Wednesday, May 05, 2010

Associated Press Pushes The Race Card Over Court Nomination

The Associated Press, the national "news" syndicate that provides content to struggling newspapers throughout the country and prominent coverage to state news in New Jersey in particular, is reporting Governor Christie's choice not to grant tenure to Supreme Court Justice John Wallace as if it was a race based decision.

From the AP article in the Asbury Park Press:

Christie created a political firestorm Monday by failing to reappoint Justice John Wallace, the court's only African-American, and nominating Anne Patterson, a white private practice lawyer and fellow Mendham Township resident, as a replacement.


This is the worst kind of yellow journalism. This is racism.

The Associated Press coverage has been blatantly anti-Christie since the governor mounted his campaign to turn Trenton upside down. Just last month they had to retract a story over salaries in Christie's Office of the Governor as they compare to those of the Corzine administration.

This time a retraction won't do. The Associated Press should fire the reporter who wrote the story and the editor who approved it. The newspapers who run the AP trash should carefully review and edit AP news until such time as their credibility is restored.

Had Christie appointed a constructionist African-American to replace Wallace on the Court, he would have been practicing racial politics.

By appointing Patterson, Christie is once again demonstrating that he intends to keep his word to the people of New Jersey. During his campaign for Governor, Christie was criticised by the AP and other is the media for his lack of specifics. He was very clear during the campaign that he intended to use the constitutional power of the office to appoint judges to the Supreme Court who would interpret the state constitution as written so as to correct the judicial activism that has wrecked our state with the Mt. Laurel (COAH) decision, the Abbot (education funding) decision, Lance v McGreevey(allowing the state to borrow without voter approval) decision and many many more.

The AP and other outlets has been inaccurately reporting that Christie's choice not to reappoint a Justice up for tenure is without precedent. Governor McGreevey announced he would not nominate Justice Peter Verniero for tenure. Verniero stepped down.

What is unprecedented is the Senate's attempted extra-constitutional power grab. That's the real news. The race of the nominees is not newsworthy.

38 comments:

Anonymous said...

Amen Art. Dell Santi is admitted Democrat who hates Chris. I love how media keeps overlooking Verniero.

ambrosiajr said...

Wait a second Art...why do you call that blatant racism? Is Wallace the only African-American on the bench or not? And, isn't Patterson a white corporate lawyer from Mendham or not? Aren't those the facts?

Maybe it hits a nerve BECAUSE they are the facts.

Fact is, if Christie had any class at all, he should have waited the less than 2 years to let this judge retire and then replace him. But it is becoming more and more apparent that he's just the big bully in the schoolyard and he plays the same way. This judge is not as activist as you would like to think.

Anonymous said...

It is racist to appoint or not appoint someone because of the color of their skin. It is sexist to appoint or not appoint someone because of their gender. Christie did neither. He appointed someone based on their qualifications and record. That is his right as Governor, and it is a consequence of the will of the people as evidenced by their most recent vote. To deny the Governor that authority is to deny the reality of the outcome of last November's election. Elections have consequences, and that is the hard yet simple truth. He is acting on his campaign promises that were embraced and given the green light to move forward by NJ's majority. If the press does not like it, that is their right as afforded by the Constitution....but it is not their right to misrepresent the truth. There is no race card here. Get over it, AP.

Art Gallagher said...

Wait a second Art...why do you call that blatant racism? Is Wallace the only African-American on the bench or not? And, isn't Patterson a white corporate lawyer from Mendham or not? Aren't those the facts?

Maybe it hits a nerve BECAUSE they are the facts.

Fact is, if Christie had any class at all, he should have waited the less than 2 years to let this judge retire and then replace him. But it is becoming more and more apparent that he's just the big bully in the schoolyard and he plays the same way. This judge is not as activist as you would like to think.


Rick,

Are you saying that you think race was a factor in Christie's decision?

I don't think you do and I don't think Angela Delli Santi, the AP reporter does either. That she is making the race of the parties the focal point of her story, thereby attempting to make this is racial issue where there is none is why I'm calling it racism.

Christie outclasses every other politician in Trenton. He's keeping his promises.

You, Rick, are drinking the Kool Aide. You're usually more objective than that.

ambrosiajr said...

