What is Digg?Sponsored by newegg
Tips to be first in line without camping out in the cold! view!
newegg.com - The Pre-Black Friday Sale. No Lines, No Crowds; Click and Save in the comfort of your own home.
48 Comments
- irfanmp, on 07/13/2009, -1/+32For Canadian viewers, if you are using firefox install:
http://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/967
then:
1) tools->modify headers
2) From the drop down on the left select add
3) Then enter: "X-Forwarded-For" in the first input box
4) Enter: "12.13.14.15" in the second input box
5) Leave the last input box empty, and save the filter, and enable it
http://imgur.com/Feb4.png - vizerei, on 07/14/2009, -3/+23I dugg you.
BUT, if Canadians start watching too much video on the internet and forget their job of being America's hat, then I will bury everything you and your children ever post. - treehugger87, on 07/14/2009, -4/+15Just because you say it and everyone you know agrees doesn't make it true.
- Hedison, on 07/13/2009, -1/+12Great stuff Pfukked and ...
- enantiodromia, on 07/14/2009, -2/+11It's funny how one one hand, she would have been an "activist judge" had she not upheld the statutes set by the Supreme Court when she sat in the Appeals court, and on the other, when she maintained rulings previously set by Scalia, she was injecting her Liberal ideologies into the court system.
People act like an Appeals judge is somehow changing policy when in fact all they are doing is reminding everyone what the last judgment from the SCOTUS said on the topic being discusses. - treehugger87, on 07/14/2009, -3/+11Bill O'Reilly is not racists because he refuses to support Sotomayor, he's a racist for the racist things that he says.
I wouldn't expect a right wing propagandist like O'Reilly to support an Obama nominee for the Supreme Court. - treehugger87, on 07/14/2009, -6/+14Racist and sexist because she says things like this?
"But I think that children learn a lot from their parents and they learn from what the parents say. But I think they learn a lot more from what the parents do and from what they take from the stories of their parents lives.
And that's why I went into that in my opening statement. Because when a case comes before me involving, let's say, someone who is an immigrant -- and we get an awful lot of immigration cases and naturalization cases -- I can't help but think of my own ancestors, because it wasn't that long ago when they were in that position.
And so it's my job to apply the law. It's not my job to change the law or to bend the law to achieve any result.
But when I look at those cases, I have to say to myself, and I do say to myself, "You know, this could be your grandfather, this could be your grandmother. They were not citizens at one time, and they were people who came to this country."
When I have cases involving children, I can't help but think of my own children and think about my children being treated in the way that children may be treated in the case that's before me.
And that goes down the line. When I get a case about discrimination, I have to think about people in my own family who suffered discrimination because of their ethnic background or because of religion or because of gender. And I do take that into account. When I have a case involving someone who's been subjected to discrimination because of disability, I have to think of people who I've known and admire very greatly who've had disabilities, and I've watched them struggle to overcome the barriers that society puts up often just because it doesn't think of what it's doing -- the barriers that it puts up to them."
Except she didn't say that. Justice Alito said that during his confirmation. - treehugger87, on 07/14/2009, -5/+12Justice Sotomayor is going to be a welcome face on the court. She was initially appointed by Bush 41 and worked her way up through the ranks with intelligent and fair jurisprudence, not through ideological ass-kissing.
- Kazbaeden, on 07/14/2009, -1/+8How is that racist? Just because it relates to race doesn't make it racist. If you'll notice, the differentiating factor she cites is the experiences each have, which are probably due to their race.
It would be racist if she had said "Given a latino and white who have had the same experiences, the latino will make the better decision" - emailowndme, on 07/14/2009, -0/+6Wait! Wait! Wait!
I thought Bill O was a fair and balanced independent...Well color me shocked. - treehugger87, on 07/14/2009, -2/+8"Because when a case comes before me involving, let's say, someone who is an immigrant -- and we get an awful lot of immigration cases and naturalization cases -- I can't help but think of my own ancestors, because it wasn't that long ago when they were in that position."
"When I get a case about discrimination, I have to think about people in my own family who suffered discrimination because of their ethnic background or because of religion or because of gender. And I do take that into account." - alanocu, on 07/14/2009, -6/+12Maybe Sotomayor meant to say “I was a white man before the surgery, and I learned a lot from the experience.”
- floridiot2, on 07/14/2009, -1/+7@Presbyterian: So where is the racist part? Do you even know the context of that quote?
- FredFredrickson, on 07/14/2009, -3/+8It can't hunt when it's nose is apparently broken. You should bring your ***** detector into the shop, pat, if you believe all the crap on the AM radio waves.
If you had heard what Sotomayor said about her comment, and heard it in context, you wouldn't have a problem with it. Take it from another white male. There was no foul there. - FredFredrickson, on 07/14/2009, -2/+7sHockz = misinformed, and too ignorant to care
- Tollboi, on 07/14/2009, -2/+7Bill O'Reilly is racist, it does not matter who says it or why they say it, he is.
