Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Obama has some explaining to do...
Townhall.com ^ | August 12, 2007 | George Will

Posted on 08/12/2007 8:46:34 AM PDT by Kaslin

WASHINGTON -- Sen. Barack Obama recently told some Iowa farmers that prices of their crops are not high enough, considering what grocers are charging for other stuff: "Anybody gone into Whole Foods lately and see what they charge for arugula?" Living near the University of Chicago, Obama has perhaps experienced this outrage, but Iowans, who have no Whole Foods stores, might remember 1987, when Massachusetts Gov. Michael Dukakis urged Iowa farmers to diversify by raising endive. Said a farmer to a Boston reporter, "Your governor scared me just a hair."

Obama is not scary, just disappointing. Regarding a matter more serious than vegetables -- a judicial confirmation -- he looks like just another liberal on a leash. His candidacy kindled hope that he might bring down the curtain on the long-running and intensely boring melodrama "Forever Selma," starring Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. It was hoped Obama would be impatient with the ritualized choreography of synthetic indignation that degrades racial discourse. He is, however, unoriginal and unjust regarding the nomination of Leslie Southwick to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, whose jurisdiction is Louisiana, Mississippi and Texas.

Southwick, currently a law professor, joined the Army Reserve in 1992 at age 42 and in 2003 transferred to a National Guard combat unit heading to Iraq, where he served 17 months. He is now 57 and until last December was a member of a Mississippi appellate court. The American Bar Association, not a nest of conservatives, has given him its highest rating ("well qualified") for the 5th Circuit.

But because he is a white Mississippian, many liberals consider him fair game for unfairness. Many say his defect is "insensitivity," an accusation invariably made when specific grievances are few and flimsy.

Obama, touching all the Democratic nominating electorate's erogenous zones, concocts a tortured statistic about Southwick's "disappointing record on cases involving consumers, employees, racial minorities, women and gays and lesbians. After reviewing his 7,000 opinions, Judge Southwick could not find one case in which he sided with a civil rights plaintiff in a non-unanimous verdict." Surely the pertinent question is whether Southwick sided with the law.

To some of Southwick's opponents, his merits are irrelevant. They simply say that it is unacceptable that only one of the 17 seats on the 5th Circuit is filled with an African-American, although 37 percent of Mississippians are black. This "diversity" argument suggests that courts should be considered representative institutions, like legislatures, and that the theory of categorical representation is valid: People of a particular race, ethnicity or gender can only be understood and properly represented by people of the same category.

Southwick's Senate opponents, having failed to find ammunition in any of his 985 opinions (Obama's figure of 7,000 opinions is interestingly imprecise), cite two cases in which he joined (BEG ITAL)other judges'(END ITAL) opinions. Both cases concerned the proper parameters of government agencies' discretion.

In 1998, Southwick was in the majority in a 5-4 ruling that upheld a state administrative agency's action in overturning a punishment imposed on a state employee. A white female social worker had been fired after referring in a meeting to a colleague, who was not there, as "a good ol' n-----." The court on which Southwick served ruled that the agency given broad latitude to review such discipline had not abused its discretion in deciding that the firing was disproportionate punishment, given that the woman had a hitherto unblemished record and the man, although offended, said the woman's words had caused no workplace problem. By law, the court could not overturn the agency's actions without finding legal error or "arbitrary and capricious" judgment.

In 2001, Southwick was in the majority in an 8-2 ruling finding no legal fault with an official's decision to transfer a child from the custody of a bisexual mother to the father. Southwick's opponents note that the opinion and a concurrence he joined contained "troubling" words like "homosexuals" and "homosexual lifestyle." Troubling, presumably, because not using the word "gay" was insensitive. But Bill Clinton, announcing his 1993 "don't ask, don't tell" policy regarding gays in the military, used the term "homosexual lifestyles," and the U.S. Supreme Court, in its landmark 2003 decision that anti-sodomy laws are unconstitutional, spoke of "homosexual lifestyle."

