Does opposing Sotomayor make you a racist/sexist?

Today, Obama nominated Sonia Sotomayor for the Supreme Court. Clearly no member of the public fully knows and understands her yet. The entire GOP has said as much in their public statements, universally stating that they will give her a full and fair analysis first. I too have yet to develop a fully formed opinion of her.

One thing on which I have formed an opinion is all of this preemptive talk about Republican Senators and other members of the GOP being racist or sexist if they oppose her. It hasn't just annoyed me, it has infuriated me. This is the same type of crap that happened when anyone criticized Candidate Obama - they were branded a racist under the argument that they were degrading him because of his race, which of course is absurd and was routinely shut down by Obama himself. This preemption helped to chill out any valid negative opinions of Obama, and thus contributed to his golden boy image. Luckily the racist label on criticism has diminished since he has taken power, and valid criticism can and has been made.

But now we're facing a very similar situation with Sotomayor. Many have attempted to chill out criticism of Sotomayor by Republicans, arguing that they may lose Hispanic support if the GOP opposes the first ever Hispanic nominee for the bench. A similar argument has been made that women will coalesce against Republicans if they oppose adding her to the bench because she's a woman.

I call bullshit. If Republicans oppose her, it most certainly will have absolutely nothing to do with her race or sex. Not a single member of the Senate will have that as a basis for opposing her outwardly or inwardly, guaranteed. It's not that the GOP will be opposing Hispanics or women, but that they're opposing THIS Hispanic and THIS woman.

The confirmation process of a Supreme Court Justice is about the substance of her legal views and her view of the role of judicial branch. Is she too quick to dismiss certain types of cases? Read: the Ricci firefighter case. Will she inject public policy into her decisions? Will she adhere to the letter of the Constitution and precedent? Does she engage in careful, thoughtful, intelligent legal analysis? None of that has nor should have ANYTHING to do with her sex or her race (even though she has apparently suggested that that does in fact matter).

Of course, the people who feign outrage at the idea of anyone opposing her are the same people who demanded that Obama nominate a woman and a Hispanic to the bench. They're the ones making it about gender and race. It is an embarrassing travesty of justice to brand someone a racist or sexist solely because they fundamentally disagree with someone's opinions or qualifications, and yet we have already begun to see people wielding that brand.

Obama himself opposed both of Roberts and Alito (hailed as highly intelligent legal minds) solely on ideological, public policy-esque grounds rather than an evaluation of their abilities to analyze legal issues. If any Senators were to treat Obama's nominee as Obama treated Roberts and Alito and oppose them, would they get a free pass to do so as Obama did or would they be bashed relentlessly?

MLK Jr. would not be happy...

First, I'll refer you to a post I made earlier this year: In politics, does race trump gender?

As I mentioned there, Obama was elected with indifference to his race. MLK Jr.'s dream of holding content of character over the color of skin appeared to be realized (although I'm sure some will argue over what the actual content of Obama's character is and whether that was worthy of being elected...but I digress...).

But then we get Roland Burris, a man appointed by the poster boy for corruption, with clear concerns about how he received that appointment, with serious questions about his qualifications for the US Senate. Yet people like Bobby Rush turned his appointment into a racial issue, and as much as the Senate Dems tried to claim that they weren't taking race into account, it was pretty clear that that was what convinced them to seat him.

And now, good old Dick Durbin confirms our suspicions in this article: Durbin: Race factored in Burris seating.

Thanks Dick. I would normally appreciate the honesty, but this is a case of too little, too late, like we always see from Durbin. If race was really playing a part of the calculation about whether to seat Burris, then that's relevant information that we needed to know at the time. Add in the fact that Durbin was adamant about the fact that race wasn't a factor when he was defending the decision to seat Burris. So many names I'd like to call Durbin, but I think his disingenuousness speaks for itself.

Read the Bill

So no one read the stimulus before being forced to vote on it. Now, the Sunlight Foundation is encouraging Congress to enforce the 72-hour rule, which is the amount of time that is supposed to be offered for all bills to be subject to public scrutiny before taking a vote.

