What About The Black Progressive Agenda Can't A White Jewish Liberal Woman Fully Represent?

What about the agenda of the Black Quasi-Socialist Progressive-Fundamentalist Racism Chaser Agenda can't a White Jewish Liberal Woman not fully represent which requires a Black Liberal Judge instead?


This is a heart-felt question that I have as I consider the views of the Black Establishment as it relates to the ideology and judicial voting record of Associate Justices Ruth Bader Gisburg and Clarence Thomas.  

We often hear the attack upon Justice Thomas with the diss "We have no Black representation upon the Supreme Court".   As I distill this claim I choose to go beyond the race of the person in question and make note of what these people want the most - a favorable vote.   Thus the real question that must be asked is "What if the ideology and favorable rulings that the Black Establishment favors the most?".

In listening to and reading many of the expectations for the next Supreme Court appointment by President Obama as opined by the prevalent voices purporting to speak for Black America - the value of a "liberal judge" to insure that the Civil Rights of Black Americans and that we have protection against the powerful forces that attempt to roll over our community's interests is the number one area of focus.  A "conservative" judge, by comparison is counter to the interests of Black America because they tend to protect the establishment and give no special consideration to the plight of the "little guy".

There is presently a little bit of consternation from the Black Progressive-Fundamentalist class over the choice of Elena Kagan by President Obama.  Questions about her own commitment to racial diversity as dean of the Harvard Law School.  Questions about Obama's bondage to the Jewish power structure over Blacks.

As we focus upon the "5 to 4" hurdle that is an obstacle for those who oppose the "conservative voting block" the real question is "What other than 'a portrait upon the wall' that the Black Establishment can feel proud of is the value of a Black liberal associate justice upon the Supreme Court?

The Black Establishment CLAIMS that a "Black Judge" is important because he or she can bring into a debate the nuance of "the Black experience" to the discussion.   In truth they don't want the 'Black Experience'.  The merely want a ruling that is balanced toward the PROGRESSIVE end of the spectrum.

I have pointed out many times before that Ruth Bader Ginsburg is the biggest "Black Inferiorist" on the court today.   I now conclude that the Black Establishment doesn't need a "Black perspective" represented upon the court.  Instead it needs to obtain a bit of "Black Dignity" first.   Simply put - Deliberations initiated by a Black Progressive or a White Liberal Snarling Fox in which the Black man is argued to be "damaged goods" as a group, prior to even walking into the court room, needs to be rejected.   Only a firm sense of "racial dignity" and an unwillingness to serve as the "poster child", assuming the position in order to receive the payoff at the end of the transaction must be mandated.   Some victories are indeed too costly.

Go to the "Ricci vs New Haven" court case and read the views of Ruth Bader Ginsburg regarding the Black firefighters in question.   In her writing she provides better "dog ate my homework" excuses for the Black promotion candidates than even they could conger up out of fear of credulity.  Justice Ginsburg retains the progressive tendency to "expand the police tape far beyond the crime scene in question", attempting to make the entire society the crime scene.   In my view she is the most effective "Black Progressive voice" on the court, much to their liking.     In my personal view as a Black Conservator - she is also the most insulting to the dignity and cultural consciousness of the Black American.  

The attacks upon Justice Clarence Thomas as being a "White man" per his thoughts ultimately undercuts the credibility of the argument for "racial representation" upon the court.  If a Black man can be said NOT TO represent the interests of Black America then it stands to reason that a non-Black can be equipped to fully represent the "Black Progressive" perspective that the prevailing Black Establishment desires.

In my analysis the most acerbic characteristic of Justice Clarence Thomas is that he has the audacity to believe that the Black American is an equal human being under the law.  To those who are used to transactioning in "Black Inferiority" and our historical damage for present political advantage.  Without a sense of shame as a boundary they will continue to find offensive a Black man who refuses to grovel.  Thus a White Liberal Jewish Woman who is willing to play their game is more favorable to their orientation.