Saturday, May 8, 2010

SCOTUS Pick Watch From Loony Right and Left

It seems the wingnuts are placing their orders for the upcoming Obama Supreme Court nomination like ordering a funny pizza with all the trimmings.

Concerned Women for America is demanding that Obama name a nominee that they supports their right wing views and Phyllis Schlafly is demanding that Obama name a military veteran ... and now a group of leaders are demanding that he name someone "who will support the right of the government to maintain a decent society and to protect children from indecent and other media content that is harmful to them":

Let's review, Schaffley wants a military type justice and some other nutters want apple pie for dessert with theirs. I suspect a "decent society" is a concept we can all rally around, maybe with mothers milk and plenty of diaper for baby jeevus. I am not against those things, and certainly the bouncing baby Christ I don't want stinking up the country with dirty diapers. But somehow, I think they want a little more than those things.

And the left. Well at least they keep it simple. It's want they don't want that is on their mind, and her name is Elena Kagan, by all measure a brilliant New York native jewish lesbian attorney and currently Solicitor General of the USA. She is reported as Obama's likely choice, and you would think that would bring cheers from the high minded progressive internet lords of the left, but you would be wrong. They want someone else, cause Elena might be a racist and a closet right winger, and because Glenn Greenwald says shut up, that's why. They are busy pre smearing her with speculation that because she didn't hire enough people of color from her time at as Dean of Harvard Law School, that ipso facto she could loves white folks to a fault. Of course, they have no evidence, and no records of those hires to demostrate there were actually equal or greater qualified applicants of color for the 25 faculty hires she made, but that doesn't matter cause they don't like her nor want her to be a SCOTUS justice, and that's good enough reason to bring out the tar and feathers, even before she is picked, or anyone picked. <i>Irresponsible to speculate, irresponsible not to</i>. The wankers credo.

This is using right wing tactics again, that we have seen time after time by the likes of Glenn Greenwald and other puma types claiming to be dems and Obama supporters. It is a lie, and they, and especially Mr. Greenwald, are lying liars of the worst kind. It is throwing up mud, that without context and more info seems true or at least plausible, but cannot be known without more evidence. On top of accusing, or insinuating that a person with a long record of supporting equal rights, and one who has faced bigotry due to her sexual orientation, could maybe possibly be a racist, and even white supremacist.

It is scurrilous tactics, and serves the purpose of validating an avenue of attack for the wingnuts once she is nominated. Or, giving them the creds, being racist themselves, or some of them, to point to good concerned progressive liberals like Mr. Greenwald as cover to go after her, based of a few hires she made in the past.

To quote Mr. Greenwald

Regardless of your particular views on these matters, that diversity is both vital and fair in the hiring process has long been a central plank in progressive thinking. It takes little creativity to imagine what Democrats would say about a Republican Supreme Court nominee with a hiring record similar to Kagan's. The question is whether they will be as consistent as these law professors are in applying their claimed beliefs to their own side. This is the issue that caused Linda Monk to rescind her endorsement of Kagan. Will Kagan-defending progressives now suddenly say that diversity is irrelevant? Will they try to claim that there were no qualified minorities for the Harvard Law School faculty? How will they reconcile everything they've always said about diversity with Kagan's record as Dean?

You really need to read the whole piece by this jackass. Complete with insinuation after insinuation citing other bloggers and such wanking the same shit he is, and all of it adorned with his usual "Obama Cultist" blind allegiance bullshit, at even the hint of anyone challenging, or thinking about challenging his nonsense. This is your Nutroots.

No comments:

Post a Comment