|
unique visitors since July 27, 2005 |
Remember how all the "progressive" activists told us about 20 minutes ago that Samuel Alito would be the downfall of Western civilization? Well, it took the newest justice approximately one day on the court to get them to start changing their tune.
So maybe he's, you know, not so bad after all.
Since I suffered through all the senatorial huffpuffery, I may as well note it. Cloture on Samuel Alito's Supreme Court nomination just passed 72-25. The filibuster attempt wasn't even close. Alito will be confirmed tomorrow morning around 11 AM EST.
That howling you hear just over the horizon is every moonbat and left-wing interest group revving up to tear their own political party apart. That is what will be a little strange about this. Now that the filibuster has failed (and hard), it is the Democrats who have much to fear from their base. Go figure, eh?
I'm a little disappointed in Hillary as well. Normally she chooses her issues with great care in regards to positioning herself in the center. Certainly, by supporting the filibuster, she had some reason to believe the vote would be remotely close. Major uncharacteristic misstep here. Unless, of course, she has begun to fear her chances in the primaries.
Writing on DailyKos.com, or what James Taranto brilliantly describes as "the Mos Eisley of the Angry Left," John Kerry said:
"Do I support a filibuster? The answer is yes. Yesterday Senator Kennedy and I spoke with our colleagues about it. I don't have a shred of doubt in my opposition to Sam Alto's nomination."
Who is this "Sam Alto," and is he somehow related to Tony Soprano?
"Rarely is the question asked, 'Is our children learning'?"
— George W. Bush, March 29, 2001
"Everyone knows there is not enough votes to support a filibuster."
— Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, Jan. 27, 2006
"Cake or Death?" writes about the narcissistic personality disorder and hypersensitivity that than run riot at groups like GLAAD and the ACLU. Money quote:
"No longer are we looking for mere acceptance. You not only have to tolerate us, but you must like us, love us, watch us do what we do, praise us, and generally fellate our egos until we've had enough and decide to roll over to go to sleep. If you don't? You're a bigot."
Reading this along with Robbie's piece about the gay media makes me wonder more than ever if our "community" will ever have its priorities right. I suppose if you want more nuanced coverage of figures like Samuel Alito, you'll have to get it from blogs.
(Related: GPW)
This is getting tiresome. In this article, 365gay.com purports to give its gay readership the relevant details on the Samuel Alito confirmation hearings. What do they note? They cite Ted Kennedy's shameful McCarthyite attempts to smear Alito based on what someone else has said. The senator quoted statements written by people who Judge Alito has most probably never met, but were fellow members of Concerned Alumni of Princeton. Statement after vile statement that Kennedy attempted to use as associative guilt, even though there is no evidence - none - that Alito shares any of those sentiments. In fact, there are sheafs of testimony from women and minorities on what an exemplary man Alito has been in treating those around him with equality and respect.
What does this news article not mention? It does not mention that during Kennedy's questioning, another homosexual issue came up concerning this case where Alito ruled with the majority, "holding that a school district did not provide a high school student with a free and appropriate public education, as required by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, when it failed to protect the student from bullying by fellow students who taunted the student based on his lack of athleticism and his perceived sexual orientation."
If the gay media were remotely interested in informing their readers of all the relevant facts of the hearings, at least a minor note of this case and Alito's comments on it would have been made. Instead, it seems 365gay.com and other publications are more invested in providing their readers with the Democratic highlight reel.
Are there actual journalists in the gay media, or is it safe to assume it mostly consists of mouthpieces for the HRC and other unabashedly partisan groups?
Maybe Senator Biden should start plagiarizing his own speeches more often.
Yes, Ted Kennedy is all wet. (Ahem)
But politics ain't beanbag. Grow up!
I'm all about karmic synergy.
Thousands of followers have gathered in Benin in the seaside town of Ouidah to celebrate National Voodoo Day . . . Followers of the once-banned religion have been dancing, drumming, praying as animals are slaughtered in ceremonies.
Mal's created a visualization that combines my strong commitment to multiculturalism with my fondest fantasy after subjecting myself to the Senate Judicial Confirmation hearings for three interminable days.
I would have requested Kennedy rather than Schumer, but puncturing that man with a pin threatens the kind of concussive force that would likely imperil most of the Eastern seaboard.
