Posted on 05/14/2010 6:53:11 PM PDT by Steelfish
Are Liberals Anti-WASP? by Patrick J. Buchanan 05/14/2010
"A chorus of black commentators and civic leaders has begun expressing frustration over (Elena) Kagan's hiring record as Harvard dean. From 2003 to 2009, 29 faculty members were hired: 28 were white and one was Asian American." CNN pundit Roland Martin slammed "Kagan's record on diversity as one that a 'white Republican U.S. president' would be criticized for." This is an excerpt from the Washington Post about the rising anger in a black community, which voted 24-1 for Obama, that one of their own was once again passed over for the Supreme Court.
Not since Thurgood Marshall, 43 years ago, has a Democratic president chosen an African-American. The lone sitting black justice is Clarence Thomas, nominated by George H. W. Bush. And Thomas was made to run a gauntlet by Senate liberals. Indeed, of the last seven justices nominated by Democrats JFK, LBJ, Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, one was black, Marshall; one was Puerto Rican, Sonia Sotomayor. The other five were Jews: Arthur Goldberg, Abe Fortas, Ruth Bader Ginsberg, Stephen Breyer and Elena Kagan.
If Kagan is confirmed, Jews, who represent less than 2 percent of the U.S. population, will have 33 percent of the Supreme Court seats. Is this the Democrats' idea of diversity? But while leaders in the black community may be upset, the folks who look more like the real targets of liberal bias are white Protestants and Catholics, who still constitute well over half of the U.S. population.
(Excerpt) Read more at humanevents.com ...
What discrimination?
Exactly. You are willfully blind to it.
Buchanan lays it out and you claim to not understand while accusing Buchanan of "racism and bigotry" all the while mocking those who are being systematically disenfranchised.
Look, the problem with Kagan is she is a secularist elite from the Northeast snob section of the USA. No different than Episopalian Souter or Roman Catholic Stevens.
You were so eager in your desire to smear Buchanan that you either didn't read or comprehend the article. The whole point of the article is that Stevens is the last protestant on the Supreme Court.
Sorry, I don’t pretend to understand Christian denominations.
So, I guess you find it discriminatory that there are no Protestant Christians on the US Supreme Court? Is that your complaint?
What evidence do you have that Ms. Kagan was selected because she was Jewish (or rather, not Protestant Christian), instead of her desireable-to-Obama qualities of being a flaming marxist who hates men and desires to destroy this nation?
None, of course.
She was selected because she was a radical.
The only people her Jewish ethnicity (certainly not her religious practice, as she is non-observant) are relevant to are anti-semites like Pat Buchanon -— well, and you.
You claimed that Stevens was a Catholic. I would say that you are either willfully ignorant or trying to excuse your deliberate misrepresentation of the man's religion. Either way, you have your facts wrong.
So, I guess you find it discriminatory that there are no Protestant Christians on the US Supreme Court? Is that your complaint?
I find it highly suspect to the point of obvious discrimination that a white Christian has not been nominated for the Supreme Court by the Democrats in nearly 50 years. They have room for everyone else, but white Christians. Mr. Buchanan correctly points out that the Democrats have been redlining the Supreme Court, preventing the nomination of white Christians. Who sits on the nomination committee? Those names should be part of the public record. I wonder what reasons they would provide for excluding the majority of Americans in favor of ethnic and religious minorities.
What evidence do you have that Ms. Kagan was selected because she was Jewish (or rather, not Protestant Christian), instead of her desireable-to-Obama qualities of being a flaming marxist who hates men and desires to destroy this nation?
None, of course.
She was selected because she was a radical.
The only people her Jewish ethnicity (certainly not her religious practice, as she is non-observant) are relevant to are anti-semites like Pat Buchanon -— well, and you.
Blah, blah, blah. You have no idea why she was nominated. You keep wanting to play the anti-semite card. Abe Foxman would be proud to know that he has fans here at Free Republic.
Only you care whether or not she practices Judaism or identifies as a Jew.
The point of the article is the Democrats exclude white Christians, which you seem to have no problem with.
I notice that on your Freeper homepage you have an Israeli flag. If the Israeli Supreme Court were made up of Palestinian Muslims, Druze and Christians, excluding the majority of Jewish Israeli's, would you not suspect that Jews were being excluded? If the left in Israel had not placed a Jew on the court in nearly fifty years would you not complain? Would you say that anyone who did complain was being a bigot?
I think we all know the answer to those questions.
If they were conservative, I would have no problem.
We do?
“The point of the article is the Democrats exclude white Christians, which you seem to have no problem with.”
No, the point of the article is there are too many Jewish people, which is irrelevant — well, except to bigots.
The problem is there are too many atheist liberals of whatever origin.
“If Kagan is confirmed, Jews, who represent less than 2 percent of the U.S. population, will have 33 percent of the Supreme Court seats”
the horros.....THE HORRORS!!!!
(extreme anti-bigot sarcasm)
“I wonder how Kagan feels about white, male firefighters?”
I bet I know how she feels about white FEmale firefighters.
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.