Tag Archives: Sonia Sotomayor

Will Kagan come out NOW?

Elena Kagan, John Roberts, Jeffrey Minear

Associated Press photo

Elena Kagan is sworn in today as the third woman on the nine-member U.S. Supreme Court. She is only the fourth woman ever to have sat on the nation’s highest court.

Comedian Wanda Sykes joked that after having been given so much shit by stupid hypocritical white men for her biography,* Sonia Sotomayor, on her first day as a U.S. Supreme Court justice, should have walked into the court’s chambers with a Puerto Rican flag draped around her, shouting, “Mira!” (“Look at me!”)

So: Will Elena Kagan walk into the court’s chambers on her first day draped in a rainbow flag? Maybe she can shout: “We’re here! We’re queer! Get used to it!”

Really, though, it’s a lifetime appointment, so isn’t it safe for “bachelorette” Kagan to come out now?

Anyway, Kagan earlier in the week was confirmed by the U.S. Senate by a vote of 63 to 37, showing the political weakness of the stupid white men in the U.S. Senate, who decried her as a raging liberal when she appears to be yet another Clintonesque centrist who was appointed by a Clintonesque, centrist president.

Kagan is allowed to function as a U.S. Supreme Court justice now that she has been sworn in, but won’t formally be sworn in until Oct. 1, the first day of the court’s next term.

*The white men’s backgrounds as priviledged white men couldn’t possibly have biased them, but Sotomayor’s background as a Puerto Rican woman surely has biased her, you see. The stupid white men are never to required to prove anyfuckingthing, but anyone who isn’t a white, conservative, heterosexual, “Christian” male is required to prove his or her fitness and worthiness.

Advertisements

1 Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Assorted shit

Finally, a brilliant move by the Dems

Apparently the Democrats are planning to make the Repugnicans’ refusal to go along with Wall Street reform a centerpiece of their November election strategy.

It’s a brilliant move.

Perhaps spurred on by the attention that Michael Moore brought to the subject in his documentary “Capitalism: A Love Story” (which I reviewed here and which I just watched again on DVD), the Democrats have seized upon the fact that the Repugnicans prefer unfettered financial fraud to any regulations on Wall Street whatsofuckingever.

With so many Americans struggling financially, for them to see, graphically, what the Repugnican Party stands f0r — the interests of the plutocrats, the true elites — around election time should put a significant dent in any gains the Repugnicans otherwise anticipated they’d make.

The Repugnican Party’s insistence on aiding the already filthy rich at the expense of the rest of us should do at the ballot box for the Democrats what the unelected Bush regime’s constant reminder of the “threat” of “terrorism” did for the Repugnicans at the ballot box in 2002 and in 2004.

I’m starting to feel some hope that we’re going to have some change…  

Chuck Crist poised to pull a Benedict Lieberman

I remember the joke that Jon Stewart made when former Democratic U.S. Sen. Joe Lieberman announced that he would run for re-election to the U.S. Senate as an independent candidate (under the newly formed “party” of “Connecticut for Lieberman”after he had lost the Democratic primary to opponent Ned Lamont: Stewart joked that Lieberman had announced that if he lost the Senate election, then he would start his own Senate. (Unfortunately, Lieberman won the 2006 election as an “independent,” but fortunately, this meant that he didn’t have to start his own Senate…)

That’s pretty much what it has come to, with power-hungry, egomaniacal baby-boomer (I know, redundant…) politicians refusing to take no for an answer and wanting to hold on to their power at all costs.

Repugnican Florida Gov. Charlie Crist, who is featured in the excellent documentary “Outrage” as being a probable closet case, is considering running for the U.S. Senate as an independent because his Repugnican primary opponent, wingnut Marco Rubio, has overtaken him in the polls.

Under Florida law, Crist has until April 30 to decide whether to remain in the Repugnican primary or to run for the U.S. Senate as an independent, a la Lieberman. (Under Connecticut law, Benedict Lieberman still was able to run as an independent after he lost the Democratic primary, but Crist does not have that option. [I suppose that Florida can do some things right where the fairness of elections are concerned…].) 

Crist has indicated that he’ll do what’s best for the people of Florida.

Oh, bullshit.

Crist will do what’s best for Crist.

Those who choose to participate in one of the two major parties should accept their fate if their political fortunes fall. Running as an “independent” because one can’t make it in his or her chosen party anymore is one of the refuges of the scoundrel.

