Frank Ricci in front of the Senate ........ why?

[Stinky The Clown]

He is one of a group of people who took issue in a ruling in which a number of judges saw things differently

I will grant he was affected by the ruling

But what does he know of the law?

[nyhuskyfan]

1. He actually knows a lot

He has spent most of his adult life filing lawsuits.

[TayTay]

2. He is there for purposes of empathy

He is a human being who can "show harm" or the human cost of the ruling in the New Haven Firefighters case.

The Republican Senators are using him to generate empathy. Since Republicans are irony-immune and irony-impaired, this simple fact is both beyond them and they don't care that it is a contraction in terms for their stated case that Judge Sotomayor is too empathetic.

Republicans hate empathy, unless they need it.

[scheming daemons]

3. Because it is tradition in these confirmations to have those opposed to the judge speak

[Spazito]

4. I hope Mr. Ricci is asked HOW MANY TIMES he has filed...

discrimination claims and what was the discriminatory action in each case. The man is a serial filer and should be confronted about that, imo.

[DefenseLawyer]

5. "Reverse Discrimination" is a pillar of the Reagan Revolution

Keeping angry white man convinced that he is somehow getting the short end of the stick from the government is a major theme of what it is to be a Republican. Naturally they take every opportunity to drive the wedge just a little deeper.

[mitchum]

6. There weren't enough white men in the room?

[Hepburn]

13. Well, obviously to the old while men on the committee...

...there was a need for another old, white male nimrod.

:shrug:

[gratuitous]

7. What does he know of the law?

Well, as a professional plaintiff and resume padder, I'd guess that he knows just enough about the law to cause a lot of trouble, and that's what he's there for. In a battle of legal minds between him and Judge Sotomayor, I'd take the intellectual cannon over the pipsqueak pea-shooter every day of the week and twice on Sunday. As for the case Ricci was involved in, the appellate panel Judge Sotomayor sat on followed the precedent laid down by the Supreme Court in a previous case. As an appellate panel, they couldn't do anything else. When Ricci's case went up to the Supreme Court, the Court reversed its earlier ruling and found in favor of Ricci, as is the high court's prerogative.

It's quite unusual, to say the least, to have a party litigant testify at the committee hearing for a judicial nominee. Almost as if someone wants to re-litigate the case or something. But it satisfies the same juvenile "what if" lust that fueled cinematic dreck such as "Alien vs. Predator" or the "King Kong" sequence in which Kong battles not one, not two, but three (count 'em!) T-Rexes. "Whoa, dude, wouldn't it be cool if the Alien creature battled the Predator?" "Wow, but what about a battle againt a T-Rex?" "Just one?" "Yeah, it should be two. No, three!" "Fix up another bowl, dude. This shit's great."

[BlooInBloo]

8. Because he's Every Whiteman. And the opinions of white men are historically underrepresented.

[Cerridwen]

9. A picture is worth a 1000 words - hat tip to n2doc for the pic link

http://www.caglecartoons.com/images/preview/{2c643a6d-32b4-47f4-b0b6-25a27bb4b2bf}.gif

[Hepburn]

10. I save that 'toon yesterday...I loved it! n/t

[Cerridwen]

11. It explains much - sad to say. n/t

[Critters2]

12. Someone should explain to the Repugs that Latinos can vote,

and are probably taking note.


No, on second thought, leave 'em alone.

[zbdent]

14. probably because his dyslexia got him in the position where he actually had the job, but then

got "bypassed for a promotion due to some minority" getting the test thrown out ...

so some fudging got him a job in the first place ... and suddenly, the fudging didn't go his way ...

Gee ... I wonder how the media will treat anybody who questions him even remotely like Anita Hill was questioned ...