazy.....oh that's right.....my mistake.....that's the blacks. Are 7 white men on the Supreme Court a result of identity politics?

Just wondering.

larry, most likely it was because she was just lazy…..I mean aren't all Latinos lazy…..oh that's right…..my mistake…..that's the blacks.

]]> By: larry d. http://www.ohiomm.com/blogs/da_kings_men/2009/05/27/taking-off-the-blindfold/comment-page-1/#comment-7179 larry d. Fri, 29 May 2009 12:06:38 +0000 http://www.ohiomm.com/blogs/da_kings_men/?p=4235#comment-7179 She pulled the "what he said" on the decision. Maybe she didn't understand it was an important case, or maybe she was just too busy to give it much thought that day. She pulled the "what he said" on the decision. Maybe she didn't understand it was an important case, or maybe she was just too busy to give it much thought that day.

]]> By: Da King http://www.ohiomm.com/blogs/da_kings_men/2009/05/27/taking-off-the-blindfold/comment-page-1/#comment-7176 Da King Fri, 29 May 2009 10:41:48 +0000 http://www.ohiomm.com/blogs/da_kings_men/?p=4235#comment-7176 Rev, Title VII says employers may not discriminate by race. It doesn't say employers may discriminate against white people. If the Ricci case consisted of a group of black firefighters who were denied promotions in the exact same scenario, do you think Sotomayor would have ruled differently ? Yes, I do too. Identity politics. But like Big Mac, I don't know for sure what Sotomayor's reasoning was either, because she didn't really provide any reasoning in the Ricci case, which is the problem. She made it appear she didn't even consider the merits of the case. Again, that leads me to - identity politics. Rev,
Title VII says employers may not discriminate by race.

It doesn't say employers may discriminate against white people.

If the Ricci case consisted of a group of black firefighters who were denied promotions in the exact same scenario, do you think Sotomayor would have ruled differently ? Yes, I do too. Identity politics.

But like Big Mac, I don't know for sure what Sotomayor's reasoning was either, because she didn't really provide any reasoning in the Ricci case, which is the problem. She made it appear she didn't even consider the merits of the case. Again, that leads me to – identity politics.

]]> By: Big Mac http://www.ohiomm.com/blogs/da_kings_men/2009/05/27/taking-off-the-blindfold/comment-page-1/#comment-7171 Big Mac Thu, 28 May 2009 20:18:33 +0000 http://www.ohiomm.com/blogs/da_kings_men/?p=4235#comment-7171 Since I did not write either opinion I can not state for sure Sotomajor's reason for not giving a more lengthy review. But I think that the opinion written by the District court was quite specific in its reasoning for for dismissing the case. Weather you think that this opinion followed the law is distinctly biased by political point of view. I personally feel that the opinion was correct based on other district and Cuircuits opinions. Since I did not write either opinion I can not state for sure Sotomajor's reason for not giving a more lengthy review. But I think that the opinion written by the District court was quite specific in its reasoning for for dismissing the case. Weather you think that this opinion followed the law is distinctly biased by political point of view. I personally feel that the opinion was correct based on other district and Cuircuits opinions.

]]> By: The Reverend http://www.ohiomm.com/blogs/da_kings_men/2009/05/27/taking-off-the-blindfold/comment-page-1/#comment-7169 The Reverend Thu, 28 May 2009 13:25:37 +0000 http://www.ohiomm.com/blogs/da_kings_men/?p=4235#comment-7169 "due to the ramifications it would have for Title VII, but that only proves that Sotomayor wasn't looking at the merits of the Ricci case. She was looking at identity politics instead." What the hell? She was looking at the law as written in Title VII...but she was looking at identity politics. Doesn't that seem a bit....schitzoid? "due to the ramifications it would have for Title VII, but that only proves that Sotomayor wasn't looking at the merits of the Ricci case. She was looking at identity politics instead."

What the hell? She was looking at the law as written in Title VII…but she was looking at identity politics.

Doesn't that seem a bit….schitzoid?

]]> By: Tbomb http://www.ohiomm.com/blogs/da_kings_men/2009/05/27/taking-off-the-blindfold/comment-page-1/#comment-7168 Tbomb Thu, 28 May 2009 11:54:56 +0000 http://www.ohiomm.com/blogs/da_kings_men/?p=4235#comment-7168 Hilzoy at washingtonmonthly.com has a pretty good take on this case. Hilzoy at washingtonmonthly.com has a pretty good take on this case.