It’s no different from phone-tapping

It is lamentable that those making the legal decisions regarding the privacy of employees’ electronic communications (e-mails, text-messages, etc.) are mostly baby boomers (or even older people) who barely fucking understand today’s electronic communications.*

I wholeheartedly disagree that an employer’s mere warning that its employees’ communications may be monitored makes it legal for it to monitor its employees’ communications any more than tapping their telephones is legal (except in certain circumstances, such as at call centers).

And if I give you warning that I might punch you in the face, does that make it legal for me to punch you in the face? Since when does a mere warning make a follow-up action legal?

New communications technology does not mean that the privacy laws that already apply to telephones, for example, don’t apply to that new technology.

The U.S. Supreme Court is deciding this issue now, with new Justice Sonia Sotomayor seeming to be leaning on the side of privacy protection and most of the other justices leaning on the side of Big Brother. 

Fact is, as Sotomayor seems to have indicated, most employers who snoop on their employees just get off on snooping.

Tell you what: When all of us can read the employers’ electronic communications, then maybe they can read ours. 

Um, yeah.

*The Associated Press indicates that Chief “Justice” John Roberts and “Justice” Antonin Scalia apparently don’t even understand how text-messaging works, yet they are poised to rule on whether or not privacy law applies to text-messaging.

Bill Clinton: Can’t we all just get along?

Former President Bill Clinton is quoted by The Associated Press as having said that the United States has an image around the world of having too much political infighting.

God, I’m sick and fucking tired of hearing direct or indirect calls for a national singing of “Kumbaya.”

Much if not most of the opposition to President Barack Obama stems from the fact that he is presiding while black, for fuck’s sake.

I’m supposed to make nice with a bunch of fucking racists and white supremacists? Who hate me and who want to continue to oppress me because I’m gay?

I just don’t fucking think so!

The rest of the world can think what it wants to think.

And Bill Clinton can go kiss all of the wingnut ass that he likes.

I, for one, would rather die than to give the impression that I think that the likes of Sarah Palin-Quayle and Glenn Beck and their fascistic followers are anything less than satanic.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Palin-Prejean 2012!

Carrie Prejean starts to leave Larry King’s show because he asked her a question that he wasn’t supposed to. Prejean, like Sarah Palin, represents a faux victimization that only harms, not helps, women. (You know that Prejean is a good Christian, by the way, because she wears that cross.)

So Carrie Prejean and Sarah Palin are what’s left of the Repugnican Party — well, except for Glenn Beck.

What do Prejean and Palin have in common? A lot, with the exception that no Palin sex videos have yet to be discovered. (And I’m really, really hoping that there won’t be any Beck sex videos…)

Both Prejean and Palin have books out (as does Beck…), only Palin’s book is doing much better than is Prejean’s: Amazon.com has Palin’s book at No. 1 and Prejean’s at No. 6,712 — yes, at No. 6,712 — as I compose this sentence.

(Porn star Jenna Jameson’s book How to Make Love Like a Porn Star is at No. 56 on amazon.com right now — I swear – so what I’m thinking is that Prejean needs to follow the logical course of her “career,” which is to do professional porn, since she’s already done amateur porn. Then, perhaps, after she has had success as a professional porn “actress,” for which she’s already had her tits artificially enlarged, she finally can sell some books!)

If you think I’m awful for comparing Palin and Prejean, Prejean makes the comparison herself. This is from her pathetic recent interview with Larry King:

KING: You characterize yourself as being “Palinized.” What do you mean?

PREJEAN: Well, you look at Sarah Palin and Congresswoman, you know, Michele Bachmann, they are relentlessly, you know, torn down by the liberal media. I mean, they’re wonderful women. They’re intelligent. They’re great mothers. They’re brilliant. And yet there’s this double standard that conservative women are fair game to be attacked. And it’s not right. And it needs to stop.

KING: Doesn’t the conservative media tear down liberal politicians?

PREJEAN: Not to the extent that liberals do to conservative women. I think that they get away with it. If you look at Keith Olbermann, for instance, I talk about it in my book, some of the things that he says on his show about conservatives, if Sean Hannity or if Bill O’Reilly said anything like that about a liberal woman, like Sonia Sotomayor or Michelle Obama, he would be off the air. And there is this double standards and Americans are now exposed to it.

KING: But the conservative media commentators denounced Sonia Sotomayor as a racist, Hillary Clinton as a bitch and a liar. Laura Ingraham recently accused Nancy Pelosi of having do everything but sell her own body to get the health bill passed. You must condemn things like that.

