The Supreme Michael Jackson And Sotomayor's Confirmation

Nothing ACTUALLY MATTERS to youAll you know is that she is a BROWN FEMALE and that frightens you.

If you are not a racist, why do you identify with the right wing racist Republican party? Why do you listen to a racist junky on the radio? Why cant you answer these questions?

By deanrddJuly 13, 2009 - 1:16pm Prime EXAMPLE of lib hypocrisy...

Go ahead. Beat up the Latino woman.

-Sooooooo, any dissent based on her RULINGS, JUDGEMENT and STATEMENTS is not legal.. Ok, is it acceptable for me to have problems with her dexterity since we aren't allowed to comment on things that ACTUALLY MATTER without being called racist?

A Bill of Rights is what the people are entitled to against every government, and what no just government should refuse, or rest on inference. - Thomas Jefferson

By deanrddJuly 13, 2009 - 1:16pm STRAWWWWWW MAN or Woman in this case....

Go ahead. Beat up the Latino woman.
-The way the left beat up on a Black man..Ohhhhh that's right, it's OK if you are a lib. Just like it's OK for a black man to use the N bomb to another black man! Got it!

The was just one judge on a panel following the law, apparently that makes her "guilty". Republican "logic". A true "oxymoron".
-Yes, but she is the ONLY one who was nominated for SCOTUS (as I've mentioned a few times). And if one of the other judges was the one nominated (I don't care if he was a white guy) I'd be screaming too...

Actually, the rule goes back to 1973. It's the current Supreme Court that changed the rules.
-Hmmmm, by that GREAT logic, the Jim Crow laws of 1876-1965 should not have been changed.. Very nice....
-And as if SCOTUS has never reversed itself.... Oh and be careful, Ms. Sotomayor may just be a closet anti-choicer... (I'm very pro-choice) But to watch the MELTDOWN that would take place on the left if Roe V. Wade was overturned and she was the deciding vote would be precious...

A Bill of Rights is what the people are entitled to against every government, and what no just government should refuse, or rest on inference. - Thomas Jefferson

Guess you were never part of a debate team. The way you jump from "it's like that here - so it should be like that there" as if there were some kind of "mystical" connections.

----and the powers that be didn't like the demographic make up of how the chips fell would it be OK to change the rules mid-stream?

Actually, the rule goes back to 1973. It's the current Supreme Court that changed the rules.

Republicans - shrinking membership - working to keep it that way. Go ahead. Beat up the Latino woman. She was just one judge on a panel following the law, apparently that makes her "guilty". Republican "logic". A true "oxymoron".

Your president is brownand soon a supreme court justice will be a brown woman. There is nothing you can do about it. There will soon be a liberal majority on the court and they will legislate our liberal agenda. There is nothing you can do to stop us.

By deanrddJuly 13, 2009 - 10:33amMilitary exams include interviews, job evaluations, and service record. It wasn't all about just one test.
-Wrong (Navy enlisted anyway)... Yes, evals are included in the computation ~30%, time in service ~10%, Awards ~5%, TEST = ~55%.. Guess what, don't do well on the test, you don't get promoted... And if an advancement exam was taken and the powers that be didn't like the demographic make up of how the chips fell would it be OK to change the rules mid-stream? Nooooooo. Just like what SCOTUS told Sotomayor when they gave her the finger..

I don't know what it takes to be an RN, but I suspect it's far different than being in a leadership position as a fireman. Maybe not. Maybe being a nurse is almost exactly the same as being a fireman which is why certification should be identical.

-Your statement was the tests shouldn't be 100% and guess what, to become an RN that test is 100% of the qualification (once you have the academic credentials). But you can graduate with a 4.0 GPA and if you can't pass the exam, guess what... YOU ARE NOT AN RN.... What happens if all the blacks fail one year, should we scrap the system? Sotomayor would...

Maybe being a nurse is almost exactly the same as being a fireman which is why certification should be identical.
-These guys were NOT testing to be firemen, they were testing for LEADERSHIP which does include more than fighting fires....

I never met a doctor that graduated last from medical school. You graduate from Medical School and automatically you're a doctor? It's that simple?
-Yes, buy definition once they pass Med School they are Doctors, now they do have to go through internship and residency but that doesn't apply to Dentists who can practice day one out of dental school...

