Skip to main content

View Diary: Gay Federal Court Nominee asks Obama to Withdraw Nomination (41 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  What evidence are you expecting? (11+ / 0-)

    Did you think the Republicans were going to come out and say, "There's no way we're letting some faggot sit on a U.S. Court of Appeals"?

    As in many such cases, the Republicans' motive has to be discerned by inference.  I think I can say without fear of contradiction that they are a homophobic party.  I think we can also agree that few nominees to the federal bench possess the kind of qualifications DuMont does.  If someone with his background isn't qualified to serve on the bench, then pretty much nobody is.  Finally, to my knowledge, no one has identified any actual problems arising from his "background investigation."

    So I think you're setting a rather high bar for proof here, Adam.  In light of what we know about the nominee and those who oppose him, I think the proper question would be, "What else could possibly have motivated the Republicans to block this nomination?"

    "Ça c'est une chanson que j'aurais vraiment aimé ne pas avoir écrite." -- Barbara

    by FogCityJohn on Thu Nov 10, 2011 at 11:31:05 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  Ideology? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      craigkg, kyril

      That's usually enough for them.  I don't know anything about DuMont -- or this area of law, really -- but that there wasn't even a hearing is really odd.  

      I think you're right that we're past the era of James Hormel and can't expect bigotry to be expressed as openly in the past, but there's something weird going on here given that it's the Federal Circuit.

      •  I think FCJ is right (5+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        FogCityJohn, sleipner, Loge, kyril, Clarknt67

        I think it is because he's gay, but they can't say that anymore, so they imply he has something nefarious in his past, but don't elaborate.

        As for the law practiced by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit...according to my patent attorney friend who used to be a patent attorney for Bell Labs (and screwed over in his retirement by its successor Lucent) it is extremely dry and hyper-technical, but he joked with me several years ago that that is what you get when you mix engineers with lawyers (and he has degrees in both).

        "So it was OK to waterboard a guy over 80 times but God forbid the guy who could understand what that prick was saying has a boyfriend."--Jon Stewart

        by craigkg on Thu Nov 10, 2011 at 11:54:07 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  But the normal process... (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          craigkg, kyril

          ... is Leahy schedules a hearing, and the nominee gets voted out of committee, and then it stalls.  That's what's so odd about this.

          •  Tweets from Chris Geidner of Metro Weekly... (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Adam B, sleipner, FogCityJohn, kyril

            About an hour ago he tweeted:

            Funny thing today: Chairman Leahy was glad to talk to me after Jud Comte meeting -- until I asked about DuMont nomination.

            and then

            Second funny thing today: White House sent a statement on RMA vote, won't respond regarding DuMont questions.

            "So it was OK to waterboard a guy over 80 times but God forbid the guy who could understand what that prick was saying has a boyfriend."--Jon Stewart

            by craigkg on Thu Nov 10, 2011 at 12:40:53 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  If DuMont's orientation were the issue ... (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              craigkg, sleipner

              ... wouldn't someone in the Senate be raising a stink in his favor?

              •  No. (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                kyril, Clarknt67, craigkg

                Do you really believe that there are senators who are going to go to the mat to help one gay man get an appointment to the Federal Circuit?  They can barely bestir themselves to force votes on major pieces of legislation.

                Besides, have you ever seen senators raise other "isms" in the context of other nominations?  When have you heard a Democratic senator accuse his or her Republican colleagues of blocking a nomination based on, say, racism?  

                "Ça c'est une chanson que j'aurais vraiment aimé ne pas avoir écrite." -- Barbara

                by FogCityJohn on Thu Nov 10, 2011 at 03:33:16 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  there's something to be said for that (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  kyril

                  Steve Benen, re Goodwin Liu:

                  [A]s best as I can tell, the fact that Liu is an Asian-American played absolutely no role in the confirmation fight. Republicans went after him for partisan and ideological reasons, not racist ones.

                  But let’s not forget how the Senate GOP dealt with controversial judicial nominees in the Bush era.

                  When Harriet Miers’ Supreme Court nomination came under fire, Republicans suggested her liberal critics were misogynists.

                  When Bill Pryor’s 11th Circuit nomination came under fire, Republicans suggested his liberal critics were anti-Catholic.

                  When Miguel Estrada’s D.C. Circuit nomination came under fire, Republicans suggested his liberal critics were anti- Hispanic.

