Log in

View Full Version : More of the Same Game



Daveparts
06-01-2009, 07:21 AM
More of the Same Game
By David Glenn Cox


The Republicans rant and froth at the mouth over Obama’s choice of Sonia Sotomayor for Supreme Court Justice, taking quotes out of context and using her membership in Hispanic organizations as they try to paint her into a corner as a racist. The left is giddy with diversity as a Latina and woman was Obama’s choice, and of course women and minorities should be better represented on the Supreme Court.

Jackie Robinson was chosen to be the first African American to play in the major leagues because he was, of course, African American but also because of his amazing talent. Thurgood Marshall was the first African American to serve on the US Supreme Court. Appointed by Lyndon Johnson, Marshall had won 29 of 32 cases he litigated before the court as the Chief Counsel of the NAACP. Marshall was, first of all, a champion for African American people, but most of all was a defender of the Constitution for all American people. His choice was not just an achievement for African Americans but for all Americans as his presence on the court threw long, towering shadows.

Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh use quotes taken out of context to describe Sotomayor as a racist. Keith Olbermann, on the other hand, finds quotes made by Justice Samuel Alito and even archconservative Anton Scalia trying to make the same point, that where we come from shades our opinions. But it struck me as odd that while Olbermann was trying to defend Sotomayor it was having the opposite affect on me. She talks just like Alito and Scalia? That’s supposed to make me feel better?

The problem is that with the Supreme Court, in most cases, they set precedent, while on the Appeals Court they merely follow precedent. She was first appointed to the bench by George H. W. Bush and promoted to the Court of Appeals by Bill Clinton. She has ruled both for and against environmentalist issues, voting to enforce the original intent of the Clean Water Act but siding against environmentalists on New York’s plan to curb ozone emissions.

In her only abortion-related court decision during her 11 years on the Court of Appeals, Sotomayor wrote, “The Supreme Court has made clear that the government is free to favor the anti-abortion position over the pro-choice position, and can do so with public funds.”

Sotomayor has also upheld the Mexico City Policy, which has since been overturned by the President. This policy prohibits federally funded non-governmental organizations from promoting abortion as a family planning measure in other countries.

In short, she is almost an exact replica of the retiring Souter who was appointed by George H.W. Bush. While she has much experience, she has done little to distinguish herself as a great legal mind. I don’t think she is a bad choice and under a Republican administration I might consider her a good choice. But is this change? Is she our champion? With the burning constitutional issues of torture and executive privilege before us, is Sotomayor the best candidate the President finds available?

President Johnson was able to appoint Thurgood Marshall because of high popularity numbers and a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate. So I’ll ask again, is this the best Obama can do? To nominate a candidate with no apparent fervor in either direction, a bureaucrat doing corporate America's bidding. A Federal Appeals Court Justice insulated and removed from the average American.

We are far from being a post-racial society, but we are far enough down the road to see that anyone of any background receiving the education and experience can grow up to think like conservative white men. That there is more to being a champion of your people than the color of your skin or the pronunciation of your last name.

Dr. King dreamed of a world where people would not be judged by the color of their skin but the content of their character. This is where I find myself in divergence with Sotomayor. We have lived through twenty of the last twenty-nine years with right wing Republican zealots appointed to the court with only the two of the most heinous and unqualified turned back.

Obama ran for office promising change! He was going to change the way the government does business. He was going turn us away from neocon zealotry and given his first shot he appoints a candidate closer to Alito and Souter than anyone now on the court. Where is our champion? Where is an appointment that will turn the courts back towards the direction of Thurgood Marshall?

How about Al Gore for the Supreme Court, or Robert F. Kennedy Jr.? Kennedy is a legal professor who has worked at all levels of the court system. He was named by Time.com as a Hero for the Planet. We, as a people, were promised CHANGE, not change. Since the 2000 election the Supreme Court has become nothing more than a right wing rubber stamp. We deserve new blood and new thinking, a champion of the people and of the Constitution. The Republicans are going to howl no matter who Obama selects, so why not give them something to really howl about?

Imagine the sweet irony of Justice Albert Gore on the Supreme Court; imagine the Exxon executives trying to sleep at night. Imagine a country where the people have a representative on the court. Imagine Justice Dennis Kucinich on the court, an advocate for peace and for jobs and for workers. You see, it is not so hard. There are lots of people qualified and more than qualified to do a hell of a job, to throw the brakes on the direction of the court and turn it around.

Sotomayor might make a fine justice, but Jackie Robinson didn’t make it to the majors because he was merely expected to be a fine second baseman for the Dodgers. It was because he had the trappings of greatness. Roberto Clemente is remembered for his great baseball talents but even more for his greatness of person. He wasn’t just a credit to the Latino community or to baseball but to humanity as a whole.

Sotomayor’s record on the Appeals Court shows that she works inside the system to protect the system. She does not sway from the straight and narrow, nor does she tarry in carrying the corporate water. She’s not the worst choice that could have been made, but she is certainly not the best choice that Obama could have made. She is more of the same game. She is no Caesar Chavez or Che Guevara. She’s not even Luis Aparicio; she is closer to Clarence Thomas or Eddie Gaedel.

Virgil
06-01-2009, 09:35 AM
With all the crimes of government and usurpation of power by the federal government, it is clear by her silence she is soft on treason. Did anyone ask her about the unitary presidency theory?

