scary that the truth is so many people are going to vote for him.
But La Raza is a model of the beautiful melting pot of American culture, and membership in an affiliated organization is in no way relevant to NPoV.
Pretty much nailed it
Are you saying that Trump is right? That the judge’s membership in La Raza is indicative of a bias that would lead him to go against Trump?
In other news:
People keep accusing Trump of being unrealistic when he makes promises about building his Wall.
But let’s be fair here: Shoving 13.2 million cubic yards of concrete up one’s ass just isn’t feasible.
By now you must have been reminded of the disgraceful Sotomayor “wise latina makes better judgements than white men” line. One can’t have it both ways. Either demographics is relevant to one’s judgements, or it isn’t – doubly so in a case where the defendant has made certain types of immigration restrictions part of his platform, and those restrictions are oppose the La Raza initiatives.
Not with that attitude, anyway. Trump’s a yuuge ass. The biggest ass, you wouldn’t believe. He could do it.
I think I’m most impressed that Ruben is still taking potshots at Trump. By this point I thought he was getting beyond satire.
you are a parody account, right?
A parody of what?
Cool paraphrase, bro. Here’s the original:
[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.”[/quote]
Sotomayor’s “wise Latina” remark (which you’ve quite carefully decontextualized) acknowledged how a Judge’s personal experience, background and perspective can influence their decisions, but that’s a far cry from “Non-white judges can’t be objective and should recuse themselves from certain cases.”
On the contrary, her remarks were part of a call for MORE diversity so that the lived experience of the judiciary would be closer to that of the public they were presiding over.
… holding my breath until you explain the material difference
You misquoted and decontextualized Sotomayor in a way that made it sound like “a Latina will always be a better judge than a white man.”
The actual quote was communicating how a person who has a wealth of relevant life experience might render a more appropriate verdict than a person who doesn’t. So for example, if a judge was ruling on a lot of cases that involve poor minorities then growing up in similar experience might help inform their judgement when presiding over those cases. Even more to the point, the speech this quote was lifted from was about how the judiciary as a GROUP should reflect a great diversity of life experiences.
Never did Sotomayor say anything to the effect of “a Latina should never have to face a white judge,” which would be analogous to Trump’s complaint here.
That doesn’t seem immediately relevant to your initial comment. Can you explain how Sotomayor’s comment has any bearing on the significance of this completely different person’s membership in La Raza?
Hmm, so let’s strip it down and play the substitution game, shall we?
“a veteran makes better judgements than civilians”
“… a veteran who has experienced combat would more often than not reach a better conclusion [in pertinent cases] than a civilian who hasn’t been in that situation”
Stop trolling; it just makes you look stupid.
(edited to correct brain-dead spelling mistakes)
So, a judge exposes a Drumpf enterprise to be not just fraudulent but predatory and his response is ahhh, he’s a Mexican. Implying that a caucasian would never expose his predition. And this is OK with some people? I’m not clear who should be more offended.
I hope he has finally offended everyone.