Taking away PAAD money from seniors on fixed incomes does not show either class or heart Art. You're right, I am usually more objective, and I was willing to give him a huge chance. But he's just trying to bully everyone around and its not the way it should happen. I don't like bullies and I don't think you do either. And he's really not keeping promises here. He took away the rebates he swore he wouldn't..again aimed at seniors. He says he won't raise taxes, yet everything he's done, from making schools use their surplus contingency funds to slashing municipal aid made it mandatory that our taxes would be raised locally. You can't tell me that he didn't figure on that happening, can you? He's not stupid. Couple that with no rebates and what do you have? (and this is not kool aid here...just facts), you have the largest one year tax increase in our history.

The classy thing to do would have been to let this judge retire. Especially since he isn't one of the more "activist" judges as the republicans like to say. And then, he could appoint a corporate attorney, who had/has oil companies, tobacco companies and other sundry companies as her client does not qualify her for the highest court in NJ. Why would he nominate her now, you have to ask yourself...especially over someone with so much more judicial experience. Just to be the big bully on the block, is all.

Joe Hadden said...

Yes, Chris Christie is a big bully compared to Jon Corzine who was an incompetent welcome mat for the unions.

When my house is on fire, I'll take the bully who will actually do something over the "classy" guy who will only take the action he figures to be least offensive.

Is Christie supposed to wait to name a new Supreme Court judge because it would be classier to let Wallace retire? By exercising his right to take action, he's classless?

I guess it's classy to spend 150% of the state's revenue. I guess a bully might not have caved into the state workers union's blackmail when the Vice President was coming to visit.

Chris Christie is exercising the power he has where he can to cut state spending. Where those cuts hit the local level, local government needs to make cuts. I just got elected to the Board of Ed. in my town, so I know what the cuts in state aid mean on a local level. It's not "mean" or "bullying" it's math. Don't spend what you don't have.

This is why the race card gets played. When one has no merit, he or she resorts to fear mongering.

It won't work for our party when we attempt to unseat the President and it won't work for Rick and his party in their attempts to defeat the Governor because anyone who will buy into the fear being pedaled is already inclined to vote against the target.

As always, all due respect to Rick, who is generally fair minded and at least has the guts to put his name on his posts.

ambrosiajr said...

If you notice Joe, I did not mention race at all. I said he should have let him retire and THEN nominate someone with no judicial experience. I only mentioned that the article stated facts. He IS an African-American and she IS a white woman from Mendham. No disputing those facts.
And if you don't think that the average Joe doesn't know what those cuts in everything mean, then you are mistaken. And I do mean that he is classless for not letting someone who has seved the state, in a very moderate way, finish out the next 22 months. Someone who is not a straight idealog and who even voted against gay marriage. (does that sound "activist" to you?)

Did something have to happen...absolutely. Do I think he's doing it all wrong? Absolutely again. You can't go through life being a bully and then get praised for it because you think you're doing the right thing.

And, if you're on a school board, how much did you raise property taxes for your municipality?

Thank you for the final comment..I have always stood by what I post with my name. I am not a fan of all the anonymous posters who sling mud and then hide and cower behind fake names or no name at all.

Anonymous said...

What is the big suprise. He said ihe was going to do this when he was running. A politician who does what he says he will do. How refreshing.

The two biggest reasons your taxes are high are Mount Laurel and Abbott. THAT'S taxation with out represntation.

If the court is going to legislate from the bench then they are the ones who have politicized the Court not the governor. Untill the Court starts to understand its proper role in government we will continue to have high taxes in NJ.

Anonymous said...

I believe the comments are not responding to the issue "the race card". Just because one is white and one is black had nothing to do with the story, unless of course the story is race based. The real fact is that the Governor exercised his right not to reappoint a specific Judge and named someone else. There is no need to mention the race of the Judges unless it is an issue. Generally there is no mention of the race of anyone in an APP is article unless it specifically pertinent to the topic. As such, I believe Art is correct.

Not gonna work, this time said...

look, here's the main FACT:if the tables were reversed, and a Dem gov. changed his/her mind and replaced this particular judge with another not of the same race, it'd be fine with the biased media, and other libs, for whom the double-standard has become, to the rest of us, far beyond obvious, and way past SICKENING!.. THEY can do/say anything now, with no criticisms or recriminations but lots of excuses, but, if the table's reversed, it's always another opportunity to divide, and incite more hate and confusion, to take our focus off the ruination of the country they are forcing on us, every damn day!!.. so, STOP!! you will see, in Nov., GOD willing, yes, I said God, that the majority is now on to all of you, and is paying attention, and will finally start to reverse this daily assault on our country and our freedoms!!!..

stopthesocialists said...

