"With Supreme Confidence President Obama Nominates Judge Sotomayor!"

It's time to Break It Down!

Surprising almost no one, yesterday President Obama named Second Circuit Appeals Court Judge Sonia Maria de Sotomayor y Ruiz de Orellana as his nominee to be the next Supreme Court Justice, replacing retiring Accociate Justice David Souter. Judge Sotomayor, a native of the Bronx, a 1976 graduate of Princeton University, and a 1979 graduate of Yale Law School, will become the first Hispanic on the High Court, if confirmed. She would also be the 6th Catholic on the current bench; an all-time high.

Just as there had been widespread speculation Judge Sotomayor would be a likely nominee, should a vacancy occur, there was substantial speculation that her nomination, or any choice offered by President Obama would be the subject of opposition by the Republican Party. This too has already come to pass, as Rush Limbaugh weighed in saying, he wants her to fail, Mike Huckabee added, she comes from the far left, and Michael Steele merely stated the his Party would reserve judgment for now; a position hardly in keeping with that of Limbaugh and Huckabee. But the Chairman has been deemed out of line…and out of order before.

Judge Sotomayor’s nomination will likely enjoy overwhelming support, and swift Senate confirmation. But before that comes to pass, some interesting contradictions and intraparty concerns will play themselves out. One prime irony of the Judge’s rise to prominence is that she was initially placed on the Federal bench by President George Herbert Walker Bush.

As Republicans attempt to brand her as a flaming far-left liberal, they will have to come to terms with the fact that before Judge Sotomayor became an Obama nominee, she was nominated to U.S. District Court by President Bush in 1991, and confirmed in 1992. Alternately, while Democrats may take comfort in the fact that President Clinton entrusted her with her current seat on the Federal Appeals Court, they must also recognize that in addition to having been a Bush appointee, as a Catholic, she may have views on abortion that many Democratic loyalists find disconcerting. And finally, the part of the Hispanic community that considers itself Republican may find itself conflicted about this nominee, as some African Americans did with Judge Clarence Thomas in 1991.

In the grand scheme of things, these issues will hardly slow the confirmation process. Judge Sotomayor is widely considered a centrist. President Obama has shown he gets it. He did not offer a nominee that would be found unpalatable to the Senate. Indeed, "With Supreme Confidence, President Obama Nominates Judge Sotomayor!"
I’m done; holla back!

Read my blog anytime by clicking the link: http://thesphinxofcharlotte.blogspot.com/. A new post is published each Wednesday.

For more detailed information on a variety of aspects relating to this post, consult the links below:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonia_Sotomayor

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/05/26/supreme.court/index.html

http://opinion.latimes.com/opinionla/2009/05/steele-gop-pwn-howard-dean.html

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0509/22962.html

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/05/26/obama-announce-supreme-court-nominee-tuesday-morning/

http://kgmb9.com/main/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=17780&Itemid=76

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=104530389

http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/laborprof_blog/2009/05/obama-nominates-sotomayor-to-supreme-court.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/27/us/politics/27court.html?_r=1

http://www.truthout.org/052609A

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=5039753n

http://www.reuters.com/article/bondsNews/idUSWAT01149820090526

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090526/pl_nm/us_usa_court_nominee

http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2009/05/obama-nominates-sonia-sotomayor-for.php

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/judicial/2009-05-26-obama-sotomayor_N.htm

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/26/limbaugh-i-hope-sotomayor_n_207690.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/26/huckabee-maria-sotomayor_n_207620.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/26/michael-steele-on-sotomay_n_207596.html

"A Doggone Shame!"

It's time to Break It Down!

It is often said, "Time flies when you are having fun." While I am not so sure blogging has been that simple, I must concede, looking back to the summer of '07, I do have a sense of, where ever did the time go? In framing the context for this week’s issue, it is apropos to recall that it was Wednesday, August 22, 2007, when I first posed that most rhetorical of questions, "Will Michael Vick ever play again in the NFL?"

That was 637 days ago, but any minute now, if it not already; Mr. Vick will be released from federal prison. He will not be free just yet, however. His 23-month sentence will not end for another 60 days. In the interim, he will spend his time confined at home, principally, and will wear an electronic monitor that allows federal authorities to track his movements. His anticipated date of release is July 20th.

