60% + 1 more

[G-Man]

That's how many of Judge Sotomayor's verdicts have been overturned.  She voted to uphold a fire departments ruling to throw out the passing grades of white firefighters because no minority firefighters passed the test.  This was a test based on fire department procedures.  How can that kind of a test be considered unfair to minorities?  The answers are all the book.  How about just studying harder???  The standards set for firefighters or ANY position that involves the public, danger, and safety should never be compromised to include those that can't meet the minimum standards that have been predetermined.  If you need to carry 250 lbs down a flight of steps, the standard shouldn't be reduced to 150 lbs. so a woman can pass the test.  I weigh 230 lbs. and if that female firefighter find me, unconsious in a burning building....I'm dead.

Why is it that all we can come up with are less than mediocore government representatives?  Why is it that failed business people, people with no business or economic experience, people who are less than mediocre, and tax cheats in charge of our country.  Why has the American public becomed so dummied down that they have signed on to this by the tens of millions? Is this really what the people who voted for Obama expected? 

[FLAVALK]

Is this really what the people who voted for Obama expected? 

The answer is "yes"

[f6john]

 I weigh 250 lbs. and I have seen some women that could probably carry me "up" a few flights of stairs, can't say they were firefighters though!

[BudMan]

In their defense, no, I don’t think the majority of his supporters expected it.  However, it is EXACTLY what most of the rest of us expected.

When Jackie Robinson broke into the majors there was a lot of talk about the other Dodger’s players striking if he played.  Leo Durocher responded with my favorite baseball quote of all time when he said, "I don't care if the guy is yellow or black, or if he has stripes like a f---ing zebra. I'm the manager of this team and I say he plays."

Leo understood something we have lost site of in recent years: You can’t waste resources. 

Giving a job to ANYONE other than the most qualified of applicants is the most horrible waste of resources possible.  Not to mention that it is just damn WRONG, and an insult to every race color and creed.

[JimL]

G-man you have opened up Pandora's box!

The fact that the decision came down to a 5-4 decision by what most people regard as the "finest legal minds in the country" is very troubling to me.  Clearly this is proof that this court decision was not an intellectual debate, but unfortunately the same political debate that has this country hopelessly mired in gridlock.  

You and I agree on the decision for possibly different reasons.  The point you make is valid that in certain jobs it is essential that consideration should be given to a person's ability to "perform" the job rather than whether race/gender quotas are met. Our elected officials are not subject to a "quota system", no one is denied the right to run for public office because there is not an open "slot" available for their gender or ethnic origins.  Even the Supreme Court allows themselves flexibility in the selection of their support staff...their argument is that they want the most qualified folks for the job.

I do agree that there has been tremendous discrimination in the past, and something needed to be done to correct this.  As a young engineer I remember seeing people not qualified promoted because their dad played golf with someones dad at the local country club.  After the EEOC laws were put in place I saw equally unqualified folks promoted purely for gender/ethnic reasons.  In my opinion injustices were done in both cases.  Since I was the white male offspring of poor Kentucky coal miners that didn't belong to the country club, I wasn't going to prevail under either circumstance.  I was forced to go to school and study..dammit!

In my judgment the best way to address the issue of discrimination is to construct a hiring policy that is completely agnostic to race and gender.  In other words a system which promotes opportunity based on an individuals ability to understand the knowledge required for the job and demonstrate that knowledge through a standardized test where "EVERYONE HAS A EQUAL OPPORTUNITY" to study and take the exam.  This is exactly the case in the Hartford firefighters case.

Enough of my soapbox rant, I am sure there are many who will differ with my opinion, and I respect your right to do so; this debate is what many on this board fought for and what makes this the greatest country on the face of the earth.  However for those of you like me who have a hard time understanding why anyone would disagree with a system which encourages full and open competition; you might find some of those answers in a book written by George Lakoff (with an introduction by Howard Dean)..."Don't think of an Elephant (know your values and frame the debate)".

One last thought...the Supreme Court was not asked to decide what was "just or unjust" or "right or wrong", they were asked to interpret the law.  The blindfold on the statue of justice symbolizes that personal feeling or emotions shouldn't enter into the process, HOWEVER it does not say that LAWS THEMSELVES can't be biased or prejudicial...and unfortunately these justices were asked to rule on laws that are biased and prejudicial in their very nature.

[Scanner]

"60% +1, That's how many of Judge Sotomayor's verdicts have been overturned."    Sounds like a Faux Noise headline and, like most of those, completely false.

Your statement could only be true if every ruling she ever made was appealed, accepted by the SCOTUS, and overturned.   Obviously that isn't true.

Possibly 60% of the appealed rulings she was involved with on the Circuit court that were appealed to the Supreme Court were overturned.  That would be below average for SCOTUS reversals (67%). They obviously only accept cases where they believe there is good chance of reversal or why accept them at all.

But once again, please don't let facts interfere with opinions, it's very entertaining.