Having time to read a bill is such a minimum standard of conduct that it's embarrassing that Congress doesn't recognize it.

Read the bill, okay? - Politico.com

Social Security and the market meltdown

I figured this would be a good companion piece for the article about Jindal's Medicare reform plan, especially given that the note I'm working on for the Elder Law Journal analyzes the common problems facing Medicare and Social Security and offers a joint solution.

One of the most common criticisms of a partial privatization solution to entitlement reform is concerns about what would happen in an economy like the one we're facing now. This piece by Ed Morrissey analyzes that concern and dismisses it. The one fact that he leaves out, which I find to be the most persuasive, is the fact that even during the nation's worst economic period, the Great Depression, the average rate of return on private stocks was still greater than the rate of return people see on their payroll taxes that go toward Social Security today.

Social Security and the market meltdown by Ed Morrissey - Hot Air

Jindal's Medicare Plan

Sure Gov. Jindal's performance last Tuesday was universally panned, and rightly so. I don't know what the deal was with it, but his cadence was off and he sounded ridiculous, not at all like he normally sounds. In order to evoke fonder memories of someone I still consider to be the next big thing, I thought I'd post a WSJ article about his Medicare plan.

His plan involves using Medicare dollars to buy private insurance. As cited by the article, his plan would provide incentive to doctors for good performance, reduce health care costs, and free up funding for other government programs.

Jindal's Medicine - WSJ.com

In the same vein, here's an article touting Health Savings Accounts, another solid idea that can save beneficiaries money and improve benefits.

Health Savings Accounts: More Time, Less Money - BusinessWeek

The Worst Part of the Economic Crisis

The worst part of the economic crisis is the great companies we're losing in the process. I'll miss Circuit City, and the attached article offers 15 more companies that might not survive 2009. I'm not really sure what I'd do without Six Flags, Sbarro, and Krispe Kreme. I may not necessarily frequent any of those establishments, but I sure do love them all.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/15-Companies-That-Might-Not-usnews-14279875.html

Obama's anti-earmark promise

Obama expressly promised to veto any bill that contained any earmarks during his first year in office, so the omnibus spending bill seems like the perfect opportunity to uphold his promise. The GOP is encouraging him to veto the pork-laden spending bill, but I think we all know that Obama isn't even going to consider it.

GOP wants Obama to veto omnibus - Politico.com

Fairness Doctrine Blocked

Thank you Senator Jim DeMint for proposing the bill to bar the FCC from imposing the fairness doctrine. The fairness doctrine is offensive to our notions of democracy and the free market, and would be a serious violation of First Amendment protections. Only 11 Democrats opposed the bill, proving that proponents of the fairness doctrine are confined to far-left extremists.

Senate adopts 'Fairness Doctrine' amendment - Politico.com

Of course Dick Durbin promptly proposed an utterly feckless bill to attempt to appease some of those extremists with his bill to "encourage and promote diversity in communication media ownership, and to ensure that the public airwaves are used in the public interest." Completely useless...

The Burris Saga

No commentary necessary:

Burris rejects call for his resignation - AP

Rep. Flake continues to take on earmarks

Thank God for Representative Jeff Flake. His ardent opposition to earmarks and other unethical uses of money in politics is commendable and essential to the proper function of our government. Of course, it will take principled individuals, will to change the way business is done in Washington if his fight is ever going to succeed. And clearly, Washington isn't exactly crawling with those types of politicians.

Flake takes on earmarks, contributions - Politico.com

Al Gore's fear-mongering

I think Al Gore is a fool and a fear-mongerer, so it brings me great joy to see him proven wrong again and again. When the global warming conference in NY was under threat of postponement due to blizzard-like conditions, I laughed.

And now I laugh again as the Dems are abandoning the climate change argument in the face of the economic crisis. Clearly the extensive costs that the environmental movement would impose are not something that this nation can afford in these times.

Dems Cool on Climate Change As Economic Pressure Escalates - Investor's Business Daily

His argument that the incidence of natural disasters was conclusive evidence of global warming always infuriated me because of how widely panned that idea has been for years by credible scientists. Global warming and cooling is a long-term trend, not an imminent disaster. Apparently Gore finally figure that out, because he pulled that slide out of his presentation. About time...