Nevertheless, when the former Falcon muses, “he is not in Kansas anymore,” unlike Dorothy in Oz, he will be quite relieved, no doubt. Even with an e-monitor tracking his every move, chances are, he will be pleased to trade-up to his comfortable home in Hampton, VA, from his digs of the past 21 months, United States Penitentiary, Leavenworth. Even Dorothy would not have been anxious to get back to Kansas, were that spot her terminal destination.

Of course, for Vick, getting out of prison is just the first step in what he hopes will be the “not too long” road to recovery. Yes, Vick is eyeing a return to the NFL. Early indications are he has a few more hoops to jump through. The League’s Commissioner, Roger Goodell has not closed the door on the possibility, but adds in addition to completing his prison term, “Vick must demonstrate remorse.” That is code for, “This will not be easy!” And it probably should not be; but it should happen, and I believe it will.

The far-reaching influence of PETA will certainly play into how many teams actively participate in the Vick Sweepstakes. There will be teams that have outstanding quarterbacks and solid back-ups; count them out. Why bother with the drama? There will be teams, with shaky quarterbacks, who would love to get in on the action, but will not rock the boat and jeopardize fan support in this dismal economic environment, when they need desperately to move over-priced tickets; pass (pun intended). Then there will be a few intrepid franchises that need a jolt; attendance is already sagging, there is no great signal-caller in the fold, and none on the horizon. Hello Michael Vick!

I am not a huge follower of football; I don’t see plays develop at the line of scrimmage and accurately predict where the ball is going, I don’t know every team’s starting quarterback, or the top 10 receivers in the NFL, or even the Panther’s starter at safety, for that matter. What I do know, as I said that day in August, 2007, is the NFL, like every professional sports league, is “All about the Benjamins.” I speculated then, and I believe just as strongly now, that Vick will be not just the first guy to go from NFL starting quarterback to the federal penitentiary, but also the first guy to get a round-trip ticket back to the NFL.

And you know what? He ought to be! Why? Because he served his time, and by doing so, paid his debt to society. Does that mean society, or more pointedly, some NFL owner owes it to Michael Vick to give him another shot? H to the no! The owner that gives Vick another shot is not going to be motivated by the redemption or rehabilitation of Michael. No siree! That fine upstanding businessman is going to a savvy guy who “recognizes,” that he is in the big leagues, and in the game he is playing, "the bottom line is…the bottom line." If Vick can produce, he will play again…in the NFL; and he will put derrieres in the seats, and cash in the team's coffers to boot. That is Free Enterprise, AKA, the American way! Moreover, the fact some interest groups will try to make an issue of it, free speech notwithstanding, is, “A Doggone Shame!”

I’m done; holla back!

Read my blog anytime by clicking the link: http://thesphinxofcharlotte.blogspot.com/. A new post is published each Wednesday.

For more detailed information on a variety of aspects relating to this post, consult the links below:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Vick

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/unleashed/2009/05/michael-vick-to-be-released.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Penitentiary,_Leavenworth

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4178964

http://blogs.usatoday.com/thehuddle/2009/05/michael-vicks-release-from-prison-could-come-overnight.html

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/1753924/michael_vicks_release_from_prison_will.html

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/2008-11-25-vick-state-plea_N.htm

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3148549

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/17/AR2007071701393.html

http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/05/05/tony-dungy-visits-michael-vick-in-prison/

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/football/2008/04/05/2008-04-05_michael_vick_playing_prison_football.html

http://www.faniq.com/article/ESPN-schedule-of-programming-for-Michael-Vicks-release-from-prison-1599060

"Taking Sides: It's Rush Hour Again!"

It's time to Break It Down!

As much as I was tempted to write about my beloved Tar Heels taking the customary Champions’ visit to the White House this week, to celebrate their National Title with the “First Hoopster,” I refrained. It would have a natural segue to delve into the details of how “shy guy” Donald Trump decided that he would tough it out despite the attendant media circus surrounding Miss California USA, and allow Carrie Prejean to keep her Crown. I resisted.

No, another saga is playing itself out in multiple dimensions; some still unfolding. Historians will record that Barack Obama was the first African American President of the United States (POTUS). It is unlikely the part-time hoopster, full-time Commander-in-Chief will add a more significant title to his sterling resume. But he has wrought other miracles, already.

