What bullcrap. She's not the hero in all this. If anyone's a hero here, it's the media which didn't buy Sanford's staff's lies and dug up the truth about where he was. Sanford's wife enabled him just like everyone else. She knew, or should have known, he wasn't hiking the Appalachian Trail but instead of saying that she plead ignorance and said she didn't know where he was. She knew about the affair months ago and yet she didn't leave him, she hasn't even left him now that it's been made clear he continued the affair after she told him to break it off. She will probably never leave him and I don't consider that the least bit heroic. I know it's hard to find an example of a strong woman in the Republican Party, Republican men don't exactly value women for their brains, but give me a break.
Monday, June 29, 2009
Grasping...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/28/AR2009062802436.html
What bullcrap. She's not the hero in all this. If anyone's a hero here, it's the media which didn't buy Sanford's staff's lies and dug up the truth about where he was. Sanford's wife enabled him just like everyone else. She knew, or should have known, he wasn't hiking the Appalachian Trail but instead of saying that she plead ignorance and said she didn't know where he was. She knew about the affair months ago and yet she didn't leave him, she hasn't even left him now that it's been made clear he continued the affair after she told him to break it off. She will probably never leave him and I don't consider that the least bit heroic. I know it's hard to find an example of a strong woman in the Republican Party, Republican men don't exactly value women for their brains, but give me a break.
What bullcrap. She's not the hero in all this. If anyone's a hero here, it's the media which didn't buy Sanford's staff's lies and dug up the truth about where he was. Sanford's wife enabled him just like everyone else. She knew, or should have known, he wasn't hiking the Appalachian Trail but instead of saying that she plead ignorance and said she didn't know where he was. She knew about the affair months ago and yet she didn't leave him, she hasn't even left him now that it's been made clear he continued the affair after she told him to break it off. She will probably never leave him and I don't consider that the least bit heroic. I know it's hard to find an example of a strong woman in the Republican Party, Republican men don't exactly value women for their brains, but give me a break.
Friday, June 26, 2009
Life of the Party...
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/06/26/from-the-white-house-files-a-fight-over-michael-jackson/
John Roberts would have been 29 in 1984. He must have been fun at parties...
Even then he was evidently a huge stick in the mud.
John Roberts would have been 29 in 1984. He must have been fun at parties...
Even then he was evidently a huge stick in the mud.
Saturday, June 20, 2009
Double Standard...
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/06/19/sotomayor.womens.club/index.html
It's absurd that she is being forced to resign from the organization. The organization only exists in the first place because the all-men's club wouldn't accept women. Considering every Republican President for almost 100 years has belonged to the all-male club, I wonder how many male Supreme Court justices also belong. It's quite ironic though that she's being criticized by Republicans for belonging to a gender specific club that sprang up as a response to a gender specific club that most well connected Republicans belong to. I wonder if Jeff Sessions, the former judicial nominee who was Bork'd for being a racist and is now the ranking Republican in the Senate Judiciary Committee, belongs to the Bohemian Grove.
It's absurd that she is being forced to resign from the organization. The organization only exists in the first place because the all-men's club wouldn't accept women. Considering every Republican President for almost 100 years has belonged to the all-male club, I wonder how many male Supreme Court justices also belong. It's quite ironic though that she's being criticized by Republicans for belonging to a gender specific club that sprang up as a response to a gender specific club that most well connected Republicans belong to. I wonder if Jeff Sessions, the former judicial nominee who was Bork'd for being a racist and is now the ranking Republican in the Senate Judiciary Committee, belongs to the Bohemian Grove.
Thursday, June 11, 2009
(Oxy)moron...
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/06/11/responsible-white-separatist/
Setting aside for a second the oxymoron that is "responsible white separatist community", this is just more political posturing by a community that's been courting violence for decades. The leadership of organizations like this always tries to distance itself from the whackos who turn their rhetoric into violence but in the end the leadership is just as responsible as the one who does the act. We see this with the anti-choice leadership as well when abortion providers are killed. They advocate violence with their rhetoric, compare the targets with Nazis and say they're perpetrating a holocaust, and then when one of their sheep kills someone they swear they had nothing to do with it. The same is true with the white supremacist/separatist community. You can't spend centuries making the worst claims about a group of people and then claim ignorance when someone decides to do something about it.
Setting aside for a second the oxymoron that is "responsible white separatist community", this is just more political posturing by a community that's been courting violence for decades. The leadership of organizations like this always tries to distance itself from the whackos who turn their rhetoric into violence but in the end the leadership is just as responsible as the one who does the act. We see this with the anti-choice leadership as well when abortion providers are killed. They advocate violence with their rhetoric, compare the targets with Nazis and say they're perpetrating a holocaust, and then when one of their sheep kills someone they swear they had nothing to do with it. The same is true with the white supremacist/separatist community. You can't spend centuries making the worst claims about a group of people and then claim ignorance when someone decides to do something about it.
