Quote:
Originally Posted by FRPLG
I think this infers the opinions of those in the majority are wrong simply because they are in the majority. I'll stand corrected if that's not what was meant.
|
My post reflect my sentiment as to slippery slop fallacy used by CRedskinsRule to justify why we shouldn't consider race/sex/background as a factor. And the fact that the arguments tends to be the argument of choice by the majority (i.e. gay marriage could lead to bestiality arguments).
Quote:
Originally Posted by FRPLG
She did more than just express her unique background. She held it like a flag of honor and basically said it provided her higher qualifications than people of differing backgrounds.
All-in-all none of this matters but I am just amused at how this discussion has gone. She's going to be appointed, she'll be fine as a judge, it doesn't shift the balance of the court. It's why he went this direction with this pick...because those predisposed to fight it will be less inclined to really go hard to the mat since it doesn't matter all that much in the political scheme. Now when one of the 5 conservative leaning judges kicks it he'll go more moderate knowing that the Pubs will fight to the death over it.
Is she liberal? Yeah. What did everyone expect him to do? This is the guy we elected. He gets his shot now.
|
Is that what this tells you?
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."
|
p.s. The future looks bright...everyone will be singing a different tune in 2050.