Just Shut the F*ck Up

[Rusty5329]

Originally posted at http://leftchattering.blogspot.com/2009/05/just-shut-fck-up.html
Please feel free to leave a comment or criticism there. Thanks!

I swear to, well, who or whatever, that if I hear one more conservative say that the 2008 election is proof that we do not need affirmative action, I am going to tear my hair out. Of course, with the nomination of Sonia Sotomayor for the Supreme Court, the conservatives are all giddy about this chance to yell at minorities about how horrible life is for white males. "White men need not apply" they scream. So let's have at it.

Yes, the Sotomayor pick is affirmative action. President Obama picked a female, and a hispanic one at that, and those traits surely played a role in his choice. I am going to state, right now, that that is a good thing. It is good that our President intentionally chose a hispanic female. As to the "White men need not apply" meme; it is not that white men need not apply, it is that, for the last couple centuries, the sign read "All but white men need not apply."

Now on to the claim that the 2008 elections demonstrated that our country no longer needs affirmative action. First off, the vast majority of the people making this claim never supported affirmative action to begin with. They do not think we no longer need it, they never wanted it at all. Let us forget that for a moment, and discuss the validity of this claim. First thing conservatives say is, "President Obama proves that anyone can make it in America." They forget one thing. That is, that President Obama says himself that he “undoubtedly benefited from affirmative action” And he did. The only reason he could afford to go to such fantastic universities is because of a strong student loan program and partial scholarships. And while these loans and scholarships did not make him who he is, to claim he did not "benefit" from them is ubsurd. And it is a non sequitur to argue that because President Obama achieved much, affirmative action is no longer needed. Just because A is true, it does not necessarily mean B is true. The only thing President Obama's story should tell us, is that affirmative action can actually do exactly what it is intended to do: help minorities take steps towards more success.

Now on to Sotomayor and the predictable conservative outcry that she was chosen only because she is a minority. This claim, is complete crap. It is the regurgitation of the unsubstantiated conservative meme that all affirmative action choices are made solely because of race or gender. I will try to state this as plainly and directly as possible: Affirmative action is not about promoting unqualified minorities, rather, it is about intentionally seeking out qualified minorities, in an effort to correct past mistakes.

Sotomayor is absolutely a qualified candidate. In fact, she is possibly the most credentialed SC nominee in my lifetime. She was chosen beacuse she is qualified. Her race did play a role in this choice, but her credentials were the priority.

[undeterred]

1. for the last couple centuries, the sign read "All but white men need not apply."

:thumbsup:

[monmouth]

2. Sotomayor is more qualified right now than any of the present sitting justices....n/t

[Caliman73]

3. True

Funny how some people always seem to miss that. First, you have to be qualified, then you look to see if that particular minority or protected group is under served or under represented. Conservatives and even some of our own tend to jump straight into the minority issue without looking at the qualifications issue.

[hfojvt]

4. what exactly are her qualifications?

you make naked statements there.

"Sotomayor is absolutely a qualified candidate. In fact, she is possibly the most credentialed SC nominee in my lifetime. She was chosen beacuse she is qualified. Her race did play a role in this choice, but her credentials were the priority."

A couple of lines listing her qualifications would strengthen your argument.

[Rusty5329]

5. a quick google search...

of her name gives plenty of stuff. Her wikipedia page is helpful enough:
Sonia Sotomayor (born June 25, 1954) is a federal judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. On May 26, 2009, President Barack Obama nominated Judge Sotomayor for appointment to the U.S. Supreme Court to replace retiring Justice David Souter.<2><3> Sotomayor is of Puerto Rican descent, and was born in the Bronx. Her father died when she was nine, and she was raised by her mother. Sotomayor graduated with an A.B., summa cum laude, from Princeton in 1976, and received her J.D. from Yale Law School in 1979, where she was an editor at the Yale Law Journal. She worked as an Assistant District Attorney in New York for a time before entering private practice in 1984. Sotomayor was nominated to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York by President George H. W. Bush in 1991 and confirmed in 1992.

[hfojvt]

15. so basically 16 years on the US district court

and a little bit as assistant DA. Certainly more credentials than Roberts. I am not sure how it compares to Sandra Day. It seems a little less varied than Souter's experience, but still very good. I would include only the relevant details - 6 yrs District Court judge, 11 years US Court of Appeals, 9 years adjunct professor at NYU.

[Rusty5329]

16. enough credentials...

that you would think no one would question whether or not merit played a role in President Obama's decision.

[MadMaddie]

23. She has more experience than Thomas that's for sure

[napoleon_in_rags]

6. I think there is a legitimate reason to put people of diverse backgrounds on the supreme court.

I think it makes it stronger, and Sotomayor might bring that different persective. But I don't think you can argue ANY merit in choosing a candidate based on genitals or genetics.

[EFerrari]

7. And Affirmative Action doesn't do that. n/t

[Rusty5329]

14. You are right...

But affirmative action does not choose based on genitals of genetics, you choose on merit but err on the side of promoting minorities that are underrepresented. Are you going to claim that Sotomayor is not supremely qualified for this position?

