8/8/09
CORRECTION!!!
An alert reader, Michael, corrected me on Arthur Goldberg being the first Jewish Supreme Court justice. Louis D. Brandeis and Benjamin Cardoza were Jewish, as "Michael" pointed out, also so was Felix Frankfurter as my followup research revealed. I apologize for this inaccuracy and thank Michael for bringing this to our readers' attention.
He went on to make some distinction on the application of "Latino" could apply per definition to those of Iberian Pennisula ancestory, but in my essay, I am using the currently understood political definition of "Hispanic" as being people from Spanish speaking countries in the Western Hemisphere. It is such people that are addressed as the victim group by the PC police.
I hate making mistakes, but I am anxious to correct them and admit to them which is more than can be said of media sources far greater and more powerful than my funky little blog could ever be.
-RMF
THE ORIGINAL ARTICLE (errors included)
Okay, Sonya Sotomayor is now Barack Obama’s first nominee to teach the Supreme court. What’s the big deal?
She’s the kind of hard core Liberal idiot everyone would have expected Obama to nominate. Her record is of judicial activism even commenting on the circuit court truly does make policy. She proudly proclaims her advancement shows the value of affirmative action. She’s exactly the kind of justice one fears when a Democratic President is in power, but in the big scheme of things, for now, she is just one Liberal replacing another. David Souter was a rather quiet fellow, but he sure turned out to everything George H.W. Bush would have expected him not to be when he was appointed to the Supreme Court. Souter might be more of a legal scholar. Sotomayor more of a big mouth, but the results would be essentially the same.
What’s the big deal? She’s the third woman on the court, the first Hispanic. Why should that be such a big deal? Was there a lot of hoopla when Benjamin Cardoza was appointed to the court serving from 1932-1938 . He was the first justice of Portuguese ancestory? How about Arthur Goldberg, a John F. Kennedy appointee, he was the first Jewish justice. Why not make a big deal about Anthony Scalia being appointed as the first Italian by Ronald Reagan? Shouldn’t all the “Sons of Italy” members had rejoiced and thrown lavish parades to mark his historic accomplishment?
The Supreme Court should in some measure reflect the overall makeup of the American population. It would only seem natural at some point, a person of Hispanic ethnicity should be on the court. Somehow, this just doesn’t seem to be the big deal and historical event that Thurgood Marshall’s appointment marked as the first African-American represented. After all, he was the lawyer who represented the children excluded from integrated schools in the famous Brown versus the Board of Education case one of the most important cases ever determined by the Supreme Court. African-Americans were the victims of severe racism sanctioned by laws through the 1960’s when he was appointed to the bench in 1967.
What horrible fate faces what is considered the Hispanic or Latino population? Isn’t the notion of a Hispanic population just a bizarre mutation created by identity politics in the first place. Put it in perspective, Cuban immigrants fleeing the dictatorship of Fidel Castro are Hispanic. Puerto Ricans, residents of an American territory, are Hispanic. Immigrants from Mexico regardless of the terms on how they entered the country are Hispanic. Nicaraguans, Costa Ricans, Venezuelans, Peruvians, Hondurans, Panamanians, and all Spanish speaking Central and South Americans are Hispanic. Go all the way down to Argentina and Chili, they’re Hispanic too.
Look at world history. Spanish settlers came to the New World more than a century before the first English settlers came to North Carolina, then Virginia and Massachusetts. In over 500 years, these different Spanish settlements have developed their own unique cultures and customs. Aside from a common language and distant heritage, they have evolved to become very different nations with different issues and identities. Those who left those countries to come the United States have done so for a myriad of reasons but all united by the promise the great American melting pot provides. Only recently largely through political exploitation, the development of the ideology of identity politics and establishing Hispanics as the latest victim class, have we seen this huge monolithic block of a seemingly united population with shared interests.
Let’s look at it this way. Is what we consider Hispanic any more genuine than if we were to take Americans, Canadians, Australians, New Zealanders, British, Irish, some South Africans, and the ruling class of the Marshall Islands as all being Anglicans as if they have some specific identity interests? Silly isn’t it? Maybe the Hispanic distinction is just as artificial.
The media, the academic elites, and the Democratic party, the purveyors of political correctness and definers of social distinction have promoted all kinds of obscene arbitrary groups under the guise of identity politics and somehow most of them are all victims of evil white men of mostly British and Western European heritage. For their unique identify, society owes them certain things such as definable representation as a percentage of the work force or student body. They also should be established fixtures in our great institutions like the President’s cabinet and the Supreme Court.
The goal of all freedom-loving true Americans should be to get beyond the barriers of race, ethnicity, and the abyss of “identity politics.” What unites us is far greater than that which divides us, but as long as there are opportunistic politicians, media figures, and demagogues who exploit our divisions for their gain and profit, the struggle continues.
Much work needs to be done as our society continues to write off African American males as disposable citizens. Our court system, education system, and political leadership fail to accept their responsibilities. As a caring culture, we must insist on promoting the core values that allow all Americans to achieve our potential. Identity politics plays against that needing victims to maintain their power base.
As such, the seating of Sonya Sotomayor on the Supreme Court is a supreme tragedy as she now one of the leading champions of perpetuating the destructive nonsense.
