- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Supreme Court & the affirmitive action vote
Posted on 4/22/14 at 2:08 pm to Antonio Moss
Posted on 4/22/14 at 2:08 pm to Antonio Moss
quote:
Sotomayor seems to be simply arguing that the "fix" isn't ready to be lifted.
For many, that time would never come.
0
Posted on 4/22/14 at 2:10 pm to Cmlsu5618
If they struck down affirmative action then why is Obama still in office?
Posted on 4/22/14 at 2:54 pm to ShortyRob
quote:
I mean crap woman. At least PRETEND you give a crap about law.
Nope, she's all about the proportions:
quote:
As of September 1, 2001, the federal judiciary consisting of Supreme, Circuit and District Court Judges was about 22% women. In 1992, nearly ten years ago, when I was first appointed a District Court Judge, the percentage of women in the total federal judiciary was only 13%. Now, the growth of Latino representation is somewhat less favorable. As of today we have, as I noted earlier, no Supreme Court justices, and we have only 10 out of 147 active Circuit Court judges and 30 out of 587 active district court judges. Those numbers are grossly below our proportion of the population. As recently as 1965, however, the federal bench had only three women serving and only one Latino judge. So changes are happening, although in some areas, very slowly. These figures and appointments are heartwarming. Nevertheless, much still remains to happen.
not about impartiality:
quote:And lest we forget:
I further accept that our experiences as women and people of color affect our decisions. The aspiration to impartiality is just that--it's an aspiration because it denies the fact that we are by our experiences making different choices than others.
quote:
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.
LINK
Boy do elections have consequences.
Posted on 4/22/14 at 2:58 pm to Maxx99
quote:Well, that wasn't a racist statement at all.
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.
Posted on 4/22/14 at 5:07 pm to Maxx99
quote:That's my favorite because of just how exceedingly illogical it is. What makes the "wise latina's" experiences more "rich" than a white dude's? She has one narrow set of experiences, he has another. And, if either has a broader set of experiences it is a direct result of choices they made in life, not their skin color.
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.
Posted on 4/22/14 at 5:31 pm to ShortyRob
doesn't change anything, imo ... universities use any admissions criteria they want ... they'll just word it differently ...
Posted on 4/22/14 at 5:34 pm to tiderider
quote:Perhaps but they'll need to walk a much finer line.
doesn't change anything, imo ... universities use any admissions criteria they want ... they'll just word it differently ...
If some enterprising white student with stellar records doesn't get in and engages in a lawsuit where discovery finds that MANY such students didn't get in while many minority students with less impressive records did, that is a suit that is gonna be tough to turn back.
Posted on 4/22/14 at 5:49 pm to goldenbadger08
quote:
It just makes my head hurt that she is 1/9 of the reviewers of the supreme law of the land.
If we're lucky, President Paul will fill at least 3 SCOTUS vacancies with Scalia, Thomas, and Ginsburg possibly retiring with 3 very young judges, preferably in their very early 40's. That happens, we won't have to worry about Sotamayor having any major impact on rulings for a long lifetime, she'll be an irrelevant afterthought.
Posted on 4/22/14 at 6:03 pm to ShortyRob
quote:
As a result of the ruling, she said, minority enrollment will decline at Michigan's public universities, just as it has in California and elsewhere. "The numbers do not lie," she said.
God she's horrible. The poor numbers for minorities should serve as a wake up call for us to get our act together. We shouldn't be preferred for admission only based on race.
Posted on 4/22/14 at 6:10 pm to LordSaintly
quote:
We shouldn't be preferred for admission only based on race.
AGREE!!!
Preference should only be based on penis length!
Posted on 4/22/14 at 6:10 pm to LordSaintly
quote:
God she's horrible. The poor numbers for minorities should serve as a wake up call for us to get our act together. We shouldn't be preferred for admission only based on race.
In fact, it is arguable that AA can just as easily be used as a tool to allow for continued substandard education of minorities.
If I was a race baiter, I could say the white man is using affirmative action to keep from having to actually enact policies that don't screw the black man.
Now, do I actually think that's the case? Nope. But, it would seem to me that a bleeding heart liberal could just as well view AA that way.
Regardless, this is the net effect even if not the intent. AA allows enough black HS students to have hope to help keep the bitching down about how shitty blacks are doing in HS.
Posted on 4/22/14 at 6:27 pm to BlackHelicopterPilot
quote:
BlackHelicopterPilot
Posted on 4/22/14 at 6:31 pm to ShortyRob
(no message)
This post was edited on 3/27/24 at 1:21 am
Posted on 4/22/14 at 6:46 pm to BlackHelicopterPilot
quote:
Preference should only be based on penis length!
That sounds reasonable!
Posted on 4/22/14 at 6:49 pm to Sentrius
quote:
If we're lucky
If we are unlucky, President Clinton (the penis-less one) will screw us over with 3 more Sotamayors.
Posted on 4/22/14 at 7:05 pm to BlackHelicopterPilot
quote:Having a big dick is not the bed of roses a lot of guys seem to think it is. One gets tired of having girls tell you, "Hey, you're not sticking that thing in ME!"
Preference should only be based on penis length!
I'd glad give up 3 or 4 inches just to be normal.
Posted on 4/22/14 at 7:18 pm to L.A.
quote:
Having a big dick is not the bed of roses a lot of guys seem to think it is. One gets tired of having girls tell you, "Hey, you're not sticking that thing in ME!"
I will vouch for this.
r/bigdickproblems has been my friend for... well.... the name is self explanatory.
quote:
I'd glad give up 3 or 4 inches just to be normal.
No.
Just no.
Posted on 4/22/14 at 7:19 pm to theenemy
quote:
If we are unlucky, President Clinton (the penis-less one) will screw us over with 3 more Sotamayors.
All the more reason we need to make sure GOP power brokers don't screw us over eh...
Posted on 4/22/14 at 7:50 pm to theenemy
quote:
If we are unlucky, President Clinton (the penis-less one) will screw us over with 3 more Sotamayors.
You mean Chelsea?
Page 3 of 3
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News