What’s Wrong with this Picture?

After the President said that the Cambridge police Department had acted “stupidly” in arresting distinguished Harvard professor Louis Gates in his own home, he made more conciliatory statements today that both the white police seargent and professor Gates had “overreacted.” The President is correct, politically, in dialing this back.

But here’s what I don’t get. Did anyone see the Massachusetts police unions press conference today? (See picture below.) I happen to think the picture is at variance with the AP story lead on this, by Bob Salsberg, which was widely distributed in the mainstream media:

“CAMBRIDGE, Mass. — A multiracial group of police officers today stood with the white officer who arrested a prominent black Harvard scholar and asked President Barack Obama and Gov. Deval Patrick to apologize for comments the union leaders called insulting.”

“Multiracial group of police officers” –– really?


When the camera pans out to include the entire group, there are a whole lot of ethnic white middle-aged men (sorry, but these guys come across as Archie Bunkers to me) with two African American men and two women that I could see –– tokenism at its best. One of the women was hidden behind a wall of plump beer-and-donuts white guys, and the other was a P.R. step ‘n fetchit responsible for tapping microphones and making sure everyone exited stage right. None of the black officers or women onstage spoke or were introduced as leaders in their organizations.

Is it me, or was this lineup of Massachusetts' finest long on obesity and white ethnic homogeneity and short on diversity and promotional opportunities for women and minorities?

Chris Matthews (mixed feelings about this guy) made an awful analogy, when he said had it been a black police officer and the “GREAT” white Henry Kissinger who was arrested in his home, the black officer would have gotten all kinds of grief for treating such a “distinguished” academic in this way.

Not from me, he wouldn’t. My hope is, the black officer would be arresting Kissinger on an order of extradition to a ballsy country, like Spain, or to the World Court at the Hague, which the Obama Administration had rejoined as signatory, to be tried for war crimes.

The black officer might not get an invite to the White House for a beer with the President, but he wouldn’t lack for invitations from those of us who believe no one is above the law.

The Dumbass Hall of Fame

Our newest inductee of this special and elite section of the corner is Peter J. Riga of Houston, Texas. In an inspiring work of pure genius appearing in today's Chicago Tribune, our newest Hall of Famer pens that

History is both revealing and obscuring. Walter Cronkite was a superb TV anchorman--calm, collected and intelligent. The one time he deviated from his position was a disaster. When he came back from Vietnam and told the American people that Vietnam was a stalemate that we could not win, that was a turning point of public opinion. Even then-President Lyndon Johnson said that view from Cronkite lost America the conflict in Vietnam. That was precisely when we were on the verge of victory in Vietnam and Cronkite turned public opinion massively against the war, which then became unsustainable for the president. In other words, Cronkite was indirectly responsible for our defeat in Vietnam, which history will show.

Mr. Riga, I have little to add to your perceptive grasp of history except to point out the obvious, that you are a pathetic and delusional little man.

And oh, by the way...

,

Those Obamas were clever birth conspirators

Imagine the depth of the conspracy, when the Honolulu papers printed the phony birth announcement!!

Matthews Exposes Whacko Birther Wingnuts

I'm not a big Chris Matthews fan, but every so often he's pitch perfect, as in this instance:



Anyone up for the circus, free of charge? Look up your local Repugnant town hall meeting and show up incognito, which means dressing like Joe the Plumber with an American flag in each hand. Be sure to bring a copy of President Obama's birth certificate. When the Birthers disrupt the meeting screaming that Obama is not a citizen, stand up and demand to be heard by waving your American flags. As soon as the dumbass Birthers cede you the microphone, proceed to mock them by producing the President's birth certificate and reading its contents aloud. Then call for all red-blooded Americans to stand up and recite the Pledge of Allegiance while you make your getaway.

One more thing. Today, Lou Dobbs of CNN -- aka Faux News Lite -- picked up on this garbage, venting his ill-concealed racism by calling President Obama "undocumented."

Sotomayor and the 2nd

One opinion that the Repubs seized on in the Sotomayor hearings was Maloney v. Cuomo (link). In that decision, she authored an opinion that was absolutely correct in holding that the Heller 2nd Amendment decision did not apply to the states. If you are completely conversant with 14th Amendment incorporation, or aren't interested in legal geekiness, you may stop reading now.