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
Confusion...
http://www.freshconservative.com/Fresh_Conservative/Fresh_Conservative/Entries/2009/6/10_Holocaust_Museum_Shooter_Was_Left_Wing_Radical.html
Somebody needs to give this guy a refresher course in the left-right political spectrum because I think he's confused.
Conspiracy theorists are by and large usually right-wingers since those conspiracies usually have a healthy amount of "the government is always wrong" thrown in for good effect.
"Freeman" white supremacists are certainly not liberals. They think that non-whites should be removed from this country. They also have an unhealthy hatred/fear of the government.
Anti-Semites that think that Jews control the financial system, hate the Federal Reserve Bank, think that black people are inferior to whites and post on Free Republic to almost universal approval are not liberals.
The worst part is that this douche is using this to try to explain away the very real threat of violence from the right-wing, this episode very much included, and allow his followers (all of whom will eat this shit up) to pat themselves on the back and say "at least we're not those damn liberals shooting up museums" all the while still supporting the idiots who commit this type of violence.
Seriously though, no person with a working knowledge of politics and a working brain could possibly look at this guy's views and label him a liberal. There are plenty of whackos on the left, though our whackos are relegated to the far fringes while the right-wing ones have radio and television shows and get to meet the President, but none of what this guy did even approaches the views of those fringe radicals.
Somebody needs to give this guy a refresher course in the left-right political spectrum because I think he's confused.
Conspiracy theorists are by and large usually right-wingers since those conspiracies usually have a healthy amount of "the government is always wrong" thrown in for good effect.
"Freeman" white supremacists are certainly not liberals. They think that non-whites should be removed from this country. They also have an unhealthy hatred/fear of the government.
Anti-Semites that think that Jews control the financial system, hate the Federal Reserve Bank, think that black people are inferior to whites and post on Free Republic to almost universal approval are not liberals.
The worst part is that this douche is using this to try to explain away the very real threat of violence from the right-wing, this episode very much included, and allow his followers (all of whom will eat this shit up) to pat themselves on the back and say "at least we're not those damn liberals shooting up museums" all the while still supporting the idiots who commit this type of violence.
Seriously though, no person with a working knowledge of politics and a working brain could possibly look at this guy's views and label him a liberal. There are plenty of whackos on the left, though our whackos are relegated to the far fringes while the right-wing ones have radio and television shows and get to meet the President, but none of what this guy did even approaches the views of those fringe radicals.
A Pattern is Developing...
http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/06/10/museum.shooting/index.html
This is such a sad story. It turns out the shooter was an 88 year old man with a long history of right-wing, anti-Semitic and anti-government violence. He evidently attempted to kidnap the Federal Reserve Board of Governors in the 80s. He only served 6 years for that crime. Now he's killed a man who was only doing his job. It's a good thing the security reacted quickly and stopped him before he could get to an occupied part of the building. Many more than that one brave guard would have died if that would have happened.
It deeply scares and saddens me the increased level of violence coming from the right-wing in recent months. It seems to get worse and worse. This is an entire movement devoted to nothing but hate and violence. I have no doubt this isn't the last we'll hear from these people.
This is such a sad story. It turns out the shooter was an 88 year old man with a long history of right-wing, anti-Semitic and anti-government violence. He evidently attempted to kidnap the Federal Reserve Board of Governors in the 80s. He only served 6 years for that crime. Now he's killed a man who was only doing his job. It's a good thing the security reacted quickly and stopped him before he could get to an occupied part of the building. Many more than that one brave guard would have died if that would have happened.
It deeply scares and saddens me the increased level of violence coming from the right-wing in recent months. It seems to get worse and worse. This is an entire movement devoted to nothing but hate and violence. I have no doubt this isn't the last we'll hear from these people.
The Straw...
http://www.cnn.com/2009/SHOWBIZ/06/10/prejean.dethroned/index.html?eref=rss_topstories
It's about time she was removed. If she wasn't a darling of the extreme right-wing she would have been dethroned when she pulled this shit the first time. Because of her connection with the same people shooting up museums and doctors' offices, she was given a pass the first time. I guess this time they figured they should do something. I can't think of another legitimate job where you can refuse to show up and keep your job. I guess she figured that now that she's got her new job as right-wing hate bitch she didn't need the pageant anymore. After all, even though she lost the national pageant, I bet nobody can name the woman who beat her.
It's about time she was removed. If she wasn't a darling of the extreme right-wing she would have been dethroned when she pulled this shit the first time. Because of her connection with the same people shooting up museums and doctors' offices, she was given a pass the first time. I guess this time they figured they should do something. I can't think of another legitimate job where you can refuse to show up and keep your job. I guess she figured that now that she's got her new job as right-wing hate bitch she didn't need the pageant anymore. After all, even though she lost the national pageant, I bet nobody can name the woman who beat her.