PREJEAN: Look at the things that they said about Sarah Palin and her children. I mean, it’s unbelievable. The attacks are still coming. And, you know, when they’re not happy with the message, Larry, what do they do? They attack the messenger.

KING: Well, you don’t see that it happens on both sides?

PREJEAN: I think that it’s important for women to stick together. I think that’s the biggest thing. And I think that there definitely is this bias against conservative women. It’s fair game. And if they don’t like what you have to say, they have to attack your personal life. And that’s what we’ve been seeing. It’s very consistent.

Oh, puhhhfuckinglease. If you put yourself in the public spotlight, like both Prejean and Palin have done, you can’t complain that the public spotlight shines on those parts of your life that you wish it wouldn’t.

Especially when you claim to be such a great fucking upstanding “Christian” (which includes hating fags and dykes, just like Jesus did/does, of course!), as Prejean does, you can’t expect your hypocrisy (such as breast implants and amateur sex videos) not to be exposed.

When I watched the Prejean-Larry King clip with Prejean ostentatiously wearing her Christian cross pendant, as though she actually exemplifies what Jesus Christ taught, I wanted to vomit.

All that Palin and Prejean do is cry “victim.” How, exactly, does this victim mentality empower women? And is their incessant whining about the “liberal media” enough to elect the likes of Palin to positions of power? Aren’t you supposed to have actual accomplishments, not just bogus claims of victimhood? 

Prejean is full of shit when she claims that women on the right are given worse treatment than are progressive women. And women on the right usually are attacked because they are fucktarded and mean-spirited, not because they are women.

Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann are “brilliant”? Well, consider the source of that assertion. No doubt Prejean considers herself to be “brilliant” as well.

I recall the incredibly vicious attacks on Cindy Sheehan by the right. (The majority of Americans now agree with Sheehan, of course, that the unelected Bush regime’s Vietraq War was dead wrong.)

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and my only truly Democratic U.S. senator, Barbara Boxer, constantly are villified by the right, as was U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor (primarily because she isn’t a conservative white man), yet here is Prejean whining about what supposedly horribly unfair treatment she and Palin have received. She’s even coined a verb for it: “Palinized.”  

What Palin and Prejean and their ilk really want is for progressive women to be crucified while wingnut dingbats like Palin and Prejean get a free pass — lest they scream “sexism.”

Why won’t Palin and Prejean just go the fuck away, even though the McCainosaurus-Palin-Quayle ticket tanked at the ballot box a year ago this month and even though Palin and Prejean both, to my knowledge, are unemployed, except to peddle their books?

Because of Americans’ love affair with white trash, that’s why. We haven’t seen Palin’s nasty bits, as we have Prejean’s, but we are promised that soon we’ll see Palin’s grandkid’s baby daddy’s pee-pee on playgirl.com.

That’s why Palin and Prejean endure: because Americans just can’t get enough of stupid.

I don’t expect Prejean to be around much longer, and I don’t see that Palin-Quayle ever will make it to the White House. Still, I believe that it’s a mistake to misunderestimate, as our last “brilliant” “president” would put it, how popular stupid is in the United States of America.

Sarah Palin and Carrie Prejean appeal to the fantasy of millions of fucktarded Americans that they, too, can become famous one day, even though they have attained absofuckinglutely nothing. It’s the American dream, to attain to heights that you never earned and don’t deserve. (It was, I think, the “brilliant” “President” George W. Bush who started that trend.)

Still, though, Palin and Prejean (and Glenn Beck) do represent an ever-shrinking segment of the U.S. population: the misogynist/pro-patriarchal, white supremacist, “Christo”fascist, xenophobic, homophobic, pro-bogus-war, anti-social-program, anti-environmental (not necessarily in that order) set. They are vocal, but they are going extinct like the dinosaurs they don’t believe in.

The Repugnicans think that just because they can front a she-Nazi or two, the majority of the American voters won’t see that a Nazi is still a Nazi, male or female, Dick Cheney or Sarah Palin.

“I think that it’s important for women to stick together,” Carrie Prejean proclaimed on Larry King.

Because getting breast implants in order to compete in the Miss USA pageant is what feminism is all about! As is the anti-abortion stance of both Prejean and Palin! Yes, women of the United States of America, these brilliant women are on your side!

Prejean already is dead in the water, so she might as well go ahead and make that pro porn, and Palin is riding high right now only because of her book. She’ll fade. You betcha.

And even if she didn’t, she and her ilk just don’t have the numbers anymore. It’s not even close enough for the Repugnicans to be able to steal presidential elections anymore, like they did in 2000 and again in 2004.