In The Paper Chase, the imposing Prof. Kingsfield tells his first year students that "You come in here with a skull full of mush, and you leave thinking like a lawyer." I used to think that was crap until I realized that I think like a lawyer. That is what makes explaining 14th Amendment incorporation, which to me seems so easy and obvious, seem so difficult.

First of all, something that there is NO argument about. That FACT is that the so-called Bill of Rights applies BY ITS OWN TERMS only to FEDERAL matters. We have wacko sites that give you headlines that "Sotomayor Ruled That States Do Not Have to Obey Second Amendment." Yup. That woman hates you gun freaks who demand the right to vaporize deer with shoulder mounted rocket launchers. The LAW on this, which Judge Sotomayor followed, was absolutely correct.

On incorporation--the first 10 amendments apply only against the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. Beginning in the late 19th century, the Supreme Court decided that certain rights described in the Bill of Rights could be "incorporated" or made applicable against the states. Never has the Supreme Court decided so w/the 2nd--that was not an issue given that DC was federal and the 2nd applied.

The question is not whether Heller is binding but rather whether individual gun ownership is a fundamental right that should be applied against the states.

Sorry, been under the weather

Methinks the whole damn Love Boat crew has been sick!

Anyway, some scattershot thoughts on the Sotomayor hearings.

Nothing surprising really happened in light of the absurdity of having someone with Jefferson Beauregard Session's record leading the inquisition questioning and what that said about the party. It turned out to be exactly what I expected, the Repubs using the forum to rile up their base on brown people.

That said, the GOP and the Dems both screwed with it. The GOP tried to rally their base, the Dems failed to aim at the twisted direction of the Roberts court.

And THEN the Republicans dragged out one of the Bush administration's tired old tricks, using people in uniform as props. Exactly WHY were the firefighters there? [as an aside, it should be noted that Mr. Ricci is a very litigious fellow. Whenever he feels wronged, he calls one of those pesky "trial lawyers" the Republicans loathe. he is a serial litigator.] Litigants do not appear before appellate court judges. His case before Judge Sotomayor's panel was strictly a paper affair. The judges saw the district court record, read the briefs and heard the lawyers. Period. They would not have seen Frank in person, unless he was in the spectators' benches. He had nothing to add to the hearings except "I'm white, and I'm in uniform. She's not in uniform and she's brown!"

We have also seen the end of confirmation hearings as evaluative and informational inquiries. Now they are just a circus.

First, both sides grandstand, with the liberals equating her to Oliver Wendell Holmes and then the conservatives, after greeting her with some nice platitudes, ask why she hates America and has puppy smoothies for breakfast. Conservatives ask if we can kill this "little baby," liberals ask if an ex-con child rapist meth addict should be able to buy a shoulder-mounted rocket launcher under the 2nd, and of course the judge rightfully says that she can't speculate on future rulings.

Spector came close to an opportunity during his ever-so-predictable "why doesn't the court hear more cases" rant but wandered off into asking about one specific one. Of course she can't answer that, Senator. She wasn't there. She didn't read the briefs, wasn't in on conference how could she say that any particular case could have been heard.

Senators, STOP WASTING TIME and leave the community theater to me. Sen. Spector, ask her and future nominees about their GENERAL PHILOSOPHY of court docketing. What KINDS of cases need to be heard? What are your philosophical criteria in the abstract for seeing a case as decision-worthy?

And to the rest of you, leave your pet issues behind. Ask about judicial philosophy, her views on 14th amendment incorporation, the proper balance of federalism, etc.

For the love of God, ask questions that might actually be answered.

The Word is REPREHENSIBLE, Senator Hatch. Can You Say It?

In light of the following exchange between Senator Orrin Hatch and Judge Sonia Sotomayor, in which the Senator indignantly condemns an ad campaign by People for the American Way against the New Haven firefighter litigants, compelling Judge Sotomayor to call the ad -- sight unseen -- “reprehensible,”



Senator Hatch is invited to revise and extend his remarks regarding this utterly despicable anti-Sotomayor ad by the wingnut group with the incongruous title of “Committee for Justice”:



Senator Hatch’s mild rebuke of such right wing garbage, calling the spot “pretty harsh” and “not the type of ad I would run,” in a statement released by his office, is inadequate and offensive. The ad is an outrageous pack of lies.

