Arizona... why do you shame me again?

Check out these stories...

Man Church

Gov. Brewer

Sheriff Joe

Grain of Salt

It's been really annoying that the drama over Obama's speech to students that will happen tomorrow night is really unnecessary. I speculate that it's most likely not about the speech itself, and not even that a Democratic, African American president is speaking to students. It could be that the opposing political party just is making a fuss. For the record, George HW Bush and Ronald Reagan spoke to students as well and there was a bit of fuss over HW's speech as well. Even famed educator Laura Bush and NASCAR support the speech.

I think that it's also probably waving candy at the general American public to get their minds off of the health care debate.

The speech is fine. Why don't we get back to the real issues, such as healthcare.

Congrats

... to Supreme Court Judge Sonia Sotomayor. I am pleased that the senate confirmed her nomination although it was to be expected that all but 9 of the republicans voted against her. It sounds like the republican party is losing many of the hispanic voters as well. Esp. Sen. John McCain (Rep. AZ). I'm not excited about him being my senator again. Read more here.

Sotomayor and the Fundamentals of Diversity and Affirmative Action

This is a recent blog post by Jim Wallis. You can view the blogpost online or I've copied the text below. I like that he quotes Toobin's book "The Nine". A good read! I also like Brian McLaren's comments (which are linked) as well.

"The confirmation hearing for Judge Sonia Sotomayor this week again brings up the fundamental issues of diversity and affirmative action. Regardless of what we think of the good judge – I like her, and was honored to be at the White House for the announcement of the first Latina for the Supreme Court by the first African-American president, something that I actually did find very moving – it is worth reflecting theologically and politically on the issues involved.

The story of creation in Genesis provides a great depth of insight into the being and nature of God. In those first chapters of scripture we see that the image of God is best reflected not through sameness but through the breadth that exists within the grand diversity of creation. Jonathan Sacks, Chief Rabbi of the U.K., argues in his book, The Dignity of Difference, that the Tower of Babel stands as a warning against the hubris of humans who try to impose uniformity where God has created diversity. The doctrine of the Trinity holds that God, while perfect in unity, is at the same time diverse as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Our country is always at its best when diversity is not viewed as a problem to be overcome but as a strength to be celebrated. The challenge diversity presents is not for the country to become colorblind but for us all to be able to recognize and celebrate our differences while maintaining the proposition our country was founded upon, that all are created equal. While all are equal, we are not all the same — and that is a very good thing.

This principle was affirmed in the 1978 case of Regents of the University of California vs. Bakke, when the Supreme Court struck down as unconstitutional a strict quota system for admissions into medical school. But it was in the opinion of Justice Lewis Powell that another precedent was established. Justice Powell affirmed the role of well-designed affirmative action policies because of the benefits for society as a whole. Jeffery Toobin describes and quotes from the opinion as follows in his book The Nine:

…Powell justified affirmative action because of what it did for everyone, not just for its immediate beneficiaries. In his view, diversity — a buzzword that came into wide use only after Bakke -- helped all students of all races. “The nation’s future depends upon leaders trained through wide exposure to the ideas and mores of students as diverse as this Nation of many peoples,” Powell wrote, so “race or ethnic background may be deemed a ‘plus’ in a particular applicant’s file.” … In the subsequent 25 years, Powell’s rationale had become the dominant intellectual justification for affirmative action — not as a handout to the downtrodden but as a net benefit to the society as a whole.

In the 2003 cases against the University of Michigan (Gratz vs. Bollinger) and the university’s law school (Grutter vs. Bolinger), the principle of taking race into consideration as one factor of admission to achieve the goal of diversity was again affirmed. In those cases, the law school’s affirmative action policy was considered to be set up in a way that promoted this principle while it was determined that the undergraduate system was not. Of special concern in the case was a brief signed by top retired military officers who argued that affirmative action programs in place for officer training was vital to the quality, effectiveness, and cohesiveness of our armed forces.

One of the great benefits of diversity is that whether in regards to life in general or the particulars of a court case, our background, life stories, and identities all afford us different perspectives and unique insights. A diverse class, officer training program, community, or Supreme Court is going to have a broader and deeper wealth of knowledge and experience to interpret the world around them or a plaintiff’s grievance. This is the value of empathy that the president laid out as one of his requirements for a judge. Empathy allows us to rightly consider our emotions in the process of making a decision and to view the facts within more than just one framework. David Brooks, conservative columnist for the New York Times, said it like this:

It is incoherent to say that a judge should base an opinion on reason and not emotion because emotions are an inherent part of decision-making. Emotions are the processes we use to assign value to different possibilities. Emotions move us toward things and ideas that produce pleasure and away from things and ideas that produce pain. People without emotions cannot make sensible decisions because they don’t know how much anything is worth. People without social emotions like empathy are not objective decision-makers. They are sociopaths who sometimes end up on death row.

