Expose Obama » Sonia Sotomayor

Obama’s Race War Against Police and Firemen

Ben — Tue, 15 Mar 2011 18:09:13 +0000

Ben Johnson, FloydReports.com

Michael Savage once wrote, “Liberalism is a mental disorder.” Not only are the passions that animate left-wing policies and reverse racism irrational; they are life-threatening. The most jarring example is Barack Obama race war against police and fire departments everywhere from the heartland to Ground Zero.

Last month Obama’s Justice Department forced the city of Dayton, Ohio, to lower standards for hiring police and firemen, allegedly because not enough minorities passed. The Dayton Daily News reports that time is of the essence vital, since recent retirements “have left public safety forces near all-time lows.” Nonetheless, the Obama administration stepped in to keep police off the streets until he could saddle them with unqualified co-workers. Under the deal Dayton cut with Eric Holder’s department, city officials would hire people who scored as low as 58 percent on one section and 63 percent on another – failing marks on any conventional grade curve. The 748 people who passed the test will soon be joined by 258 new, incompetent public servants. No one will know one group from another except their HR department and the people whose lives they fail to save.

Even the local NAACP – which, as its name implies, can usually be counted on to support any policy that advances the interests of “colored people” – thinks Obama and Holder have gone too far. Dayton chapter President Derrick Forward has said, “The NAACP does not support individuals failing a test and then having the opportunity to be gainfully employed…If you lower the score for any group of people, you’re not getting the best qualified people for the job.” (In reality, the NAACP regularly supports these kinds of actions, but at least Forward does not.)

Most of us agree that the middle of a gunfight or an engulfed building is no place for on-the-job training. We’d prefer an expert. Not racial extortionists in the Obama White House.

The administration’s legal assault on Dayton would be regrettable enough if it stood alone. However, it is but one front of Barack Obama’s race war against police and firemen.

A Full-Scale War on Safety

The most outrageous and underexposed targets of the PC grenade-throwers has been the people who rushed to save lives at Ground Zero on 9/11.

Left-winger Sotomayor is sworn in as Supreme Court justice

NewsEditor — Sun, 09 Aug 2009 16:02:15 +0000

By MARK SHERMAN, Associated Press

It’s Justice Sotomayor now. Sonia Sotomayor has been sworn in as the Supreme Court’s first Hispanic justice. She’s only the third female justice in the court’s 220-year history.

Sotomayor took the second of two oaths of office Saturday from Chief Justice John Roberts in an ornate conference room at the high court, beneath a portrait of the legendary Chief Justice John Marshall. She swore a first oath in a private ceremony minutes earlier.

Sotomayor’s mother, brother, other relatives and friends joined her for the occasion.

In one oath, she promised to support and defend the Constitution. In the second, she pledged to "administer justice" fairly and impartially.

Did Sotomayor Lie to Senators?

NewsEditor — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 15:04:57 +0000

By Texas Fred

Did Judge Sonia Sotomayor twist the truth when she met with Senators before her confirmation hearings began? Does anyone on the Judiciary Committee have the guts to call her on it?

“Is there anything the Senate or Congress can do if a nominee says one thing seated at that table and does something exactly the opposite once they [are on the Supreme Court]?” Senator Arlen Specter asked Judge Sonia Sotomayor on Wednesday. When Sotomayor promises her “fidelity” to the rule of law the Senators simply have to trust that she is telling them the truth. Unfortunately, there is significant evidence that Sotomayor has been less than honest in private meetings with the Senators.

This past Saturday, The Wall Street Journal reported on a series of interviews it had done with Senators about their private meetings with Sotomayor. Incredibly, every one of Sotomayor’s private statements to the Senators, as reported by The Journal, were not only false, but she should also have known that they were false when she made them. Each inaccurate statement to the Senators involved speeches the judge had given numerous times and that she had clearly reviewed before meeting with the members of the Judiciary Committee.

For instance, shortly after Sotomayor’s nomination, her now infamous Berkeley law school speech began to receive public scrutiny. Understandably, many Senators asked her about her statement that: “a wise Latina woman with the richness of his experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white man.”

Sotomayor apparently told Republican Senators in private meetings that those words were “inadvertent” and “inartful,” — implying that her statement was an accident. President Obama himself tried to explain this statement as just a one-time utterance that she would have worded differently if she had the chance to do it all over again.

But after these private meetings with Senators it was revealed that Sotomayor had used the equivalent phrases during at least seven different speeches over a period of a decade. It is one thing for Obama to explain this as an accidental, single occurrence; it is something quite different for Sotomayor, especially now that we know that she repeatedly made such statements.

By Texas Fred

Did Judge Sonia Sotomayor twist the truth when she met with Senators before her confirmation hearings began? Does anyone on the Judiciary Committee have the guts to call her on it?

By Texas Fred

Sotomayor accused of lying under oath

Did Judge Sonia Sotomayor twist the truth when she met with Senators before her confirmation hearings began? Does anyone on the Judiciary Committee have the guts to call her on it?

