- 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: WSJ: Justice Sotomayor on Justice Thomas
Posted on 6/21/22 at 5:08 am to loogaroo
Posted on 6/21/22 at 5:08 am to loogaroo
quote:
. You really can’t begin to understand an adversary unless you step away from looking at their views as motivated in bad faith, but until you can look at their views and think about what the human reaction is that’s motivating those views.
I’m actually really shocked at this board for being so monolithic in its condemnation of this statement.
Forget what it says about Sotomayor for a second and consider that if everyone in the country would take this to heart, we’d be better off. Automatically assigning all of the opposing sides’ opinions to ill intentions and nefarious designs is a huge part of what’s wrong with political “discourse” in this country.
Not to mention, conservatives would have more success because the left’s favorite play to assign nefarious intentions to everything the right does since they can’t actually win ideological argument.
2
Posted on 6/21/22 at 5:26 am to CatholicLSUDude
It is not that statement is condemnable from a political point of view but from a judicial one. USSC justices above all else are supposed to be impartial and approach every case and controversy with open minds and without preconceived points of view.
Her statement, while I believe was as about sincere and "nice" as the Wise Latina can be, is not only an admission that she lacks these qualities but also lacks the awareness to realize she is openly admitting it.
Dishwasher: Aahh-OOOOOMMMMMM-AH! Aahh-OOOOOMMMMMM-AH!
Her statement, while I believe was as about sincere and "nice" as the Wise Latina can be, is not only an admission that she lacks these qualities but also lacks the awareness to realize she is openly admitting it.
Dishwasher: Aahh-OOOOOMMMMMM-AH! Aahh-OOOOOMMMMMM-AH!
This post was edited on 6/21/22 at 5:40 am
Posted on 6/21/22 at 5:35 am to Tigers0891
quote:
Biden tried his hardest to smear Thomas years ago. What a turd human Robinette is
That show trial of a confirmation proceeding is what solidified my hatred of Biden and Ted Kennedy for eternity.
Posted on 6/21/22 at 5:39 am to CatholicLSUDude
quote:
I’m actually really shocked at this board for being so monolithic in its condemnation of this statement. Forget what it says about Sotomayor for a second and consider that if everyone in the country would take this to heart, we’d be better off. Automatically assigning all of the opposing sides’ opinions to ill intentions and nefarious designs is a huge part of what’s wrong with political “discourse” in this country. Not to mention, conservatives would have more success because the left’s favorite play to assign nefarious intentions to everything the right does since they can’t actually win ideological argument.
This high-mindednesses would have been terrific advice until circa 2008. Then still conceivably admirable until 2016. Now it’s merely naïve.
Posted on 6/21/22 at 6:26 am to TerryDawg03
Thomas doesn't view himself as above the peasants. He's a genuine down-to-earth person.
It's a damn shame that he has had to endure decades of smears from the establishment, just because he follows the constitution.
It's a damn shame that he has had to endure decades of smears from the establishment, just because he follows the constitution.
Posted on 6/21/22 at 7:45 am to ManBearTiger
quote:
Clarence Thomas, Fred Douglass and Thomas Sowell- in no particular order- are the most intellectually beefed up black Americans to ever live
If only we could get young black men to look to these types as role models
Posted on 6/21/22 at 7:57 am to TerryDawg03
quote:
You really can’t begin to understand an adversary
This is the problem right here. Why the hell does a Justice consider another Justice an adversary. You are American citizens that have been chosen to interpret law. It doesn't matter who else is serving with you on that Court unless you are working an agenda.
Posted on 6/21/22 at 8:08 am to TerryDawg03
My man.
Saw an outstanding Documentary on Justice Thomas, on of all places, PBS.
Great man.
Saw an outstanding Documentary on Justice Thomas, on of all places, PBS.
Great man.
Posted on 6/21/22 at 8:30 am to TerryDawg03
Best justice on the bench with Alito running a close 2nd . About the only thing the Bushes got right .
Posted on 6/21/22 at 8:35 am to loogaroo
quote:
She almost had me thinking she was capable of empathy, but….nope!
I didn't read that to be negative at all. I understand her to say, after considering what kind of man he is she believes his motivations are good. IMHO
Posted on 6/21/22 at 8:41 am to lake chuck fan
quote:Their panties are in a collective bunch because she used the word “adversary“ to describe a fellow member of the Court, who’s core means of interpreting the constitution (textualism) is 100% at odds with her core means of interpreting the constitution (living document).
I didn't read that to be negative at all. I understand her to say, after considering what kind of man he is she believes his motivations are good.
Posted on 6/21/22 at 8:45 am to loogaroo
quote:
That shite right there is pure evil.
She almost had me thinking she was capable of empathy, but….nope!
Dude, wtf? That’s probably one of the smartest things she’s ever said.
As a society, this is where we have failed and continue to fail. She is saying that we need to stop our judgement against someone simply because they have a different opinion. Get to know them and what factors motivate them for having the different viewpoint. She’s also implying that just because someone thinks differently than you, that does not make them a terrible person.
Posted on 6/21/22 at 8:53 am to RougeDawg
quote:
This is the problem right here. Why the hell does a Justice consider another Justice an adversary. You are American citizens that have been chosen to interpret law. It doesn't matter who else is serving with you on that Court unless you are working an agenda.
It is my understanding that the term adversary is used commonly when discussing parties in a legal process. It doesn’t mean “enemy”. It merely means opposing party. And if you don’t think the liberal views are adversarial to conservatives views, then there really isn’t much more to talk about.
Posted on 6/21/22 at 9:04 am to Floating Change Up
I think the circumspection in this thread is more an, “It’s sort of sad that this sentiment is remarkable in any way and should be a given.” Also, given the atrociousness of the leftist members of the bench and the compromised Roberts, we are rightly suspicious.
I’m not apologizing for any of that.
Ftr,
I spent significant time with both RBG/Marty and Scalia, and they would tell you they were close friends. So yes people with diametrically opposed views could still coexist at least up until Feb 2016.
I now have my doubts given the all-out assault on freedom lovers of the past 5 years.
I’m not apologizing for any of that.
Ftr,
I spent significant time with both RBG/Marty and Scalia, and they would tell you they were close friends. So yes people with diametrically opposed views could still coexist at least up until Feb 2016.
I now have my doubts given the all-out assault on freedom lovers of the past 5 years.
This post was edited on 6/21/22 at 9:05 am
Posted on 6/21/22 at 9:06 am to Floating Change Up
quote:
It merely means opposing party
You’re sort of proving the opposite of the point you’re attempting to make here.
Posted on 6/21/22 at 11:31 am to ManBearTiger
TRM Howard outshines them all.
Page 3 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News