Clearly, as President, he infused the dynamics of the already diversity-conscious Democratic Party with even more kinetic energy. And while all manner of emphasis has been placed on his first 100 days in office, it should be noted, it took exactly 10 days for the shadow of POTUS to re-engineer the Grand Old Party. On January 30, 2009, The RNC elected Michael Steele to the Chairmanship of the Republican National Committee. Let's be clear; this was not a race, but a cause and effect sequence. Mr. Steele, the first African American to hold the post, is a former Lieutenant Governor of the State of Maryland. You may remember Mr. Steele as the only African American with a speaking part, roughly 10 minutes, during prime time at the Republican National Convention.

In the September 10th Edition of this blog, I wrote about the numerical benchmarks that defined the Republican Convention, including 2,380 delegates, and 36 African Americans, which amounted to 1.5% representation. But I digress. Today’s post is not about rehashing the St. Paul Convention. It a brief look at the effort to “Rebrand the Republican Party.” A group called the National Council for a New America, comprised of GOP heavyweights, John McCain, Jeb Bush, Mitt Romney, and Bobby Jindal are among those prominently featured in this Political Public Relations Machinery. Republican House Minority Whip Eric Cantor is said to be one of the chief designers of the effort.

The idea has met some resistance from the party’s base. While Senator McCain describe the effort as one intended to attract moderate Republicans, and some Democrats, social conservatives have noted there was no mention made of several bedrock components of traditional Republican Articles of Faith, including taking positions on same-sex marriage, abortion, and immigration. At least one recent Republican presidential candidate, Mike Huckabee, has distanced himself from the effort, saying, “It’s hard to keep from laughing out loud when people living in the bubble of the Beltway suddenly wake up one day and think they ought to have a listening tour; even funnier when the first earful expedition takes them all the way to the suburbs of Washington, D.C.”

The yin of the Council’s charge and the yang of the social conservatives’ reaction to it provide the context of this contemporary battle for the soul of the Republican Party. One interesting dimension; call it the battle within the battle, is the three-way dust-up involving former Secretary of State Colin Powell, conservative radio personality Rush Limbaugh, and former Vice President Dick Cheney. Briefly, Powell in effect, took on Limbaugh, suggesting among other things that in his role as an entertainer, he has diminished the Party’s ability to deal effectively with a number of important issues.

Now you might say to yourself that sounds familiar, and it should. On March 4th, I Broke Down the details of the intrepid Michael Steele going boldly where…well, you know the rest. After Steele referred to Limbaugh as an entertainer, Rush promptly told Steele where to go, and a number of GOP stalwarts followed-up by chiding the new RNC Chairman. The man of Steele quickly apologized, and has, basically, not been heard from since.

In response to Powell, who has described himself as a Republican and a right-of-center conservative, Limbaugh said he’s “just another liberal,” and added, “He should close the loop and become a Democrat.”

This past Sunday on CBS’ Face the Nation, the former VP joined the fray, noting, “If I had to choose in terms of being a Republican, I’d go with Rush Limbaugh. My take on it was Colin had already left the Party, I didn’t know he was still a Republican.”

While this intra-party drama unfolds, others are busily engaged looking for the proverbial chink in President Obama’s armor. One of the most recent opportunities stemmed from Comedienne Wanda Sykes’ comments at this past weekend’s White House Correspondent’s Dinner. She told several jokes that pushed the envelope, as she almost always does. Conservative pundit and political theorist, Bill Bennett led a chorus of boos, and cried foul on Ms. Sykes.

Of course the fact the President appeared to find several of Sykes’ quips amusing made offense greater, some argued. That many of the same commentators had defended Mr. Limbaugh when he oft repeated his hope that President Obama fails; even though if he fails we all do, seemed to have been lost on them.

Ms. Sykes pointedly framed at least one of her remarks as a response to Rush; she hoped his kidneys failed. If given the authority to draw the line, I would declare both sentiments over that line one should not cross. Moreover, without condoning either comment, I would add, therein lies the problem with defending an ad hominem attack; one is certain to beget another. Where does it end?

The one recurring theme with these issues is Rush Limbaugh. Good bad, or indifferent, he is behaving as, and being treated as though he were the Republican North Star. It is not up to me to say whether he is or is not. There are those who argue not only that he is, but he should be, while others suggest he is not, never has been, nor will he ever be. Perhaps; but in the vernacular of one sect of sociological purists, the Duck Test does not lie. You know, that is the scenario in which, “if it walks like a duck, and it quacks like a duck, it is…yeah, you got it!” Nevertheless, the GOP is “Taking Sides: It’s Rush Hour Again!”

I’m done; holla back!