Gore Pulls Slide of Disaster Trends - The New York Times

Also, there was a report that arctic sea ice has been underestimated for weeks. Not sure how much that shows, but it's something I felt was related.

Arctic Sea Ice Underestimated for Weeks Due to Faulty Sensor - Bloomberg.com

I'm Just a Bill

Check out this great take on the classic Schoolhouse Rock tutorial on how a bill becomes law, updated to reflect the current Congressional environment, specifically the stimulus.

Instant classic.

http://jimtreacher.com/archives/001991.html

Is this the lost city of Atlantis?

This is entirely unpolitical, but very cool nonetheless.

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article2255989.ece

Obama still owes Chicago

With all the money the government's taking from the taxpayers for this stimulus package, the least Obama can do is pay back Chicago for the cost of his victory bash. Just sayin'.

Obama victory bash owes city $1.74 mil - Chicago Sun-Times

Huffpo red in the face over Fox News hoax

This has to be one of the all time great corrections:

http://www.portfolio.com/views/blogs/mixed-media/2009/02/20/huffpo-red-in-the-face-over-fox-news-hoax

The embodiment of America

This may be the single greatest image of all time. If I could find it in poster form, I just might get it. Thank you CollegeHumor.

Blago's Sociopathic Tendencies

Blago accused those in Springfield of hypocrisy, adultery, and excessive drinking, which is hilarious enough in itself.

Then, Speaker Madigan's spokesperson offered one of the great responses I've seen in politics, simply offering the dictionary definition of sociopath. Awesome.

Blagojevich blasts hypocrisy, adultery & excessive drinking in Springfield - Chicago Tribune

Ethics Problems for Obama and the Dems

Obama promised the change Washington, make it more ethical, and all that jazz we always hear from politicians. But how successful has he actually been? Yea, not so much...

Dems wrestle with ethics problems - Politico.com

Murtha and Rangel are both under investigation on corruption charges, but we know that the media will never fully explore either. If the two were Republicans, you'd better believe that the media would be all over them, just like we've seen for years. That's some bullshiz if you ask me.

Obama's promise of ethics reform faces early test - International Herald Tribune

And there's the serious problems facing Obama and his nominees for numerous cabinet secretary positions. It's not just that they have problems, but the fact that Obama stood squarely behind all of them, in spite of his vast assurances that he wouldn't accept anything even remotely resembling ethical conflicts of interest.

Presidential Earnings

An interesting look at how much the President actually earns each year:

No more than the President of the United States

The Cult of Snuggie

It's ridiculous how popular the Snuggie has become...

Snuggie gets a warm embrace from pop culture

Obama and the Press

Obama's experienced an unprecedented honeymoon with the press, and many of them still refuse to ask the hard questions or do any actual investigative journalism. What will Obama's response be when they actually do come to their senses and become journalists again? If this is any indication, we're going to see Mr. Cool struggle a little bit when he learns that there are people who don't worship his every move.

Obama flashes irritation in press room - Politico.com

Shortly thereafter, Obama decided to pick a fight with Rush Limbaugh. I don't necessarily agree with Rush most of the time, but I still can't figure out why Obama would want to ignite a culture war so early in his presidency. Rush has always been one of those guys who speaks openly and is going to be controversial no matter what. He's got a segment of listeners who hang on every word, but most people just ignore him and laugh it off. But by Obama stepping up against him, he is emboldening Rush's supporters and giving Rush added mainstream credibility. Doesn't seem like the smartest move to me...

Barack Obama picks a fight with Rush Limbaugh as bipartisan spirit crumbles - Telegraph

Nancy Pelosi: Dumber than Soap

I think my favorite part of this video is the title:

Nancy Pelosi: Dumber than Soap - YouTube

She's also batshiz crazy and terrifying.

The American Public's Priorities

Very interesting list:

http://people-press.org/report/485/economy-top-policy-priority

Notice that my six vital issues for the Republican Party are all encapsulated in the top 8 responses, making it more clear than ever that these are the issues we should be focused on above all else: taxes and spending (the economy, jobs), national security (terrorism), education, entitlement reform (Social Security and Medicare), energy, and health care. Also notice that global warming is last. And rightfully so.