- papashawn, on 07/14/2009, -0/+4Blows my mind that people are concerned with her "objectivity", when split decision supreme court decisions are almost always split down political and ideological lines.
- howdareyou, on 07/14/2009, -0/+4It's not working for me either.
- pintomp3, on 07/14/2009, -1/+5Projecting much?
- Tape99, on 07/14/2009, -0/+3Same.
- CraigNobbs, on 07/15/2009, -0/+3The Modify Headers window must remain open for it to affect the headers. It wont affect anything unless it's open.
Summary: Keep "Modify Headers" window open for the addon to work. - bossm4n, on 07/14/2009, -0/+3@treehugger87 My apologies, I got my justices mixed up there for a minute. I was thinking Scalia when I typed that, not Alito.
- inactive, on 07/14/2009, -1/+3Followed the instructions, it looks just like your image, restarted FF, but I'm still getting the same message on the website regarding my Canadianess.
Thanks for trying though. Dugg for effort. - rwiggum, on 07/14/2009, -0/+2@abw1987 - "Clearly?" How was it clear? She said that, since she has a background of having been discrminated against, as has her race, she could understand issues of race more comprehensively than someone who has never been discriminated against. For one, how is that wrong? It's one thing for a white person to say "Oh sure, it sucks to be discriminated against." It's another thing altogether for someone to actually experience it. She didn't say that she was better because of her race, she said that experiences that she has had that were directly a result of her race make her more qualified to make decisions based on race than someone who has not had those experiences.
- treehugger87, on 07/14/2009, -2/+4He may not explicitly state "as an Italian-American male," but it's exactly what he means. If you're too partisan or too obtuse to understand that then I can't enlighten you or overcome your hypocrisy.
To be clear, I have no problem with Justice Alito's statements. In fact I respect him more, though find it hard to understand why he would side with corporate interests 100% of the time given his statements above.
Some do take issue with Alito's statements and openly question if he has given preferential treatment to Italian Americans:
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/05/27/ ... - rwiggum, on 07/14/2009, -0/+2@bossm4n dugg for being able to admit you were wrong. That's pretty rare here.
- inactive, on 07/14/2009, -2/+3@ treehugger - There is a difference because where Sotomayor clearly dis-favored (if that's a word) white people, Alito merely stated that he thought it prudent to put himself in other peoples' shoes.
@ murrdpirate - Exactly. It's like all the people justifying Obama's deficit because "well Bush ran up a big deficit".
@ bossm4n - Yes, that's why these hearings are completely useless. Her record is really all that matters. Certainly more than carefully-phrased answers to carefully-asked questions. And her off-hand remarks about being a latina woman are far more telling than the answers she's giving in the Senate right now. - dlan4327, on 07/14/2009, -2/+3Definitely don't want to get reameduptheass...
- treehugger87, on 07/14/2009, -2/+3@murr. Yes, objectivity in a judge is an essential quality when the legislative body has provided clear, constitutionally sound and non-conflicting law on an issue. A case does not make to an appeals court and certainly not to the Supreme Court unless there is reason for a judge to apply some level of subjectivity to the case. We have justices Roberts, Thomas and Scalia who quite consistently support corporate interests over individual interests. That does not come from 100 years of case law supporting corporate interests, that comes from their own personal subjectivity when applying the law.
@boss. Justice Alito did make those comments during his confirmation. It is exactly what he said to Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) during the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing on Judge Samuel Alito's Nomination to the Supreme Court. The famous quote from Judge Sotomayor was not said during her confirmation. I would expect her to apologize for her rhetoric and would expect her to explain her meaning during her confirmation hearing. If she meant "I hate all those white mother ***** always trying to keep us beautiful Latina women down", I would expect some line of questioning during the confirmation to reveal that. I think that what you will find, however, is that she was saying out loud nothing different than what Justice Alito said during his confirmation. - bossm4n, on 07/14/2009, -3/+4Except Justice Alito did not make those comments during his confirmation. It's also not even remotely similar to her words or the context of her speech. In fact, she's back pedaling as fast as humanly possible away from those remarks. She has even apologize for her choice of rhetoric. Sounds to me like she knows she made a mistake. The problem we have, is whether or not we are seeing the Real Judge Sotomayor or not. We certainly have to look at her record, not only on the bench, but also those speeches she has made and papers she has written. I have no doubt she is a brilliant judge, but I do have doubt about the bias undertones in some of those comments she has made.
- foucaultsvac, on 07/16/2009, -0/+1I would hope that a wise Anglo-Saxon man with the richness of his experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a Latina female who hasn't lived that life.
- treehugger87, on 07/15/2009, -0/+1Sorry, Murr, but that's how it works. Justices opinions and experiences matter because neither the Constitution nor the Legislature are always perfectly clear. Consider the majority opinion and the dissent in General Dynamics Land Systems, Inc. v. Cline (http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?c ...