Happy National Voodoo Day!
Celebrate wisely.
At long last, Senate confirmation hearings on the nomination of judge Samuel Alito begin today, giving us all the rare opportunity to listen to normally tight-lipped U.S. Senators as they delight us with their wit, wisdom, and deep reverence for the constitution and/or abortion. They're the same things, aren't they?
Mine and Mal's previous postings on Alito's nomination, including links to past cases relevant to the community, can be found here. As gay rights groups grease the gears of left-wing partisanship, it would behoove us to remember that Alito's record on the subject is mixed. The Taskforce, the HRC and others - loyal more to the Democratic party than actual gay folk - will do their damnedest to ensure no one hears of the cases when the judge ruled in favor of homosexual plaintiffs.
If you'd like to watch Joe Biden ramble and rumble on for endless hours until masturbating with a fistful of glass seems like an attractive alternative, the hearings begin at 11:30 AM EST on C-Span.
The Boston Globe reports on some possibly gay-friendly impulses from Samuel Alito's past:
As a senior at Princeton University, Samuel A. Alito Jr. chaired an undergraduate task force that recommended the decriminalization of sodomy, accused the CIA and the FBI of invading the privacy of citizens, and said discrimination against gays in hiring ''should be forbidden."
And one cheer to HRC's Joe Solomonese for not immediately trying to find the cloud lurking behind this silver lining:
"This is a hopeful sign that may provide insight into his philosophy,” said Solmonese. “There were very few people standing up for gay Americans 34 years ago and most who did have evolved even more since.”
That, of course, was Joe Solomonese 2.0, a far cry from the ready-fire-aim guy who said on Monday that Alito was "the far right's choice."
Let's just hope that, as in Harriet Miers' case, this revelation isn't followed by recriminations from the religious right and subsequent newspaper profiles about being "born again."
Either way, it is sure to stoke the fires of the multi-headed snark-beast known as Wonkette.
Not since White House reporter Cyrus Merganthaler asked if William Howard Taft was able to wash his scrotum on his own has there been such insolence among the White House press corps.
John Roberts (the CBS anchor helmet, not the CJOTUS) today asked WH Press Secretary Scott McClellan if the Samuel Alito nomination, in the wake of the failed Miers bid, amounted to a term that is synonymous with ... ummm ... having sex with someone who was just sex-had-with:
John Roberts: “So, Scott, you said that -- or the President said, repeatedly, that Harriet Miers was the best person for the job. So does that mean that Alito is sloppy seconds, or what?”
McClellan's response mysteriously didn't involve a Ninja throwing star.
UPDATE: Roberts culps mea, tone was "too casual."
It happened to John Roberts. It happened to Harriet Miers.
And with the left spittle-flecked with rage about Judge Alito, how many nanoseconds before it happens to him (or his family)?
 |
|---|
| "Hey, Bill! Watch those hands!" |
Answer: Zero, or less than zero. (Links to "AmericaBlog.")
UPDATE: Looks like the left's oppo-research turbines are whirling away. Five of The Malcontent's top-20 referrals (the pages via which someone comes to this site) currently involve searches for the terms "gay" and "Alito." You won't find it here, brainiacs.
UPDATE deux: Wonkette, the semi-respectable mouthpiece of leftist wackadoos, joins the fray. Sort of.
I called it. Gay rights groups are none too pleased with President Bush's Supreme Court nomination:
LGBT civil rights groups wasted no time Monday criticizing President Bush's latest nominee to the Supreme Court.
Of course, they will be very selective in registering their outrage:
 |
 |
 |
(Alito: Old news to us ...)
ConfirmThem says the new SCOTUS nominee will be Samuel Alito of the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Linked here is a bio of the man billed as a "mild-mannered Scalia."
An early review of his decisions shows him, indeed, as very much in the Scalia mold. At the appellate level, he was the only dissenter in Planned Parenthood v Casey, which will no doubt send the pro-abortion crowd around the bend. (Chief Justice Rehnquist actually quoted Alito in his own dissent in that case.)
I haven't found much about where Alito stands on gay issues, but he did side with the majority in a decision holding that a school district failed to provide a student with a free and appropriate public education "based on his lack of athleticism and his perceived sexual orientation."
Just reading some tea leaves ...
[HT: Hewitt]
