You expect Tammy Baldwin to be wrong on the big issues, and she is. Look no further than her objection to Gordon Giampetro to the Fed bench, Eastern District of Wisconsin.
....U.S. Sen. Tammy Baldwin, D-Madison, is raising concerns about the nomination of Wisconsin attorney Gordon Giampietro to the federal bench after past writings surfaced in which he called “calls for diversity” a “code for relaxed standards.”...
Having a lick of common sense disqualifies anyone, in the eyes of Tammy.
Reading what Giampietro ACTUALLY said about the Civil Rights Act is enlightening--not that Tammy likes enlightenment:
...On March 25, 2014, Giampietro wrote on the website the Catholic Thing
that, “calls for diversity” are “code for relaxed standards (moral and
intellectual).” Giampietro was commenting on a blog post about arguments
in the US Supreme Court over the Affordable Care Act’s contraception
care mandate and the history of government regulation of businesses. The
author of the blog post had written that with the Civil Rights Act of
1964, “the federal government crossed a constitutional divide when it
claimed the authority to bar discriminations on the basis of race in
private inns and restaurants.”
Giampietro commented on the
post that blog post author Hadley Arkes was “exactly right to trace the
intrusion into private business to the Civil Right Act,” and that he
would go back farther to “the original sin of slavery.”
“Absent slavery, there might have been a vibrant federalism that allowed
for differences of opinion to exist side by side until the truth will
out. Absent slavery, there is no racial spoils system, no calls for
diversity — which is code for relaxed standards (moral and intellectual)
— and no eye-rolling when appeals are made to ‘states rights.’ In
short, because we denied blacks the fundamental human right to freedom
we sowed the seeds of our own loss of freedom,” Giampietro wrote....
(The Civil Rights Act happens to be the 'justification' for forcing people to bake homosex-wedding cakes. So it's not really a "rights" act at all. One more thing: passing the CRA engendered one of LBJ's most ...ahhh.....revealing quotes. You remember it; it had to do with '200 years of voting Democrat'....remember? That's why I refer to "The Plantation," folks.)
Who can argue with Giampietro's conclusion? Well, given the Democrat Party's secret love for continuing The Plantation, Tammy's flabberwocky is no surprise. Without The Plantation, where would Democrats get their votes?
Oh--maybe from the 3% of the country which practices unnatural "marriage"?
....In a July 24, 2015, radio interview, a month after the Supreme Court recognized a nationwide right to same-sex marriage in Obergefell v. Hodges,
Giampietro said it was “irrefutable” that children are best raised by a
heterosexual couple, and appeared to refer to same-sex relationships as
“No one would disagree with the fact that children,
all the social science research shows this, are best raised by a man and
a woman. This is natural, this is the truth, and it’s irrefutable. And
so I think it has to be articulated in a way which isn’t dismissive of
those troubled relationships, but it is reaffirming of the truth of
marriage,” he said....
"Truth" and "Democrat Party" cannot be placed in the same sentence, sorry to say.
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
Post a Comment