Progressivism and Humanitarianism – Conflict of Interests? Maybe…

It’s so easy for people to pass off those who oppose Obama’s agenda as bigots or having a disdain for the poor. This has evolved into a standard argument raised by people on the left to in effect depersonalize dissent as something selfish or harmful to society. However, seldom is this claim brought up with any substantive base. In fact, in many cases the exact opposite ends up panning to be true. Just take a look at the way all major world dictators made their way to power when force was not an option. They disguised themselves as humanitarians and tried to empathize with those who have less. In the end nothing gets fixed, the only result is an increase in central authority over the people of a nation. There are so many examples of this panning out in history. The question becomes: How much more can this country take? Read more of this post

New Supreme court Activist appointed

President Barack Obama has officially nominated a new Supreme Court justice, Sonia Sotomayor, and as expected its affirmative action driven. It’s been all over the news now about that this is the first Hispanic to ever serve on the Supreme Court and how she is one of two women who will be serving on the high court among the nine, aside from Ginsburger  and that she is the third woman in history. Those stats are all well and good but that’s not why we nominate people to serve on the Supreme Court. The court is not some popularity contest and there is no reason to seek out one race or gender over another. This is a panel that is supposed to exist to uphold the constitution of the United States, not merely reflect the population percentages.

Over the years the court has evolved into a venue for political activism. There are currently no checks on decisions made by the Supreme Court by other branches of government. It can also be noted that justices serve on the court are for life. It is the result of this job security that they have grown to carry a tremendous amount of influence on public policy. A president generally favors justices who are most inlign with party platforms rather than looking for the one who will respect our constitution. As a result we have watched the repeated butchering of our constitution through  landmark supreme court decisions. The idea that one would select a justice based on race or gender is so repulsive to me – it detracts from everything this court was meant for.

Sonia Sotomyer has been an activist herself. Prior to her nomination she has been working as an appellatre court justice and has proven to be a judge with an agenda. She has presided over a number of cases that involve her opposition to life, her favor of gun control – a direct violation of the second ammendment, and her support for illegal immigration. She is idealogically the perfect justic for Obama because she is young and fits the typical minority stereotype that he was looking for.

This whole idea that the makeup of the court has to represent our population distribution and that in order to be fair we must conform that way is an atrocity. Merely the fact that this nominee was a Hispanic woman made her more qualified than anyone else being considered. How does that ensure we have the most qualified nominee? It doesn’t. This is the product of affirmative action in our country which has plagued the job market for a few decades. Now it’s affecting the selection of supreme court justices. We all of a sudden need a hispanic because of our rapidly increasing illegal alien population. The good news out of this is that the court idealogical makeup will not be cahnged. We still have the same number of leftists and conservatives.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 530 other followers