Cartoon:Franken confuses Perry Mason with real lawyer

NewsEditor — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 14:41:29 +0000

By Eric Allie, Cagle Cartoons

Sotomayor’s self-contradictions,The nominee argues against herself

NewsEditor — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 14:32:59 +0000

The Washington Times

After two days of hearings for Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor, it appears that her strategy for confirmation is to contradict herself at every turn. She spent much of yesterday claiming not to have meant the things she actually said or not to have ruled the way she actually ruled. For the first time, therefore, it is not just her judgment but also her integrity that is in question.

Consider this exchange from very early in the Senate Judiciary Committee’s questioning. Speaking of her infamous line, repeated in seven speeches, that a “wise Latina” would be more likely to rule correctly than a “white male,” Judge Sotomayor said this: “The words I used, I used agreeing with the sentiment Justice Sandra Day O’Connor was attempting to convey.”

The record is the direct opposite, as a matter of incontrovertible fact. Here’s what she actually said in her multiple speeches: “Justice O’Connor has often been cited as saying that a wise old man and wise old woman will reach the same conclusion in deciding cases. I am not so sure Justice O’Connor is the author of that line since [Yale Law] Professor [Judith] Resnik attributes that line to [Minnesota] Supreme Court Justice [Mary Jeanne Coyne]. I am also not so sure that I agree with the statement. First, as [Harvard Law] Professor Martha Minow has noted, there can never be a universal definition of wise. Second, I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life.”

The Washington Times

Sotomayor at hearing

Sotomayor Hearings, The Cartoon

NewsEditor — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 14:05:05 +0000

By RJ Matson, Roll Call

Sotomayor Hearings offer Republicans an Opportunity

NewsEditor — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 22:42:22 +0000

By Craig Shirley, Politico.com

America remains a center-right country and while the GOP is struggling with its own identity crisis, this is also an opportunity to put on display the Politics of Pander as practiced to perfection so far by Obama. The fact that Judge Sotomayor is from New York City only exacerbates this point, a city which most Americans regard as Ground Zero for bubbleheaded leftwing political correctness, corruption and anti-Americanism.

More important, it is an opportunity for the GOP to show once again what it is made of and what it stands for. These hearings in many ways have little to do with Obama but far more to do with the moral courage of the GOP, trying to rebuild their party.

What virtually all political commentators—both Left and the so-called Right which dominate the mainstream media—fail to grasp is that the Right is not built the same way the Left is in America. The modern and sophisticated Left, operating as enabler to their co-dependents, the Democratic Party, is about coalitions of power. Together, they gather power by appealing to “aggrieved” interest groups
ranging from gay people to unhappy people, from corrupt Wall Street Gekos to Elm Street Griswolds.

Their party is not about “merit” but instead “give it” and “take it.” Hence, the pick of Sotomayor. No one for a second, even in the liberal media, thinks for one second she was chosen because she is a model of jurisprudence. Her choice was crass politics at its most basic. Obama could have chosen Carmen Miranda for all he cared about scholarship.

The Right—which is in marital counseling right now, estranged from the Republican Party after eight years of spousal abuse—is watching the GOP to see if they see the opportunity afforded them in terms of a reconciliation. To woo back the affection of the conservatives, the GOP has to understand what these hearing are about. Flowers and chocolates alone won’t do it but principles and philosophy whispered in their ear could get conservatives hot and bothered once again about the Republicans.

I said before that Sotomayor’s hearings would be the equivalent of the Panama Canal Treaties in that it was the first big test of the GOP in the mid-1970’s after Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford beat and them locked the conservatives in a closet, only letting them out to sporadically see the sun. Nothing has changed to alter that view.

Continuing the metaphors, this could also be their “Alamo” in that while all can see they will lose the battle, they just might do enough collateral damage to the Left to win the war in 2010.

The GOP tried over the last eight years tried to be the party of big government and tried to be everything to everybody. They failed. America already have one party that performs that function quite well.

The Republicans have to decide when they want to get back to being one thing to all people and the Sotomayor hearings are an excellent place to start.

Sotomayor’s Selective Empathy

NewsEditor — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 17:39:03 +0000

By Floyd and Mary Beth Brown

empathy? hah! if only they knew how much we tilt justice

Judge Sonia Sotomayor is wrongly being sold by Team Obama as an “empathetic nominee.” This adjective is shown a farce when one examines her record in two noteworthy cases involving Jeffrey Deskovic and Frank Ricci. In these instances, she acted callous and indifferent to the injustice and suffering of these men.

As a 17-year-old young man, Deskovic was convicted for the murder and rape of a classmate despite a negative DNA test. He ended up serving 16 years in prison before he was ultimately exonerated after additional DNA evidence proved another man was guilty. A good portion of his life was taken away by a justice system with Sotomayor playing judge.