NGWTT - Beautifully said! As Art pointed out - this racial crap that the liberal press loves to pull out of their butts isn't working anymore. Look at the assault on Arizona over the illegal immigration bill. The liberals and illegals are trying everything to lie there way to the support of everyone and it's failing. In fact, a dozen other states are considering similar legislation. Why? Because the polls show most Americans are fed up with illegal immigration and support Arizona's law. Wait until November and the politically correct liberal Democrats get their political heads handed to them. Even the liberal press won't be able to save them. And you will have Art Gallagher to thank for it.....

ambrosiajr said...

There's that "assault on our freedoms" mantra again. I will ask this once again...please be specific and let me know exactly what "freedoms" have been denied to you. As I have said many times, I still get to get up and go to work each and every day. I still get to vote in every election. I still get to say what I want, when I want to anyone I want to and I still get to cross state lines without showing someone my ID, I still get to...well, you get the idea. So, please stop the bullshit line of losing your "freedoms". Geesshh.

Russell said...

One word: Typical.

Please take off the blinders said...

well, pretty simple,from our perspective, given the trashing of anybody at a townhall or a tea rally daring to say they're "Taxed Enough Already", how about we really HAVE to watch every word, for fear of being labeled biased or retaliated against, often violently?..how about being forced soon,to buy their crappy healthcare plan nobody wanted, then being fined by the IRS if we don't?.. how about the enviro-wackos who want to tax each breath, and inspect our every toilet and light bulb, and keep us enslaved to foreign, rather than our own oil?..how about the soda tax and the food police in various areas?.. how about the ever-creeping-up percentage of our incomes going to those who DON'T WORK and DON'T PAY TAXES?.. how about every social program they ever gave out, at our expense, going BROKE, with it never being enough $?.. how about the decimating of religion,patriotism,personal responsibilities,work ethic, and real American history being removed/distorted by our lib public educ. system, K -thru university?..it's taken just about 40 years to get us to this brink of total socialism/ruination: look at Greece, the EU, and formerly Great, Britain!..respectfully but firmly, you really gotta wake up,don't you get that your great "freedom to work" now means working for everyone but you and yours, but for everyone else who doesn't or won't?!- with our so-called leaders continually stealing from us, for their own advancement, to stay in charge??.. get out the electoral brooms, folks, sweep 'em all out, and let's begin again!..our kids and grandkids deserve nothing less!

ambrosiajr said...

All of those things you mentioned are not really freedoms being taken away now, are they. Most of those rants have been in place for decades and have not really impacted your way of life. At least, they haven't impacted my way of life in any significant way. And since these are all man made by by both parties, then you need to deal with your anger issues, which I think if you don't, you will stroke out.

Also, my religious freedom is still intact, along with my ethics, morals and family. Sorry if yours isn't, but that seems to be your issue, and has nothing to do with government. As to oil, and our dependence, as I said before, and as its being proven now, it only takes one problem to make a catastrophe. Have you read the papers lately? Also, its not just the republicans nor the tea partiers that have the corner on patriotism and its insulting for you to even question someone's patriotism just because they don't think like you do. That's the height of arrogance.
Now to health care reform. No one is making you do anything. If you don't want insurance, you don't have to buy it. But, why should I have to pay for your illness if you need to go to the emergency room? Is that fair? I'm glad you would get fined to offset the costs we are paying right now for free care for people that don't have insurance. Why shouldn't we make you pay so you don't burden us with your costs.
Well, that's all I have time for today...thanks for playing.

pushing 50 said...

I wanna go back to ambros padd comment
I am tired of people thinking they are entitled to drug benefits, health care, COLA increases, proerty tax rebaters just cause they are old.
You know you are going to get ols. You know as you get old you will need more health care. You know health care is expensive. I,ve got an idea. How about you plan for it cause im tired of paying for it.

ambrosiajr said...

Yes pushing 50...maybe we should just put them all on icebergs and send them out to die.

Maybe some have not been as fortunate as you have. Maybe these old folks fought in WWII and served their country and now need some assistance.

I would like to see you subsist on $1300 a month from SS.

One more heartless bastard in the ranks. Nice.

stopthesocialists said...