                  When Samuel Alito’s Supreme Court nomination came under fire, Republicans suggested his liberal critics don’t like Italian-Americans.

                  When Janice Rogers Brown D.C. Circuit nomination came under fire, Republicans suggested her liberal critics were racists.

                  Still, it's not just that they're calling out Republicans for being racist ... they're not calling them out at all on this nomination.  And Leahy has been pretty diligent otherwise about highlighting the judicial vacancies crisis up and down the board.
      •  Um, DuMont is a conservative (6+ / 0-)

        I know a law school classmate of his.  He says DuMont isn't very political, but to the extent he is, he's a conservative.  In addition, both DuMont's area of practice and the jurisdiction of the Federal Circuit make it virtually inconceivable that "ideology" is a factor.  Seriously, do you think the Republicans are worried about some kind of ideological bias in patent and trademark cases?  Customs duties and anti-dumping investigations?  Veterans benefit appeals?  MSPB determinations?

        "Ça c'est une chanson que j'aurais vraiment aimé ne pas avoir écrite." -- Barbara

        by FogCityJohn on Thu Nov 10, 2011 at 12:29:48 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Thank you, FCJ. (7+ / 0-)

      I despise the position that bigotry is not bigotry unless the bigot calls a press conference and announces "I shall now perform an act of overt bigotry."

      "In America racism is a misdemeanor. Noticing racism is a felony" -- Max Minton

      by teachme2night on Thu Nov 10, 2011 at 11:45:52 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  The Dogs That Aren't Barking (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      kyril

      If this is about orientation, where is Schumer, Franken, anyone raising a stink about why the nomination didn't go forward?

      •  You're assuming they give a shit. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        kyril

        In the grand scheme of things, this is small potatoes to those guys.  I like both Schumer and Franken, but I don't view either of them as impassioned crusaders for the rights of gay people.  They're certainly allies, but they're not the types to declare that this is a hill they're going to die on.

        "Ça c'est une chanson que j'aurais vraiment aimé ne pas avoir écrite." -- Barbara

        by FogCityJohn on Thu Nov 10, 2011 at 03:35:26 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I'm assuming ... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          kyril

          ... that even if they don't see this as homophobia, they give a shit about getting vacancies filled by a Democratic President.

          •  Not too much, apparently (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            kyril, Clarknt67, craigkg

            Unlike the Republicans, the Democrats don't seem to have much fight in them when it comes to judicial nominations.  The Republicans threaten the nuclear option.  Democrats leave their nominees to twist in the wind until they withdraw.

            In some cases, this can have some benefits.  Out here in California, we now have Justice Goodwin Liu on our state supreme court.  So the Ninth Circuit's loss has been our gain.

            "Ça c'est une chanson que j'aurais vraiment aimé ne pas avoir écrite." -- Barbara

            by FogCityJohn on Thu Nov 10, 2011 at 04:45:59 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  And he'll still get the judicial experience... (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              FogCityJohn

              ...to one day get him on the Supreme Court, which is why Republicans were so adamant about trying to block him from getting on the 9th Circuit.

              "So it was OK to waterboard a guy over 80 times but God forbid the guy who could understand what that prick was saying has a boyfriend."--Jon Stewart

              by craigkg on Thu Nov 10, 2011 at 06:58:19 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  He'll still never get through the Senate (0+ / 0-)

                Because of his comments on Alito.

                •  You're almost certainly right. (0+ / 0-)

                  Getting him through the Senate would require Democrats with spines.  Unfortunately, vertebrate Democrats are a nearly extinct species.

                  "Ça c'est une chanson que j'aurais vraiment aimé ne pas avoir écrite." -- Barbara

                  by FogCityJohn on Fri Nov 11, 2011 at 12:26:35 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  It was self inflicted (0+ / 0-)

                    There was no good reason for Goodwin Liu to appear before the Senate in opposition to Sam Alito. There were other panelists making the same points. What Liu really needed was a wise godfather in the Senate to whisper in his ear, before he was announced as a panelist, that his testimony would likely make it difficult for him to ever be a federal judge. Where were the Dem godfathers to give this talented jurist some sage advice?

                    "let's talk about that"

                    by VClib on Fri Nov 11, 2011 at 09:25:01 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site