The Party Of "No" Speaks Loudly When Minorities Are Involved
Remember when Rush Limbaugh, the true leader of the Republican Party, jumped all over then-judge Sotomayor when she was nominated by Pres. Obama for the seat she eventually won on the Supreme Court?
Well, Republicans are at it again, this time attacking an Asian-American nominee to the US Court of Appeals.
The GOP base is increasingly white/Tea Partyish, so attacking minority leaders fits into a regional/southern strategy for the GOP - - a losing plan nationally in an increasingly diverse country.
5 comments:
James:
Maybe someday you will see people as Americans as the Founding Fathers crafted a Country where people left their previous identity such as Italian,Polish etc.. and became American. Plainly and simply American. Without any other descriptive words needed.
Can't we consider a persons ability and not their race or gender. Isn't that truly what "equality" is about...or is it equality only when a white male is discriminated against.
Race and gender do not play a role in interpreting the Constitution and upholding the law of this land.
These would be the documents that defined Blacks as less than full citizens,and did not extend the vote to women, either?
Have you been to a central city lately? Or an Indian reservation? Or an office where women make 68% of the mens' wages?
Before you have your knee-jerk reaction of playing the race card - which I realize is one of the few strategies progressives like you have - can you point to one instance of where the conservative opposition to a nominee is based on their race?
Exactly what opposition was there to then-Judge Sotomayor because she was either a woman or of Hispanic descent?
Versus her opinions and judicial philosophy.
What opposition can you point to of Professor Liu because he is of Asian descent.
Versus his writings and judicial philosophy.
Justice is blind, except in your eyes. In the end, who are the real racists here?
Btw those aspects of the constitution you cited were corrected thru the proper constitutional processes as outlined in the constitution some time ago, and not by some activists judge or justice.
STM/BFTG
To Anon Jim: I am amused that you begin a long-winded comment with "before you have your knee-jerk reaction..."
In my estimation commenting on one of your posts, after having first read it 4 days earlier does not exactly make it a "knee-jerk" reaction.
My apologies if I am long winded, but it would be nice if you would actually respond to the substance of one of my posts for a change.
Guess that would involve messy things like facts.
At least I amused you James.
Post a Comment