Enough ambrosia with the tired liberal guilt trip. My father fought in WWII, worked for 40 years after and prepared for his retirement every step of the way. My parents lived frugally, saved, never incurred debt, put all their kids through college, and are now comfortable in their 80s. It's not a matter of being "fortunate" it's called personal responsibility. We are turning into a country of pathetic, helpless whiners because of liberal enabling. If you run up big credit card bills, no problem, there are companies who will help you pay pennies on the dollar and screw the company out of what they are owed. Why does it become my problem if someone chooses to eff up their own lives? Thanks to liberal thinking and policies, our future may look more like Greece than America.

ambrosiajr said...

Once again you show your compassionate side STS...my father fought in the Pacific, came back, started a business, then it failed and he worked into his 70's driving a limo. He didn't make much money and lived paycheck to paycheck. Now he lives on SS and what I can afford to give. That little itty bit of money he gets to help pay for his prescriptions keeps him going. But hey, its a matter of responsiblity, right? Lets not help some that may need it..screw them if they didn't have the wherewithall to save for retirement.

Once again you have proven to be a heartless bastard. But I expect nothing less from you.

stopthesocialists said...

Oh my God, I can hear the harps and violins all the way from Colts Neck. Why don't YOU step up to the plate and do what other generations did and care for an elderly parent? Why must the government do it? Where is YOUR compassion for the overtaxed people of this country? Typical liberal response to be generous with other people's money.

ambrosiajr said...

That's exactly what I'm doing asshole. Good thing you don't need a heart transplant...because it would be tough to find yours.

Pushing 50 said...

Ambro.
I agree that Vets deserve medical care but why everyone. Why shouldn't we have to plan for it ourselves.
Sure there are some people who because of circumstances beyond their control that does not work out. Thats what charity is for. But lets for a second assume government should be in charge of giving out charity.
Why should everybody get a hand out just because they are old?

As to your father I don't begrudge him since he fought in WWII. But that issue aside I note you said his business failed. OK Thats tough but that doesn't mean the government should be responsible for his bills. Not my fault he didn't put money away for his retirement. Maybe it should be a persons childrens job to subsidize their parents and not the government.

As for being a heartless bastard.
You have no idea how much time or money i give to charity yet you assume I am heartless bastard because I do not agree with you about governments role in society

Well since you started the name calling, Anybody who believes it is the governments job to take care of us is a brainless idiot.

stopthesocialists said...

You see, the minute someone challenges liberals with their hands out - they descend into childish name calling. The funny thing is, I bet I do more charitable work and giving through my church and private organizations in a month than most liberals do in a lifetime. The main thing - I choose to do it, I am not forced into a headlock by the government. Benjamin Franklin once said the best way to end poverty is to make it as unbearable as possible. Is it any wonder then, that poverty has become generational because of the absurd social programs that liberals have rammed down our throats lo these many years?

ambrosiajr said...

I think its ANYONES role to take care of our elderly. Shouldn't matter who pays for it. The deserve our respect and our compassion and our charity. Whether its government, private, public, whatever. If you don't believe that, then I would think you're heartless. No one bailed my father out when the business failed. He didn't look for any handouts from anyone. He just went and worked at something else, so don't feel like you or STS did anything for him. As to charitable giving, good for you. Now pat yourself on the back because you did what you should be doing anyway.

Anonymous said...

precisely,2:57!.. with the libs always resorting to dividing and name- calling,and,just by this one blog, we can all see how deep the philosophical divide is getting in this country..I still beg to differ: we think the lib anger, at OUR being sick of their pee-ing away and confiscating our money, is making THEM the angrier ones,look at how defensive they get, as soon as we air our fears and concerns!.. but, so be it, the major problem is, we need a right turn, right away, or, the celebrated, but rapidly- failing,"European model" that so many libs, (including the lib-in-chief), want to force us all into,will have our kids see a country NONE of our relatives fought and died for would recognize, THAT is the main issue!!..it's Friday, why not chill out, and start counting how much less you'll get to help your family with, when the tax cuts expire next year, because Pres.Grabby's gotten us into so much debt, it'll just be more surveillance, and tax and tax and tax,and again, never enough for all the demands...hey,do remember the moms, all, they'd want us to be happy,at least for a day!..

pushing 50 said...

Ambro, you did not answer the question.
why should everybody get Government handouts because they are OLD.
Why should Old be a criteria for anything?

ambrosiajr said...