Lawyers have to pass the bar to be lawyers. These guys are already firemen.
-Yes, but as with RNs, if you CAN'T pass the test, you can't practice so it all comes down to ONE test.....

Oh and you want to talk about tests? Go to get a driver's license, blow away the driving test (prove that you can drive) and fail the written test....What do they call you? Bus rider....

A Bill of Rights is what the people are entitled to against every government, and what no just government should refuse, or rest on inference. - Thomas Jefferson

Oh yea, graduates from the Naval Academy are all so smart. It's why so many of our top scientists and doctors and engineers came from there. Like, well, like, well, ok, so I can't think of any. Oh yea, the best were probably kicked out for being gay.

Military exams include interviews, job evaluations, and service record. It wasn't all about just one test.

I don't know what it takes to be an RN, but I suspect it's far different than being in a leadership position as a fireman. Maybe not. Maybe being a nurse is almost exactly the same as being a fireman which is why certification should be identical.

Lawyers have to pass the bar to be lawyers. These guys are already firemen.

I never met a doctor that graduated last from medical school. You graduate from Medical School and automatically you're a doctor? It's that simple?

Were you ever on the debate team?

By deanrddJuly 13, 2009 - 9:11am Do you take tests for your job?
-I most certainly did... Before an ADN or BSN can become an RN (and work) they MUST pass the NCLEX. Your entire livelihood depends one ONE test that you take AFTER you have paid for years of a college education.. Can't pass it? Guess what, NO LICENSE!!!!! It all comes down to ONE test.. Lawyers do it too, it's called the BAR.. Can't pass it? Can't work as a lawyer...

When I was enlisted, all promotions from E-4 - E-7 required an advancement exam, guess what, if you didn't do damn well, NO PROMOTION....

McCain was 5th from the bottom out of 899 in his graduating class. Were tests important to the Republican party then?
-Yes, but he did graduate... Ever see what it takes to get into a service academy? It takes FAR more than to get into most other colleges. What do you call the guy/girl who grads LAST in their Med school class from Harvard....... YOU CALL THEM DOCTOR...
By the way, I didn't know people took tests when they graduated college to become President or for any other political position… I thought it was based on age, citizenship and votes...My bad…

A Bill of Rights is what the people are entitled to against every government, and what no just government should refuse, or rest on inference. - Thomas Jefferson

The test was challanged, back in 1973.So I'm still wondering, why is this one single test so important? Do you take tests for your job? McCain was 5th from the bottom out of 899 in his graduating class. Were tests important to the Republican party then? I suspect McCain never met a test he could pass.

Operation OverkillI hate to say it but the Michael Jackson story won't be going away any time soon. By the end of the summer the running joke will be the fact that his body will still not be buried. Let's face it; there's not a mound of dirt on this planet that's clean enough for the body of the King of Pop.

The family wants to turn Neverland into another Graceland - how utterly apropos is that? There is a weird connection between the unreality of the careers of Michael Jackson and Elvis Presley that is imposiible to ignore. In the final analysis, both were overrated icons of popular culture.

Recently, someone who has known me for decades pointed out the fact that when John Lennon died in 1980, I took that event with a seriousness that I did not afford the Jackson or Presley coverage.

Let us face some serious facts here: First of all, the kings of pop and rock were responsible for their own respective demises - Lennon was murdered in cold blood. Second; at least John Lennon stood for something. Something to think about.

As far as Judge Sotomayor is concerned: You go girl!

www.tomdegan.blogspot.com

Tom Degan
Goshen, NY

Give it a break. If they can't tell the difference between "FLAMMABLE" and "NOT FLAMMABLE", the only place they could get a job these days is in the US Military. They are the only ones lowering their standards.

Why are you guys so concerned with one test. How come you don't mention "interviews" and "evaluations" and "doing the actual work" and all the other things that are part of "real world jobs"? How many people have their entire careers impacted by "mulitiple choice" tests? Next to zero????

If one cannot readhow is one going to tell the difference between "FLAMMABLE" and "NOT FLAMMABLE?" Those three little letters could mean the difference between life and death.