The demographics are their death.

But it doesn’t hurt to help the demographics along.

5 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

SHOCKER!: Sonia Sotomayor approved along racial, partisan and gender lines

Supreme Court Justice designate Sonya Sotomayor waves as she ...

Associated Press photo

Sonia Sotomayor, the newest addition to the U.S. Supreme Court, waves to fans today in New York City. Sotomayor is the nation’s first Hispanic and only the nation’s third female U.S. Supreme Court justice — and the first Democratic president’s appointment to the nation’s highest court since Bill Clinton appointed Stephen Breyer in 1994. “In opposing Sotomayor, Republicans risk a backlash from her fellow Hispanics, the fastest growing U.S. minority. Hispanics make up 15 percent of the U.S. population and voted by a two-to-one margin for Obama in the 2008 presidential election,” notes Reuters.

So I’m looking to see who voted for and who voted against Sonia Sotomayor today in the U.S. Senate. Sotomayor today won confirmation as the nation’s first Latina U.S. Supreme Court justice on a vote of 68 to 31.

(The only senator who didn’t vote was Democrat Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts; undoubtedly his vote would have been in favor of Sotomayor’s confirmation, so that would have been 69 to 31… All 31 of the votes against Sotomayor were cast by Repugnicans; gee, which party is looking out of step with the nation these days?)

From the horse’s mouth — the U.S. Senate’s website — it looks like the vast majority of today’s “nay” votes are from white male Repugnican senators from red states.

Voting nay today were:

John Barrasso, Wyoming

Robert Bennett, Utah

Sam Brownback, Kansas

Jim Bunning, Kentucky

Richard Burr, North Carolina

Saxby Chambliss, Georgia

Tom Coburn, Oklahoma

Thad Cochran, Mississippi

Bob Corker, Tennessee

John Cornyn, Texas

Mike Crapo, Idaho

Jim DeMint, South Carolina

John Ensign, Nevada

Michael Enzi, Wyoming

Chuck Grassley, Iowa

Orrin Hatch, Utah

Kay Bailey Hutchison, Texas

James Inhofe, Oklahoma

Johnny Isakson, Georgia

Mike Johanns, Nebraska

Jon Kyl, Arizona

John McCain, Arizona

Mitch McConnell, Kentucky

Lisa Murkowski, Alaska

James Risch, Idaho

Pat Roberts, Kansas

Jeff Sessions, Alabama

Richard Shelby, Alabama

John Thune, South Dakota

David Vitter, Louisiana

Roger Wicker, Mississippi

So again, that’s all 31 votes against Sotomayor cast by Repugnicans and not a single vote against her cast by a Democrat or an independent. No surprise there.

That’s 29 male votes against Sotomayor and two red-state Repugnican female votes against her — no surprise there, either.

That’s also 31 white votes against Sotomayor — I looked at the website for each of the senators who voted against her, and each of the 31 senators looks pretty white to me.

The states that these nay-saying senators are from are the usual suspects, too: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Georgia, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky,  Louisiana, Mississippi, Nebraska, Nevada, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Wyoming — all but a few of these 20 states are solidly red states, and all 20 of them except Iowa, Nevada and North Carolina went to Repugnican John McCainosaurus in November. (Those states in bold are those states for which both senators voted against Sotomayor.)

It was convenient to use gun rights or the like as an excuse to vote against Sotomayor, but let’s face it: the No. 1 reason for the “nay” votes is that she’s not a right-wing white man.

And it’s clear from today’s vote on Sotomayor’s confirmation in the Senate that the Repugnican Party is a national party no more, but is the party of the South and a handful of podunk states in the West.

P.S. Nine Repugnican senators did vote for Sotomayor. They are:

Lamar Alexander, Tennessee

Christopher (“Kit”) Bond, Missouri

Susan Collins, Maine

Lindsey Graham, South Carolina

Judd Gregg, New Hampshire

Richard Lugar, Indiana

Mel Martinez, Florida

Olympia Snowe, Maine

George Voinovich, Ohio

These states went to Obama in November, with the exception of Missouri, Tennessee and South Carolina, and Obama lost Missouri by less than 0.2 percent.

Collins and Snowe are considered to be among the most liberal of the Repugnicans, and I don’t know why they don’t just switch parties already, since Maine is pretty blue.

