The Student News Site of Stony Brook University

The Statesman

54° Stony Brook, NY
The Student News Site of Stony Brook University

The Statesman

The Student News Site of Stony Brook University

The Statesman

Newsletter

A Reaction to “No Drama Obama Has To Go”

As I sat in the HSC cafeteria amongst my peers, reading the latest issue of The Statesman, I came across an opinion article by the Contributing Writer, Michael Heinz entitled ”No Drama’ Obama Needs to Go.’ Within the article, Heinz argues that the right-wing media, Corporate America and Republicans are feeding lies and misinformation to the General Public in order to advance their agenda and to continue the ‘status quo’ the country has become accustom to. I would like to state it is in my opinion; Michael Heinz has stifled his own understanding of the issues by observing the politics of today through the lens of the contemporary liberal, or he is deliberately presenting a slanted point of view using The Statesman to peddle his own propaganda.

Heinz’ first claim made is concerning the latest Supreme Court nominee and newest Justice, Sonia Sotomayor. He affirms: ”hellip;officials denouncing Obama’s pick for the conservative-packed yet somehow still ‘radically liberal’ as a ‘reverse racist”hellip; and centering their opposition to her around her gender and ethnicity.’ If Heinz took the time to research all the information out there on Sotomayor, he would understand that there was cause for concern about her ‘impartiality’ as a Supreme Court Judge and not necessarily about her liberal or conservative points of view. Additionally it was her own statements to which brought the issue of race in the confirmation process. Stated in the Supreme Court Oath, ‘…I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all, the duties incumbent upon me’hellip;’ in which all Supreme Court picks are to recite and follow to the best of their abilities. Sotomayor herself stated on multiple occasions: ‘I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would, more often than not, reach a better conclusion.’ Not only did her own words inject the factor of race into the confirmation hearings, she literally defied the entire Supreme Court Oath’s notions of being fair and impartial with her very own statements. Not something conjured up by the ‘right’ and a legitimate cause for concern in my opinion. I would prefer to have an impartial left-of-center judge on the bench before a right-of-center judge that views the law with a slanted bias.

Heinz also states that; ”hellip;conservatives are doing whatever they can to shape the debate around absurd distractions and to turn public opinion around using fear and misinformation.’ If Heinz took the time to listen to any debates about Healthcare Reform, he would know that there is validity in the arguments against it. Not only is it healthy for any Democracy to thoroughly debate any change in policy but the Democrats attempts at this Healthcare bill have gone awry. The Democrats are talking about using ‘reconciliation’ to pass it through. ‘Reconciliation is a legislative process of the United States Senate intended to allow a contentious budget bill to be considered without being subject to filibuster.’ This means that the Democrats want to circumvent a large enough percentage of American Representatives that could normally block the passage of healthcare. Is this using ‘fear or misinformation’ on behalf of the ‘right’ or is this simply the ‘left’ hijacking what was once a democratic system of government by passing legislation that the people don’t necessarily want or understand?

Leave a Comment
Donate to The Statesman

Your donation will support the student journalists of Stony Brook University. Your contribution will allow us to purchase equipment and cover our annual website hosting costs.

More to Discover
Donate to The Statesman

Comments (0)

All The Statesman Picks Reader Picks Sort: Newest

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *