More Bull From the U.S. Senate Re: Confirmation Process

Don't you just love the condescension coming out of the hearings for the supreme court nominee, Sonia Sotomayer?
Think about it for a minute, and it does take a minute, and let me ask you the following:

What white man or woman during these same type of hearings has been asked whether being Caucasian makes h/her unable to apply the law without bias in cases involving people who are not white?

What male Supreme Court nominee has been asked whether he can apply the law without prejudice/bias to cases involving women? Remember that more than 1/2 of the U.S. population is female.

Those two questions alone automatically suggests that Sotomayer is being held to a totally different standard.

Let's throw in the issue of life experience that keeps creeping into the process. Could the lofty, yet unsettling voices from the Senate chamber have one believe that such experiences are not part of the rule of law. Did they miss something in the history of this land? Experiences should not have been taken into consideration in the Dred Scott Case? Brown v. Board of Ed.? Gideon v. Wainwright? or Hamda v. U.S.? Are they kidding?

The humans that sit on the high bench do not live prosaic lives. Anyone who has been lectured by the Supremes during oral arguments know full well that they can dish out a tongue lashing over life experiences to any counsel that is stupid enough to think they are vapid about circumstances surrounding a legal issue.

Police with Backbone and Teachers with Brains Fighting a Corporate Giant

The sale of the automaker Chrysler Group to an Italian car maker, Fiat, has been put on hold. Teachers and police officers in Indiana filed an emergency petition in the U.S. Supreme Court to block the sale.

The Indiana State Police Pension Fund and the Indiana Teacher Retirement Fund filed the petition this morning suing on the grounds that "the terms of the sale favor unsecured stockholders at the expense of secured stockholders and alleged that the use of Trouble Asset Relief Program Fund (TARP) to finance the bankruptcy is unconstitutional".

In an ideal case where the police chose not to be financially bullied and where teachers put their collective brains to work to stop an otherwise collapse of their retirement fund, we have a David versus Goliath smackdown with supremes serving as the referee.

The outcome? You guessed it! The police with all their muscle and the teachers with all that esoteric logic won't have a prayer. One need only a short perusal of the recent court's history to grasp an understanding that corporations reign huge in the eyes of the mighty robed jurists. One shouldn't be surprised if the court just stuck out its sinewy finger to those teachers and police officers and boldly said, "Stare Decisis!" (a sort of we-heard-this-before-and-we-don't-want-to-hear-it-again).

If that weren't enough, the talking heads in the media will probably eviscerate both groups because they had the temerity to stand up to Wall Street and the federal government over a highly questionable if not illegal sale.

The average Joe or Jane on the street or at the water cooler is probably just a little torqued about the suit as well because they didn't have anyone in their corner to champion for them when the financial crisis placed their retirement accounts in jeopardy.

Brains and backbone. I am proud of them.