There are a total of 17 women in the U.S. Senate, four of them Repugnican and 13 of them Democratic.  Democratic female senators from the red states of Arkansas and Louisiana and the purplish state of Missouri voted in favor of Sotomayor’s confirmation.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Alito: ‘I have to think about people in my own family’ in decision-making

Sexy brainiac blogger Glenn Greenwald has had some insightful things to say about Sonia Sotomayor’s confirmation process.

The best that most bloggers can do, in my estimation, is to make you think of something in a new light, to present an angle that the mainstream media are not presenting; most bloggers can’t act as news gatherers because most of them, myself included, don’t have the resources.

However, research via the Internet is easy enough, and I’m surprised that in all of the discussions of Sotomayor that I have seen on the Internet thus far, no one has bothered to include the latest photographic group portrait of the U.S. Supreme Court, which shows that seven of the nine justices (including the recently retired Justice David Souter, whom Sotomayor will replace) are white men. That one picture, which is whiter than a Repugnican National Convention, speaks thousands of words, methinks.

Here’s what you’re also not seeing in the mainstream media’s coverage of Sotomayor: 

In one recent post, Greenwald reminds us that Sotomayor’s appeals-court ruling affirming affirmative action — out of which the Repugnicans have been trying to make a lot of political hay for the Joe the Plumber set — was not really a minority opinion (bad pun fully intended). Writes Greenwald:

In light of today’s [U.S. Supreme Court] ruling, it’s a bit difficult — actually, impossible — for a rational person to argue that Sotomayor’s Ricci decision places her outside the judicial mainstream when: (a) she was affirming the decision of the federal district court judge; (b) she was joined in her decision by the two other Second Circuit judges who, along with her, comprised a unanimous panel; (c) a majority of Second Circuit judges refused to reverse that panel’s ruling; and now: (d) four out of the nine Supreme Court Justices — including the [one] she is to replace — agree with her.

Put another way, 11 out of the 21 federal judges to rule on Ricci ruled as Sotomayor did.  It’s perfectly reasonable to argue that she ruled erroneously, but it’s definitively unreasonable to claim that her Ricci ruling places her on some sort of judicial fringe.

What I like even more is this nugget of information from Greenwald (links and emphases are his):

At his Senate confirmation hearing, [George W. Bush’s nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court, Samuel] Alito used his opening statement to emphasize how his experience as an Italian-American influences his judicial decision-making (video [and full transcript] here):

“But when I look at those cases, I have to say to myself, and I do say to myself, ‘You know, this could be your grandfather, this could be your grandmother. They were not citizens at one time, and they were people who came to this country….

“When I get a case about discrimination, I have to think about people in my own family who suffered discrimination because of their ethnic background or because of religion or because of gender. And I do take that into account.”

Greenwald comments:

Did Alito’s Italian-American ethnic background cause him to cast his vote in favor of the Italian-American [firefighter] plaintiffs [in the Ricci case]?  Has anyone raised that question? 

Given that he himself said that he “do[es] take that into account” — and given that Sonia Sotomayor spent six straight hours today being accused by GOP senators and Fox News commentators of allowing her Puerto Rican heritage to lead her to discriminate against white litigants — why isn’t that question being asked about Alito’s vote in Ricci?

As I asked yesterday:

When is the last time that a white male nominee for the U.S. Supreme Court was admonished against allowing his whiteness or his maleness or his “personal background” influence his rulings?

So I’m exceedingly glad that Greenwald provided a specific instance in which a white male nominee for the U.S. Supreme Court explicitly stated that his personal background influences his rulings and yet he wasn’t called to the carpet for this as Sotomayor has been called to the carpet for having the gall to be a — gasp! — Latina.

Racism, thy name is Repugnican.

Misogyny, you too.

Hypocrisy: Ditto.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Stupid white men set to beat up on Sonia Sotomayor for being a Latina

Updated below (Monday, July 13, 2009)

In this photo provided by CBS, Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., appears ...

Associated Press photo

Repugnican Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions, shown above in an image from today, plans to beat up on U.S. Supreme Court justice nominee Sonia Sotomayor at her confirmation hearings because Sotomayor doesn’t think, speak and act like a fellow stupid white man does.

Is it possible for the Repugnicans be bigger fucking idiots than they already are?

Federal appeals court judge Sonia Sotomayor’s confirmation hearings in the U.S. Senate for her promotion to the U.S. Supreme Court begin tomorrow, and Repugnican Sen. Jeff Sessions plans to call a white firefighter who was involved in the affirmative action case that Sotomayor ruled in — that the right-wing, stupid-white-male-dominated U.S. Supreme Court reversed — to testify regarding Sotomayor.

