Home | Editorials | Lets call it like it is, OK?

Lets call it like it is, OK?

By
Font size: Decrease font Enlarge font

OK, I’m confused, so help me out here.

As a society we are supposed to abhor racism. Yet, we seem to be in a position to reward it; at least some of us it would appear. Mostly Democrats and socialists seem ready to jump on the reward bandwagon. I just can’t figure it out. So, give me a hand.

Newt Gingrich called the recent nominee for an associate justice’s seat on the U.S. Supreme Court a racist on the basis of a 2001 statement made in front of an audience in Berkley, California, then after much racket on the left’s blogosphere and mainstream media, backed off. I’m confused about that. Why not call someone exactly what they are then stand by your guns? Rush appears to have done so.

Of course I’m talking about Judge Sonya Sotomayor from the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, Barack Obama’s nominee to replace Associate Justice David Souter on the Supreme Court, who famously said in 2001 that "a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experience would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male" sure seems racist to me.

So, if it waddles like a duck, quacks like a duck and has web feet then why not call it a duck? Racism is racism regardless of who utters the words. Oh, I know a lot of uninformed folks believe only whites can be racist, but truth is that’s just not a fact.

Let’s be sure we have our terms defined here. Webster’s defines racism as a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and those racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race. If Judge Sotomayor’s statement doesn’t fit that to a tee, then I don’t quite know what does.

Now, we are supposed to embrace her based on her life story. She’s of Puerto Rican descent, grew up in the Bronx, her father died when she was young, she overcame childhood diabetes, then graduated summa cum laude from a very prestigious law school. That’s all wonderful, but does it really tell what type of a Justice she’d make.

Based on the above Alberto Gonzales should have made a splendid Justice, but unfortunately he was conservative and Republican to boot. That’s two strikes against anyone, even a Latino. So, he was savaged by the leftist media and leftists in Congress. Too bad they are such hypocrites. The difference in treatment between Sotomayor and Gonzales should stand out like a beacon.

So, how was Sonia Sotomayor as a judge?

According to lawyers arguing cases before her court she was "nasty," "angry," and a "terror on the bench." Does this withering evaluation come into play in her confirmation? Probably not because there are the usual gaggle of apologists organized by the White House who will say the criticism is "misplaced," or she’s just "misunderstood." One lawyer said she simply "does not suffer fools gladly." Isn’t that nice? It probably is no accident she’s the only member of the 2nd Circuit to receive universally negative reviews for her temperament.

Another striking thing about Judge Sotomayor is she’s been overturned by the Supreme Court on 60% of her cases. That certainly does not speak well for her ability and sensibility as a jurist that three out of five decisions cause someone to hold their nose and say she’s full of it. One thing people are getting tired of is judges deciding things not on the basis of the law but on the basis of their personal feelings.

Activist judges are a plague on the rule of law and Sonia Sotomayor certainly seems to fit that description. In fact at a panel discussion at Duke Law School, she endorsed judicial activism on the appeals courts telling students: "Court of Appeals is where policy is made. And I know – I know this is on tape, and I should never say that because we don’t make the law. I know." Wink, wink, snicker, snicker.

If one is to question her racial inclinations nothing illustrates it more than her out-of-hand dismissal of a suit brought by some white firefighters who finished high on an advancement test only to be denied that advancement and have the test results thrown out because no blacks would be promoted. This was not "reverse" discrimination; it was just plain ol’ discrimination.

So there you have it. Barack Obama’s first building block in his vision of a mediocre society. She’s obviously the best of the worst which is scary enough, but unfortunately for our nation, I don’t think we’ve seen nothin’ yet.


Subscribe to comments feed Comments (0 posted)

total: | displaying:

Post your comment

  • Bold
  • Italic
  • Underline
  • Quote

Please enter the code you see in the image:

Captcha

Log in

  • Email to a friend Email to a friend
  • Print version Print version
  • Plain text Plain text

Tagged as:

No tags for this article

Rate this article

0
Powered by Vivvo CMS v4.5.2