Tuesday, June 09, 2009
Terrorism...
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/10/us/10abortion.html?_r=2&hp
This was the point of the whole thing after all. The anti-choice movement knows exactly what it's doing. This is exactly why laws like RICO should be used to prosecute anti-choicers who move from peaceful methods towards violence. The law may have been designed to prosecute the Mafia but in a lot of ways, the anti-choice leadership is acting like the Mafia. They're using violence, and the unending threat of violence, to force legal medical providers out of business. Even the "non-violent" protesters benefit from the violent ones since those inside the clinics know all too well that any one of those people running around outside with snuff films of dead fetuses could throw a bomb or pull a gun at any moment. It makes it a bit hard to run a business.
I can't blame the family, nobody can be expected to willingly risk their life. War has been declared and the pro-choice movement is completely unprepared because we don't practice violence. The worst part is that the women who most need abortions are going to be the ones to suffer the most, women who mostly wanted to have a baby but found out late in the pregnancy that the fetus was going to die or their life was seriously threatened. These women only had 3 options and now they only have 2. Soon, it will probably be just 1 and then none as the remaining two doctors are either attacked themselves or quit out of fear for their families.
This is the very definition of terrorism. I don't see why our government, especially now that there's a pro-choice President, doesn't treat these people accordingly. Randall Terry should be stewing in Guantanamo right now and learning just how serious waterboarding really is.
This was the point of the whole thing after all. The anti-choice movement knows exactly what it's doing. This is exactly why laws like RICO should be used to prosecute anti-choicers who move from peaceful methods towards violence. The law may have been designed to prosecute the Mafia but in a lot of ways, the anti-choice leadership is acting like the Mafia. They're using violence, and the unending threat of violence, to force legal medical providers out of business. Even the "non-violent" protesters benefit from the violent ones since those inside the clinics know all too well that any one of those people running around outside with snuff films of dead fetuses could throw a bomb or pull a gun at any moment. It makes it a bit hard to run a business.
I can't blame the family, nobody can be expected to willingly risk their life. War has been declared and the pro-choice movement is completely unprepared because we don't practice violence. The worst part is that the women who most need abortions are going to be the ones to suffer the most, women who mostly wanted to have a baby but found out late in the pregnancy that the fetus was going to die or their life was seriously threatened. These women only had 3 options and now they only have 2. Soon, it will probably be just 1 and then none as the remaining two doctors are either attacked themselves or quit out of fear for their families.
This is the very definition of terrorism. I don't see why our government, especially now that there's a pro-choice President, doesn't treat these people accordingly. Randall Terry should be stewing in Guantanamo right now and learning just how serious waterboarding really is.
Friday, June 05, 2009
Concerned...
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/06/05/steele-sotomayor-white-male/
Wow, Steele is really worried about keeping his jobs. He's a real hero for standing up for the downtrodden white male. They're such a persecuted group. Give me a break.
So I guess if a white male is in mortal danger by going before Justice Sotomayor, then minority women are at an equal amount of peril going before the four Catholic male, and three white Catholic male, justices...oh wait, I guess they are. This argument that Sotomayor will side against white males just because she's a Hispanic female is racist, sexist and just plain stupid. Nobody argues that white male judges can't make decisions affecting other groups and yet they make that argument all the time about minorities and females (at least liberal ones, conservatives like Thomas get a pass from the establishment).
I wonder if Steele is equally concerned about non-immigrant minorities chances against Samuel Alito given this?
Wow, Steele is really worried about keeping his jobs. He's a real hero for standing up for the downtrodden white male. They're such a persecuted group. Give me a break.
So I guess if a white male is in mortal danger by going before Justice Sotomayor, then minority women are at an equal amount of peril going before the four Catholic male, and three white Catholic male, justices...oh wait, I guess they are. This argument that Sotomayor will side against white males just because she's a Hispanic female is racist, sexist and just plain stupid. Nobody argues that white male judges can't make decisions affecting other groups and yet they make that argument all the time about minorities and females (at least liberal ones, conservatives like Thomas get a pass from the establishment).
I wonder if Steele is equally concerned about non-immigrant minorities chances against Samuel Alito given this?
That word doesn't mean what you think it does...
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/06/05/sotomayor.sessions/index.html?eref=rss_topstories
"You will get a fair hearing before this committee,"
I'll believe that when I see it. It's already been made clear that Sessions will do whatever it takes to advance the Republican agenda regardless of its negative effect on this nation. I have no doubt he'll try something to derail her nomination.
President Reagan nominated Sessions to be a federal judge, but the Senate Judiciary Committee rejected him 23 years ago this week.