The Repugnican Party is sinking because it still, in the year 2009, is the party of the stupid white man in a rapidly demographically changing nation. Shifting national demographics don’t favor the Repugnicans, yet here they are, making Sotomayor’s confirmation hearings a battle between the stupid white man and the “racist” Latina.

The Repugnicans already have dug their own grave; they now are throwing the dirt upon themselves.  

The “victimized” white man bullshit might fly with Rush Limbaugh’s audience and in Sessions’ podunk red state of Alabama, but nationally, it goes over like a lead balloon. That the historically oppressive stupid white man now is the “victim” because groups that historically have been oppessed by the stupid white man — women, non-whites, non-heterosexuals, non-Christians, et. al. — are gaining more power is a big fucking joke to those of us who historically have been oppressed by the stupid white man.  

I encourage the stupid white men who comprise the Repugnican Party to beat up on Sonia Sotomayor as much as they possibly can. I encourage them to continue to criticize her because she does not think, act and speak just like a stupid white man does. I encourage them to continue their charade of being “victimized” because the nation is about to get its first Latina U.S. Supreme Court justice.

Since white people comprise no more than 74 percent of the U.S. population, white men comprise no more than a little more than a third of the U.S. population, yet seven of the nine current U.S. Supreme Court justices (more than 75 percent of them) are white men. Here’s photographic evidence:

And it would be unconscionable to the stupid white men if we had one more woman on the U.S. Supreme Court. That would be two of the nine justices being women, or fewer than 25 percent of them, even though women actually comprise slightly more than 50 percent of the U.S. population.

Yes, I encourage the stupid white men who comprise the Repugnican Party to bash Sonia Sotomayor as much as they possibly can this coming week so that the Repugnican Party’s grave is more quickly completely covered in dirt.

Update (Monday, July 13, 2009): Lest you think that my headline “Stupid White Men Set to Beat Up on Sonia Sotomayor for Being a Latina” is inaccurate and/or over the top, Sen. Jeff Sessions, the highest-ranking Repugnican member of the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, said this today, on the first day of Sotomayor’s confirmation hearings:

“I will not vote for — no senator should vote for — an individual nominated by any president who believes it is acceptable for a judge to allow their [sic] own personal background, gender, prejudices or sympathies to sway their [sic] decision in favor of, or against, parties before the court.”

What Sessions is saying, essentially, is that Sotomayor isn’t allowed to be a Latina — unless she thinks, acts, speaks and rules just like a white man does. (A conservative white man, in this case, of course.)

When is the last time that a white male nominee for the U.S. Supreme Court was admonished against allowing his whiteness or his maleness or his “personal background” influence his rulings?

How can one’s race and gender, which shape one’s life, for fuck’s safe, not influence how he or she thinks and what she or he values and believes?

No, Sessions’ and the other stupid white men’s real problem with Sotomayor is that she isn’t a fellow stupid white man. She would be acceptable to the stupid white men only if she acted just like a stupid white man, like Sarah Palin-Quayle and Condoleezza Rice do.

It’s as simple as that: Repugnican opposition to Sotomayor is more about racism and misogyny than anything else. If she has to be a Latina, then she should be a “good” Latina as the Repugnicans define the term “good,” just as Condoleezza Rice is a “good” black woman and Sarah Palin-Quayle is a “good” white woman.

Times are changing and the stupid white men can’t handle it. The nation’s first black president has nominated the first Latina to the U.S. Supreme Court. This can mean only one thing: End times!

“President” George W. Bush, when he had the opportunity to replace two justices on the U.S. Supreme Court, chose two white men. He could have chosen a non-white; he did not. He could have chosen a woman; he did not. (He initially nominated Harriet Miers in 2005, in my estimation, only to give the appearance that he was willing to nominate a woman. He knew all along, I believe, that his eventual nominee would not be Miers, who ended up withdrawing herself for consideration for Supreme Court justice*, but that the nominee would be yet another white man.)

For all of their talk of “reverse discrimination,” the fact of the matter is that the Repugnicans want to see only conservative white males on the U.S. Supreme Court.

I rest my case.

*Wikipedia notes of Miers: “Miers’ nomination was criticized from people all over the political spectrum based on her never having served as a judge, her perceived lack of intellectual rigor, her close personal ties to Bush, and her lack of a clear record on issues likely to be encountered as a Supreme Court justice.”

Does this sound like a nominee that Bush really expected to get on the U.S. Supreme Court?

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

More on the Nouveau Victimes*

Republican Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin waves as she arrives at a ...

