DEBBIE WASSERMAN SCHULTZ: Unpledged delegates exist really to make sure that party leaders and elected officials don't have to be in a position where they are running against grassroots activists. We are, as a Democratic Party, really highlight and emphasize inclusiveness and diversity at our convention. And so, we want to give every opportunity to grassroots activists and diverse, committed Democrats to be able to participate, attend and be a delegate at the convention. And so, we separate out those unpledged delegates to make sure that there is [NOT competition between them.
[...]
AARON MATE: Right. Okay, so on that front, let's talk about a few key cases. You have a gubernatorial race in New York between Cynthia Nixon, seen as the progressive favorite, and the incumbent governor, Andrew Cuomo. How is the fight over rules, and this suspicion that the rules are rigged against progressives like Nixon, playing out when it comes to that race?

LARRY COHEN: It's huge in that race because there's three point six million unaffiliated voters in New York. They're not in any party. They were registered without a party, in many cases almost automatically, when getting a license. Many of them are young and they had to join the Democratic Party on October 13 of 2017, exactly eleven months before the gubernatorial and legislative primary. It doesn't even stop with Cynthia Nixon.

As you likely know, or viewers would know, there's eight people, eight senators [SIC] in New York that are Democrats from heavily Democratic areas that caucus with the Republicans. They all have challengers. In fact, we're supporting all those challengers. Those challengers can't look to those millions of unaffiliated voters, the ones who live in those districts, because they're shut out because they didn't switch last year. We've been pushing all year to change that. In fact, the Democratic Party itself could change it in New York. And at their convention a few weeks ago, they tabled the resolution to do so.

Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.

Here's another one.
Justice Kennedy and the Myth of the Legal Neutrality
I have crossed the path of many examples though, demonstrating what appears to be common belief that law is NOT a political instrument; that "democratically elected representatives"--legislatures, congress, assemblies-- do NOT formulate and enact law; jurists do without hide nor hair of an army.

I'll tell you what: I hope I am dead before Teh People discover the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) of the United States. It'll save me the embarrassment of living.

What is the matter with you people?

Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.

Here is another one.
Female [US] lawmakers, candidates must be the voice for women worldwide
Because?

Andrea Taylor is a nonresident fellow in the Atlantic Council's Rafik Hariri Center for the Middle East.

Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.

Here is another one.
Sessions Nixes 24 DOJ Guidance Documents
signifying nothing BUT utter disregard for US history, US common law, US federal agencies' purviews.
Regents of the Uni v. of Cal. v. Bakke 438 U.S. 265 (1978), a private action

Held: The judgment below is affirmed insofar as it orders respondent's admission to Davis and invalidates petitioner's special admissions program, [p267] but is reversed insofar as it prohibits petitioner from taking race into account as a factor in its future admissions decisions.

Now, I remember this one as it happened. I am black. At the time I was 3rd yr high school. I intended to apply for university enrollment and was generally conversant with the objectives of affirmative action obligation in admission policy by institution, public or private.

"Bakke's basic approach"
At that time the US federal government had still scarcely applied EEOC --NOT DOJ-- enforcement outside private sector employment. I was alarmed. This ruling conspicuously circumscribed the obligations of the public to remedy historical discrimination against ethnic minorities' desegregating institutional funds and resources. This case put in place a formula applied to every "similarly situated" complaint of discrimination over the next 40 years. Fisher vs. Texas (2016) is a stellar boilerplate production, crediting A. Kennedy affirmed in part, reversed in part.

Furtherfuckingmore, Mr Richard Posner, to whom I have here referred before disparaged the ruling and perverted the remedial meaning of affirmative action with the coin favored by reactionary conservatives ever since: casting "reverse discrimination" at any selection process that does not favor a white applicant.

The Bakke case received enormous attention while it was awaiting decision in the United States Supreme Court, largely because reverse discrimination, generally under the euphemistic name of "affirmative action," has become almost as deeply entrenched an institution in American life as was segregated public education in the South before the Brown (1954!) decision. A decision broadly and unequivocally outlawing reverse discrimination would have exposed innumerable universities, corporations, labor unions, and other institutions to successful lawsuits for reverse discrimination. It would have outraged liberal opinion, the federal government's affirmative action bureaucracy, the leadership of a number of minority organizations, and other vocal and influential groups. And, according to a Gallup Poll, it would have pleased the vast majority of the American people, including almost two-thirds  of all nonwhites.4

Attaching "progressive" alarm today to "guidelines"a whistle in the graveyard.


Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.