Posted by
EARL THINKS... on Sunday, June 14, 2009 2:34:23 PM
The system of the United States are three pronged for a reason. The vulnerabilities of the Legislative and Executive Branches that fall toward political agendas and motives, has the one last bastion in place to save the integrity, principles and values of this "great experiment" and that lies in the Judicial Branch. The one unique element of this democracy is in how emotions, which have no intellect, are tempered by " The Rule of Law".
It's time that we define the present state of the Democrat agenda from "Liberal" to "Progressive". Liberalism seeks to "relax" the status quo while Progressivism intends to dismiss the status at the expense of core successful principles that lay in the foundation. This is what is happening in what is coming to all areas of the system of "The Republic of the United States of America". A Democracy must be tempered by law to avoid the potential of it being a lynch mob. However, Progressivism has as its cornerstone, or so it appears, the intent to circumvent the law through redefinition of the spirit of law and/of dismissal of recognition of the law as being archaic and out of date. Relativism is its "Escape Hatch 'A' " when challenged, and then presumes, assumes and imposes immediate dismissal of any proposal in disagreement with "their" position. This is simple from the Legislative and Executive Branches, but the intents and purposes of the Judicial does not have that luxury. It is to follow the law keeping, into its letter and the spirit of its intentions.
The consideration of those who would adjudicate outside of those boundaries and factor in emotions and or empathy will corrupt the entire process that was outlined in the nations inception. The rule of law is housed in wisdom and not emotions or considerations of Man, Woman, Black, White, Gay, Straight, National Origin of ones family, where they grew up and the prevailing circumstances, whatever. In fact, the intent of the law is to see to it that all of these are considered; not one over the other, but a compliance that meets all of these such that they don't infringe on the rights of one another.
Just the idea that being a "Latino Woman" gives her an "edge" of some sort over a White Man, in and of itself is sexist and reflective of the elitist attitude of Progressives. That one's condition and background offer an interpretation of "The Law" that "The Law" doesn't give account for in its "being" and needs "them" to render "Genuine Justice". As if "some" of these groups of people should have more justice than others or less justice than others. The Law must be made "Demographically Correct" and, of course, it takes a Latino Woman from The Bronx to bring these demographics to the Forum of Justice.
She offers herself as an "Affirmative Action Baby". I have a friend who is a graduate of a university via Affirmative Action. I asked him, "How many of the people that got in the program graduated"? He said, "About 12%". Does this demonstrate a successful program or policy? I don't think so. Should she be applauded for being a part of that "12%" of the program to graduate? Absolutely! But this brings to mind something that has had me perplexed for decades.
So many successful members of a minority achieved based on hard work and persistence. They sacrificed time with friends to study, denied themselves of some of the frivolous indulgences of "growing up" as a teenager and young adult to reach their goal. THEN....they tell other minorities to "wait" and let "us" do it for you through government. This is particular to Blacks in America for the last 40 years. Is "this" now the direction that Judge Sotomayor intends to lead and direct the Latin community in this country. I suggest to my Latin Brothers and Sisters, BE VERY AFFRAID!!! I've watched how that works for the last 40 years...but I digress.
When the Judicial Branch of The Republic of the United States begin to "customize" the process of "Justice" to suit private agendas and special interests, we ALL lose. The Law will no longer be the foundation of our own freedoms as individuals and the peace within our nation. The law is fair. When it isn't, there is a process in place that can make it fair. There are many who use the Civil Rights Bill as the precedent for Judicial Justice. It was. It was attached to a moral imperative that is part of the promise of the nation in its Constitution; or as Reverend Dr. King put it,"...a promissory note for which all of its citizens were heirs". Blacks were "people". A particular ethnic group denied freedoms based on skin color.....NOT CONDUCT OR BEHAVIOR.
Progressives want to use this correction of an injustice as a precedent to support other agendas that the perceived injustice they "suffer" is more linked to conduct, behavior or political affiliations. If the "injustices" are valid, they should be made to go through the process as the Civil Rights leaders did. But no. Progressives' intent is to usurp, circumvent, redefine, dismiss the process and insert their agenda. Appointment of this particular nomination is yet another step this administration has been taking through its actions thus far in creating a "class" of people who are already doling out our economic projections and will seek to insert into the Judicial system, people who will dole out the degrees of our freedoms. Ironically....by "Law". Let's not forget that there is yet another woman on the Supreme Court nearing her exit.
Just a thought....