Which, as you'll see, was the right decision.
"It was not a pleasant event, I got to tell you. It was really so heartbreaking to me," Sessions said.
It was such an injustice that they didn't confirm another racist to the federal bench.
His nomination to be a U.S. District Court judge was troubled from the start because of controversy surrounding his prosecution of civil rights activists for voting fraud.
How dare they question why he tried to throw civil rights activists in jail for registering blacks to vote? That was a common tactic among the racist governments of the south during the civil rights era.
Sessions' fate was sealed after Democrats called several witnesses who accused him of a pattern of racial insensitivity -- including calling a black lawyer "boy" and civil rights groups such as the NAACP "un-American."
That's not hard to believe. These are pretty good reasons not to confirm someone to a position of power. Evidently the people of Alabama don't care about this kind of record. Hell, they might consider it a plus.
"That was not fair. That was not accurate. Those were false charges and distortions of anything that I did, and it really was not. I never had those kinds of views, and I was caricatured in a way that was not me," Sessions said.
Nobody ever admits to doing these things. Even people who think they are correct to do such things know in their hearts that it's wrong and they should not admit to it.
The parallel to today, with conservatives such as Rush Limbaugh labeling Sotomayor a racist, is eerie.
No, it isn't. It's not even close. Trying to draw a parallel between the honest concern about Sessions record and the completely baseless and political charges against Sotomayor is borderline racist in itself. The charges coming from the likes of Limbaugh and Gingrich are being leveled for purely political reasons. The Senate had an obligation to investigate the charges against Sessions and came to the right conclusion when they found out the charges were credible.
She ruled for some cases that might be called affirmative action in which one group may have prevailed over another group and I think that raises questions.
Affirmative Action is not racism. It's certainly not comparable to the aggressive, and sometimes murderous, tactics used by law enforcement and government officials against civil rights activists.
Because he is the lead Republican on the committee holding Sotomayor's confirmation hearings, Sessions will have a big role in setting the tone of the opposition.
It is quite ironic that someone who was denied a position on the federal bench for acts of racism would now be in a position to derail someone else's nomination for the federal bench for racist reasons. I mean really, aren't there enough white Catholic males on the bench for them? Is one minority woman really too much for them?
"You will get a fair hearing before this committee,"
I'll believe that when I see it. It's already been made clear that Sessions will do whatever it takes to advance the Republican agenda regardless of its negative effect on this nation. I have no doubt he'll try something to derail her nomination.
President Reagan nominated Sessions to be a federal judge, but the Senate Judiciary Committee rejected him 23 years ago this week.
Which, as you'll see, was the right decision.
"It was not a pleasant event, I got to tell you. It was really so heartbreaking to me," Sessions said.
It was such an injustice that they didn't confirm another racist to the federal bench.
His nomination to be a U.S. District Court judge was troubled from the start because of controversy surrounding his prosecution of civil rights activists for voting fraud.
How dare they question why he tried to throw civil rights activists in jail for registering blacks to vote? That was a common tactic among the racist governments of the south during the civil rights era.
Sessions' fate was sealed after Democrats called several witnesses who accused him of a pattern of racial insensitivity -- including calling a black lawyer "boy" and civil rights groups such as the NAACP "un-American."
That's not hard to believe. These are pretty good reasons not to confirm someone to a position of power. Evidently the people of Alabama don't care about this kind of record. Hell, they might consider it a plus.
"That was not fair. That was not accurate. Those were false charges and distortions of anything that I did, and it really was not. I never had those kinds of views, and I was caricatured in a way that was not me," Sessions said.
Nobody ever admits to doing these things. Even people who think they are correct to do such things know in their hearts that it's wrong and they should not admit to it.
The parallel to today, with conservatives such as Rush Limbaugh labeling Sotomayor a racist, is eerie.
No, it isn't. It's not even close. Trying to draw a parallel between the honest concern about Sessions record and the completely baseless and political charges against Sotomayor is borderline racist in itself. The charges coming from the likes of Limbaugh and Gingrich are being leveled for purely political reasons. The Senate had an obligation to investigate the charges against Sessions and came to the right conclusion when they found out the charges were credible.
She ruled for some cases that might be called affirmative action in which one group may have prevailed over another group and I think that raises questions.
Affirmative Action is not racism. It's certainly not comparable to the aggressive, and sometimes murderous, tactics used by law enforcement and government officials against civil rights activists.
Because he is the lead Republican on the committee holding Sotomayor's confirmation hearings, Sessions will have a big role in setting the tone of the opposition.
It is quite ironic that someone who was denied a position on the federal bench for acts of racism would now be in a position to derail someone else's nomination for the federal bench for racist reasons. I mean really, aren't there enough white Catholic males on the bench for them? Is one minority woman really too much for them?
Subscribe to:
Comment Feed (RSS)