JAPAN NEWS AND DISCUSSION
-
- English Instructor (Osaka, Kyoto, Kobe)
- Berlitz Japan, Inc. (ベルリッツ・ジャパン株式会社), Kansai
- Salary: ¥125,000 ~ ¥250,000 / Month
-
- FT English Teachers for Kids - Osaka
- Kohgakusha Co., Ltd. （株式会社興学社）, Osaka
- Salary: ¥255,000 ~ ¥275,000 / Month Travel Expenses, Encouragement of Japanese learning*
-
- Translator
- ZAIHON, Inc. (日本財務翻訳株式会社), Tokyo
- Salary: ¥6.0M / Year Negotiable
0
yabits
Justice Breyer and Justice Ginsberg are highly respected, and their conservative colleagues would, I am sure, object to their being referred to as "raving nutcases." If Republicans believe in the constitution and support the President's appointees, why do they behave like, well, "raving nutcases" on forums like this one?
Posted in: Obama calls for swift confirmation of Sotomayor
0
yabits
No. They would first be staunchly defended by Republicans spouting "persecution due to political correctness."
Republican white supremacy would never be so overt as to specifically target a specific group like "Latina Justices." What it comes out as is focus on nativist issues like "English first" and who says what about the border with Mexico.
Posted in: Obama calls for swift confirmation of Sotomayor
0
yabits
I've looked at the aims of La Raza and don't find their aims to be racist at all. The more a person is geared towards white supremacy, the more they are likely view La Raza as racist.
Sotomayer can speak in front of them. So can George W. Bush (and has). But David Duke? No way.
Posted in: Obama calls for swift confirmation of Sotomayor
0
yabits
Gee, that sounds awfully impolite to another poster.
The only thing worse is when that one party is the Republicans.
Posted in: Obama calls for swift confirmation of Sotomayor
0
yabits
No, she hasn't. Sotomayor will end up getting a lot of support from Republicans -- just as Bill Clinton's two appointees did.
It will not just be the Democrats. Sotomayor will garner a fair amount of Republican support too.
The American voters, nearly 60% of whom reject Republicanism, will go to the polls in 2010 knowing that President Obama made a masterful choice.
Posted in: Obama calls for swift confirmation of Sotomayor
0
yabits
It would depend upon the individual white man, and what constitutes the "richness of his experiences." Sorry, but a white-WASP male born to a well-off family that has never known hard times, and who entered a university on a legacy endowment and graduating to join the firm of one of daddy's country club friends is not, for his own experiences, a very inspiring story. It is not inspiring because he was born to privilege.
He is not likely to understand what life is like for millions upon millions of Americans of all backgrounds who had to struggle to get where they were. As a woman, Sotomayor had to successfully navigate her way through the world dominated by men. As a Latino, Sotomayor had to make her way through a society dominated by non-Hispanics. As a child born of immigrants in a housing project, Sotomayor had a closer experience of what it is like to be without.
As such, she is more likely to understand the conditions of many of the people who approach her seeking justice much, much better than the rich white dude.
It is some of these whites who raise the insulting insinuation that Judge Sotomayor would treat Latinos more leniently than non-Latinos, who have stepped close to the line of letting their racism show. The reality is this: A Latino man, or a poor white man for that matter, facing Judge Sotomayor, is more likely to feel that his case was understood and decided fairly, than he likely would if he was facing the rich white son of privilege.
After hearing Sotomayor's words, I am certain of this.
Posted in: Sotomayor says she chose word poorly in 2001 speech
0
yabits
While "fully understanding" can be interpreted different ways, there is no problem with attaining the understanding sufficient to make an effective decision. Irresponsible people calling her a racist on the basis of one innocuous remark does not appear to me to be a good faith attempt at seeking an understanding.
Nothing at all. Republicans are pouring over all of her cases looking for a smoking gun. The fact that they have yet to come up with something by now indicates something.
Again, nothing. But irresponsible conservatives labeling organizations like La Raza as "racist" does nothing but serve to show their bad faith. Espcially when reminded that many leading Republicans have supported La Raza.
If you expect people to just roll over and act like creampuffs when attacked by irresponsible conservatives acting in bad faith, you have seriously misjudged your opponents. Speaking for myself, there is no need for jackboots; the conservative negative momentum makes judo the most effective counter.