Miss California USA, Carrie Prejean, attends a press conference ...

Associated Press and AFP photos

Meet the new “victims”: Stupid-white-male supporters Sarah Palin-Quayle and Carrie Prejean, who this past week was fired as Miss California, are now “victims,” as are all stupid white men in the United States of Amnesia. Sexy brainiac blogger Glenn Greenwald recently penetratingly wrote of these Nouveau Victimes, “the only victims they ever see are themselves, the only unfairness they recognize is to their own group, the only perspective they are capable of understanding is the tribalistic ones drummed into their heads from birth.”

My broad definition of the word “politics” is “the use of power.”

When power is abused, as it so often is in politics (as in life in general), I get pretty fucking pissed off. (Yes, eight long years of the unrelenting abuse of power by the Bush regime, which began with the stolen presidential election of 2000, had me fairly perpetually pissed off for years on end. See, I’d actually bought all of the bullshit that I had been taught as a budding Gen-Xer, such as that we actually have democracy and fairness and the rule of law here in the United States of America.)

Perhaps nothing pisses me off like the claims of groups that historically have wielded a disproportionate amount of power that they now somehow are “victims.”

Jews and Zionists (and again, Zionists are Jews but not all Jews are Zionists, I recognize) are perhaps the best at this — screaming “victim” when, in fact, they are ridiculously politically powerful.

I have written about this at some length recently (here and here), so I won’t repeat myself, but I will quote sexy gay brainiac blogger Glenn Greenwald (who, from his surname, I gather, is Jewish), who recently took up the topic of faux victimization in a post he titled “Tribalistic Self-Absorption” (the links are Greenwald’s):

The most predominant mentality in right-wing discourse finds expression in this form: “I am part of/was born into Group X, and Group X — my group — is better than all others yet treated so very unfairly.” This claim persists — indeed, is often intensified —  even when Group X is clearly the strongest, most privileged and most favored group.

So intense is their need for self-victimization — so inebriating is their self-absorption and so lacking are they in any capacity for empathy — that, for all the noise and rhetoric, the arguments they make virtually always have this tribalistic self-absorption at its core.

Last week, Charles Krauthammer accused President Obama of treating every country in the world so well — except for one, the one for which Krauthammer bears great love and affection and with which he was taught from childhood to identify:

President Obama repeatedly insists that American foreign policy be conducted with modesty and humility. Above all, there will be no more “dictating” to other countries…. An admirable sentiment. It applies to everyone — Iran, Russia, Cuba, Syria, even Venezuela. Except Israel. Israel is ordered to freeze all settlement activity.

The U.S. transfers tens of billions of dollars to Israel — more than any other country in the world. We demand that no country in the Middle East have nuclear weapons — except Israel. We fuel Israel’s wars with weapons transfers, ensure it is the most militarily powerful country in its region, and loyally protect it from U.N. sanctions using our veto power.

It’s virtually impossible to imagine one country that is more favorably treated by another than the various forms of largesse Israel receives from the U.S. But no matter. In Krauthammer’s eyes, the opposite is true: the U.S. treats every country fairly except Israel. That’s the country that, to him, is singled out for unfavorable treatment by the U.S….

I don’t know how much these “victims” truly believe that they are victims and how much they knowingly are misrepresenting themselves as victims, with the aim of at least maintaining the disproportionate amount of political power that they’ve already had, if not gaining even more.

Perhaps more ridiculous than the Zionists’ claims of victimhood are the claims of the stupid white men that they are “victims.”

Stupid white men (presumably heterosexual, “Christian” and overwhelmingly Repugnican) have controlled this nation thoroughly up until very recently. As do the “victimized” Zionists and Jews, stupid white men still have far more power than is proportionate to their actual numbers.

And Barack Obama, although he is the first half-white and half-black president, hardly is going to usher in the anti-whitey revolution that so many of the NRA-card-carrying talk-radio listeners seem to have believed is coming.

Indeed, if Obama didn’t act even whiter than the typical white guy, he never would have made it to the White House. The White House. He is an acceptable black guy, you see; he is “articulate” and “clean,” as Vice President Joe Biden infamously called him before Biden became vice president.

The “victimization” of stupid white men most recently has come in the form of Sonia Sotomayor, candidate for U.S. Supreme Court justice.

During her judicial career Sotomayor has made comments like this one: “I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would, more often than not, reach a better [judicial] conclusion [than would a white male judge, presumably].”