She’s the kind of hard core Liberal idiot everyone would have expected Obama to nominate. Her record is of judicial activism even commenting on the circuit court truly does make policy. She proudly proclaims her advancement shows the value of affirmative action. She’s exactly the kind of justice one fears when a Democratic President is in power, but in the big scheme of things, for now, she is just one Liberal replacing another. David Souter was a rather quiet fellow, but he sure turned out to everything George H.W. Bush would have expected him not to be when he was appointed to the Supreme Court. Souter might be more of a legal scholar. Sotomayor more of a big mouth, but the results would be essentially the same.
What’s the big deal? She’s the third woman on the court, the first Hispanic. Why should that be such a big deal? Was there a lot of hoopla when Benjamin Cardoza was appointed to the court serving from 1932-1938 . He was the first justice of Portuguese ancestory? How about Arthur Goldberg, a John F. Kennedy appointee, he was the first Jewish justice. Why not make a big deal about Anthony Scalia being appointed as the first Italian by Ronald Reagan? Shouldn’t all the “Sons of Italy” members had rejoiced and thrown lavish parades to mark his historic accomplishment?
The Supreme Court should in some measure reflect the overall makeup of the American population. It would only seem natural at some point, a person of Hispanic ethnicity should be on the court. Somehow, this just doesn’t seem to be the big deal and historical event that Thurgood Marshall’s appointment marked as the first African-American represented. After all, he was the lawyer who represented the children excluded from integrated schools in the famous Brown versus the Board of Education case one of the most important cases ever determined by the Supreme Court. African-Americans were the victims of severe racism sanctioned by laws through the 1960’s when he was appointed to the bench in 1967.
What horrible fate faces what is considered the Hispanic or Latino population? Isn’t the notion of a Hispanic population just a bizarre mutation created by identity politics in the first place. Put it in perspective, Cuban immigrants fleeing the dictatorship of Fidel Castro are Hispanic. Puerto Ricans, residents of an American territory, are Hispanic. Immigrants from Mexico regardless of the terms on how they entered the country are Hispanic. Nicaraguans, Costa Ricans, Venezuelans, Peruvians, Hondurans, Panamanians, and all Spanish speaking Central and South Americans are Hispanic. Go all the way down to Argentina and Chili, they’re Hispanic too.
Look at world history. Spanish settlers came to the New World more than a century before the first English settlers came to North Carolina, then Virginia and Massachusetts. In over 500 years, these different Spanish settlements have developed their own unique cultures and customs. Aside from a common language and distant heritage, they have evolved to become very different nations with different issues and identities. Those who left those countries to come the United States have done so for a myriad of reasons but all united by the promise the great American melting pot provides. Only recently largely through political exploitation, the development of the ideology of identity politics and establishing Hispanics as the latest victim class, have we seen this huge monolithic block of a seemingly united population with shared interests.
Let’s look at it this way. Is what we consider Hispanic any more genuine than if we were to take Americans, Canadians, Australians, New Zealanders, British, Irish, some South Africans, and the ruling class of the Marshall Islands as all being Anglicans as if they have some specific identity interests? Silly isn’t it? Maybe the Hispanic distinction is just as artificial.
The media, the academic elites, and the Democratic party, the purveyors of political correctness and definers of social distinction have promoted all kinds of obscene arbitrary groups under the guise of identity politics and somehow most of them are all victims of evil white men of mostly British and Western European heritage. For their unique identify, society owes them certain things such as definable representation as a percentage of the work force or student body. They also should be established fixtures in our great institutions like the President’s cabinet and the Supreme Court.
The goal of all freedom-loving true Americans should be to get beyond the barriers of race, ethnicity, and the abyss of “identity politics.” What unites us is far greater than that which divides us, but as long as there are opportunistic politicians, media figures, and demagogues who exploit our divisions for their gain and profit, the struggle continues.
Much work needs to be done as our society continues to write off African American males as disposable citizens. Our court system, education system, and political leadership fail to accept their responsibilities. As a caring culture, we must insist on promoting the core values that allow all Americans to achieve our potential. Identity politics plays against that needing victims to maintain their power base.
As such, the seating of Sonya Sotomayor on the Supreme Court is a supreme tragedy as she now one of the leading champions of perpetuating the destructive nonsense.
2 comments:
FOR YOUR INFORMATION AND TO GET THE "FACTS" STRAIGHT: BENJAMIN CARDOZA WAS THE 1ST JEWISH JUSTICE AS WAS JUSTICE BRANDEIS BUT NOT JUSTICE GOLDBERG. IT ALWAYS MAKES YOUR CASE MORE PLAUSIBLE WHEN YOU FACTCHECK BEFORE YOU WRITE IT!
SINCE JUSTICE CARDOZA HAS LINEAGE GOING BACK TO SEPHARDIM WHO EMIGRATED FROM THE IBERIAN PENINSULA, THAT WOULD BY WEBSTERS DEFINITION, MAKE HIM A LATINO. THAT WAS 65 YEARS BEFORE "THE IST LATINO JUDGE". BUT THE QUESTION IS WHY HE ISN'T RECOGNIZED THAT WAY BY HISPANIC LEGAL ORGANIZATIONS. MMMMM????
Thank you for bringing this to my attention. I have confirmed your observations with further research.
Your second point, Latino, yes those from the Iberian pennisula would be Latino, but Hispanic, as it is used in today's media culture generally points to Spanish speaking populations in the Western Hemisphere.
This further helps torpedo the whole concept of identify politics as matters of race, ethnicity, etc. are arbitrary.
Thank you for reading my column and setting the record straight.
Post a Comment