Reply #11: Everytime this issue

[Pastiche423]

comes up, you ask me to prove that the D. Brooks Smith vote had anything to do with the disabled. And everytime I do.

Yet, you never respond to my proof. Instead, you ignore my proof.

You are quite wrong when you state that it doesn't make me more understanding than you and it doesn't give me some blank check to vent without reproach. If you had read my many posts about how damaging that one vote was to any disabled person, you may have a tiny bit more understanding.

Having not lived the life of a disabled person, you have no fucking understanding of what it is like living in an abled bodied world, where some lawmaker makes it a point to vote to make it harder!


And Edwards answer as to why he voted for Smith?

Edwards, who missed the vote but later got approval to be recorded as voting for Smith, said he believed Smith would not let his personal views affect his judgment.

Affect his judgment?

"Sen. John Edwards, D-N.C., disregarded the extensive evidence of unethical behavior and discriminatory conduct that caused the Washington Post, New York Times and Los Angeles Times to oppose Smith's confirmation.

snip-

"...cowardly votes betrayed the women of their states by recommending elevation of a judge whose repeated "ethical lapses" deserve censure, not promotion."

snip -

"To promote a judge who will have to decide on cases of discrimination, when that judge has himself cavalierly participated in discrimination and even ruled in favor of discriminatory practices, is the height of irresponsibility by those who are charged with that duty."

http://www.now.org/press/05-02/05-23.html

As I have said in other posts, Edwards was given this information long before the vote via phone calls, faxes, letters and emails.