There is a little reported story out of the Democratic National Convention where two Sanders delegates have been barred from attending the event. The problem was not their credentials or their conduct. State Sen. Tim Ashe (right below) and Ken Dean are men and the DNC ruled that there were simply too many of that kind in the delegation. Vermont was ordered to replace them with women, any women, so long as the delegation was equal. Ashe and Dean have filed challenges for good reason.
Coupled with a growing controversy over the determined effort of the Democrats not to release a list of donors to the media, this is hardly a good story to trigger days before the opening of convention. The national party appears to be imposing a quota system on delegates based on gender despite the fact that such delegates can claim that they are qualified through the democratic process. After all Dean and Ashe were elected as delegates on June 11. Then, on July 5, the state party was ordered to remove them due to their gender deficiency.
Of course, the infamous superdelegates remain untouchable. It is just those elected by the people that can be negated solely on the basis for their gender. Notably, eight of 10 Vermont superdelegates are men.
The Democratic party leadership appears to be moving away from the fight against gender discrimination in guaranteeing equal opportunity to the fight for gender equality with the use of quotas to force gender balance. Ironically, it was Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg in United States v. Virginia (1996) who warned that “Today’s skeptical scrutiny of official action denying rights or opportunities based on sex responds to volumes of history.” Not only are these delegates saying that they are being denied position due to their gender, but the DNC is negating the choice of Vermont voters — male and female. There is such a thing as individual achievement and choice. The Vermont voters are allowed to select people on the basis for their individual merits rather than categorical exclusions based on race, gender, religion, or other immutable characteristics.
This point was made by the Supreme Court in University of California v. Bakke (1978):
[R]ace, like gender and illegitimacy, . . . is an immutable characteristic which its possessors are powerless to escape or set aside. While a classification is not per se invalid because it divides classes on the basis of an immutable characteristic, see supra at 355-356, it is nevertheless true that such divisions are contrary to our deep belief that “legal burdens should bear some relationship to individual responsibility or wrongdoing,” . . . and that advancement sanctioned, sponsored, or approved by the State should ideally be based on individual merit or achievement, or at the least on factors within the control of an individual.
Those concerns are heightened in my view when alleged gender discrimination negates the results of a democratic process like delegate selection.
What do you think?
@Rose
You said: “Now give it serious, pragmatic consideration. Do you want to indict Bush and Cheney and the CEOs of our biggest banks? You want to talk about a divided America…”
No, you’re wrong. If Obama had gone after the Bankers, he would have been our most popular president. I would have voted for him in 2012. Obama is and was nothing but an empty hat, full of that liberal arrogance, and no intelligence to match. I fault his advisers, and his own choice in advisers for much of his failure.
Plus, can you imagine the state of racial affairs in this country if Obama had come right out and told the truth to blacks—that it isn’t racism that is holding them back, but their own stupid and trashy and ghetto behavior? If he had said about Trayvon, not that his son might have looked like him, but instead, “Trayvon decided he wanted to emulate gangstas and it’s his own fault he got shot! Trayvon acting ghetto is why he dead.” Can you imagine the healing if he had stayed with those early speeches of his where he gave the low class trashy blacks the business for their stupid lifestyles?
But no. Democrats need to race bait to keep the black base riled up, just like the old segregationists in the South. Plus they need a fairy tale for stupid college-educated white liberals to believe in, so they can pretend its 1965 and they are Freedom Riders.
Obama had his chance, and he blew it. In spades.
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
Your link on the TPP is not much better than the government’s. I respect the folks like MSF, Green Peace,and Sierra but the genie is out of the lamp and it’s a global world. How are you going to manage trade?
And a lot of poor people in Mexico were helped by Nafta. We’re not doing so great but I suspect a lot of really poor, poor people worldwide have been helped by world trade.
@Autumn
True about the to big to fail excuse. I suspect it went further than that, and Obama and his cronies laid off them to make more money. There is a reason why Goldman Sachs pays HRC big bucks for speeches. Which is another reason why I do not understand progressives rushing to Trump. For the first time since perhaps Teddy Roosevelt there is a candidate who is not in the pocket of banksters. Maybe they can’t support every policy of his, but some I don’t understand at all.
Like Michael Moore. He embarrasses GM about moving the plants to Mexico. Because American jobs would be taken over by Mexican workers. Yet, he and others are perfectly fine with Mexicans swimming the Rio Grande and taking jobs here. There ain’t much difference.
About the only advantage is that if the Mexicans come here, instead of the factories going there, there will be more wage depression, and thus more poor people, which swells the ranks of Democrats. For the GOP, cheaper labor means more profits. So, let’s call them the 5%ers in both parties do swell. 95% of the country does not so well. Plus if they are here, they will end stuffing the ballot box for the Democrats. Why the blacks support this crap is just beyond me unless they expect a trickle down effect from the government largesse.
As far as the Mexicans, and other foreigners, I would rather hire one of them any day over a black. Mexicans work harder and are much more reliable than blacks. Geeesh, have you ever had to put up with a black server at a restaurant? By and large a horrible experience. Plus, Mexicans can advance more in our society because they are not as shiftless as blacks, and are much more family oriented. But while I prefer the Mexicans, I think it is more fair to give the first chance at jobs to American blacks who are citizens.
