GeorgeWBush appointed the judges who GUTTED the Voting Rights Act.

[blm]

Bushes have a habit of using high profile appearances to pretend that their hands are clean.

Rove ramped up the Southern Strategy to exploit the racism that would put GWBush into the WH. He ramped it up even more to elect the most racist congress he could get, so this country would be burdened with the most racist and most fascist Supreme Court in modern history.

Bush is there to MOCK this event.

Bush has no shame.

Supreme Court guts key part of landmark Voting Rights Act

Tue, Jun 25 2013
By Lawrence Hurley
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday gutted a core part of the landmark 1965 Voting Rights Act and challenged Congress to come up with a replacement plan to protect blacks and other minorities in places where discrimination still persists rather than target former slaveholding states in the South.

In a 5-4 ruling with the court's conservatives in the majority, the justices ruled that Congress had used outdated facts in continuing to force nine states, mainly in the South, to get federal approval for voting rule changes affecting blacks and other minorities.
The court ruled in favor of officials from Shelby County, Alabama, by declaring unconstitutional a section of the law - most recently updated by Congress in 2006 - that set the formula that decides which states and locales with a history of racial discrimination need federal approval to change voting laws.

President Barack Obama expressed disappointment with the ruling and asked Congress to pass legislation "to ensure every American has equal access to the polls."
"Today's decision invalidating one of (the law's) core provisions upsets decades of well-established practices that help make sure voting is fair, especially in places where voting discrimination has been historically prevalent," Obama, the first black president, said in a statement.

The ruling upended legal protections for minority voters that were a key achievement of the U.S. civil rights movement of the 1960s led by Martin Luther King Jr. The Voting Rights Act as a whole was enacted to broadly prohibit poll taxes, literacy tests and other measures common in states with a history of slavery that prevented black people from voting.
>>>>>>

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

1. And lots of Dem Senators voted to approve them.

Iirc, Scalia was approved 98-0, and that wasn't 98 Republican votes. Roberts got at least around half of the Dem Senators voting to confirm him, Thomas's confirmation was 'uneventful'. and so on.

(Edit: As noted in a comment below, I pulled the 'uneventful' line from the wrong place - it was in a block of text referring to his confirmation as a Federal Judge, not his confirmation to the Supreme Court, to which I have been reminded, the Anita Hill fight was a part. I'll leave the original line above, though, as it would make other comments below not make sense if I changed it.)

Unless Democratic Senators are going to actually vote to block hyperpartisans being appointed to the Supreme Court, you can't really whine about Republican presidents appointing hyperpartisans.

[blm]

4. LOL 'Thomas... uneventful'. Then MORE Dems woke up and Kerry tried to block Alito.

The SC never tried to blatantly overturn settled law before, Mr. Erich, so why pretend that the tradition of letting Presidents HAVE their court appointees is somehow the fault of the Democrats?

And how DARE YOU use that as a way to absolve Bush for the course that HE set.

That's BULLSH!T!!!!

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

8. I absolve Bush of nothing.

I simply point out that he had a lot of help from the corporatists on BOTH sides of the aisle.

[blm]

9. Yes, you did.

.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

12. In your eyes apparently.

Not in mine. But you're free to imagine I'm saying or believing whatever you want me to say or believe.

Personally, I've stated many times I think the man is a war criminal who belongs behind bars. But you go ahead and pretend I'm giving him 'absolution'.

[blm]

32. You are trying to on THIS thread, Mr Erich.

And that is something I don't tolerate.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

10. Although I admit to looking at the wrong section when I went back to look him up.

It was his confirmation as a 'Federal Judge' that was uneventful. (and footnoted as such.)

I'm not old enough to have been interested in politics when he was being nominated to the SC, so I only heard about Anita Hill later and in no great depth, so it didn't make much impression on me. I suppose I should have mentioned one of the other Conservatives, rather than Thomas there.

[dsc]

15. maybe you should have paid some attention

or not posted at all.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

16. The larger point stands, even if I chose poorly in mentioning Thomas.

Roberts, Scalia, Alito all got where they are because Dems thought they were worth confirming.

But yeah, I probably shouldn't have posted at all, since people are merely looking to point fingers at 'team red' while absolving 'team blue' of any complicity.

[dsc]

17. Alito and Roberts were filibustered (which was dumb in my opinion but it was done none the less)

and Renquist, whose seat was being vacated for Scalia was who got fought in the Senate. Reagan appointed Renquist to be Chief and Scalia to replace Renquist when Burger retired. Had Renquist not been approved then Scalia wouldn't have been needed. That said, it was a GOP Senate who approved Scalia, Roberts and Alito. Elections do tend to matter.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

19. Dumb?

Should have kept to it.

98-0 for Scalia.

Dem Senators who voted for Roberts.