Read my blog anytime by clicking the link: http://thesphinxofcharlotte.blogspot.com/. A new post is published each Wednesday.

For more detailed information on a variety of aspects relating to this post, consult the links below:

http://northcarolina.scout.com/2/864163.html

http://www.cnn.com/2009/SHOWBIZ/05/12/ent.miss.california.usa/index.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dick_Cheney

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rush_limbaugh

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colin_Powell

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Steele

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Huckabee

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wanda_Sykes

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/09/wanda-sykes-video-of-whit_n_201280.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/09/wanda-sykes-video-of-whit_n_201280.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/12/daily-show-wanda-sykes_n_201961.html

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2009/04/30/gops_big_names_try_to_forge_ne.html

http://www.syracuse.com/today/index.ssf/2009/05/cheney_takes_sides_in_limbaugh.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Bennett

"Miss California: A Little More Exposure!"

It's time to Break It Down!

A week from today, Carrie Prejean will turn 22; there is little chance she will celebrate her next birthday in solitude. Two weeks ago, Prejean, the reigning Miss California was, by most accounts, a controversial answer away from becoming Miss USA. At that point, she took a principled stand against gay marriage; responding with conviction to a question posed by pageant judge Perez Hilton. She was instantly and simultaneously launched in an orbit of national exposure and celebrity, the likes of which few if any runners-up ever experience, regardless of the endeavor.

Today, Ms. Prejean finds herself amidst a swirl of controversy once again. While this time, her detractors may argue, the real truth has been bared, truthfully, what appears to have been bared is Ms. Prejean. Officials of the California state pageant say she breached her contract by failing to reveal the fact she had taken semi-nude photos. The offense may lead to the organization stripping her…of the Title.

According to Carrie, she took the picture when she was 17, and an aspiring Victoria’s Secret model. She believes the pictures are now being used as part of a smear campaign to target, under mind, and silence her from speaking out in support of traditional marriage.

By providing her now familiar answer, Prejean decried “opposite marriage." Her bold and genuine sounding response led to numerous engagements in a variety of venues, including churches, where she discussed her views on traditional nuclear families. While the photos fall short of the risqué nature of several former pageant winners, it is safe to say they almost certainly do not bring the sort of coverage Ms. Prejean would have hoped for, and without question not the kind the California state Miss USA Pageant organization desired.

Pageant scandals are nothing new. Queens have lost their crowns for a variety of lapses, from getting pregnant, which is not allowed, to being found to be married with children, also not allowed, to having nude or nearly nude pictures released. Remember Vanessa William’s short-lived stint as Miss America, the first African American to win that Title? Unlike many others, at least she went on to have a successful career.

Miss California contended she lost the Miss USA competition because of her statement in opposition to same-sex marriage. That position makes for great theater and spirited debate, but is really just conjecture. That does not mean her assertion was incorrect; just unproved. What is much clearer at this point is if the California Pageant organization chooses to take Ms. Prejean’s crown, it will be because of her scantily clad photos.

None of this means Ms. Prejean is a bad person. She is bright, attractive, and apparently has a penchant for generating passionate discourse. Judging from just these past two weeks, there may well be a reality show in her future. The book is probably so far along that it had to be revised to include a section on the photos. How far behind can the movie be? Those who subscribe to the cynical outlook that holds there is no such thing as bad publicity, likely reflect on Kristen Dalton and think, all she got out this was the Miss USA Title. Meanwhile, for “Miss California: A Little More Exposure!”

I’m done; holla back!

Read my blog anytime by clicking the link: http://thesphinxofcharlotte.blogspot.com/. A new post is published each Wednesday.

For more detailed information on a variety of aspects relating to this post, consult the links below:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrie_Prejean

http://www.cnn.com/2009/SHOWBIZ/05/05/california.miss.california/index.html

http://www.thehollywoodgossip.com/2009/05/revealed-carrie-prejean-nude-photos/

http://www.thehollywoodgossip.com/stars/carrie-prejean/

http://www.mercurynews.com/breakingnews/ci_12300858?nclick_check=1

http://www.mercurynews.com/breakingnews/ci_12300858?nclick_check=1

http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/entertainment/Will_Miss_California_Lose_Title_Over_Topless_Photos_.html

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,517215,00.html

http://www.foxnews.com/photoessay/0,4644,7074,00.html

http://www.tmz.com/2009/05/05/carrie-prejean-i-was-only-17/