Just so you know, the promotion exams I took included hypotheticals ("What would you do if presented with the following scenario?"), definitions ("what are roentgens and what is the significance of a high roentgen reading?"), multiple guess, and fill in the blanks. The reading level on these tests was about eighth grade. The subject matter was more sophisticated, but frankly I don't see how cultural difference could have made a difference. Either you know about firefighting or you don't either you know how to read or you don't. Cultural bias in testing may have an effect in SATs with culturally tuned concepts, but in the fire service, it either explodes easily or it does not.

By deanrddJuly 13, 2009 - 12:40am NICE STRAW MAN!!!!!

The test was NEVER challenged!! Read the case. The city NEVER claimed the test was bias and IN FACT it was PROVEN that it wasn't. The issue was that the city threw it out because they didn't like the result.

I ask you again, if all blacks had scored better than whites, would the city have thrown it out? That answer is easy, no.

With this decision, equal protection NOW FINALLY goes both ways... For white and blacks and browns and reds and purples....

I don't believe that any race is inferior based on skin color. Show me ONE statment I've ever made where I say whites are superior because they less melanin than other people...

Me, I don't believe that it may be "fair" to have people's careers based solely on tests written by white people and, it's just so happens that white people excel at that test - how lucky.
-Than the test should have been challenged BEFORE it was taken or at least before the results were published....

A Bill of Rights is what the people are entitled to against every government, and what no just government should refuse, or rest on inference. - Thomas Jefferson

Just asking.Don't you consider yourself racist? Seriously.

Def of racist:

The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others.

Discrimination or prejudice based on race.

Me, I don't believe that it may be "fair" to have people's careers based solely on tests written by white people and, it's just so happens that white people excel at that test - how lucky. Next you'll be saying "How do you know white people wrote that test?" and my answer is, "What are the odds that white people didn't write it?" Besides the 1973 Supreme Court agrees with me.

How come tests didn't matter for Bush and McCain and now they suddenly do for firefighters? Perhaps this is where the "racism" rears it's ugly head? Hmmm?

By getmad54July 13, 2009 - 12:14am So what do we do impeach the ones that interpreted the law like she did ?

-Last I checked, being racist (and wrong) wasn't against the law....

A Bill of Rights is what the people are entitled to against every government, and what no just government should refuse, or rest on inference. - Thomas Jefferson

IfIf Soto mayor's is a racist that makes the other four justices as much as a races too. It was a split decision . So what do we do impeach the ones that interpreted the law like she did ?

If the law was so simple , why the split decision? Then why do we even need nine when one will do.

Sorry man, you even put stupid in capital letters. Do you seriously think that a "written" test is the best indicator of leadership abilities? John F-ing McCain was 5th from the bottom out of 899 cadets. He was probably the worst test taker in the world and yet Republicans wanted him as president. Fool. Sarah Palin was probably nearly as bad as was George Bush.

So what if she said when dealing with many of today's issues, she is probably more qualified than a rich and sheltered white guy who had everything handed to him on a platter. I'm sure she IS more qualified. Those same white guys have been saying the same thing for centuries. ONLY NOW it's a problem? ONLY NOW????

HOLY JUMPIN' JOHOSOPHAT....Did any of you LIBS read the link to the Slate piece....

"But then we learned late last week that Judge Sotomayor chose to use those or similar words more than once; indeed, by one count, seven times. Suddenly Sotomayor's defenders went dark. For all of the efforts to justify and rationalize and contextualize her 32 words, their repetition over the years sure sounds like a blanket claim that Latinas make better judges than white guys. And that's kind of a big deal for liberals who purport to believe that race and gender don't generally make one "better" at things."

-Unless you're a wise latina (according to Sotomayor)

Oh and deanrdd... The test wasn't to be a "firefighter" they were ALREADY firefighters, it was to be Captain or LT... In other words, more than just a responder.. And as I have linked (MANY TIMES) the promotion system had been in the city's charter for a WHILE and this was the first time it has this result.. What would we have said if all the white guys had scored lower than the black guys... I'll tell you.. I'd have said THEY WEREN'T AS WELL QUALIFIED.... Just like the blacks who lower than the whites WERE NOT AS WELL QUALIFIED to be in charge...

The blacks didn't challenge the "fairness" of the system, the city just didn't like the result and GUESS WHAT, SCOTUS told Sotomayor to "get bent".... Yes she was one judge on a three-judge panel, but SHE'S the one put up for the justice position. If either of the other two judges were up, I'd be all over them too....

A Bill of Rights is what the people are entitled to against every government, and what no just government should refuse, or rest on inference. - Thomas Jefferson

Here is the argument as to the merits of "tests". It's why firefighters actually go out and create "real" world life situations and practice them.

Seeing "chemical reactivity", meaning something goes up "boom" in flames, is so different than "reading" about it.

To me, "written tests" are the least effective way to determine whether or not someone is, how did you put it, "stupid"? Especially when it comes to "leadership". You don't want someone who would "freeze" at the first sign of a crisis. You know, someone like Bush.

If you started off with people that could only take tests, then you would severely limit your "talent". What a "hamstring"!

This is why the Supreme Court, 1n 1973, believed you need to severely limit relying on that criteria. Of course, when you look at such brilliant judges today, such as Scalia, Thomas (was he ever even a judge?) and Roberts, it's no wonder they "make up new laws". They just don't understand the old ones. I believe it's called "limited intellect" or maybe a limited experience in the real world?

Firefightersneed to know a lot about a wide range of topics--everything from chemical reactivity to how to protect oneself and one's crew from easily transmitted respiratory diseses. You can be a dumb shit and still be a forefighter, but if you kill yourself, it's only yourself. Officers on the other hand must be able to recognize dangers that are not necissarily obvious, in order to protect their crews, which consist of anywhere from two to six personnel besides themselves. In short, if you have stupid officers, you have dead firefighters.

Tests are important fpr identifying good candidates for promotion in the fire service. There are other intangibles, such as the ability to lead and/or play nice in the sandbox, that may ber harder to discern. But some tool must be used to separate those deserving from those not.

"L'homme n'est rien; l'ouvre, tout""The man is nothing; the work is everything."
--Gustave Flaubert

Palin/Wurzelbacher 2012!
Corporate freedom. Personal surveillance. And they're really, really stupid.

So trueArs longa,
vita brevis,
occasio praeceps,
experimentum periculosum,
iudicium difficile.

Art long,
Life short,
opportunity fleeting,
experiment dangerous,
judgment difficult.

Anal-Lyze This
Dissecting public personalities ... not cool.

Tell us something we don't know.

-Pete

Ars longa, vita brevis

In the early seventies, the Supreme Court ruled that you can't promote based on a single criteria AND if a single criteria was found to stand in the way of correcting racial imbalance, it could be dropped. I was reading about that and provided a link below. It was the current Supreme Court that rewrote existing law and not Sotomayor who was the "activist judge". Perhaps someone can explain to me how "taking a test" would make you a better "fireman".

Maybe your "style of writing", the way you "circle your twos"? Better are job performance evaluations and actual field tests, wouldn't you say? A nine hundred pound man may score the best of everyone, but would he make a good fireman? I would love to see him climb a ladder.

"the denial of promotional opportunities because of “rel on criteria unre-lated to job performance"

"Finally, New Haven’s actions did not unnecessar-ily trammel petitioners’ interests. New Haven did not create an “absolute bar” to petitioners’ advance-ment, and did not impose any racial quotas. John-son, 480 U.S. at 637-39. New Haven simply decided not to certify the racially-disparate results of promo-tional tests, having determined that there would be equally effective ways to select candidates for promo-tional positions with less adverse impact.15 See 29"

For those interested, you can read the 1973 ruling here:

http://www.abanet.org/publiced/preview/briefs/pdfs/07-08/07-1428_RespondentAmCuNAACPLDEF.pdf

Sotomayor was one judge on a panel of other judges who did what the elected officials of the city asked which was to drop a single test. With all the other criteria available to make these decisions, seems clinging to that one, single test, is really clinging to racism. Sorry Republicans, you may have won this battle, but you have further demonstrated the type of people you are. It's kind of pathetic.

What they should do is give a science test. Now, Republicans fail that every time because they believe "science" is a "faith" and "mysticism" is "real".

Written exams for something like "firefighting" never made sense to me. Some engineers ace every test and yet can't hold down a job because they are crappy engineers. They are only good at taking tests.