or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Civil Rights Report
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Civil Rights Report  

post #1 of 2
Thread Starter 
I couldn't resist reading the Civil right reports of GWB. I recommend that everyone read this report before voting for GWB.

Quote:
In short, the President does not present a focused civil rights agenda, and his public statements offer a limited expression of commitment. He does not speak frequently about civil rights policies, and usually when he does, it is in reference to his faith-based initiative, which chapter 5 will demonstrate actually erodes such rights. He seems to place no value on including civil rights leaders in policy discussions or soliciting input from anyone other than his own close circles, and even then only those who share his views. For example, when asked during a press conference why he had not accepted invitations to meet with NAACP leaders and how he would respond to criticisms that his record on civil rights is weak, President Bush replied: There I was, sitting around the table with foreign leaders, looking at Colin Powell and Condi Rice, referencing two African American members of his Cabinet. This reply not only misses the point about the importance of collaboration, but assumes that accomplishments such as Cabinet diversity, although important, are a substitute for a comprehensive civil rights agenda. Ironically, the President offers these two individuals as evidence of his commitment to civil rights, but as will be discussed, he does not hold their civil rights opinions, such as their stance on affirmative action, in high regard.

Quote:
President Bushs first action on judicial nominations was to change the selection process. In March 2001, the administration terminated the longstanding relationship between the American Bar Association (ABA) and the White House Counsels Office. For 50 years, ABA had advised
Presidents on the qualifications of judicial nominees for service. White House Counsel Albert Gonzales wrote to ABAs president informing her that the administration did not wish to grant a quasi-official role to a group such as the ABA that takes public positions on divisive political, legal and social issues that come before the courts.
In a news conference following the White House announcement, the ABA president expressed concern that the role of politics may be taking the place of professionalism in choosing judges. Some newspapers and civil rights advocacy groups voiced opposition to the decision and said that removing ABA could have a negative effect on civil rights law enforcement. The Bush administrations move to eliminate ABAs role presaged fierce partisan rancor over the Presidents nominees. One commentator cites the Presidents campaign promise to effect an ideological transformation of the federal judiciary as the reason for increased politicization.
The judicial nomination process has historically been subject to political connection and ideological compatibility to the party in power. However, critics attribute the recent contentiousness to nominees views, which they consider so far out of the mainstream that they would eviscerate enforcement of federal civil rights laws.


Quote:
Because federal judges have the power to interpret and establish precedent upon which future case law can be based, and because they serve life terms, their civil rights views are critical. Civil rights organizations and leadership have objected to and launched campaigns against several of
President Bushs nominees, claiming that the administration is trying to pack the judiciary with anti-civil rights ideologues. Supporters of the Presidents nominations, on the other hand, assert that their views have been misrepresented and accuse opponents of racializing the process and using the religious beliefs of nominees against them. They also argue that the failure to approve
some of President Bushs nominees reflects the growing partisanship in Congress and election year politicking. However, as the following discussion will illustrate, the Senate has rejected only those with the most controversial civil rights records.

The report goes on about all aspects of civil rights and the cowboy's record on each with facts. I am surprised that they managed to postpone any discussion on the report until after the election.

http://www.usccr.gov/pubs/bush/bush04.pdf

Most of us employ the Internet not to seek the best information, but rather to select information that confirms our prejudices. - Nicholas D. Kristof
Most of us employ the Internet not to seek the best information, but rather to select information that confirms our prejudices. - Nicholas D. Kristof
post #2 of 2
There is alreay a thread here : http://forums.appleinsider.com/showt...threadid=47093
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
This thread is locked  
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Civil Rights Report