On the majority side, Justices argued their opinion about what the Congress meant by the word "age":
'The ADEA prohibits employment discrimination based on an "individual's age." As Justice Souter explained for the majority in General Dynamics, depending on the context, the word "age" can be used to mean how old or young someone is, or it could mean "old age."
The dissenters disagreed:
'Justices Scalia and Thomas dissented. In their view, if Congress had meant to prohibit only discrimination against the old, it could have said so. Absent such a clearly uni-directional statement by Congress, they thought, the Court should not narrow the statute's coverage.'
All text taken directly from Michael C. Dorf's article on the case at findLaw.com (http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dorf/20040303.html)
Furthermore, justices who speak freely admit freely that their subjectivity matters. Of course, a Supreme Court justice who speaks often and freely is rare, but fortunately we have a current justice, Scalia, who speaks often and very openly about the workings of the court:
JUSTICE SCALIA: "Well, number one, I believe in moderation, and I don't believe in strict construction, I am not a strict constructionist, I'm sorry to tell you that. I believe legal texts should be interpreted neither strictly nor loosely, they should be interpreted reasonably." - Tape99, on 07/15/2009, -0/+1Thanks.
Works. - diemunkiesdie, on 07/15/2009, -0/+1Hmm, can I use this to watch shows on BBC iPlayer?
- falconear, on 07/15/2009, -0/+1Dugg. She's right - impartiality and objectivity are myths, and impossible. Science understands this, why don't the politicians...umm, never mind, forget I asked that. Your life experiences are going to affect your decision making process, and this includes your race and SES background. To say, "Oh, I'm totally impartial and only judge by rule of law," is idiocy or deception of the worst kind.
- inactive, on 07/14/2009, -16/+16Sondra Sotomayor is a poor excuse for a Supreme Court nominee. She is a racist and a sexist, plain and simple. Both her words and her previous judgments reflect this.
- murrdpirate, on 07/15/2009, -0/+0I know that it sometimes happens that way in practice (it's called legislating from the bench), but that is NOT how it is supposed to work. So far your only argument is that other judges do it too. Do you really think that is a reasonable argument?
Your example does not work for you. As I said, there are times where it is difficult to interpret law. In this case, the justices were not sure what exactly Congress meant by "age," whether it was a numerical age or a something such as "old age." So yes, they have to use their judicial opinion, but it is only their opinion in regards to what Congress intended, NOT their opinion on what the law should be. Sotomyer said that her experience as a Latino woman would help her make decisions. Can you explain how being a Latino woman can help you determine Congress' intention on a specific law? Of course not. She is clearly saying that she would draw on her background to alter American law based on her personal opinion and experiences. - murrdpirate, on 07/15/2009, -1/+0@treehugger87 - No, there is never, ever, ever any reason for a judge to apply ANY subjectivity to a case. The sole purpose of the courts is to interpret the Constitution. You can argue that at times the Constitution is difficult to interpret, but it does not take any SUBJECTIVITY to interpret the Constitution just like it doesn't take subjectivity to interpret something written in Spanish into English. All you are asking is what the intent of the Constitution is, personal opinion is completely meaningless. COMPLETELY.
That is why Sotomayor is taking so much heat. No one is arguing that she is right to use subjectivity, they're just trying to downplay what she said (including Obama himself). - treehugger87, on 07/14/2009, -7/+6Based on your comment history, you don't know much that your AM radio propaganda doesn't repeat to you over and over again.
- murrdpirate, on 07/14/2009, -3/+2So is your argument that because Alito said roughly the same thing, it's OK?
A judge is supposed to look at the law and see how it applies to the case in question. You are not supposed to apply your life lessons in interpreting the law, in fact that is the opposite of what you are supposed to do; you are supposed to remain objective. - inactive, on 07/14/2009, -5/+4Nice attempt at what-aboutery.
Nowhere do I see him say that he thinks, as a white Italian-American man, he could make better decisions than a black/hispanic/asian woman. Explain to me how this is even remotely comparable. - inactive, on 07/14/2009, -7/+5Yea this bitch is a member of the mexican kkk.
- pathouston22, on 07/14/2009, -13/+10I would make a comment, but I'm just a white male, what do I know?
- Presbyterian, on 07/14/2009, -10/+5"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. "
- Presbyterian, on 07/14/2009, -5/+0So this thing just like fakes your ip addressee?.
- FlashX12, on 07/14/2009, -15/+8Sotomayor is a racist & being supported by latinos with nothing other than race on their mind. Her radical dangerous supporters have slandered Republicans such as Bill O'Reilly in radio & TV ads and accusing them of 'racism' for refusing to support Sotomayor. ***** her & her racist third-world fans.
- pathouston22, on 07/14/2009, -11/+3That dog don't hunt.
- sHockz, on 07/14/2009, -22/+9sotomayor = racist
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 