Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (118967)	6/8/2005 8:34:15 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793809

This was how it was supposed to work, no? "Senate OKs Brown, Ends Pryor Filibuster By JESSE J. HOLLAND The Associated Press Wednesday, June 8, 2005; 6:00 PM WASHINGTON -- The Senate on Wednesday confirmed California judge Janice Rogers Brown for the federal appeals court, ending a two-year battle filled with accusations of racism and sexism and shadowed by a dispute over Democratic blocking tactics. Senators quickly followed by ending another long-term filibuster, clearing the way for a vote Thursday on former Alabama Attorney General William Pryor as outlined in an agreement last month that averted a showdown that could have brought Senate action to a halt. After giving Pryor a final vote and confirming two Michigan nominees to other appeals court posts, senators plan to leave President Bush's other controversial nominees dangling, moving on to other matters after devoting a month to historic but exhausting debate over judges. The Senate voted 56-43 to confirm Brown to the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, and 67-32 to end the filibuster of Pryor's nomination to the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals _ the last of the three nominees Democrats agreed to clear in exchange for Republicans not banning judicial filibusters." <snip> washingtonpost.com

To: Lane3 who wrote (118967)	6/8/2005 9:07:39 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793809

I was attempting to distinguish between bigotry, which is based on a group identity, and what was alleged to be bigotry, which was a disagreement with an individual's POV. Identity vs. POV., Sometimes it's hard to draw a line between identity vs. POV. Is being Muslim (not necessarily Arab, but just Muslim, a follower of the Islamic faith) an identity or POV? If a child is brought up in a Birch Society household and society and is not exposed to alternate ideas until well past the time that his core values are established, is his racism an identity or a POV? You could argue that one can change POV. But one can also change identity ("Black like Me", Michael Jackson, sex change). In some cases, changing identity may be just as easy as changing a deeply rooted POV.