Why? Maybe because its the right thing to do. Maybe because they've been around a long time and we just need to take care of them. Like I said, I think its anyones responsibility to take of the elderly. They've earned it.

Too bad if that's not the answer you were looking for.

Anonymous said...

Ambrosiajr...on pay day when counting your dollars...give 1.5 to me and 1 for you....1.5 for me and one for you ...keep up professing socialism..then don't complain ..it will soon become - give 2 to me and keep one for you.

That's fair and just right?
Wake up ambrosiajr, watch what you wish for

stopthesocialists said...

ambrosiajr is afflicted with liberalitis which justifies big government and the confiscation of our hard-earned money on the basis of it being "the right thing to do." There is no personal responsibility or any consideration of the massive cost, waste, fraud, bureaucracy, etc. of these boondoggles, just, shut up and empty your wallets because it's "the right thing to do."

ambrosiajr said...

You mean, as opposed to your headupyourassitis that you possess STS?

Sure, lets not worry about what's right, lets just worry about how much stuff we can keep for ourselves. It seems like you exemplify the "charity begins at home" mantra. More for me and screw you old people. You'll be dead soon anyway, so why should I help you out.

stopthesocialists said...

It's not up to you or any other liberal putz to decide what is an appropriate amount of "stuff" for someone to be "allowed" by the government to keep. The founding fathers were adamant that a person be able to retain the fruits of their honest labor. If people weren't taxed to death by the dirtbag social engineers in government, maybe they would have enough left at the end of their lives to tend to their own needs without running to the almighty government for a handout. For those who can't provide for themselves, there are plenty of private charities to turn to - ones supported by willing donors, not taxpayers who are held up by their ankles and shaken for their hard-earned money. Lower taxes would also mean an influx of charitable dollars to do just that - something that has been severely diminished since Mr. Redistribution Owealth took office. You're out of your league on this one, pal.

ambrosiajr said...

I'm not your "pal" STS..hell, I don't even like you. All the voodoo economics, as one republican put on the trickle down theory, won't do a damn thing to alleviate some of the hardships incurred by the elderly. And with your smug, condescending attitude, you reinforce that conservatives such as yourself really have greed in mind...ONLY.

What league would that be STS? You think too highly of yourself. But hey, that's ok...Gordon Gecko would be proud of you.

stopthesocialists said...

Oh I see, it's greed when you want to keep the money you earn. It's greed when you question the government's confiscation of more and more of OUR own money. You are making the same argument that the protesters in Greece are making when they are told that the entitlement programs can't be sustained. Nothing frustrates a liberal more than standing up to excessive, punitive taxation, right comrade? (thought the Marxian term would be more suitable than pal).

Pushing 50 said...

Ambro, Thanks for finally answering the question,

Just so we are clear Donald Trump should get social security and medicaer just because he has been around a long time.

So EVERYONE over a 65 is entitled to take money out of the pockets of my children just because of their age.

You really are an idiot!

ambrosiajr said...

With a ridiculous analogy like that, I wouldn't be calling anyone an idiot.

pushing 50 said...

First it is not an analogy
Maybe you did not read the question. I asked why anyone should get someting just because of their age.

You answered "
Maybe because they've been around a long time and we just need to take care of them. Like I said, I think its anyones responsibility to take of the elderly. They've earned it."


So according to you anyone who is old deserves it even if they are rich and not disabled in any way.

If Trump stops taking a salary at age 65 and starts living off his didvidends he is eligible for social security. He will also get Medicare. That is not an analogy it is a fact.
I could have a pension that pays me $250,000 year and i am still entitled to social security.

It is just one of many sbsurdities of the system

Everybody gets old. It is a stupid criteria for giving away anything.
Sorry but if you are going to defend that I think you are an idiot

ambrosiajr said...

Don't be sorry...I totally understand how you wouldn't get it in the first place. Nope, no need to be sorry. You think I'm an idiot because I like that we should take care of the elderly. And you don't. Simple. I would rather see them live as long as they possibly can...and you, apparently only want the wealthy ones to survive and screw the rest. Again, simple. Nope, no need to be sorry. I know where it's coming from.

Pushing 50 said...

I think you are misguided because you think the government should be responsible for taking care of anyone.

I think you are an idiot because you think the government should give the tax dollars of young people trying to raise a family to Rich old people just because they hit a certain age.