Despite Deskovic serving 10 years in prison, Sotomayor refused to hear two of his valid appeals. These appeals were based on DNA evidence and coerced testimony. A county clerk gave his attorney inaccurate information and his attorney filed the appeal petition four days late. The court refused to hear this appeal, so the lawyer appealed the decision before Sotomayor’s court, arguing that the error was the fault of the clerk; therefore, the case ought to be heard given Deskovic’s innocence. Sotomayor ruled against hearing Deskovic’s appeal, effectively sentencing an innocent man to six more years in prison for a crime he did not commit.

“Despite Sotomayor’s rhetoric, her ruling in my case showed a callous disregard for the real-life implications of her rulings,” Deskovic says. “She opted for procedure over fairness and finality of conviction over accuracy. Many of the victims of wrongful convictions serving long sentences had exhausted their appeals long before they were exonerated. In how many of those cases did Sotomayor vote to refuse to even consider evidence of innocence?” Even though Sotomayor displayed a callous indifference to the suffering of this innocent man, Obama wants people to ignore this case and confirm her immediately because she is a “wise Hispanic Woman.”

Another case showing her lack of empathy and poor judgment is the Frank Ricci firefighter case. Frank Ricci is a Connecticut firefighter with dyslexia who studied many difficult and challenging hours, due to his disability, to pass a written test. Along with the passing of the test came a promotion but Ricci’s aspirations for advancement quickly vanished as he watched the city throw his results away because no minorities passed the test and they didn’t want to get sued for discrimination. Sotomayor and her court agreed with the city and were willing to punish a white firefighter who succeeds just because minority candidates did not perform well on the test.

By allowing this discrimination and racism, Sotomayor proves herself to be anything but empathetic. Fortunately the U.S. Supreme Court recently overturned Sotomayor’s decision saying the city of New Haven should not have thrown out the test results because there was no proof that the test was discriminatory.

Evidently Judge Sotomayor only shows empathy when it is a member of her own race or gender: meaning, she is selectively empathetic. After all, she said, “I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life.” Apparently this means, as seen in the Deskovic and Ricci cases, a wise Latina woman will be empathetic to minorities but when white men are wronged, she turns a blind eye.

As for now, Democrats are trying to rush Sotomayor’s confirmation hearing. Republicans need more time to review 300 boxes of files recently received from the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund. This is a controversial issue because PRLDEF is connected to ACORN and worked to oppose Judge Robert Bork. Naturally, because Democrats do not want Republicans to have time to gather information and look into this connection, they are trying to rush. Sotomayor played some role in the absolutely vicious destruction of Robert Bork, and this public lynching of Bork was anything but empathetic. Americans have a right to know the full story of her involvement before she is given this lifetime appointment.

While Obama and his allies want you to believe Sotomayor is a wise, empathetic Latina, these three occurrences directly contradict the underlying argument of the Obama public relations campaign. Sotomayor is actually an advocate of old-fashioned identity politics. Justice is supposed to be blind, but in Sotomayor’s case, what exists of her empathy is racially tinted. Republicans must vote against her confirmation if not given more time to look into her record. Obama shouldn’t be allowed to appoint a racist to the Supreme Court.

Republican: Sotomayor had ties to extreme group

NewsEditor — Sat, 04 Jul 2009 04:53:43 +0000

By JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS, Associated Press

Sotomayor worked for a far left group

The top Republican on the Senate committee that will consider Sonia Sotomayor’s Supreme Court nomination says a Puerto Rican civil rights group’s papers could shed light on her judicial approach, particularly her view of racial preferences in hiring.

White House Counsel Greg Craig, however, told Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., in a letter that board meeting minutes and other papers detailing the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund’s activities while Sotomayor was an outside adviser shouldn’t impact her nomination because she had no role in writing or approving them.

“During her time there, the organization took extreme positions on legal issues ranging from the death penalty to abortion to racial quotas,” Sessions said in a statement. He said it was “absurd” for the White House to call the documents irrelevant.

More Scandals Haunt Sotomayor

NewsEditor — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 15:52:27 +0000

By Cliff Kincaid, GOPUSA

Sotomayor with Senate Leader Harry Reid (D-NV)

Bill O’Reilly has declared, “I don’t think she’s a racist,” in regard to Obama Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor, even though it turns out that her comment about a Latina woman making better decisions than a white man was repeated on several occasions. O’Reilly turns a blind eye to her raw display of racism because he doesn’t want to be accused of being a racist himself. This is how cowardly the sponsor of the “No Spin Zone” has become in the face of a politically correct “debate” that has already forced former House Speaker Newt Gingrich to retract his charge of racism against her.

False accusations against white people are tolerated by the media, even the conservative media. This is why Al Sharpton is a frequent guest on the O’Reilly show, despite his participation in the Tawana Brawley hoax, whereby he falsely accused a group of white men of raping a black woman.

But accurate accusations of racism against members of minority groups who make racist statements are not tolerated. That is why Gingrich backed away from his accurate comments, and why O’Reilly said he didn’t want to have anything to do with them.

“When I did a Twitter about her, having read what she said, I said that was racist, but I applied it to her as a person,” Gingrich said on Face the Nation. “The truth is, I don’t know her as a person.” Gloria Borger on CNN reported that Republican senators had asked Gingrich to retract the charge. More cowardice.