The belief that diversity is a goal worth pursuing because it is a benefit to all of us is not a conservative belief or a progressive belief, but a deeply held moral value and American proposition. As Brian McLaren wrote, this is not racism. It is from this foundation that our country has overcome the sins of slavery and legalized segregation — and it is from this foundation that our country will continue to make strides in overcoming racial inequality through the courts, legislation, and the transformation of society."

Sotomayor Part 2

I continue to watch the Sotomayor hearings and I am intrigued by the questioning of Senator Lindsay Graham (R. South Carolina). I think that the demeanor and approach to his questioning was much more diplomatic and graceful than Senator Kyl's. Or perhaps, they were just sugar coated with southern charm. I'm not sure and I know I'm not qualified to make character judgments on someone I don't know.

But, here are some things that I noticed which seemed to hold a different tone:

- His admiration of Sotomayor and his questioning of her temperment on the second circuit. I think he raised some good points about her character and challenged her to examine it.
- His pointing out of her record of judgement
- His challenging of Sotomayor's "wise Latina" comment and how if the tables were turned he would be in the hot seat and how he recognized and affirmed the fact that we all should have a second chance for the things in which we say
- His ability to help see the human side of Sotomayor when asking questions about her reaction to the attacks of 9/11/01.
- His encouragement for Sotomayor to think about and entertain certain concepts and thoughts

However, I do think that he raised hot button issues (abortion, war, death penalty) in a subtle manner and I thought there was a very slight tone of condescension at some points - but very slight. I wonder if some would see his southern charm holding the ability to seem nice and yet pull out the big issues...

I'm not saying that he's my new hero but I do see a different tone to his questioning than I have yet seen thus far. I think his delivery method was an intelligent approach.

Supreme Ct Nominee Sotomayor

I've been watching the nomination hearings for the past two days and I've been struck by the matter of how race, ethnicity and gender has been a point of attack on her perspective.

And frankly, I am embarassed and ashamed by the attack on Sotomayor from Sen. Jon Kyle (R. Arizona). I think he's one of the white males that is threatened by a strong, powerful woman who is very much in touch with and proud of her ethnicity and her support of the importance of women and people of color. I understand that his concern is that he's afraid that race and gender will become determining factors in the judgements that she may rule upon. I think that she is a strong advocate for more women and people of color to be in leadership positions, perhaps on the Court itself. I think she's fallen under attack for supporting diversity in a Court and judicial system that has for a majority of the time held mainly white males. In a society that has dominant white privilege, Kyle should recognize that yes, the speeches that she gave at various commencements were empowering but that in action and in judgements, she will be as impartial as possible, as any other white supreme court judge could be as well.

I think as a woman of color, she is coming under attack for the fact that her decision making skills as a supreme ct judge should be questioned because of her biases. I think it's ridiculous to assume that simply because she is not a white male that she will be easily swayed by her racial and gender biases.

Perhaps some think that at this level of judging, there should not be mistakes or errors in judgement. But when I think over the course of the judges, many of them seem to have made mistakes of which the American people have not agreed with decisions. I also think that other recent supreme ct nominees, now judges, have received much more lienancy in their judging. For that matter, I think that presidents past and even the current president has made mistakes and will make mistakes.

Sotomayor has said and will continue to say, "I do not believe that any ethnic, gender or race group has an advantage in sound judging." And I think CNN's commentator Maria Echaveste captured the heart of my issue with these lines of questioning when she said, "If you are a minority and you're a conservative, you're independent minded. If you're a minority and sort of to the left, somehow you're going to be biased and in favor of minorities. There's a double standard here and that's ultimately what's problematic about this. The fact is, would we be asking about her bias in the Richie case if she were anything BUT a minority."

Such Significance

I love how this photo conveys monumental dreams for all people but especially and specifically African-American young men. And whether or not you agree with Obama's politics, this photo is incredible at helping young African-American young men have something to hope for, to aspire to, and to be a role model. Very moving!

Prop 8 in CA

Sad for the state of CA. Dang.

Read here and how generations disagree on this issue.

Year of the Bible

Do we need one? Rep. Broun (R-GA) thinks we do. Read this!