ARS on Twitter
RSS
Sotomayor admits she is stupid
Posted by Raven on June 11th, 2009
You know, if she’d kept her mouth shut back in the day people probably wouldn’t have a problem with her now. Our words have a way of coming back to haunt us.
Judge Sonia Sotomayor says she is a “perfect affirmative action baby,” and that she was accepted to Princeton and Yale despite her lackluster test performance compared to other applicants.
She made these comments in a video dating back to “early ’90s” that she submitted to the Senate Judiciary Committee last week as part of her Supreme Court nomination process.
Sotomayor admitted that her acceptance to the Ivy League schools would have been “highly questionable” if not for affirmative action.
“My test scores were not comparable to that of my colleagues at Princeton or Yale,” she said on a panel for a nonprofit law organization.
This says a lot. The dumbing down of America is coming home to roost.
June 11th, 2009 at 12:35 pm
Sotomayor is best described as average or maybe a bit dull. She got where she is, by her own admission, through racially biased selection (affirmative action) which is racism pure and simple.
She is entirely unqualified for the Supreme Court becuase of her dullness and biases. That we have fallen so low in selecting members of our government shows us what a huge mistake electing Obama was. His lack of qualifications are even more stunning.
June 12th, 2009 at 6:59 am
Her test scores don’t make her dull or dumb. Only her actions would make her so.
June 12th, 2009 at 3:47 pm
Classic….
June 12th, 2009 at 9:31 pm
Some of my liberal friends like to make a big deal out of I.Q.’s and test scores. I wonder if Sotomayor’s admission will affect here standing with such egghead liberals.
June 12th, 2009 at 9:49 pm
I don’t equate stupidity with grades or affirmative action per se. How Sotomayor did in law school is far more determinative.
However, this video IS damning regarding her SCOTUS nomination, because it provides further evidence that she does not have a judicial temperament but rather views her role as judge to be that of an advocate to make law rather than to impartially administer the existing law. The two key lines of evidence are these:
1) In her denigrating testing as being culturally biased, etc. for which affirmative action is thus necessary, she make clear her allegiance to an extreme left-wing collectivist worldview of oppressive white rule that needs to be taken down in favor of supposedly oppressed minority groups (in which individuals have no role except as membership in some group).
2) Her assertion that since she did well in school and her career, that affirmative action is a good thing reflects an “end justifies the means” philosophy, which in the judicial realm translates to “results-based” jurisprudence, the bane of the modern day court decisions. In results-based jurisprudence, judges begin with what they want the decision to be or what they think it should be, and then they go back and adduce legal reasons to defend that outcome. In a sense, this is another manifestation of judges taking an advocacy role.
This is the opposite of faithfulness and adherence to the existing law and ruling on the basis of what the law says, which is how conservatives approach judicial decision-making.
June 12th, 2009 at 10:56 pm
If judicial decisions are “faith-based”, i.e., they are based upon the faith of the judge (whether traditional religion or the newer liberal religion of metaphysical faith in their own god-like ability to render “justice”), then there is no longer any rule of law, for laws are relatively static while “faith-based” decisions depend on nothing more than the judges prejudices and whims.
June 13th, 2009 at 12:44 am
Admitting one is a “bit dull” is something a lib will never do because their whole “raison d’etre” is to play god with absolutely no consequences for their actions, judicial, legislative or social.
In other words, it’s all about them, not their proclaimed “victims”, and as such, any actions they take are deemed worthy and superior simply because they took them.