Baucus (D-MT), Yea
Bingaman (D-NM), Yea
Byrd (D-WV), Yea
Carper (D-DE), Yea
Conrad (D-ND), Yea
Dodd (D-CT), Yea
Dorgan (D-ND), Yea
Feingold (D-WI), Yea
Johnson (D-SD), Yea
Kohl (D-WI), Yea
Landrieu (D-LA), Yea
Leahy (D-VT), Yea
Levin (D-MI), Yea
Lieberman (D-CT), Yea
Lincoln (D-AR), Yea
Murray (D-WA), Yea
Nelson (D-FL), Yea
Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Pryor (D-AR), Yea
Rockefeller (D-WV), Yea
Salazar (D-CO), Yea
Wyden (D-OR), Yea

At least with Alito, only 4 of the Dem Senators joined in to make sure he got his spot.

But you can't place every iota of blame on the Presidents who appointed these men and none on Democrats who voted to confirm them.

[dsc]

21. Presidents get to name justices

that is the way it works. Would it have been OK for GOP Senators to filibuster Ginsburg and Breyer? The fact is in democracies elections are supposed to have consequences. In 1980 the country chose a GOP President and a GOP Senate and it had every right to have the policies of those people implemented. The filibuster is profoundly undemocratic and has no business whatsoever being used by anyone at anytime.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

22. Which is why we've got Justice Bork and Justice Meirs?

But really, I also disagree with you on the filibuster, although I do think it should be 'real'. If you want to filibuster, you have to get up there and keep talking, and preferably actually on topic. Not reading children's books, and not simply saying you oppose and that being enough to block anything. The filibuster is a needed way to place at least a bit of a check on exactly the kind of destructive behaviour we see out of the hyperpartisan conservatives on the court, and to push Presidents to choose less partisan candidates. Now I have to admit, in my own hypocritical way, I wish we'd gotten more liberal picks out of President Obama, at least in line with those they replaced. But the judiciary should ideally not be partisan at all. It should be composed of people who don't place political power of a given party above the general welfare of the country.

[dsc]

23. Bork was defeated by a Democratic Senate

after a race in which the partisan nature of Reagan's picks was an issue. Myers was rejected by her own party for being unqualified. Neither were filibustered.

[blm]

34. Yeah - sure.

Rand2016.

[blm]

25. It was a TRADITION back then to let presidents have their appointees, historic genius.

You have no sense of context, either.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

27. I have no respect for 'tradition', sorry.

But keep on throwing the personal insults. It seems to be what's most important to you.

[blm]

29. Your lack of perspective has annoyed me.

Move on.

[blm]

31. You wouldn't post Dem votes for Alito - wouldn't serve your purpose here

now, would it?

Too important to you to spread the meme that both parties are the same, on a thread devoted to calling out Bush's role in gutting the Voting Rights Act.

Gee - whatever would Republicans do without guys like you telling Democrats that it was Democrat's fault.

[blm]

18. Dems tried filibustering Alito - you don't see history clearly, at all.

It's apparent your interest is in furthering your bothsidesarethesame mantra on a thread that I POSTED TO CALL OUT Bush for showing up in Selma today to MOCK the Voting Rights Act.


Go play your little reindeer games to an audience that will appreciate them.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

20. Both sides are far from the same on many issues.

And at least a goodly chunk of Dems are far better on economic justice and equality than Republicans. Sadly, a different goodly chunk see eye to eye with their Republican counterparts on keeping the poor poor and the rich rich.

[blm]

24. And you feel compelled to say that on a thread about Bush and the VOTING RIGHTS ACT?

Gee - now why would you feel so compelled? Selfish, much?

You, apparently, have no sense of proportion.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

26. No, i felt compelled to say it in reply to a comment where you misrepresented and maligned me.

If you didn't want me to point out that no, I don't believe 'both sides are the same', maybe you shouldn't have felt compelled to tell me i believe both sides are the same.

[blm]

28. Baloney - go play in a sandbox that suits your argument.

This is NO sandbox.

[dsc]

6. thomas' confirmation was uneventful

do you even read history books for crying out loud.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

11. Not ones that recent, no.

Most of the history books I have read discussed events set between about 2000 BC and 1600AD.

[Octafish]

2. ''Outdated Facts''?

These bastards have infested the judiciary, legislative and executive branches with spawn raised on Reagan. Like Rove, they manufacture their own reality and the rest of us mopes have to suffer their consequences.

Thank you for keeping clear on what doesn't change, blm.

[Rex]

7. +1

[hifiguy]

13. It all goes back to the loonies from the 1940s and 1950s

who wound up being the motivating force behind Goldwater (who eventually wholly disowned them) and then rallied behind Raygun, who could sell the message

[randr]

3. Biden was head of Judiciary Committee when Thomas was appointed

He made a circus of Anita Hill's testimony and refused to hear others like her.
I will never forget that.

[blm]

5. So that's how you pretend Bush deserves to be there?

.

[Gothmog]

14. We need to fix the voting rights act

[blkmusclmachine]

30. ,

,

[Cryptoad]

33. May be the great reason of all not to allow

another GOP Prez..........

[blm]

35. No way, no how, NO RANDPAUL!!! NOJEBBUSH!!!

This nation and the world cannot afford to believe the 'no difference' memes being pushed by Rand2016 crowd.

[Cryptoad]

36. I would bet the farm,,,

there are Papa Paul Forces at work on this board.

[blm]

37. Safe bet.

Not falling for their concerned, benign approach.

Like we never saw that playbook used here at DU before.