The word is “REPREHENSIBLE,” Senator. Can you say it?

Perhaps Sen. Hatch’s reticence to condemn the ad in the strongest terms and in person has to do with the fact that he headlined a 2003 fundraiser for CFJ in which he raised $50,000 for the group.

Context is everything.

End this Session

So the Republicans have decided to make Jeff Sessions, too racist to be confirmed to a judgeship by a Republican Senate



their point man in the Sotomayor attacks.

His parents

must be so proud.

That crazy radical activist judge!

When you say ""I can walk in the shoes of the people who are affected by what the Court does" and I can "bring something different to the Court," that is just wrong. That is irresponsible and shows the judge is prejudiced.....right?

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Oh, wait--Clarence Thomas said that.

We've been Dicked. Isn't that "Special?"

C'mon, Mr. Attorney General. Do your job. Protect and defend the constitution. Name a special prosecutor NOW.

Absentee

I'm hoping to come back around here soon, but I'm back in the hospital again. This time it's for a slightly different reason, and when I finish recovering from this surgery, I'll essentially be back to normal. 'bout damned time.

In other news, we have good health care, so this whole process is something we can afford. I've gotten quality nursing and medical advice, I get supplies when I need them, and everyone is nice. There are tens of millions of Americans who don't get this, and that turns a very hard experience into something unbearable.

Happy Bastille Day!

I know Bastille Day isn't until Tuesday, and I know Lula doesn't eat things that used to have faces, but I think she gets a kick out of my cooking posts. Here is tonight's French feast, accompanied by Parisian jazz from the 30s (Django Reinhardt)

BASTILLE DAY MENU

Escargots Provencal
Snails in the Style of Provence

Salade Française du Marché avec Chevre
French Market Salad with Goat Cheese

Paquets de Veau avec de la Sauce à Vin Blanc
Veal Packets with White Wine Sauce

Gateaux Peter
Peter's Special Chocolate Cake

Yahoo's Demographic: 70% YAHOOS!

Seen on the Yahoo main page today:


I dropped the following comment in their electronic suggestion box for comments on how to "improve" their service:

Re: Judge Sotomayor confirmation survey

Do you realize that 70% of your users (or those who answered the survey) are ignorant YAHOOS? Is this something you people are particularly proud of? Just wondering … I don't know why such numbers surprise me, but they do. I suggest you post a follow-up survey:

"Have any of the 70% (morons) who voted not to confirm Judge Sotomayor actually READ any of her decisions?

- YES

- NO

- I'm a YAHOO (functionally illiterate); I just vote as I'm told"

Rove, aka Turdblossom, Testifies on Prosecutor Firings

Former Bush White House official Karl Rove was questioned by House Judiciary Committee lawyers Tuesday on any role he may have played in politically motivated firings of U.S. attorneys. - msnbc.com politics

Robert Strange McNamara, Butcher of Vietnam, Is Dead

He was so utterly reviled in his time that a meek hippie artist from Martha's Vineyard tried to kill him and nearly succeeded. The architect of the Vietnam war died with the knowledge that every attempt he made at redemption was met with ferocious pushback from those who had witnessed the ghoulish consequences of his folly. They would not permit him to rewrite the history of the men and women and children who perished in Vietnam. There would be no whitewash. And no sympathy for a broken, delusional apparatchik.

The commentary (excerpted below) by Joseph Galloway is an eloquent reminder that the strong feelings McNamara provoked in those who witnessed his role as the architect of America's tragedy in Vietnam have not diminished over the years, nor on the occasion of his death:


Reading an obit with great pleasure

Joseph L. Galloway | McClatchy Newspapers

"I have never killed a man, but I have read many obituaries with great pleasure." —Clarence Darrow (1857–1938)

Well, the aptly named Robert Strange McNamara has finally shuffled off to join LBJ and Dick Nixon in the 7th level of Hell.

McNamara was the original bean-counter — a man who knew the cost of everything but the worth of nothing.

