hvp05
Methodically disorganized
And I would say that contention is grossly presumptive and ignorant. How does she know any given white person (man, specifically) could not have been the victim of racism/discrimination? I was on the short end of it myself as I grew up a white minority in predominately black neighborhoods when I lived in P.G. County. Conversely, how can she know that all minorities (Hispanics, specifically) grew up in substandard oppressed slums? What if they grew up more 'privileged' than most whites?She stated that when dealing with cases involving racism (of any kind) she would hope that a person of Minority or Ethnicisty would come to a better conclusion than a White Man. Her contention is the White Man wouldnt have been a victim of racism and thereby wouldnt understand racism.
Additionally, I would go with T_P to say that such a position could potentially put her in position to make a worse judgment on a case involving discrimination than a non-minority for the fact that she is making wild assumptions. Consider her thinking: "I know I have been discriminated against, and this person is claiming to have been discriminated against, so I am more inclined to believe their argument." If she feels the need to prove something by siding with the little guy that could lead to some rather errant decisions.
I see her point, and she may have a valid point in there somewhere, but she probably should have kept her mouth shut. During his campaign Oblahma told us he would act like a socialist, and surely enough he is; now Sotomayor is telling us she would view things with a prejudiced eye, how do you believe she will rule?