Seven reasons for health skepticism

Call it skepticism or cautious optimism, but there are several reasons to temper expectations about the Obama Administration. After all, he's not going to turn a nation facing its worst economic downturn since the Great Depression into candyland in a day.

Politico posted seven reasons to be cautious in a great read. They are, without further explanation:

1. The genius fallacy
2. The herd instinct
3. We are broke
4. Words, words, words
5. He rarely challenges the home team
6. Everyone is winging it
7. The watchdogs are dozing

Numbers 5 and 7 are particularly disconcerting to me. As Politico puts it, "by Obama’s lights, the national interest usually coincides with his personal interest."

Seven reasons for health skepticism - Politico.com

Bush's Achievements

Sure the Weekly Standard is a conservative outlet, but Fred Barnes does a pretty good job of summing up Bush's accomplishments in this piece. He might have screwed up some things, but it's important to remember him as a President rather than an infantile f---up (feel free to disagree, I know so many do).

Bush's Achievements, Ten thins the president got right by Fred Barnes - The Weekly Standard

Here's the list in sum:

1. Ditching the flawed Kyoto Treaty
2. Enhanced interrogation of terrorists
3. Rebuilding of presidential authority
4. Unwavering support for Israel
5. No Child Left Behind
6. Promoting democracy
7. Medicare prescription drug benefit
8. Roberts and Alito on the Supreme Court
   
9. Strengthened relations with east Asian democracies
10. The surge

I would personally add the attempt to fix Social Security to that list, even if it was widely panned, at least he tried to do something that far too many politicians ignore.

Global Warming

According to my Weatherbug application, today's high was -4 degrees and today's low was -18 degrees. The wind chill has been hovering around -40 degrees. Just sayin'...

And people wonder why I hate Al Gore...

What if I didn't pay taxes?

Many politicians wonder why the general public refuses to trust them. The simple answer is that they give us an endless supply to reasons to distrust them. There's a double standard that exists between politicians and the rest of America. Obama's cabinet nominees' failures to pay taxes are the latest proof of this double standard.

By defending individuals like Tim Geithner, Obama and other defenders appear to be making the argument that it's okay to forget to pay your taxes. However, after taking income taxation last semester, I know that that isn't the case. In fact, the IRS likes nothing more than going after people for failing to make payments. The IRS also has a tendency to go after people who may have paid their taxes in full but the IRS feels like it would like a little more money at the moment, so they create some new interpretation of the existing rules to screw the taxpayer.

So what message does Obama really want to send? It seems that he wants to reinforce the double standard we've seen countless times, especially given that the Obama folks didn't admit to Geithner's failure to pay taxes, but instead kept it secret until the WSJ discovered it and made it known. With the IRS's tendency to come down hard on taxpayers, the whole flap brings up serious questions as to how he's going to be able to credibly enforce the IRS rules.

The linked Politico article sums it up well: "we will see how easy he is on other people when they say they made 'honest mistakes.'"

What if I didn't pay taxes? - Politico.com

In politics, does race trump gender?

A recent Politico article takes a look at the cakewalk that Roland Burris has had on the way to the Senate, with not a single question asked about where he stands on the issues. It highlights the absolutely disgusting absurdity of people like Bobby Rush making the issue of whether to seat him solely about race. So much for that whole "content of character" thing...

Obama made it to the White House largely with indifference to his race, so why is it necessary to behave this way in regards to Burris?

The article also looks at how the treatment of race compares to the treatment of gender in politics, and it doesn't even hit the tip of the iceberg on this topic.

Politico.com - In politics, does race trump gender?

Obama's Redeeming Quality

What is Obama's redeeming quality?

The answer is easy: sports. His love of Chicago sports, especially the Bulls and Bears, warms my heart. And the fact that basketball is his favorite sport evokes feelings of camaraderie. Those feelings may end there, but at least it's something.

Hoops Fans Can't Wait for Obama to Take Office - NYTimes.com