Hey, just where is the wording for an amendment she thinks would improve justice? Should there be an abortion amendment and be done with the infinity of controversy now on schedule? Would an amendment changing the representation model of the Senate help? Would an amendment to assure access to health care be the most important amendment? How about putting the question out there as an effort of expanding thought and seeking improvement?

The Constitution as a document for 2009 is highly lacking even if it still had recognition before the Monopoly Power and its creative merger to a One Country World Rule by the Financial Oligarchy. Constitution2009 needs some improving as well as defending. Shouldn't something be in there for mission statement even if it is to change the word "Preamble" to "Mission Statement?"

The woman is fine for the Supreme Court. She really does not give a shit about justice. Long rule The Oligarchy.

Montag
06-01-2009, 01:19 PM
Good points,
I've been wondering where the criticism of the Sotomayor choice is from 'the left'. Al Gore though, I don't think he'd be a good selection either. I'm not a legal scholar, or even a casual follower of legal affairs so I don't know who's out there, but obviously a real lefty would be preferable.

p.s. Kucinich? I think you have to be a lawyer to be on the Supreme Court, maybe I'm wrong on that I know there are judges who are not lawyers.

Two Americas
06-01-2009, 02:41 PM
There are no specific requirements for eligibility to the court.

You are right about liberals being obsessed with what the right wing lunatics say. Worse, modern liberalism is now defined as "the opposite of whatever random idiocy comes out of Rush Limbaugh's mouth." Unfortunately, the opposite of random idiocy is random idiocy. That is the whole point, the intention of the right wing propagandists. They are not trying to "rally" any "base," nor do the things they say represent the thinking of very many people in the country. The goal is to cripple and confuse the liberals, and to get them to attack the political Left.

I don't know how much more clear that could be when you watch what is happening today. The liberals have all turned on the Left and are spouting conservative doctrines. They think they are fighting the right wing or "the fundies" or something, and that the leftists are preventing them from doing that somehow. They are completely deluded.

maat
06-01-2009, 03:46 PM
talking about being proud of taking the party back from the left (it was within the last couple of months).

If Obombem had any guts, he's pick:

Erwin Chemerinsky (born May 14, 1953) is an American lawyer and law professor. He is a renowned scholar in United States constitutional law and federal civil procedure. He is the current and founding dean of the University of California, Irvine School of Law, which is scheduled to begin classes in the fall semester of 2009.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erwin_Chemerinsky

If you read his books, he's simply the best in terms of comprehending the constitution and explaining it to everyone.

soryang
06-01-2009, 04:17 PM
I believe his name is Ogletree, Prof. Ogletree said that Obama was a Constitutional scholar. This is horseshit. Obama is subverting the Bill of Rights and the judicial branch on a broad scale in current litigation. He is trying to expand the state secrets doctrine to foreclose any judicial review of NSA violations of FISA and the 1st and 4th Amendments. He is using a ridiculous theory of sovereign immunity to do the same in In re: NSA Telecommunications Records litigation. He is also shutting down the law suit against the Saudi Royal Family by 911 survivors. Obama represents the fascist power structure period. He is no f.....g good. He is a fraud. He drinks the war on terror cool aid. His administration aids and abets torture. He didn't shut down GITMO. He is expanding colonial wars against people of color in Asia. He failed to address the N. Korean crisis. It is more important to place the internet under the Cyber Command per Rockefeller marching orders.

Montag
06-01-2009, 04:59 PM
I thought Joan Claybrook would be good. She is older than I thought though, so there's that.

Joan Claybrook
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joan_Claybrook

Joan Claybrook (born June 12, 1937) is an American lawyer who served as President of Public Citizen from 1982 until she announced her resignation on December 9, 2008.[1] Previously, she was head of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) in the Carter administration from 1977 to 1981.[2]

Claybrook grew up in the 1940s in Baltimore. She graduated from Goucher College in Baltimore in 1959. While working in Washington, she met Ralph Nader, and the two became close friends as they both worked to on improving highway and auto safety. In 1966, she teamed up with Nader to successfully lobby for passage of the nation's first auto safety laws - the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act and the Highway Safety Act. These acts empowered the government to establish safety standards for new vehicles and issue recalls for defective vehicles and parts.

Prior to her time with NHTSA, Claybrook ran Public Citizen's Congress Watch, worked for the Public Interest Research Group (PIRG), the National Traffic Safety Bureau, the Social Security Administration, and the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.

She earned her J.D. from Georgetown University Law Center in 1973 and currently serves on its Board of Visitors. She also holds positions on the boards of Consumers Union, Citizens for Tax Justice, Trial lawyers for Public Justice, Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety, the Goucher College Board of Trustees, and the California Wellness Foundation Advisory Board.[3]

Her work on behalf of civic interests has been recognized through the following awards and honorary degrees:

* Honorary Doctor of Law, Goucher College
* Honorary Doctor of Public Service, University of Maryland
* Philip Hart Distinguished Consumer Service Award, Consumer Federation of America
* Excellence in Public Service Award, Georgetown Law Center
* Honorary Doctor of Law, Georgetown University

Two Americas
06-01-2009, 05:05 PM
He is also betraying organized Labor and GLBTQ equality advocates and teachers and home owners and many more.

These things are all connected. When we start making those connections, and stop living in isolated little worlds of discrete causes, we will be able to build a movement to end this nightmare.

Gee it has only been 100 days, and look at all the damage.

maat
06-01-2009, 05:20 PM
There were so many better choices than Sotomayor.