I can see why she would hate men.
By the way, either this is an old photo, or she is having phantom memories of the 1950s.
Posted on 07/27/2005 10:47:54 PM PDT by churchillbuff
Leave it to George. His nomination of John G. Roberts to the Supreme Court bench made me feel for a few minutes as if I were traveling back to the 1950s land of Beaver and Wally where the men were buttoned-up white guys who wrinkled their noses at anything remotely unconventional. Roberts, if confirmed, will become the 105th white male appointed to the Supreme Court.
The court will then be made up of seven white men, one black man and one woman -- looking very much like a law school graduating class circa 1958. How is this reflective of the diversity of this country? Or the recognition that half of the students in law school are women? Or that minorities now make up a quarter of law school classes? This alone makes Roberts a very unfortunate choice.
According to all accounts Roberts is a brilliant jurist who seemingly has none of the unsavory ideological baggage of a Robert Bork, President Reagan's failed candidate for the Supreme Court who believed the social revolutions of the 1960s, including Civil Rights and feminism, corroded Americans' morals. It is not discernable, yet, how Roberts would decide concerning Roe v. Wade, but liberal groups have cause to be concerned since he is a Bush appointee and we know what Bush thinks about abortion rights.
We hope for a pleasant surprise. Previous appointments of supposedly right-leaning Supreme Court justices show that it's often unpredictable how jurists will vote once attaining a seat at our highest court -- to wit: Harry Blackmun (nominated by Richard Nixon) who wrote the Roe decision, Sandra Day O'Connor the first female justice (appointed by Ronald Reagan) and David Souter (appointed by George H. W. Bush).
But since this court is the highest in the land, it should be reflective of the community for which it is interpreting the law. Having a bunch of white guys at the top is regressive.
O'Connor, whose retirement has left the opening for Roberts, has said it would be hard to determine from her written decisions that they were crafted by a woman. Maybe it was not discernable on paper, but I refuse to believe she could divorce her gender from the way she saw the world -- and the law. Her decisions had to have been filtered through her experience as a woman, a mother and a breast cancer survivor.
Regardless of her previous comments, even O'Connor has expressed disappointment in President Bush's choice of Roberts. She noted that he is "good in every way, except he's not a woman." The truth is that women and minorities do offer a unique perspective. How could they not? They experience prejudice and limitations that white men simply do not.
There are those who argue that Roberts is a far more palatable nominee than some of the women Bush was supposedly considering, including Janice Rogers Brown, a rabid right-winger who was clearly anti-abortion. But Bush never would have succeeded in getting her through the nomination process because she was so controversial. She would have been Borked. And there was a long list of other female judges on the Bush list who were conservative but may have made good candidates, including Edith Brown Clement of the U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
I knew I would have to hold my nose no matter who Bush chose. I'm just crossing my fingers that Roberts, a staunch Catholic, will be a pragmatic jurist and won't impose his right-to-life views if he gets confirmed. The 1950s is not a period I remember with fondness.
well, there you have it - the gauntlet has been thrown down: the race-card has been well and truly played.
"...and won't impose his right-to-life views if he gets confirmed."
As she would impose her pro-abortion views on children in the womb everywhere.
"The court will then be made up of seven white men, one black man and one woman -- looking very much like a law school graduating class circa 1958. How is this reflective of the diversity of this country? "
Gee, maybe it looks like a law school graduating class of decades ago because, er, to be a USSC Justice, you needed to have graduated a top law school sometime back then.
... Jenny was hoping for a 20-something bartending lass with body piercings and dyslexia.
and btw, I dont recall any columnist saying something like "100% of Clinton Supreme Court appointments were Jewish. Is that representative of America?"
I'd like to know if Clinton nominated his 'share' of evangelical Christian judges!
"But since this court is the highest in the land, it should be reflective of the community for which it is interpreting the law."
Sigh... *wrong*
It *should* be composed of those who can best interpret/uphold the Constitution. The idea of having racial/sexual quotas is ridiculous.
If this woman got a rare form of brain cancer, would she want the best doctors available, or a group of doctors that better represented the demographics of the country?
To quote another FReeper:
"multicultural insanity"
This author is wracked with prejudice.
"The 1950s is not a period I remember with fondness."
How old is this moronic women?
Was she spending the whole 1950s thinking "gee, I can't wait for the Supreme Court to make it legal to abort babies, so I can feel better."
I'm guessing she wasnt even born then. Here babbling is too ignorant, she sounds like a woman young enough to beleive the PC nonsense they stuffed in her head in College, and she was too naive/dumb to notice it was wrong.
Jenny Hunter is a racist pig.
I can see why she would hate men.
By the way, either this is an old photo, or she is having phantom memories of the 1950s.
The author is an ass.
WTF?! So, now we cross over into (not EVIL CHristians) but to Catholics with "right to life" views? Well, let's simply invent a quick time machine. What if it were the authors ass on the line with "modern day" views on life? What would he say then if his mother simply said "oops! f*cked up saturday night, this lil bastard gotta go!
Yay Mommy! thanks for killing me!
Nope, if his ass was aborted and he still had the ability to write, it would be "My Mom the f()(!^$ B!tch"...and he damn well knows it.
Abortion is nothing more than the safeguard for "I shoulda TOLD him to usea condom."
AND, ANY guy not married BEST be wearing a condom; else; you have no excuse.
oops! I broke..Nah, sorry, ain't buying that.
I can't wait to hear what she says when Janice Rogers Brown and Miguel Estrada are nominated.
Jennifer Hunter
Ms. Hunter doesn't look like someone who would remember the 1950s in great detail...
Maybe she didn't care for Howdy Doody?
Bwahahaha. Is that the best they've got?
Her lack of logic and general poor argumentation makes a great case against affirmative action and quotas.
I mean, does anybody believe she'd be given column space if she wasn't a woman.
She is as stupid as a particularly stupid rock.
"She is as stupid as a particularly stupid rock."
LOL.... for some reason, that sounds like a Blackadder insult.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.