Hey, liberals: My Pet Goat THIS!
Also: don’t go to college. You are wasting your time. It’s a scam.
Sotomayor herself admits she’s not very smart, and NYT — incredibly — publishes it:
The New York Times reported that, to get up to speed on her English skills at Princeton, Sotomayor was advised to read children’s classics and study basic grammar books during her summers. How do you graduate first in your class at Princeton if your summer reading consists of “Chicken Little” and “The Troll Under the Bridge”?
In video clips dating back 25 years, and now provided to the Senate Judiciary Committee, Sotomayor, according to the Times, even calls herself an “affirmative action product.”
“The clips include lengthy remarks about her experiences as an ‘affirmative action baby,’ whose lower test scores were overlooked by admissions committees at Princeton University and Yale Law School because, she said, she is Hispanic and had grown up in poor circumstance.” [sic]
Yep, that’s an actual “sic”... (Do Hispanics get their plural usage mixed up the way French people do?)
“If we had gone through the traditional numbers route of those institutions,” says Sotomayor, “it would have been highly questionable if I would have been accepted. … My test scores were not comparable to that of my classmates.”
[Videos Shed New Light on Sotomayor’s Positions, By Charlie Savage, June 10, 2009]
Thus, Sotomayor got into Princeton, got her No. 1 ranking, was whisked into Yale Law School and made editor of the Yale Law Review—all because she was a Hispanic woman.And those two Ivy League institutions cheated more deserving students of what they had worked a lifetime to achieve, for reasons of race, gender or ethnicity.
It gets worse. Sotomayor…
“has difficulty defining ‘merit’…”
Believes “[t]here are cultural biases built into testing…”
And, in a hilariously depressing NTY postscript:
The report quoted Judge Sotomayor saying in a speech in April that “Article IV of the Constitution” says treaties are “the supreme law of the land.”
She misspoke; in fact, as several readers later noted, it is Article VI that refers to treaties.
Numerals!? We don’t need no stinking Roman numerals!!
That “traditional numbers route” is such a buzzkill. Cuz hey, Roman numerals are “culturally biased” and “invented by old dead white men” so their fairly simple conventions can be ignored at will.
A truly enlighted person, after all, would use “Arabic numbers” exclusively. (Naw, they ain’t really “Arab” or anything but it makes them happy, so we humor ’em.)