So to me, the halt on immigration thing is more about fairness to blacks.
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
Regarding China’s moves and who in Asia is going to manage them.
Japan? Will have to change their constitution. Abe would like to do that. The right is on the rise there.
Is South Korea going to manage China? and North Korea?
Or is it Viet Nam, Malaysia, or the Philippines?
Sorry. I don’t think it is realistic to think those countries can manage China.
Prosecuting the crooks? It should have started with Bush and Cheney. But consider this. The country was split 50/50. Tea Party was born in April ’09. Whole world was threatened with financial collapse. Obama was an illegitimate black Kenyan.
Now give it serious, pragmatic consideration. Do you want to indict Bush and Cheney and the CEOs of our biggest banks?
You want to talk about a divided America…
Autumn
You may want to amend your ‘corporation infiltration’ timeline. Think Hawaii, South America, and “What’s good for General Motors is good for America”. The GM business takes us back to ’53.
If you will knock off the crack remarks, I will respond. IIRC, you were the one who wanted a discussion of the issues. I’m willing, but knock off the insults. Leave them for the Lesbian Guy.
I somewhat share your view that Nato’s move eastward is a problem. I like John Mearshimer (sp?) and am no fan of Nuland. However, what happened in Crimea and before that, Georgia, is not encouraging. Nor is the rise in homophobia and who knows what was done to get all those wins at the Sochi Olympics – although foreign policy should not rest on that.
Maybe Putin has no intention of bothering the Baltics, but because of the evidence of a more aggressive stance (forgot to mention Syria) and the instability in Europe because of Brexit, I think it is best to have Nato around for awhile.
Okinawa hasn’t liked us for a long time, but I don’t know that Japan would be too happy if we pulled out, nor would South Korea. You ready to give North Korea free rein?
@Squeek:
RE: “Our government couldn’t even find any crooks in the 2008 financial bust.”
Not true –they found ’em. But then Eric Holder came up with the “too big to fail” doctrine when he was AG. Now he’s back at his old law firm defending vile corporations. That revolving door thing don’t you know that both establishment Repugs and Demoncrats take advantage of.
Rose,
I grew up in what was then West Germany so I think I have a damn good idea about NATO. Actually, I benefited from it as my father worked for DOD as a teacher overseas. All this hysteria about Russia is crazy. Russia is NOT the aggressor – we are. They are not moving towards Western Europe, but we are stationing troops and weapons on its borders. They have not threatened the Baltic states at all. As far as China’s moves – that’s something the Asian states need to work out. Maybe we should show goodwill and get our troops off Okinawa – more than 60,000 people protested just last month:
http://thediplomat.com/2016/06/after-murder-mass-protests-in-okinawa-against-us-bases/
I know it’s a hard concept for most Americans to grasp: we do NOT own the world!!
Rose,
You must be smoking crack if you use the USTR as a source. The corporations have infiltrated the government since Clinton continuing with Dubya and now Obama/Clinton. The TPP is like NAFTA on steroids – maybe you should research some of the lawsuits that have been filed against countries that have hurt so many poor people and their communities. You think it’s okay that a tribunal can make decisions and bypass national judicial systems? I do not. AND ISDS allows corporations to sue for loss of “expected profits” – the US has never lost a case, but Canada, Mexico and other nations (under CAFTA) have paid big when they tried to prevent pollution, etc. So we have “won” at the expense of others. that is immoral IMO.
The “sister” trade deal, the TTIP, which includes Europe has been fought off because generally they are better informed and more organized.
Look at who opposes the TTP/TTIP: Doctors Without Borders, Sierra Club, Green Peace, Progressives – in short anyone with conscience.
Obama continues at the Police Event:
But I wanted to come by to make sure that all of you knew how grateful the American people are for your service, how appreciative we are of your sacrifice. As a general proposition, you guys are not looking for the spotlight; you just want to do your jobs and keep your community safe. And you also want to come home to your own families at the end of a tough day. And for you to put yourself out there like that is one of the greatest gifts that you could give your fellow citizens.
So our job is to support you in every way that we can. It is my view — and, let’s be honest, sometimes this is a controversial view — that one of the best ways to provide support to our police officers is to make sure that we are addressing potential underlying tensions between officers and the communities where they’re serving; that pretending sometimes that those tensions aren’t there is not going to make things better. But when we’re able to bring people together and strengthen those bonds, then that’s going to make the lives of police officers on a day-to-day basis just a little bit easier, and it’s going to make our streets safer, and it’s going to create the kind of atmosphere whereby we continue to bring crime rates down to near-historic levels.
Notice: Obama says he wanted to come by to be sure they all knew how grateful the American people are for your service…..
Is that the way the president ordinarily addresses the press? Do you think the American people are grateful for the service of the PRESS?
Or do you think it was a roomful of cops at a police event?
SWM
No, I am not a Trump supporter. I am for Bernie and / or Jill Stein. Gary Johnson is truly scary and he’s pro TPP like the rest of the establishment.