Why does Obama think Southwick should have ruled differently in the two Mississippi cases? Because he thinks Southwick applied the law inappropriately? Or because he does not like the result? Obama is seeking the office from which federal judges are nominated. Southwick has explained himself, in writings and in testimony to the Senate. Now Obama has explaining to do.


TOPICS: Editorial; Government; Politics/Elections; US: District of Columbia
KEYWORDS: georgewill; lesliesouthwick; obama
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-33 last
To: Kaslin
There is a solution.


21 posted on 08/12/2007 10:23:38 AM PDT by ConservativeofColor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
I think Obama looks goofy.
22 posted on 08/12/2007 11:18:53 AM PDT by Born to Conserve
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: all_mighty_dollar

Arugula? Sounds like the noise you make in the bathroom when you eat something bad.


23 posted on 08/12/2007 11:21:38 AM PDT by darkangel82 (Socialism is NOT an American value.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
Fancy degrees, affirmative action, etc. don’t mean jack shiet to a bunch of down-to earth Iowa farmers.

Hey, Mr. Muslim man, try this: “I’ll be the first to admit I know very little about farming. But I know how much you’ve contributed to our country’s greatness. I hold you guys in the highest regard. Thank you for your bounty.”

Dumbass!

24 posted on 08/12/2007 11:31:34 AM PDT by upchuck (Today there are 10,000 more illegal aliens in yer country than there were yesterday. 10,000! THINK!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pnh102; John Jorsett
I remember the whole "Belgian endive" thing. (And yes, it was "Belgian endive" as I recall.) The idea was that Rommel was completely out of touch with middle America and farmers such that his only contact with the agrarian sector was via a chilled salad plate. There were cutting referenes made (by Dan Quayle?) to "fancy Harvard vegetables" and perhaps growing such vegetables in "Harvard Yard". Funny stuff!
25 posted on 08/12/2007 12:41:45 PM PDT by rogue yam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: ClaireSolt
Maybe, but I have known a lot of affirmative action types who did not measure up. I worked for a department chair once who could not figure a percentage, even though he was a PhD in sociology.

Your key word there is "sociology".

26 posted on 08/12/2007 12:43:22 PM PDT by rogue yam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Obama, like Turban Durbin, is owned and operated by the Chicago and Cook County political mafia.


27 posted on 08/12/2007 12:47:09 PM PDT by hgro (Jerry Riversd)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

This is the old George Will I remember, taking liberals to the woodshed. Excellent column here.


28 posted on 08/12/2007 12:47:23 PM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist (Ron Paul: Doctor. Military Captain. Constitutionalist. Patriot. Devout Christian.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steely Tom
Obama is intensely intelligent.

So were Napoleon, Hannibal Lecter and Lex Luthor.

29 posted on 08/12/2007 12:49:17 PM PDT by reg45
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin; SevenofNine; AnnaZ

^^^ click
30 posted on 08/12/2007 1:01:39 PM PDT by monkapotamus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Jorsett
I think the criticism is that the market for endive is, shall we say, limited.

How about arugula?

31 posted on 08/12/2007 1:03:54 PM PDT by Freee-dame
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: John Jorsett
Smart, maybe. Tone-deaf and out of touch, definitely.

"Anybody gone into Whole Foods lately and see[n] what they charge for arugula?"

Better than any six screens' worth of cogent psycho-politico-historico-socio-economic analysis, that single sentence epitomizes the bottomless and forever unbridgeable chasm separating us, mere mortals, from our anointed betters.

32 posted on 08/12/2007 3:34:52 PM PDT by Tenniel2 (The heroes of Flight 93 diverted the wrong plane.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: rogue yam

He was not moved up beyond his ability because of sociology (which one historian defined as elaboration of the obvious.)


33 posted on 08/12/2007 5:04:13 PM PDT by ClaireSolt (Have you have gotten mixed up in a mish-masher?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-33 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson