With the confirmation of Sonia Sotomayor, the press is filled with liberals patting themselves on the back for breaking a "glass ceiling" by having a Hispanic on the Court.
What a joke. If they were truly concerned with having a Hispanic on the Court, why did they do everything they could to block the nomination of Miguel Estrada?
Two thoughts below:
1) When it comes to Appellate Court and Supreme Court nominations, liberals use diversity as a cover for ideology. For example, when Miguel Estrada was nominated to the DC Circuit, which is widely considered a stepping stone to the Supreme Court, nary a peep was heard about diversity. The fact that he came to the U.S. from Honduras at 17 and made his way to the top of his classes was not a concern. All that mattered was that he was perceived to have a Conservative judicial philosophy. Thus, the DEMS filibustered his nomination. They used the most undemocratic tool in the Senate arsenal-the filibuster- to block Estrada. So much for Estrada's life experience enriching the DC Circuit. So much for Hispanics being represented in the judiciary branch. And so much for the Democrats being concerned with breaking so-called glass ceilings. This Hispanic-American did not even get a chance to have the Senate vote on his nomination! So much for diversity trumping ideology.
2) Again its all about ideology. Liberals would take a Supreme Court full of judges that are more white than Edgar Winter playing in a snow storm if those judges were reliable ultra-left votes on the Court. Conversely, liberals would do everything in their power to stop one black nominee if they said the following words " I would model myself on the Court after Clarence Thomas." The big lesson: diversity never trumps ideology.
1) When it comes to Appellate Court and Supreme Court nominations, liberals use diversity as a cover for ideology. For example, when Miguel Estrada was nominated to the DC Circuit, which is widely considered a stepping stone to the Supreme Court, nary a peep was heard about diversity. The fact that he came to the U.S. from Honduras at 17 and made his way to the top of his classes was not a concern. All that mattered was that he was perceived to have a Conservative judicial philosophy. Thus, the DEMS filibustered his nomination. They used the most undemocratic tool in the Senate arsenal-the filibuster- to block Estrada. So much for Estrada's life experience enriching the DC Circuit. So much for Hispanics being represented in the judiciary branch. And so much for the Democrats being concerned with breaking so-called glass ceilings. This Hispanic-American did not even get a chance to have the Senate vote on his nomination! So much for diversity trumping ideology.
2) Again its all about ideology. Liberals would take a Supreme Court full of judges that are more white than Edgar Winter playing in a snow storm if those judges were reliable ultra-left votes on the Court. Conversely, liberals would do everything in their power to stop one black nominee if they said the following words " I would model myself on the Court after Clarence Thomas." The big lesson: diversity never trumps ideology.
No comments:
Post a Comment