]]> By: Da King http://www.ohiomm.com/blogs/da_kings_men/2009/05/27/taking-off-the-blindfold/comment-page-1/#comment-7166 Da King Thu, 28 May 2009 01:24:34 +0000 http://www.ohiomm.com/blogs/da_kings_men/?p=4235#comment-7166 Your second link didn't work. When you say I don't have all the facts correct, it would be helpful if you told me which facts were incorrect. Thanks for the link, but I read the Slate piece before I wrote my post. Slate didn't contradict anything I wrote. If anything, they only reinforced it. I agree that Sotomayor dismissed the Ricci case out of hand due to the ramifications it would have for Title VII, but that only proves that Sotomayor wasn't looking at the merits of the Ricci case. She was looking at identity politics instead. That's why empathy/preference for certain groups comes with a loss of civil rights for other groups or individuals, such as the New Haven firefighters. That isn't justice. New Haven changed the rules of the game after the fact, because they didn't like the outcome. That would not have happened if blacks had scored higher than the 19 New Haven firefighters, and that is why New Haven discriminated against those men. Sotomayor didn't even address the issues involved in her opinion. Your second link didn't work.

When you say I don't have all the facts correct, it would be helpful if you told me which facts were incorrect.

Thanks for the link, but I read the Slate piece before I wrote my post. Slate didn't contradict anything I wrote. If anything, they only reinforced it. I agree that Sotomayor dismissed the Ricci case out of hand due to the ramifications it would have for Title VII, but that only proves that Sotomayor wasn't looking at the merits of the Ricci case. She was looking at identity politics instead. That's why empathy/preference for certain groups comes with a loss of civil rights for other groups or individuals, such as the New Haven firefighters. That isn't justice. New Haven changed the rules of the game after the fact, because they didn't like the outcome. That would not have happened if blacks had scored higher than the 19 New Haven firefighters, and that is why New Haven discriminated against those men. Sotomayor didn't even address the issues involved in her opinion.

]]> By: The Reverend http://www.ohiomm.com/blogs/da_kings_men/2009/05/27/taking-off-the-blindfold/comment-page-1/#comment-7164 The Reverend Wed, 27 May 2009 21:08:00 +0000 http://www.ohiomm.com/blogs/da_kings_men/?p=4235#comment-7164 This too, must read....http://www.prospect.org/csnc/blogs/tapped_archive?month=05&year=2009&base_name=stuart_taylor_and_pat_buchanan#115277 This too, must read….http://www.prospect.org/csnc/blogs/tapped_archive?month=05&year=2009&base_name=stuart_taylor_and_pat_buchanan#115277

]]> By: The Reverend http://www.ohiomm.com/blogs/da_kings_men/2009/05/27/taking-off-the-blindfold/comment-page-1/#comment-7163 The Reverend Wed, 27 May 2009 21:05:39 +0000 http://www.ohiomm.com/blogs/da_kings_men/?p=4235#comment-7163 Sotomajor is a mainstream moderate. You do not have all the facts correct, but then it's a CNS source. "The four liberal-moderate justices currently on the court are likely to agree with her, in the name of preserving Title VII as a tool for fair hiring. There's even an outside chance that Justice Anthony Kennedy will follow along. The problem for Sotomayor, instead, is why she didn't grapple with the difficult constitutional issues, the ones Cabranes pointed to. Did she really have nothing to add to the district court opinion? In a case of this magnitude and intricacy, why would that be?" Slate.com http://www.slate.com/id/2219037/?from=rss Sotomajor is a mainstream moderate. You do not have all the facts correct, but then it's a CNS source.

"The four liberal-moderate justices currently on the court are likely to agree with her, in the name of preserving Title VII as a tool for fair hiring. There's even an outside chance that Justice Anthony Kennedy will follow along. The problem for Sotomayor, instead, is why she didn't grapple with the difficult constitutional issues, the ones Cabranes pointed to. Did she really have nothing to add to the district court opinion? In a case of this magnitude and intricacy, why would that be?"

Slate.com http://www.slate.com/id/2219037/?from=rss

]]>