Posted in: Obama calls for swift confirmation of Sotomayor
0
yabits
The slime comes from overt misrepresentation of President Obama's remarks. President Obama did not call for "swift confirmation" of Sotomayor. He fully acknowledged the need for a thorough and rigorous process. Since the confirmation of Roberts took two months, and the confirmation of Alito took three months, I don't see any reason why a thorough, rigorous examination of an Obama nominee would need to take longer than that.
Slime is added when the misrepresentation by some irresponsible conservatives becomes slander directed against all Democrats.
Posted in: Obama calls for swift confirmation of Sotomayor
0
yabits
In relation to the great sensitivity to racism, civil rights, and inclusion that became the Democratic Party's standards from the 1960s on, one would have to examine the patterns of racism as a matter of locality.
What appears to me to be the case is that hardcore conservatives, in feigning all this offense over Sotomayor's completely harmless words, will bring up someone like a Senator Byrd in an attempt to whitewash their own party's racist tendencies. This is why, within very recent history, the Republican National Chairman felt the need to apologize to African-Americans for the racist "southern strategy" employed by the party.
This does not mean the Repubican Party has totally abandoned such racist strategies. (Look at how their initial response was to rally behind Trent Lott's defense of an arch-segregationist.) We see many of their hardliners crying "reverse racism" in response to the innocuous remarks of Judge Sotomayor. To the extent that Byrd might still be a racist is better known to the voters in his home district. One would have to see how they would vote in an election where a white person was pitted against a non-white. To the extent that they would send a person of Byrd's background to Washington in the belief he still was that kind of person, one would expect them to vote heavily Republican in other contests.
Posted in: Sotomayor says she chose word poorly in 2001 speech
0
yabits
Why would Repubicans want to drag out the confirmation process as long as possible?
One simple reason: To throw red meat out to their base and raise funds for their sorry party.
This is mentioned in the article on the topic relating to how Repubicans are not likely to filibuster.
Posted in: Obama calls for swift confirmation of Sotomayor
0
yabits
And the evidence of this is where?
Morgan Freeman didn't mention it.
Posted in: Obama calls for swift confirmation of Sotomayor
0
yabits
Yes, in relation to the authority of government officials acting in their roles, the Constitution is the highest law of the land.
However, when we are discussing "the People," there is a higher law. After all, the people have the right to abolish the constitution -- a right not spelled out in it. You can only assert your position if you believe that people are made for constitutions, and not the other way around.
And I am pointing out the utter absurdity of claiming that a person brought up in two cultures will not have a greater richness of experience than a person who only knows one.
Well, if such richness is not there it can't be helped. But a person who can speak more than one language fluently certainly has an edge over a person who can't -- all OTHER things being relatively equal.
Posted in: Sotomayor says she chose word poorly in 2001 speech
0
yabits
There was nothing racist about Sotomayor's choice of words. She simply expressed a hope that a wise Latina woman, could as often as not, reach a better conclusion than a white male judge who didn't happen to have the richness of experiences.
Did she state that Latinas are better than all whites as a fact? No. Read it again: She's not making a comparison to every single white person, just those who, for whatever reason, didn't have the richness of experience of growing up in two cultures.
Does she say that the Latina would make better decisions as a fact? No. She said she hoped that the Latina would -- as often as not.
And conservatives call this blatant racism, and playing a "race card?" LOL!!! I think you're only making bigger fools out of yourselves in doing so.
Posted in: Sotomayor says she chose word poorly in 2001 speech
0
yabits
And the obvious misrepresentation by some irresponsible conservatives demonstrates a Republican Party sinking into its own slime.
Obama never called for swift confirmation. He wants the confirmation process to being swiftly, but that it should be rigorous and thorough. What he wants, and what most Americans want, is for this process to flow in a timely manner.
In the end, many Republican senators will vote to approve Sotomayor, leaving the slanderers behind in the dust.
When former-President Bush picked a moderate in John Roberts, the Senate confirmed him after a 2-month process, with no question of delay via filibustering. When Bush nominated Alito, someone many Democrats considered far too conservative, it is true that many Democrats, Obama included, voted to filibuster.
But with Sotomayor, a great many Republicans admit that she is a moderate. However, that doesn't mean much to a lot of conservatives here, who are on record as doing nothing but casting out slander on Sotomayor as well as all Democrats.
Posted in: Obama calls for swift confirmation of Sotomayor
0
yabits
It wouldn't have stopped some people. Obama is not one of them.
