| SoreSenate 2003 |
| LoserDems |
Posted on 04/29/2003 6:37:01 AM PDT by BOBTHENAILER
Edited on 05/07/2004 7:09:22 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
I truly hope you get some sense of satisfaction from your victory.
We all need successes in our daily lives and I can afford (emotionally) to provide you with yours in this case. Let's see....I feel okay...Pulse close to normal. BP just about the same as usual. Outlook on life still sunny and optimistic.....
When you get to my advanced age, you learn that you win some and you lose some and that learning to see the truth is more important than winning an argument.
You still haven't convinced me that you are not looking through the wrong end of a telescope on this Estrada/racism issue. I've learned, from my experiences with the tactics of liberals, that people can pick at something, take it out of context and magnify it and pretend it is something it isn't. Even a dust mite under a microscope looks pretty threatening.
In the big picture of things, it doesn't matter whether I can convince you to see things my way. It does matter to me that I get to say what I think about things, and hear what others have to say.
One outcome of this discussion with you:
I have become even more convinced that Estrada is being viewed by the liberals, not as a human being, but as a sacrificial animal.
They have dehumanized him, treat him differently than other candidates for similar positions, and they will use any tactic to deny this man the position that the majority of Senators think he deserves.
Tell me, if you will.....Don't you think Schumer seems to have it "in" for Estrada (in particular)? Does Schumer have a yearning to be on the Supreme Court, himself? Too bad he dropped out of practicing law...he would have had a better chance if he'd stayed in law.
I'm glad I don't feel particularly threatened by Latinos who are Jesuit educated and conservative and smart.
That poster was me. And you are misrepresenting what I wrote.
Your contention that the Democrats have blocked Estrada only because he is conservative (and not because he is a conservative Latino genius) is weakened by your ignoring the important fact that I included in post 151. The Democrats have allowed a vote on Sutton and allowed confirmation of Sutton. As the quote in post 149 says...."Throughout the debate, Sutton's critics portrayed him as a right-wing extremist."
Can you tell me why Sutton got to have his vote, and Estrada doesn't get to have one?
Hmmmm......This discussion is making me think the Democrats mostly don't like Estrada because he is much smarter than they are and they are worried he will make them look like fools.
Could you agree with me on this....
Democrats won't allow a vote on Estrada, partly because they have an anti-genius bias
?
Estrada is not being treated as a group by Bush. He is being treated as a human being.
And I think the Democrats are treating Estrada like an animal.
You know, now you do probably have a point there - I am sure most of the lawyers in congress aspire in their own minds to the Supreme Court.
I am not excusing what the Democrats do when they behave in their usual way. But that is all they are doing here. I really don't care about them and their morals. That's too big a job. I do care about the Republican Party. It is the last hope for this country to return to some sanity and some togetherness. This kind of behavior just helps to make it less and less a possibility.
I appreciate that you get to say what you believe - that is a good thing - but I would like the same courtesy and so far, you have given me that. I just ask that you truthfully look at the way it has been handled and the way the Republican party has been 'courting' the Hispanic (what every the heck that is - someone tell me) vote. You can't deny that - it is there for all to see. That is racial politics. So was the Trent Lott situation. The President wanted him gone (as did everyone else in this country besides him and possibly his wife) - but to use racial politics to do it does not do this country any good. It only does it harm. YOu have to see that.
Mr. Estrada may very well be the most qualified man on the face of the earth - perhaps that is one of the reasons he is being opposed.
No one should deny their affiliations - but affiliations and race are two different things, I think. But the President of the US, when nominating, hiring, etc., HAD BETTER NOT use it as one of the reasons, or he is not being President of the US - but just another pandering politician.
Racial politics is bad - in fact, it is the main reason this country is in the shape it is today. The Republican party with Pres. Bush and the congress could go a long way to changing that - instead they are just adding to the problem.
You're right. This is confusing.
I agree that chosing a candidate based on race is (probably) wrong (in any situations I can think of, anyway). I may change my mind someday, but right now I think affirmative action, where one group is favored over another, is wrong.
I'm sure affirmative action was responsible for the insufficient student aid my older girls got when they attended college. Students from objectively much better-off families than ours, who happened to belong to "minorities," got more student aid at two different all-women colleges. (My kids were best friends with "minority" students and knew their friends' backgrounds.) I'm glad this unfair policy, based on race rather than need, seems to be changing now.
I can't see where anyone is being hurt by Estrada's nomination, unlike the cases of affirmative-action, where non-minority candidates are hurt.
I think you and I have two different definitions of what type of behavior toward an individual is racist and what isn't. I say it's unrealistic to totally ignore people's affiliations and backgrounds. (Maybe I have some prejudice here, because biographies are my favorite books to read. I love to hear people's life stories). You seem to say it is realistic.
I certainly can't read Bush's mind to see if he has the totally pure motivations in nominating Estrada that you would like him to have.
If I had heard Bush say, "I have nominated Miguel Angel Estrada because he is latino, I might begin to think there is a problem. But I haven't heard Bush say that. If Bush were only nominating Latinos, and shutting out other qualified candidates, I would definitely begin to worry.
I've think I've heard other people saying Bush chose Estrada because he is Hispanic. And, if memory serves me right, those people have been liberals who are against the Estrada nomination. (I've got no interest in finding any documentation on this)
Anyway, I can't see why Estrada should be punished for Bush's imperfections, if it is true Bush has bad motivations.
Personally, I cannot conceive of a reason to prefer one of any race over another. That is just two wrongs - and I remember what my Granny said about that. It has created more problems than it has solved.
My complaint has never had anything to do with Mr. Estrada himself. Although, many have tried to deflect it. My problem has always been the way the Republicans have handled it and Pres. Bush's willingness to indulge in this kind of politics. But now, I don't think Pres. Bush has publicly announced he has nominated Mr. Estrada because he is Hispanic - but you know, I know and most everyone else knows that is one of his qualifications, as far as Pres. Bush is concerned. He wanted someone Hispanic - now he may have been very fortunate to be able to find the best man in the world for the job and that man is Hispanic also.
But you cannot deny much of the defense on this site and I personally believe WH spin has been they are blocking the man because he is Hispanic. President Bush is actively seeking the Hispanic vote - that is also a given. No one can say otherwise - that is my problem.
Now of course, I am being unrealistic to think that race WILL never play a part in politics - but it SHOULD never play a part. The defense of the Estrada nomination and the Trent Lott silliness were both endulging in racial politics and that is bad.
Racial politics is devisive and destructive - to this country and to human beings as a whole. It should never be tolerated - there is no reason good enough to tolerate it. We know the Democrats use this often - but I really had hoped the Republicans were above it. I do hold them to a higher standard. If the Republicans don't hold the line on this vile behavior - who is left? No one. It will continue to grow, to fester, to divide and to destroy this country.
We just shouldn't accept it from anyone - but we should hold our own to a high standard and just because we like them, admire them, whatever, we should not give them a pass to do something just because it is expedient.
There is just no excuse for it. None.
Now other than the harm it has done the country, I don't know of an instance it has harmed my family as a family. So I don't have an axe to grind personally, just for the sake of this country and the good people in it of all kinds. We deserve better.
| SoreSenate 2003 |
| LoserDems |
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.