Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It was Trump who was looking through the prism of race, and disregarding a judge's oath to put aside partialities and view a case on its merits and rule on objections in accordance with the law. If the case is a jury case, it's the jury who decides on the facts, while the judge makes the decisions on the law. Judges are used to putting aside their partialities. Even if a judge cannot put aside all partiality, the case had nothing to do with immigration or Trump's stance on immigration or with hispanics. So his comment was way out of line and an insult to any sitting judge, and no reason whatsoever to recuse a judge.
Trump was doing what Trump always does: He blames someone else ahead of time, in case he fails. So the bad result can be logically blamed on what it was he blaming before. In this case, an hispanic judge. In the election, on a "rigged election." Trump never, but never, admits faults or failure. Never. So that means he has to have a scapegoat.
He was out of line, and that was just something that seemed logical to him that people would believe. Of COURSE an hispanic judge would have been unfair to Trump, since Trump wanted to deport hispanics! So logical, his supporters would think. But if he had won the litigation, you'd never hear a peep out of him about the hispanic judge. Just like with the election. Not a peep about it being rigged. No reason to blame someone about a failure any more. But he was ready. Because, as I said, he never admits failure.
It was a Mexican judge, not a generic Latino judge who would not have a bias for Mexico. Even a Mayan may not have a bias for Mexico. Surely a random white person will not have much of a Canadian bias, unless of course they are Canadian.
It does if you don't twist my words into nonsense. I'm not for handouts. If you knew my posting history you'd have realized you were only putting your foot in your mouth with that comment.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MPowering1
I think it had more to do with people being tired of Americans being put on the backburner while help is being given to other countries, people entering illegally, etc.
Fair enough.
Explain how resentment over others getting government help doesn't mean that tRump voters think they should be getting that help instead.
Even Sotomeyer stated that her views are influenced by her heritage.
She said, in paraphrase, that a Latina woman would be better at making a decision that a white man. That isn't "influenced by her heritage", in my opinion. That is flat out racism.
"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."
It was a Mexican judge, not a generic Latino judge who would not have a bias for Mexico. Even a Mayan may not have a bias for Mexico. Surely a random white person will not have much of a Canadian bias, unless of course they are Canadian.
The judge had Mexican roots which is a country not a race. There is no question that there could be bias. No one is accusing anyone of racism in this case.
Now to an unusual case of an immigration judge who was suing the U.S. Department of Justice, alleging discrimination. The judge is of Iranian descent and she says her superiors ordered her not to hear any cases that involved Iranian nationals. NPR's Richard Gonzales reports.
But surely Trump can be suspected as having bias with Russia because he built a brick crap house there. A first generation immigrant would never have any bias for their parents country of origin.
"Furthermore, the ever-present drumbeat from the Left that every conservative victory is the death throes of bad, old white people who are about to be swept away by waves of brown immigration is making many whites dig in."
It does if you don't twist my words into nonsense.
I'm not for handouts. If you knew my posting history you'd have realized you were only putting your foot in your mouth with that comment.
You're white.
It isn't enough that you don't do or say racist things and just want to provide for your family and be left alone.
You must placate anyone not like you who may feel hurt or victimized by your existence.
The good news is this:
IMO, the racial nonsense is coming to an end. Grant it, a slow death (see this thread for those going down with the ship) but people regardless of their "grouping" are fed up with having to apologize for simply wanting to be left alone and live their life without having to be shamed for not having their earnings stolen from them to "help the disenfranchised".
I work with mostly small business owners and private individuals in security. From my experience the trend is clear: Asians and Hispanics don't give a crap how offensive it is to invest and protect their homes and businesses. Blacks are moving a little slower but they too are making up more and more of our client base.
The day is coming. Whether any of us are alive to see it or not I don't know. But you have to take a stand. You want to live peacefully, not steal & play the victim, take care of your family vs. the perpetual victims that spend their entire lives undermining anyone who simply wants to make a life for themselves.
So tRump voters want the handouts they think others are getting?
That makes sense.
No, we are tired of paying for handouts.
You might not know this but there is no money tree growing behind the WH.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.