"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 29 May 2009 18:21:08 -0400, the infamous Wes
scrawled the following:

"John R. Carroll" wrote:


"Wes" wrote in message
...

I'm interested in the discrimination case in Connecticut and her
ruling.
I didn't care
for that piece where she indicates that her heritage affects her
ruling.

Did you read it Wes?
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/15/us...text.html?_r=1


I'm reading it now.

First problem, she isn't an immigrant. Citizens of Puerto Rico are US
citizens. The NY
Times blew that one. Her parents have been US Citizens since 1917. She
was born after
that date.

I wonder about a person that talks about her racial heritage in that
lecture. I might
understand a black discussing that due to that abomination of slavery we
subjected them
to. I don't give much thought to being English and Dutch nor do I give
much thought to my
siblings being English, Dutch and Polish.

Americans of Chinese heritage were ****ed on heavily years ago, you don't
hear them going
off on how they were mistreated and how that gives them perspectives, they
got over it and
moved on as we got more enlightened as a society.

I wish Hispanics, Blacks, and Jews would do the same thing today.


I'll go as far as say a woman will often see things differently than a man
and I don't
think it matters if she is liberal or conservative.

Verily.


Obama is obligated to put a woman on the court. The only one serving may
not have long to
go. Catching the Hispanics with a twofer is good politics.

...but not good public policy.


I know you don't think much of Rush as an oracle of ideas and comment but
he mentioned
that some women's groups are a bit nervous about her since her stand on
abortion isn't
totally locked up.

Swaping her out with Souter isn't a world changing event.

I'm thinking it will be if and when we go into court over the North
American Union.

Do you seriously think that's possible? It's not. It's pure right-wing
bull**** and paranoia. I hope you haven't swallowed *that* nonsense.

--
Ed Huntress