News-Record.com

Personally, I would have liked to see an ethnic minority nominated.

What is an ethnic minority?

One great quality I see in Bush is ability to make hard choices based on what he feels is right. There is no question Christian groups wanted a pro-life conservative, many, including his own wife wanted a woman and most folks would have loved a hispanic. He chose a young man, respected by both sides intellectually and socially.

I suppose Roberts is pro-life, though he will not be a threat to Roe vs. Wade. He did represent G.H.W. Bush's adminsitration in a pro-life case. More likely, he will vote with Thomas, Scalia, Renquist on issues before the court.

This appointment is politically brilliant. Democrats will be hard pressed to paint Roberts as a threat. The real threat for Roe and many liberal decisions the court has made is the next appointment. Then we'll see a minority that Democrats will be forced to oppose...

I meant not just a woman but a Latino or Asian -- make the thing a whole rainbow coalition.

I agree with Chip that Roberts will not be an immediate threat to Roe V Wade. That would be a disaster for the Right Wing in today's political climate. But he will most likely be on the court for 30 years, so he'll be positioned to take advantage of any opportune moments that happen for the rest of my lifespan.

I hope that he turns out to be as open-minded as O'Connor was, but I have serious doubts on that score. Still, as Chip pointed out, this was a pretty safe move on Bush's part. There should be no danger of a filibuster, pretty smooth sailing to SCOTUS.

The Klan/CWP Shootout was an awakening for me... This is from Christspeak,Rx

I have always been proud to call Greensboro home. As a very young man, I remember gloating over the city�s rich sports tradition, the military history of Guilford Courthouse and Civil Rights history of the Woolworth Sit-ins. Growing up in this beautiful city of Dogwoods, quiet streets with little traffic and neighborhood pools, I never knew the difference between a Republican and a Democrat. Everything changed the day after the 1979 massacre�

The Klan/Nazi-Communist Worker�s Party shootout on November 3rd, 1979 became my intellectual and political awakening. I was 24 years old, married, a new father and had just been awarded with a trip to Scottsdale, Arizona in recognition for meeting my sales quota by my company. The Saturday of the shooting, I had spent the day traveling to Phoenix, where we were to be picked up Sunday morning and bussed to a Scottsdale resort. As I made my way through the hotel lobby Sunday morning, I froze in shock at the sight of the Phoenix paper�s headlines, something like, �Klan Kills in 5 in Greensboro Shootout.�

The combination of my political naivety, civic pride and viewing the news from Greensboro through the foreign eyes of the Arizona Republic ignited a spark of indignation within me. I had never heard of any KKK activity in Greensboro. How could this happen in my city?

My ancestors migrated to Winnsboro, SC in the early 1700�s. Some were slave owners, but I remember my grandparents and parents were quietly, but adamantly opposed to racism. Of course, they were proud of the family�s Confederate heritage, but they detested the Klan and all it stood for. They associated Klan with �white trash,� ignorant men trapped in bitterness over their place in society. How ironic is it that a Winnsboro native, Virgil Griffin, would lead a group of fellow Klansmen to Greensboro, NC in answer to a challenge from the Communist Worker�s Party?

I was relieved (I still am), to learn that none of Klan members involved in the massacre were from Greensboro. However, as the news of the events leading up to November 3rd conflict were made public, my anger became focused towards the Communists Workers Party, the real culprits of that horrible day.

The Klan members who came to Greensboro that fall day were indeed ignorant, bitter, poor white men. Beginning with the Civil Rights Act that ended the Jim Crow era, the Klan quickly dissipated to a few scattered groups of men, almost exclusively from rural Southern communities. The Klan of 1979 was less organized and less powerful than it is today.

Their counterparts, in contrast, were led by a Duke graduate and other highly educated, politically radical people looking for a fight. With the end of the Viet Nam war and Nixon gone, this group turned its attention to unionizing the textile industry. The fact they called themselves the Communists Workers� Party meant their intentions were far more than helping organize textile laborers. They were smart, angry, manipulative socialists using the naivety of its poorer, less educated member- workers and the ignorance and bitterness of the Klansmen to make Democracy look bad.

The CWP needed martyrdom in order to legitimize its existence. They organized the �Death to the Klan� march with violence in mind. They were careful to choose Greensboro�s poorest community, Morningside Homes, as the site for their protest. They invaded a small Klan march in Concord, NC and literally threatened the Klansmen physically, while daring them to show up in Greensboro.

In the subsequent trials, CWP witnesses refused to testify against the Klansmen in order to make a mockery of the North Carolina and United States justice systems. I remember riding by the courthouse on W. Market Street just as CWP member Nelson Johnson climbed a pole in mock protest for a group of television reporters.

As for my political awakening, I was first incensed that my city was permanently marked by strangers from other places who proudly called themselves Klansmen, Nazis and Communists. As the stories unfolded, I saw something more devious than the actual violence. I saw the misuse of knowledge by intelligent men, devoid of any moral standard, against groups of suppressed peoples in order to achieve a political foothold.

The Klan of 1979 was and remains today an evil institution. It is still made up largely of ignorant, foolish men. Its only virtue is its lack of stealth.

Since 1979, I have witnessed the Democratic party leadership embrace the politics of division as its flagship. Like the CWP, the Democrat leadership is constantly portraying America as a land of two classes, the rich and poor. (The Kerry/Edwards message was two Americas.) And like the CWP, Democrats have misused knowledge to manipulate the less educated in America into believing Democracy is only for the wealthy.

I guess this means Chip thinks that divisive politics is the fault of Democrats. Or the CWP. Or something...

The question is, where did all of the klan/CWP rhethoric come from? What does that have to do with the new US Supreme Court nominee?

It sounds like someone is "grinding an ax" to me. Sadly, that person is still living in the past and has yet to recognize from whince he came. Thereby, he does not know where he is and worse yet, where he is going! That is a tragedy.

Shalom

Pardon the interruption. Since discussion on the topic was stalled, I did change subjects...

Do not be afraid to address who you are talking to, Darryl. Your post makes no sense. Tell me, what did you mean by, "Sadly, that person is still living in the past and has yet to recognize from whince he came. Thereby, he does not know where he is and worse yet, where he is going!"?
God Bless you tooooooooooooooo......

Hi Eric, you are correct. The Dems are guilty of almost all of it.

Chip, are you saying that all the ills of this country are the fault of the Democrats and that the Republicans' hands are squeaky clean?

Well, Chip did cover himself rhetorically by adding the word "almost." I have my doubts.

I recall some of the things Ronald Reagan was saying in 1976 when Ford barely beat him out for the nomination. And don't forget Nixon's dirty tricks against McGovern in 1972. No, the Republicans aren't white-clad saints when it comes to partisan hatchet jobs.

Hi Gov, no I am not. I am saying that since the 80's the Dems have been the ones trying to make the African Americans, working class and poor Americans see themselves as 2nd class citizens.

All the Dems policies have supported that premise. All their rhetoric pits Republicans against those groups.

And Eric- my awakening came in November of 1979. I hwas raised (in G'boro) to beleive in equal rights and civil rights. I never understood Nixon or Carter. (Everyone understood Reagan in the 80's and beyond.)

Chip, changing subjects in the middle is kinda like changing horse in the middle of a crick, most of the time you wind up falling off and getting wet.
In this case it weakens any credibility you may have built on other blogs.
It appears sort of Trollish, and trolls don't last long.

I already apologized and since the subject matter was exhausted, it is in no way trollish. But again, forgive the interruption.