[napoleon_in_rags]

18. I'm responding to this line in the OP:

President Obama picked a female, and a hispanic one at that, and those traits surely played a role in his choice.

I just think we have to be careful in how we discuss this stuff. The RWers would love to frame it like its a genitals and genetics thing, and we have to be prepared to explain why it isn't, why its about more, like how different experiences and cultural perspectives enrich the court.

[Rusty5329]

19. I agree...

but we shouldn't be shy about saying that race and gender played a role. That should be a good thing. And the argument that, race played a role therefore she is not qualified, is a non sequitur. Just because A is true, does not necessarily mean that B is true.

I just think we should not shy away from, rather embrace and celebrate, the fact that President Obama considered race and gender. As Martha Stewart would say "It's a good thing."

[napoleon_in_rags]

26. I somewhat agree, but I think its deeper.

I think we have to mention WHY we embrace the different race and gender, which I talk about here in post #25
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=5730618&mesg_id=5733700

What I'm getting at is that the RWers would love to reduce it to JUST race and gender, and from there they can make accusations of racism and sexism. But when we allow ourselves to see race and genders as indicators of broader cultural experience and perspectives, then we can make solid arguments about the merits of affirmative action as being about something deeper. :)

[Number23]

20. No one has suggested that.

SS's ethnicity and gender are the candied sugar on top of the sprinkles on top of the icing that is the cake (the cake of course being her education and work experiences).

[napoleon_in_rags]

25. Well I'm proposing that her unique cultural perspective brings something to the court

And its more than just icing. I think we all know she's qualified. I guess what I'm arguing is that the spirit of affirmative action is about something bigger than just skin color and gender. For instance, suppose you had a government panel dealing with broad social issues, many of which affect latinos, consisting entirely of...white folks. Two people were being considered for the panel: A guy named Jose Perez who went to high school with the white guys and had the exact same cultural experiences, and a blond guy originally from Spain who grew up in Latin America, and lived with Latino Americans his whole life. I'm arguing that hiring the second guy would bring more to the panel, and be more in the spirit of affirmative action. Of course the overwhelming odds are that the skin colors would in reality be reversed, so I'm just giving an example. But I think the main issue is putting the emphasis on the different cultural perspectives that affirmative action brings.

[EFerrari]

8. Proud to be the first rec!

[Rusty5329]

9. thanks EFerrari!

[EFerrari]

11. I sincerely believe that a lot of people don't understand what affirmative action is.

In my case, I was a Latina that grew up in a household just holding its own around the poverty line. No one at my high school ever talked to me about college even though I was in the top 1% of my class. Heck, *I* didn't even know that until years later because my future was so scripted for me -- I'd drop a few kids and maybe go type somewhere if they'd have me. That's true. I didn't have any burning awareness of the way we were routed at the time.

But, after only dropping 1 kid, lol, I knew I couldn't type the rest of my life and stay sane. So, I took some more classes at our JC and then applied to Berkeley. And the only reason I applied there was that they had access to AA grants and loans. In other words, that was really the only campus I had any hope of going to that I could afford. I brought my academic record and they responded by giving me a few grants and access to a few good loans. No one pushed me forward because of my gender or my ethnicity, they pushed me forward because of my record. All they were doing was helping me stay in school once I showed that I could produce.

I was one of two Latinos in my grad school class, and one of three students of color and one of two students over 30 -- all in a class of 19. I don't see how we can take over the world at that rate, so everyone should just relax. Especially given all the time we spend filling out forms and interviewing and writing to committees to get the money we need just to do something easy like stay in grad school. :crazy:

Affirmative Action isn't about putting unqualified people in better positions. It's about not wasting qualified people. About retaining them and helping them position themselves where the benefit is not only to themselves but to the community. Now, there's a thought.

As usual, the Republicans have inverted what Affirmative Action means and are getting away with it.

[Rusty5329]

13. thanks so much for that story,

you stated my point far better than I did.

[Rusty5329]

17. I just...

threw your story up on my blog: http://leftchattering.blogspot.com/2009/05/so-you-think-you-know-what-affirmative.html

[mmonk]

10. We have a Just Shut The F*ck Up thread and a We Will Not Shut Up thread today.

Guess I'll post in this one for the moment.

[EFerrari]

12. What we need now is a "Continue at a Dull Roar" thread.

lol

[annabanana]

21. (happy to have rec'd it onto Greatest. . . ). . .n/t

[HughMoran]

22. Right-wing morans are self-immolating

I can provide a match if needed :eyes:

[EFerrari]

24. I'll bring the marshmallows. Somebody grab a boom box.

[shellgame26]

27. why is it

that opponents of affirmative action never question the talent and credentials of the default group ie, white males? Do they think that by being white and male they are automatically qualified? and how come they're only stuck on one category of affirmative action? I've never heard anyone challenge legacy-type affirmative action in ivy league schools that produced stars such as George W Bush.

[Rusty5329]

28. I was thinking...

that same thing yesterday about legacy admissions. If we truly will only accept people based on merit, shouldn't legacy admissions be outlawed then?

As for your question, "Do they think that by being white and male they are automatically qualified?"

Simply put, yes. They do.