Capitol Hill Blue Forums Political Issues The Obama Administration Obama picks Sotomayor for high court

Iss, you raised the issue;

I congratulate you on your retraction above, btw. But this statement has no foundation in fact:

Can you provide statistics of the percentage of cases brought by "government lawyers"? My experience it seldom they who bring such cases to the court.

Yes, I caught the retraction. Well done. Once I understood the power of the internet to obtain original source documents, I stopped relying on second-hand sources such as editorials, news articles or blog posts as sources of authoritative information.

BTW, no need to address me by my full "member name." "Chuck" will do. Or "bleeding-heart, commie, pinko, degenerate liberal" also works.

Although the internet is a great resource for finding materials, especially original materials, I often find that the regurgitated stuff - often self-referential as well - is less than satisfactory. At a time when skepticism and critical thinking and reasoning are most required, I find that the population seems to be losing those abilities. Of course, it has been policy for the last 8 years or more to eliminate them from public discourse. I am encouraged, though, that the current President, and many of his staff, are bringing those skills back into usage. Some of us may pooh-pooh it, but I read and listen carefully to what is said and written. It is incredibly nuanced and well thought out.

but would you want to have a beer with it?

Whether it is Reagan, Clinton, Bush, or the current occupant of the Oval Office, the use of "nuance" has never been a stranger to them. President Bush used nuance as a way of placing responsibility on Saddam for the attacks on the WTC and the Pentagon, yet he was able to claim he never said any such thing.

Nuance, when used in public commnunication, is not so much an attribute as it is a sophisticated form of deceit.
Yours,
Issodhos

It wasn't a statement, Phil, it was a question. And I probably would not provide statistics to show that it rains a lot in Western Oregon, either.;-)
Yours,
Issodhos

So if you put a question mark at the end of an outrageous claim it gets a pass and doesn't require any backup? When did you stop beating your wife?

Julia...

It seems that I've created a little hail storm with my comment. I wasn't ignoring responding as my rural ISP Internet service has been down for equipment upgrading over the last few days.

I know that you all might want me to provide some "hardcore source" for my statement, which you've listed above...it's a comment I made related to Texas hispanics and what some (of whom I've spoken with) say what they think about the nomination as it relates to the hype about Judge Sotomayor being "HISPANIC".

Since I don't really believe I can offer you the definitive source of all sources to PROVE my comment, let the just say the following:

Texas is a RED STATE, which includes a lot of Republican voting hispanics. Just because Judge Sotomayor is "CONSIDERED TO BE HISPANIC" doesn't automatically make her fall into the category or cultural meaning of hispanic with Texas Hispanics. And being called Hispanic by the media doesn't give her automatic acceptance of the Texas Hispanics under the guise of being a HISPANIC. In other words...the word Hispanic in Texas with Hispanic voters doesn't instantly turn them into Blue supporters or voters. Nor does it really apply to definition among the various ethnic groups or cultures who find themselves labeled as Hispanic.

But this issue goes way beyond the political affiliations and ideologies. It's about ethnic/cultural differences between origins of individuals who surely all speak Spanish, but in most cases, that's where the similarities virtually end. I use the word "origin" to refer to Mexico, South America, Cuba, and Puerto Rico, primarily. These are all different regions of our tiny world.

So, the only way I can really reply to the "origin of my comment"....I talk with hispanics in my area. I do contract work for a Mexican-American attorney. He's (they) is (are) of the opinion that I've voiced in my posting, which you've questioned.

All I can say is...that there is an "identity difference" between various ethnic groups and cultures who are all wrapped up under the umbrella label of "Hispanic".

I wonder who created this ONE SIZE FITS ALL kind of idea about what constitutes being "Hispanic"?

If anyone is having a problem understanding Hispanic ethnic/culture Indenty, then let me offer just a little bit on that topic and maybe you'll grasp, at least on some small scale" why I stated what I did.

Some Relevant Information Regarding "Hispanic Culture Identity"

I'll see if I can find something from my neck of the woods that might help aleviate the suspicion that I've just create my own view of what Texas Hispanics believe, think, or how they might be reacting to Judge Sotomayor's nomination. Until then...if one chooses, one can consider my comment as nonsense, made up, bullsh!t, or otherwise just plain false. But that wasn't my intent in my posting.

AR - I know my comment sounded critical of you; it wasn't really intended to be. I just wanted to point out that a lot of jumping up and down was happening over what was basically an opinion without a lot of context.

It wasn't what you said (much of which I agree with at one level or another), but the reaction to it, that prompted my comment. It usually takes more to kick off a duststorm like this one, and I was a bit surprised.

As I think you said somewhere in your post, and Issodhos taught me in a post of his months ago, all Hispanic really means is "of or relating to Spanish language" (and/or culture, depending on the definition you pick.) To expect a Guatemalan to have the same outlook as a Texan of Mexican descent would just be silly.

What Mellow Julia said!

Prolly the same folk who like lumping other folk under single words like "Black", "Women", "Gays" ... y'know.. folk who are only comfortable in a two dimensional world of their own making.