Obama’s Justice
Digg 
Stumble Upon 
Newsvine 
Slashdot 
Mixx 
Diigo 
Delicious 
Reddit 
Facebook
When you think about it, Sonia Sotomayor is the perfect pick for the Supreme Court — in Barack Obama’s America.
Like Obama, himself a beneficiary of affirmative action, she thinks “Latina women,” because of their life experience, make better judicial decisions than white men, that discrimination against white men to advance people of color is what America is all about, that appellate courts are “where policy is made” in the United States.
To those who believe the depiction of our first Hispanic justice as an anti-white liberal judicial activist, hearken to her own words.
Speaking at Berkeley in 2001, Sonia told her audience, “I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experience would more often than not reach a better conclusion (as a judge) than a white male who hasn’t lived that life.”
Imagine if Sam Alito had said at Bob Jones University, “I would hope that a wise white male with the richness of his life experience would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a Hispanic woman, who hasn’t lived that life.”
Alito would have been toast. No explanation, no apology would have spared him. He would have been branded for life a white bigot.
Judge Sotomayor will be excused because the media agree with her and she is a Latina who will use her court seat to impose upon the nation the values of the National Council of La Raza (The Race), of which she is a member.
Indeed, she sees this as her mission. Speaking at Duke in 2005, Sotomayor declared: “(The) court of appeals is where policy is made. I know this is on tape, and I should never say that because we don’t make law I know.” She and the audience joined in the laughter.
Who were they laughing at? Americans who still believe the role of judges is to apply the Constitution as the Framers intended and to interpret the law as written by our elected legislators.
In Barack Obama’s America, that is so yesterday.
Sotomayor’s support for discrimination against white males was on exhibit when Ricci v. DeStefano came before a three-judge panel of the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals on which Sotomayor sits.
Frank Ricci is the New Haven firefighter who, suffering from dyslexia but desperate to realize his dream of becoming an officer, quit his second job, bought $1,000 worth of books and had a friend read them to him to prepare for the crucial exam. He made it, coming in sixth among 77 firefighters, qualifying for promotion to lieutenant.
A problem immediately arose. Seems that of those who qualified for promotion, all but one were white, and he was a Hispanic.
Can’t have that. So, the New Haven City Council, under pressure from the usual suspects, threw out the tests, refused to promote Ricci or any white firemen, and called for new tests — to produce greater diversity. In other words, get rid of at least some of those white guys who somehow managed to come in near or at the top of their class.
Ricci and 19 other firemen sued, claiming they had been denied the promotions they had won for one reason: They were white.
What did Sotomayor’s three-judge panel do with Ricci’s appeal of the district court decision that turned him down? She tried to kill and bury it in a single dismissive unpublished paragraph so Ricci and the white firefighters would never get a hearing in the Supreme Court.
Stuart Taylor, former New York Times Supreme Court reporter and a National Journal columnist, charges Sotomayor with engaging “in a process so peculiar as to fan suspicions that some or all of the judges were embarrassed by the ugliness of the actions that they were blessing and were trying to sweep quietly under the rug, perhaps to avoid Supreme Court review or public criticism, or both.”
Had it not been for the intervention of Judge Jose Cabranes — a Clinton appointee outraged that so momentous a case was being put in a dumpster — Sotomayor’s misconduct might never have been uncovered, and those firemen would forever be denied their chance for justice.
The process by which Sotomayor was selected testifies to what we can expect in Obama’s America. Not a single male was in the final four. And she was picked over the three other women because she was a person of color, a “two-fer.” Affirmative action start to finish.
Reading 30 of her opinions, GW law professor Jonathan Turley found them “notable” for “lack of depth.”
Liberal law professor and Supreme Court expert Jeff Rosen of The New Republic reports, after talking to prosecutors and law clerks, that Sotomayor covers up her intellectual inadequacy by bullying from the bench.
The lady is a lightweight.
What should Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee do?
Abjure the vicious tactics Democrats used on Robert Bork, Clarence Thomas and Sam Alito. Lay out the lady’s record. And let America get a close look at the kind of justice Barack Obama believes in.
COPYRIGHT 2009 CREATORS SYNDICATE INC.
Filed under: Politics
Sotomayer is a racist, as are all members of the treasonous La Raza -by definition- who advocate a “Re Conquista” of the SW United States and who’s motto is “For our race everything- for others, nothing”.
Clearly Eric Holder has some racial hangups and agenda too… as does Obama, since his behavior betrays a wierd pro-Kenyan grudge against the British… and he’s the one who nominated all these kooks.
What happened to the idea of a colorblind society? These three define their world in racial terms all the time- and unlike any white people I know.
I wouldn’t want to be judged by any of them after what I’ve heard come out of their own mouths- they sound like Jesse Jackson.
