I am anything but an Obama fan. But something that irks me, and that I believe discredits his critics, is this penchant for slamming him for a simple act that they imagine to be something else.
One instance. In Italy, at the recent summit, he was shown apparently staring at the derriere of a woman passing in front of him. If one views the clip, it appear very obvious that he is preparing to assist a person to descend the steps in front of him and therfore looking down. That a woman passed in front of him at this moment appears to be a mere coincidence.
It is crude and rather stupid to imply that he has committed some lewd or lascivious act. It diminishes these critics at least in this writer's opinion.
Sunday, July 12, 2009
Sotomayor "Wise Latina" Quote - Not Very Wise
Here is the controversial quote from Judge Sotomayor: "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."
What strikes me is that the discussion is always something like: Is this or is this not racist? I don't really know. I do know that if a non Latino white male made this statement it would be said to be so. It would result in rejection of the candidate for the Supreme Court.
The quote is very telling. Sotomayor believes the Latina opinion to be superior to that of a white male. That is her opinion and not a fact. We simply don't know whether a wise Latina or wise white man would make a better decision. Each of us is a product of our experiences and the thoughtful often torturous process that must precede wisdom. So I would say that some Latinas are wiser and better equipped to reach good conclusions than some white men. The reverse is also true. The problem is she says that the Latina would "more often" do this. And that is where I have a problem with what she said.
The statement is one of ignorance, stupidity or prejudice or all of these. She cannot possibly know who would make the better decision. While their personal opinions and biases are always with them, judges must strive to make decisions based on the facts in the context of law and precedent, primarily the former.
Obama can nominate whom he pleases to the Court. I would hope that he and all other presidents would simply look for the wisest persons that they can find in the light of their (the presidents) personal views about the powers and limitations of government.
I do not think that Sotomayor is the best Obama could do. I think that their are wiser Latinas than she. And who knows maybe an Asian man, black woman or heaven forbid a white male however impoverished his life experience.
P.S. By her unwise conclusion, Judge Sotomayor appears not to be the "wise Latina woman" that she posits.
What strikes me is that the discussion is always something like: Is this or is this not racist? I don't really know. I do know that if a non Latino white male made this statement it would be said to be so. It would result in rejection of the candidate for the Supreme Court.
The quote is very telling. Sotomayor believes the Latina opinion to be superior to that of a white male. That is her opinion and not a fact. We simply don't know whether a wise Latina or wise white man would make a better decision. Each of us is a product of our experiences and the thoughtful often torturous process that must precede wisdom. So I would say that some Latinas are wiser and better equipped to reach good conclusions than some white men. The reverse is also true. The problem is she says that the Latina would "more often" do this. And that is where I have a problem with what she said.
The statement is one of ignorance, stupidity or prejudice or all of these. She cannot possibly know who would make the better decision. While their personal opinions and biases are always with them, judges must strive to make decisions based on the facts in the context of law and precedent, primarily the former.
Obama can nominate whom he pleases to the Court. I would hope that he and all other presidents would simply look for the wisest persons that they can find in the light of their (the presidents) personal views about the powers and limitations of government.
I do not think that Sotomayor is the best Obama could do. I think that their are wiser Latinas than she. And who knows maybe an Asian man, black woman or heaven forbid a white male however impoverished his life experience.
P.S. By her unwise conclusion, Judge Sotomayor appears not to be the "wise Latina woman" that she posits.
Saturday, July 11, 2009
Obama Care - Reduced Care for Many
Obama has to find a way to finance his heath care plan, and short of taxing us into oblivion, he has to sacrifice someone. For him the elderly will do. They are not his biggest constituency. Mark my words.
You have already heard that savings on Medicare are part of his plan. What do you think these savings are? They are reduced levels of diagnosis and treatment which he doesn't talk about except vaguely as excessive defensive medicine to avoid lawsuits. Don't believe it.
Also, you will note that he continues to protect trial lawyers who are responsible for much unnecessary spending on health care.
Really, there are no solutions to the problem of health care costs other than 1) cutting benefits, 2) cutting litigation effects, 3) raising taxes, 4) reducing non health care costs such as excessive paperwork, and 5) permitting free market practices (that is, individuals have tax credits and buy their own insurance individually or through associations). That's pretty much it. Numbers 2, 4, and 5 in combination are the only good solutions.
For sure Obama will not want to support any plan that reduces government control, so number 5 is out immediately. He will do number 4, but the cost of his new government bureaucracy will wipe out any savings. He will not do number 2 because the lawyers are his supporters.
Look out people. The future is bleak for freedom in America.
You have already heard that savings on Medicare are part of his plan. What do you think these savings are? They are reduced levels of diagnosis and treatment which he doesn't talk about except vaguely as excessive defensive medicine to avoid lawsuits. Don't believe it.
Also, you will note that he continues to protect trial lawyers who are responsible for much unnecessary spending on health care.
Really, there are no solutions to the problem of health care costs other than 1) cutting benefits, 2) cutting litigation effects, 3) raising taxes, 4) reducing non health care costs such as excessive paperwork, and 5) permitting free market practices (that is, individuals have tax credits and buy their own insurance individually or through associations). That's pretty much it. Numbers 2, 4, and 5 in combination are the only good solutions.
For sure Obama will not want to support any plan that reduces government control, so number 5 is out immediately. He will do number 4, but the cost of his new government bureaucracy will wipe out any savings. He will not do number 2 because the lawyers are his supporters.
Look out people. The future is bleak for freedom in America.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
