Than a Latino woman, would he stand a chance of getting confirmed and appointed to the Supreme Court?
No, because coming from a white man it would have been considered a racist comment and there probably would have been a riot.
Probably not. But the reason that ‘wise latina woman’ can say such things and get away with it is because it is the presumption of most whites that there are no wise latina women. So the wise person who is not a white man but is highly successful in a field overwhelmingly stacked with white men, is most probably is a better decision maker than their more typical colleagues who have the presumption of wisdom but no alternative experiences informing their wisdom. So when a white man says he would make a better decision than a latino it is just hubris of the majority – not an insight with any truth. People can say controversial things when there is insight and truth in them, but can’t really get away with it when it is hubris.
And that distinction has nothing whatsoever to do with ethnicity or race.
It depends. If that statement was set up by a question asking whether a white male or Latino woman would reach a better decision in a court case involving whites, he would probably still stand a decent chance of getting confirmed.
I totally agree but remember there is no such thing as reverse racism or reverse discrimination in our country. Because we are now a nation of sheep who do not want to raise a fuss and then be judged as being a ":racist": for pointing out something like that. Instead, we keep our heads down and our mouths shut for the most part. However, I’m not sure of why you used the word ":negr0": instead of the more obvious Latina in reverse fashion of how Sotomayor made her statement. How about a white preacher pounding on his pulpit every week chastising African Americans for ruining the good old USA? How long before the NAACP would ":hang": that preacher? Yet Rev. Wright was allowed to preach hate against whites for many years going unnoticed and even when the story broke, the mainstream media wanted nothing to do with the situation.
YES, because if a white male had said it they would have used the made sure to use the quote in context…. unlike you who it taking just a tib-bit of what she said and leaving out the rest of it. You are focusing on one part of the answer and not the rest.
Besides the Male white supreme court justest have actually said a lot worse.
See here’s where conservatives FAIL. The reason the statement would be ":controversial": coming from a ":white male":……. is because HISTORICALLY…. WHITE MEN HAVE ALWAYS SAID THIS!!!!
Throughout HISTORY…. there MILLIONS of examples of something called DISCRIMINATION… where WHITE MALES felt they were BETTER….
Are you following me? So much so, that they actually passed LAWS giving them MORE RIGHTS than everybody else!!!
So, NOW. when the VERY FIRST Latin and 3rd woman to possibly join the ranks of the Supreme Court makes that statement….. it is to SAY that EVERYBODY…. EVEN somebody who is NOT a WHITE MALE… can possibly make these SAME DECISIONS and maybe be even BETTER at it….. if ONLY given the chance!!!!!!
No, he would have been accused of being racist and crucified. I don’t understand how a minority can get away with a racist statement like she did but a white man or woman cannot do the same thing. Double standard?
Uhm, that has pretty much been implied by their continuous appointments to the Supreme Court over the past 230+ years. Dee dee dee….
No, the Libs can say whatever they want and their leaders make all sorts of excuses.
If he had said it, it would be a fact.
50% of blacks and hispanics drop out of school according to Harvard and LA Times