I did the research on the dissent votes to prove my point with you. I thouight you were intelligent enough to connect the dots with the ones who voted for the firefighters. My mistake (mental note: Nickie is an idiot) it won't happen again.First off, Sotomayor isn't on the district court, and it wasn't about that they wouldn't "let get heard". Its that they didn't discuss the issues as much as they could have. Secondly, your quoting from the dissent. That is, a MINORITY of the justices. How exactly did you equate a minority of the justices to "almost all"?
As for your weird speculation about how I would be ok with open and obvious discrimination against myself, what in hell would lead you to such a stupid, obviously wrong, and moronic belief?
Obviously wrong and moronic belief? Where I grew up the people who got the highest score were the ones who go the jobs first....despite race. In your world it seems more like "affirmative action"....something that even Martin Luther King was against. Who's the moron, Nickie????
You made a specific point about the lower courts decision and the expansiveness of it. Voting for, or against, the lower court has absolutely nothing to do with the expansiveness of it. You flat out lied, and now you are trying to backtrack from it.
You obviously don't know the facts of the case. It had nothing to do with affirmative action.
Don't call me a liar asshole...I didn't lie about anything. I was stating that the lower court didn't even hear the case. They made a 1 sentence ruling, then a 1 paragraph ruling on the case in the lower court. Ginsberg even said they should have been more expansive on it. (Calm down Meister, Nickie is an idiot) No lying there, Nickie
When lower scores get jobs because of race...it's affirmative action moron...even if you don't call it that....your are the town idiot aren't you?