Back in 1990 I had a series of strange phone conversations with McNamara while doing research for my book We Were Soldiers Once And Young. McNamara prefaced every conversation with this: "I do not want to comment on the record for fear that I might distort history in the process." Then he would proceed to talk for an hour, doing precisely that with answers that were disingenuous in the extreme — when they were not bald-faced lies.

Upon hanging up I would call Neil Sheehan and David Halberstam and run McNamara's comments past them for deconstruction and the addition of the truth.

The only disagreement I ever had with Dave Halberstam was over the question of which of us hated him the most. In retrospect, it was Halberstam.

Hitler Reacts to Sarah Palin's Resignation

"There is absolutely nothing I want to do in Indiana."

Johnny Depp as Dillinger gave us the title quote, but I have to agree with him!

While visting the mother-in-law in Fort Wayne this weekend, I went to the neighborhood bare bones fitness center/gym. They had 8 TVs in front of the treadmills. Four were tuned to Faux News and the other four to Nascar. I kid you not.

CNN's Castellanos Mired in 20th Century Cold War

Heard on CNN from their regular right wing Cuban-American contributor, Alex Castellanos:

"President Bush looked into Putin's soul, and President Obama blinked. The less Russia has to worry about nuclear deterrence, the more aggressive they will become on their Western Front."

What? In the space of a couple of sentences, this right wing agitprop talking head managed to interject three Cold War clichés: Obama "blinked" (Cuban Missile Crisis), "nuclear deterrence," aka MAD (Mutual Assured Destruction), and "aggressive on their Western Front," which conjures up all sorts of Cold War imagery of an aggressive Russian bear surrounded by a wall of satellite states. It's worth noting that Castellanos is an old school right wing Cuban-American. These types are UberHawks who still believe the U.S. would be justified in invading Cuba.

The neocons count on the short attention span of the American people. Lest we forget, this kind of talk is what got us into Iraq. Who can remember when the neocon lunatics were drafting white papers in the 90s calling for the U.S. invasion of Iraq, based on the flimsiest of pretexts? Despite their sometime halfhearted mea culpas, the neocons remain true believers. We're bogged down in the quagmire of Iraq, thanks to the neocons, and now Castellanos invokes Cold War fantasies of a resurgent Russia with the old battle lines drawn. Never mind that Russia and the U.S. concluded an agreement to allow U.S. military aircraft ferrying weapons and supplies to Afghanistan to fly over Russian territory.

Neocons such as Castellanos are certifiably insane. Haven't they done enough when they were making disastrous foreign policy in the Bush White House? Now Castellanos is sniping from the sidelines making absurd Cold War statements -- one more reason to hate CNN.

The last of the 20th Century Cold Warriors, Robert MacNamara, is dead. He spent his waning days a tortured, pathetic soul trying to justify his tragic mistakes in Vietnam.

Get with the program, Castellanos. In case you've been sleepwalking for the past 40 years, this is the 21st Century. Really, it is.

Don't go away mad, just go away

She stepped down in part because the national media attacked her? I hope that people remember that if that moron runs again in 2012.

Happy Independence Day!

I do this every year, but TODAY is the actual anniversary of independence. On July 2, 1776, the 2nd Continental Congress adopted Richard Henry Lee's resolution that these colonies "are, and of right to be, free and independent states." [The actual declaration document was adopted on the 4th--I guess the 4th of July either had a better ring to it or a better press agent. Besides, you'd have to change all the white sale flyers]

As John Adams, the leading light of independence, wrote to Abigail:

"The Second Day of July 1776, will be the most memorable Epocha, in the History of America. I am apt to believe that it will be celebrated, by succeeding Generations, as the great anniversary Festival. It ought to be commemorated, as the Day of Deliverance by solemn Acts of Devotion to God Almighty. It ought to be solemnized with Pomp and Parade, with Shews, Games, Sports, Guns, Bells, Bonfires and Illuminations from one End of this Continent to the other from this Time forward forever more. You will think me transported with Enthusiasm but I am not. I am well aware of the Toil and Blood and Treasure, that it will cost Us to maintain this Declaration, and support and defend these States. Yet through all the Gloom I can see the Rays of ravishing Light and Glory. I can see that the End is more than worth all the Means. And that Posterity will tryumph in that Days Transaction, even altho We should rue it, which I trust in God We shall not."

So you all have my permission to take today off!