Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by IcyPatriot, May 27, 2009.
:confused2: I'm just saying he would have been the 1st ... right? :confused2:
First Latina, not first Latino. PSYCHHHHH!!!
Yeah, he is. But he never got close to SCOTUS so he doesnâ€™t count.
This guy did though.
Benjamin Cardozo served on the SCOTUS from 1932-1937. He was a Sephardi Jew whose family traces it's origins to Portugal. Traditional & historic definitions of the term Hispanic denoted a relationship to Hispania, which was the roman term for the Iberian Peninsula of Spain and Portugal.
Historically, the term Hispanic basically referred to those that were from, or whose culture and language traced it's origin back to Iberia, and it included both Spain and Portugal.
So from a historic perspective of what/how the term Hispanic came to be, we've already been there. That is not very romantic and Benji is probably too "White" in appearance to get much press, but he was, as a matter of historical definition, Hispanic.
There is some controversy to that of course, because some (but not all) parts of our government chose (for unknown reasons) to deviate from the traditional definition and exclude Portuguese (and by default Brazilian too) from the definition. For example, The US OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
Typical of our government though, that is not uniformly applied though, as the US Dept. Of Transportation defines Hispanic as
Basically, there is nothing wrong with the historical definition, which clearly does include Portuguese and Spanish together and itâ€™s probably proper to not change a historic definition without a good reason to, but some bureaucrat did at some point.
Like I said, using the traditional and historic definitions, we've already had a Hispanic Justice. Not that it matters much.
Jeff Rosen (Constitutional Scholor) said of him in a 1997 NYT Book review for a biography on his life (titled Cardozo).
Purely speculative of course. But wouldn't that be a hoot.
A Jewish, gay and Hispanic justice that had already served on the SCOTUS almost 80 years ago. That is an bonified three-fer right there. :singing:
And yeah, the guy was a lib.
Why wern't all these politically correct f---ing left wing a$s holes running around gushing and fawning over Mike Dukakis being
"The First Greek"
God Damn Liberal Racist Bastards imagine how all the White People in America feel listening to to all this "First Sh!t" this old lard a$s Judge is a friggin racist herself if Sarah Palin or Hillary Clinton said the things this Latineny B!tch said they would have been run out of the country, I don't like her looks either, she looks like one of those old hags that hang around the neighborhood beer & wine joints in the South End.
RACISM IS ALIVE AND WELL IN THE DINGOBAT LOBERAL LOON COMMUNITY WE DON'T NEED RACISTS ON THE SUPREME COURT.
JIMMY CARTER WAS THE FIRST A$S HOLE PRESIDENT
They were...the "son of a Greek Immigrant" was being touted by them but that could only do so much for him.
Yeah well Latino/Latina if it was so important then why did the democrats fillibuster to keep him from becoming a Supreme Court judge???
Billy Blue Dress was the first Oval Office Diddler (that got caught)
God isn't this all wonderful we are going to have our first Female (gush) Latinia Supreme Court Justice, Jesus Christ I am so thrilled my friggin legs are flopping all over my floor, holy sh!t I'm having an orgasm argghhhhhh, oh god America is great god bless this First One, please God
It wasn't the Supreme Court...it was for the DC Court of Appeals.
And his ethnicity probably was a HUGE factor in them killing his appointment. That probably killed any chances he may have had at a future appointment to the high court, because had they allowed him to sit on the appeals court he would be among the top of the list for the next opening under a Republican President, either as their "minority" choice or as their young gun choice. Taking him out of the picture prevents Republicans doing to them what they are going to do to Republicans who try to oppose Sotomayor's choice: call them racist or worse for refusing to confirm a minority who rose up from poverty in a developing country to make a good life for himself...the same shtick they are doing with Sotomayor now
I think its fair to differentiate between someone who's family is from Europe and someone who's from Mexico or to the south.
I believe there's some benefits to diversity. For example, I think its perfectly ok to seek out a qualified minority candidate even if there's several white candidates just standing right in front of you. Not that you should be forced to do so; but the choice should be yours. However, my initial impression of Sotomayor is that she's just not good enough. Its one thing if there really wasn't much of a difference between her and the very best legal mind available; but I'm concerned that there is a rather large difference and that makes this choice wrong IMO. Obama is no longer perfect in my eyes
Then again with Clarence Thomas on the bench, I suppose the Democrats deserve a mulligan too.
You are missing the point? It's not differentiating Mexicans and Europeans. Spaniards are ALWAYS considers hispanic. The definition traditionally meant people that traced their roots to Iberian Peninsula, which means traced their roots to either Spain or Portugal. Doesn't make much sense to drop Portugal from the definition, because that also drops Brazilians from the definition to.
So someone from Peru or Ecuador would be hispanic, but someone from Brazil would not
Makes not sense. Lots of stuff we do doesn't though, so that is just par for the course.
Separate names with a comma.