She is according to the President, who also happens to be an expert on constitutional law.
You should stop believing the terribly unfortunate title chosen or passed along by JT. The title of the President's weekly radio address, given by the White House press office is: President Obama Calls for Thorough and Timely Confirmation for Judge Sonia Sotomayor. Here is what President Obama actually said in his radio address:
"Congress returns this week and I hope the confirmation process will begin without delay. No nominee should be seated without rigorous evaluation and hearing; I expect nothing less. But what I hope is that we can avoid the political posturing and ideological brinksmanship that has bogged down this process, and Congress, in the past. Judge Sotomayor ought to be on the bench when the Supreme Court decides what cases to hear this year and I’m calling on Democrats and Republicans to be thorough, and timely in dealing with this nomination."
http://www.whitehouse.gov/thepressoffice/WEEKLY-ADDRESS-President-Obama-Calls-for-Thorough-and-Timely-Confirmation-for-Judge-Sonia-Sotomayor/
He hopes that the confimation process will begin swiftly. And he expects the process to be rigorous and thorough. I am certain that Democrats can be rigorous, thourough, and timely. Are folks here implying that Republicans can't accomplish that?
Finally, the question is not and as never been whether or not Sotomayor meets some mythical criteria for "the best of the best." Can she be an effective Supreme Court justice? Her record of accomplishments -- which are many -- will show that she can. Some of conservatives on this board, following Limbaugh (who wants Obama to fail) and Gingrich, have cherry-picked one remark she made in 2001 to call her a "racist." What they don't seem to be able to provide, however, is a consistent pattern of legal decisions that Sotomayor has made which backs up that slander.
Posted in: Obama calls for swift confirmation of Sotomayor
0
yabits
Alphaape: You totally misunderstand.
After a very narrow victory over John Kerry in 2004, George Bush told the American people: "I've earned political capital in this campaign, and I intend to spend it."
President Obama won by an even greater margin over John McCain, and the Democrats trounced Republicans in many other places. Yet we don't see President Obama blustering about his "political capital."
I don't know what that has to do with Obama's attempt as a senator to stall the nomination of Alito.
How would that have caused him to "rise above" the political fray? That is not why so many millions of Americans rallied behind his candidacy. (So that he could pick a conservative.)
You mean to say that Republicans get to call Obama "sleazy" and his pick (Sotomayor) a "racist" and then it is incumbent upon President Obama to kowtow to those people? (People whom the American voters soundly rejected!)
Conservatives should be delighted that President Obama picked a moderate. Those on the left -- The Nation magazine, for example -- have serious reservations about Sotomayor. But many of the conservatives I read here don't have an ounce of fair-mindedness in them. Nothing, but nothing, Obama could do would appear "above the fray" to these people.
Posted in: Obama calls for swift confirmation of Sotomayor
0
yabits
After the previous administration's calls for swift confirmation of its nominees, it strikes me as very odd that a Republican should term this as "sleazy."
I will repeat the fact that President Obama has not blustered, telling the American people about all of his "political capital." What a refreshing change from the sleaze of the past.
If anyone, purposely or accidentally, misconstrues this to to say that I think that Obama is sleazy, they are totally wrong.
Posted in: Obama calls for swift confirmation of Sotomayor
0
yabits
I understand that a Republican who is neck-deep in sleaze will see the whole world that way.
Posted in: Obama calls for swift confirmation of Sotomayor
0
yabits
I can understand why Democrats would be so sensitive to racism. For decades, up until the late 1950s and early 1960s, the Democratic Party formed an unholy alliance with southern racist whites. When the northeastern and midwestern liberal forces in the party pushed for greater integration and civil rights for blacks, the southerners rebelled and started joining the Republicans.
What is so puzzling is why Republicans are so up in arms about something as mildly ambiguous as Sotomayor's remarks, and yet rushed to defend the obvious racist sentiments of Trent Lott.
Hypocrites? I think so.
Posted in: Sotomayor says she chose word poorly in 2001 speech
0
yabits
It depends. If she was raised among migrant fruit and vegetable pickers, perhaps not. If she was raised in a middle-class suburb that was not predominantly Latino, then her experience wouldn't allow her to understand that of the migrant pickers to the extent of someone who was living that life.
Definitely not.
Posted in: Sotomayor says she chose word poorly in 2001 speech