If Obama is going to go on with his “justice” agenda largely based upon race- the double standards need to stop, and NOW.
http://reaganiterepublicanresistance.blogspot.com/
Sotomayer is a racist, as are all members of the treasonous La Raza -by definition- who advocate a “Re Conquista” of the SW United States and who’s motto is “For our race everything- for others, nothing”.
Clearly Eric Holder has some racial hangups and agenda too… as does Obama, since his behavior betrays a wierd pro-Kenyan grudge against the British… and he’s the one who nominated all these kooks.
What happened to the idea of a colorblind society? These three define their world in racial terms all the time- and unlike any white people I know.
I wouldn’t want to be judged by any of them after what I’ve heard come out of their own mouths- they sound like Jesse Jackson.
If Obama is going to go on with his “justice” agenda largely based upon race- the double standards need to stop, and NOW.
Sotomayor’s not a racist, but she is clearly aggressively pro-affirmative action. This is where the GOP should raise questions – respectfully – I think, since it wouldn’t be too hard to point out to the public that in the Ricci case, neither justice nor equity were properly served.
But let’s no blame her for simply practicing her judgement within pretty well established limits.
Obama is still lining up his soldiers. the long march hasn’t begun yet but from the looks of it, America doesn’t seem to bother.
I noticed his NASA chief is black too. White Protestants are still about 30-40% of the population but about 4% of his cabinet.
But that’s a cheap game, taking any comment on race or ethnicity and substituting “white.” There is a vast difference between being white and being Latino in this country, and it is grossly dishonest to suggest that they are the same.
Incidentally, the comment, “the treasonous La Raza -by definition- who advocate a “Re Conquista” of the SW United States,” is not true. La Raza opposes separatism.
Dear Wally,
It’s about what you said: “There is a vast difference between being white and being Latino in this country, and it is grossly dishonest to suggest they are the same.”
Who said that? I looked through the quotes and I didn’t see anybody say they were the same. Did I miss something?
No, they’re not the same. Just like all the white people who live in Appalachia in abject poverty, aren’t the same as white people who live in Bel Air. Whether or not they are “the same” is not the point. In fact it’s exactly the opposite!
America is not about everybody being “the same”. It’s about everybody becoming their own individual, to have the freedom, the opportunity to better themselves and not have to deal with the tyrannies enforced by some overbearing government, religion, or aristocracy. And–never forget this Wally, it is very important– it is about development of the heart, of the conscience, as much as it is the pocketbook.
What this woman said is just more of the same old bigotry, part of the tyranny we’ve been fighting against for so long. (And, by the way, read her speech on that last page there’s more than one racist comment.) It’s only coming from another race. And it is motivated by the same old bugaboo of humanity: Power.
It’s not about white or black or red or what have you. It’s about imposing power on another human being unjustly. Try to spin it however you like, in whatever amoral (relativist) system that’s been developed by the most diseased mind; the human heart will not accept the imposition of power upon an innocent.
Thanks for your time Wally. Hope to hear from you soon.
I am Canadian agree with Pat Buchanan about this being a typical ethnic person wishing to move forward certain identities to the loss of other identities. Obama too.. In fact its the core value of the liberal establishment and the Democratic party. A lot or republican establishment folks too.
Yet there is a greater reason why this nominee should be defeated and patriotic Americans and so the true conservatives to be the leaders on this.
i accuse president Obama of picking this person for the motive of ethnicity and sex.
I insist he picked the “best’ “hispanic” woman that was to be found.
Needed a woman of coarse since the court was short. Bush tried and thankfully failed.
Needed to reward the “Hispanic” voting bloc for its votes for Obama and democrats.
This is so clear that its fair to accuse.
The media announced right away about the identity as a important point. Hispanic groups have warned republicans (and Americans) that not supporting this person will be met with punishment. so its on their mind about the importance of identity.
Its all about being a different ethnic and sex. it is the important point of the the liberal establishments mind and so on Obama etc mind.
to pick a person on these points is illegal. Its discrimination against the American people first and second against the equality ideal of all citizens.
its robbery. this is a new ‘group’ that has no right to be pushed over others. All those European Catholics have been dismissed as “white” people.
This is a obscure Puerto Rican group of little numbers or success and Obama wants America to believe she is worthy of the esteemed Supreme court over all other New York judges. She is the best?
This is a fraud. yes all of them pick judges with ethnity/sex on mind but its wrong.
This is way wrong because of being very new and unsuccessful people groups.
This is why conservatives have a great chance to attack the whole rottan structure and injustice of identity politics. This is a chance to fight for justice in jurisprudence.
The Bush/neo conservative types will not.
Its Americans right to oppose judges who are picked for illegal and immoral principals.
TAC should war against this nominee being successful.