From whitehouse.gov
For Immediate Release
July 22, 2016
Remarks by the President at a Drop-By of 21st Century Policing Event
South Court Auditorium
THE PRESIDENT: Hello, everybody. Have a seat. Please, have a seat. I just wanted to come by to say thank you for being here and the extraordinary work that you do each and every day. I was a little bit delayed — some of you are aware there were shootings in Germany. And we don’t yet know exactly what’s happening there, but obviously our hearts go out to those who may have been injured. It’s still an active situation. And Germany is one of our closest allies, so we are going to pledge all the support that they may need in dealing with these circumstances.
Entire transcript is found at:
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2016/07/22/remarks-president-drop-21st-century-policing-event
It was a 21st Century Policing Event. They were cops. They had attended a policing event.
Read the transcript if you won’t watch CSPAN.
Notice – No questions from the press – usually the press ask questions at a press conference – but there were no questions because they weren’t press. They were cops. At the close of an event.
Notice – The location was the South Court Auditorium. That’s not the press center. It is an auditorium. Where events are held. Not press conferences.
@Rose
Pull your head out. No matter what the Treaty says, it is only good if it is enforced. As Trump notes, many of our various “deals” are not being enforced. The U.S. does what it is supposed to, and the other sides play whatever games they want. Meanwhile, our officials usually do squat.
For egs., NATO. Where we spend our 2%GDP on defense, but other nations don’t. BUT, we are supposed to come running. Trump is right. If other nations were paying their share, that would amount to more jobs here in our defense industry.
Our take Obamacare. Face it, nobody really understood the bill. That is why it doesn’t work, and Obama had egg on his face with the “You can keep your doctor” spiel. Have you seen the commercial on TV where a girl asks if you have read the 22 page insurance policy??? Hell no. Nobody does unless they are part autistic or something. Do any of us even read the Terms of Service internet things.
Yet, there is this 1,000+ page document that you feel certain our officials will read and enforce. Ha. Our reps are too busy snorting coke and getting laid. Our government couldn’t even find any crooks in the 2008 financial bust.
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
Autumn, I’ll buy your bumper sticker!
And the Daily Mail is primarily an online newspaper. Apparently you wipe your ass w/ your computer. Explains the sticky keys.
He was speaking to cops but it was A PRESS CONFERENCE covered by the press. How the hell else would there be video and print reports? I watched the CNN feed LIVE. The ENTIRE presser. CNN knew he was going to talk about Munich. They didn’t realize he would crack wise in the middle. The tape speaks for itself. I ENCOURAGE all to watch it. You just got your butt kicked, but you are not bright enough to know it.
JT links to the Daily Mail all the time. I know it’s not the HuffPo, your source for news. So, take up your partisan issues w/ the Daily Mail w/ JT.
Autumn
I don’t know who the guy is who wrote the OPINION piece on Trump’s foreign policy but I would question his assessment regarding Trump’s isolationism.
Trump is going to eradicate “ISIS Fast – from Day One”. He is going to need more than drones to get that done.
And Trump isn’t too happy with China “winning all the time”. How is Trump going to deal with the South China Sea if he is going to go all isolationist?
And is Trump really going to pull out of NATO? What about Putin and the Baltics?
Do you think Congress is going to let NATO go? The military let NATO go?
You need to begin thinking further than sentence number one.
Nick
The CNN video was truncated.. CNN is not CSPAN. The Daily Mail is useful for toilet paper.
Watch the entire 10 minute video from the moment he comes into the room apologizing for being late.
You are obviously misinformed since you have continued to state he was speaking to the press.
It was a roomful of cops.
What are you afraid of learning?
Autumn
I was worried about the sovereignty issue as well.
Then I learned that EVERY trade agreement allows participants the ability to protest , dispute and contest those that break the agreement. TPP is no different. As I understand it, these disputes are brought before a TPP panel for settlement – not our courts. How could you have an agreement without having a means of solving disputes? Disputes will reach settlement and corrected. The agreement cannot force any country to change its laws or regulations.
From the government website:
While the Parties recognize the importance of prompt compliance with panel determinations, nothing in the Agreement can require the United States or other Parties to change a law or regulation.
Private rights
No TPP Party can provide for a private right of action under its domestic law against any other TPP Party for failure to carry out the obligations in the TPP Agreement.
I’m guessing that if the losing party refuses to comply, it is kicked out of the agreement.
I’m reassured that no country or party can force us to change our regulations or laws.
I’m worried about pharma, too. I don’t think we will be flooded with unsafe food. I think our oceans and their bounty will be better protected.
As you know, this is a huge issue. For me, I think we have to have free trade. What do you propose instead of trade agreements?
BTW. NAFTA was negotiated by and signed by George HW Bush. Not Clinton as Trump and many others state. Clinton was the one who got it through Congress for implementation. Overall, most economists believe we came out a little ahead on that agreement. And yes, many manufacturing jobs were lost, but many of those jobs were lost to technology and increased productivity. NAFTA wasn’t the cause for those loses. And many new manufacturing jobs have been created during Obama’s administration. I think I read that something like 1,000,000.
Here is the government website. Maybe you will find it helpful.
https://ustr.gov/tpp/#issues