The likes of baby-boomer blowhard Rush Limbaugh, whom the largest number of people in a recent national Gallup poll identified as the apparent leader of the Repugnican Party, immediately jumped upon Sotomayor as a “racist” for such comments of hers as the one above.

Now, for more than two centuries in the United States of Amnesia, stupid white men never had to talk about their race or their possession of penises, because it was just a fucking given that if you were going to hold high political office in the nation, such as U.S. senator or U.S. Supreme Court justice, you had to be a white man. It was well understood and therefore there was no need to talk about it, that’s how entrenched white-male power was (and still is, although to a lessening extent, thank Goddess).

For Sotomayor, who presumably does not possess a penis and who is not white, life in the United States of America no doubt has been different than it has for the stupid white man. It does not make Sotomayor “racist” for talking about her minority experience as an American.

An I agree with Sotomayor 200 percent that the United States of America, which is teetering on the brink of collapse after the stupid white men have run it into the fucking ground, sure could use the wisdom and the perspective of other groups, such as women, non-whites and non-heterosexuals, to recover from the mess in which the stupid white men have mired it.

Stupid white men and their supporters, drunk and blind with power, aren’t fit to be behind the wheel, being drunk and blind. The sober vision of others is what the nation sorely needs now.

But the Zionists and the stupid white men aren’t the only “victims.”

Heterosexuals also are victims, too.

Carrie Prejean, who has a promising career in porn ahead of her, this past week was dumped as Miss California because, according to the Miss California USA organization, she was violating her contractual agreements by making unauthorized appearances (such as to deliver her anti-gay sentiments) and by refusing to make requested appearances.

But no, Prejean has blamed her overdue ousting on gays, whom her Taliban-style “Christianity” has taught her to hate.

Reminds me of how the Nazis blamed all of Germany’s problems on the Jews. (And the Nazis persecuted and murdered gays, too.)

That was one of the actual “arguments” that I saw as the wingnuts were arguing for the anti-gay Proposition 8 here in California: that allowing legalized same-sex marriage actually violates their rights.

The “argument” is that if I believe that an historically oppressed minority group should be kept down — if that is my “Christian” belief — then it is a violation of my religious freedom if the oppressed groups that I believe should continue to be oppressed no longer are oppressed.

Yes, before the November vote I saw pro-Prop 8 signs that actually asserted that to allow same-sex marriage violates the First-Amendment rights (including freedom of speech and freedom of religion) of those who oppose it. There is no more fundamental American right than the right to hate and to feel superior to another group, right?

No, it’s quite simple: If your religious beliefs preclude same-sex marriage, then do not marry someone of your own sex. But keep your fucking backasswards, Taliban-like religious beliefs to yourfuckingself. Keep your toxic spiritual sludge off of the rest of us, who have the right to be free from your toxic waste.

I suppose that those white-supremacist “Christians” who believe that mixed-race marriage is wrong, according to the Old Testament, are having their First-Amendment rights violated because the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1967 that no state can outlaw mixed-race marriage. So let’s outlaw mixed-race marriage again in order to placate the members of the American Taliban!

Yes, let’s turn the United States of America into a Taliban-like theocracy, shall we? That’s exactly what the wingnut “Christians” want.

Speaking of whom, there also is Repugnican presidential wannabe Sarah Palin-Quayle out there constantly claiming victimhood, because apparently the way to show strength is to claim perpetually that you are a victim.

Palin-Quayle’s latest “victimization” is at the hand of late-night television talk-show host David Letterman, who, Palin-Quayle asserts, should apologize to all women because Letterman made some joke about one of her daughters.

No, the one who should apologize to all of the women of the United States of America — and of the world — is Palin-Quayle, who has set the women’s movement back by at least decades by supporting the stupid white male system that oppresses women. 

Palin-Quayle’s backasswards “Christo”fascist ideology threatens the typical American woman far more than does a joke by a late-night TV talk-show host. Further, Palin-Quayle and her ilk are a threat to freedom and democracy — to real freedom and democracy, not “freedom” and “democracy” as they define it, such as by stolen presidential elections, illegally spying on American citizens, illegally detaining — and torturing and even killing — individuals, and launching bogus wars for war profiteers (such as Dick Cheney’s Halliburton) and for the Israel-first lobby.

You know, if these historical oppressors truly want to be the victims now, how about those of us who have been historically oppressed by them — we women, non-whites, non-heterosexuals, non-Christians, et. al. — not make them into fucking liars and start really victimizing them?

*With apologies to those who actually speak French. I think that I have that correct, but I am not sure…

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized