Speedy Gonzalez for the U.S. Supreme Court

On more than one occasion, I have mentioned that an ideal U.S. Supreme Court pick for Barack Obama would be a tri-racial Latino pygmy.

Mr. Obama had to settle for Sonia Sotomayor, who fills his main criteria of tokenism, activism, collectivism, and legislation through judicial fiat.

Ms. Sodomizer will be raping the Constitution as soon as she gets confirmed.

She has “empathy,” which means she is willing to ignore the law in favor of some politically correct form of favoritism.

If I were a minority right now, I would be celebrating, knowing that I could now break the windows of rich, white, store owners and steal everything, all in the name of fairness.

(Note to Jews: You are only minorities when it is a liability. You do not get the benefits of tokenism.)

Those on the left praising the selection of a Hispanic judge apparently forgot the Jihad they waged against Alberto Gonzalez and Miguel Estrada. Actually, forgive my being politically incorrect and calling it a Jihad. It was, to quote Justice Clarence Thomas, a “high-tech lynching.”

So what should a politically correct president do? Who is best qualified to fill the roll of multi-racial (tri-racial is soooo several lines ago) Latino pygmy and satisfy the various groups of beggars that make up the Demagoguic Party?

President Obama should nominate Gonzalez for the High Court.

No, not Alberto Gonzalez. Speedy Gonzalez.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speedy_Gonzalez

Think about it. Speedy Gonzalez is Mexican.

More importantly, he belongs to the most oppressed minority group in the history of minorities.

Speedy Gonzalez is vertically challenged. I don’t care what color or religion you are. When you can fit into your locker room in junior high school, life is bad.

Speedy Gonzalez is so short that he makes pygmys seem like bigmes.

Yet Speedy Gonzalez is not just any mouse, or even any Mexican mouse for that matter. Speedy Gonzalez is the fastest mouse in all of Me-hee-co.

Justice moves so incredibly slowly. Anything that speeds up the process is an improvement. Who could make the system speedier than Speedy himself?

In fact, I have been researching some of Speedy’s decisions in various cartoons (One woman’s lazy boyfriend watching Cartoon Network instead of doing chores is another man’s intense research.). The legal reasoning is sound.

In fact, I could have sworn that Speedy said “Res Ipsa Loquitor” in one scene, but despite replaying the tape in slow motion and backwards while listening to Ozzy Osbourne, the girlfriend insisted that all Speedy said was “Andale Arriba.”

When you think about it (and God help those who do think about this stuff), the Supreme Court could come to more thoughtful conclusions if the Warner Brothers characters were on the high court.

Who is better to debate the constitutionality of the Minutemen at the border then Sylvester the Cat and Speedy? After all, Speedy is trying to get into the AJAX Cheese Company, and Sylvester does use some heavy-handed tactics. Are these tactics torture, or just coerced interrogation?

Also, Sylvester sets bombs to go off. This could lead to a thorough review of IEDs.

In addition to Sylvester, Speedy also grapples with Daffy Duck. Everybody knows that Daffy would make an outstanding Supreme Court Justice. He would also be a politically correct choice because he has a lisp. Rudy Giuliani has a lisp, and he would have turned his prosecutorial career into a judgeship had he not been busy saving the world like Duck Dodgers in the 24th and 1/2 Century.

Daffy brings a lifetime of criminal law experience to the bench. Who else but he could take down criminal mastermind Aardvark Ratnik?

Who else but he could rule on the constitutionality of wealth redistribution. After all, he and Porky Pig were Robin Hood and (Very) Little John. I read his decision that emphatically declared:

Ho! Ha-ha! Guard! Turn! Parry! Dodge ! Spin! Ha! Thrust! (Then his beak would fly up, and he would straighten it out)

Does that make any less sense than anything written in Latin Legalese by some obscure clerk?

In the interest of diversity, a white male could join the court. We know where Elmer Fudd and Yosemite Sam stand on the Second Amendment to the Constitution.

Would Speedy be a strict constructionist? I suspect he would be a loose constructionist, or at the very least a loose constrictionist. Remember the time Daffy wished for Speedy to have a burrito stuck on his nose? That was such tight constriction that Speedy could not breathe.

Some would argue that Speedy Gonzalez would be a terrible choice because we need more judicial restraint. We need to go slower, not faster. The solution is more balance on the court. Speedy’s cousin Slowpoke Rodriguez would be much more measured and deliberate, to the point of being laconic.

Others would argue that Speedy Gonzalez is a negative stereotype about Mexicans. However, in 1999 the League of United Latin American Citizens passionately argued that he was a positive role model. After a brief stint off the air, their advocacy resurrected his career in 2002.

Speedy appeals to every race, color, and creed. The Rabbit lobby might be upset if Bugs Bunny gets passed over, but Speedy can point to his cameo in “Who Framed Roger Rabbit?” He can capture black support and the male athletic vote due to his brief appearance alongside Bugs Bunny and Michael Jordan in “Space Jam.”

Bill Murray was in that movie, ensuring the support of maladroit, white, male golfers.

(If only Speedy had appeared in “Caddyshack” it would be a fait accomplis, which is French for something.)

So I say since the world is filled with Looney Tunes, we might as well have the real Looney Tunes, rather than cheap imitators who have no qualifications beyond already having done the judicial thing as a career.

Forget Sonia Sotomayor, Susan Sontag, and even Suzanne Sommers. Forget “Three’s Company.” (I’ve tried)

On this court, Eight is not enough. Nine is Company.

Support Daffy, Bugs, Elmer, Yosemite, Sylvester, and the Warner Brothers Yakko and Wakko from “Animaniacs” as seven of the associate justices. The eighth can be Brain from “Pinky and the Brain.” After all, most justices secretly want to try to take over the world anyway.

Besides, the business community would love him. In fact, the fliers of support could be drawn up by Sir Speedy Printing Services.

Support Speedy Gonzalez for Chief Justice.

Our ability to laugh depends on it.

eric

21 Responses to “Speedy Gonzalez for the U.S. Supreme Court”

  1. Micky 2 says:

    Thanks Eric.
    Its posts like this that never fail to remind me how old I’m getting.
    Just wait till your my age and I’ll getcha back. If I’m around.

    Its cool, for a few minutes there I was in my living room, 8 years old, on a Saturday morning, in my jammies with a huge bowl of Apple Jacks and not a care in the world.

    Yea, I cant even begin to say what a classic display of tokenism Sotomayors pick was. When you look at the field he has to choose from its only too obvious where his head was at.
    As a wise white man with the richness of his experiences I believe I’ve reached the right conclusion.

  2. Toma says:

    Me too eric, I’m sittin’ next to Micky.

    And hooray!! for the League of United Latin American Citizens for re-instating Speedy. I was unaware he had been dug out of the mire of political correct mess.

    Sotomayor is just the beginning. There is no place in Obamunism for the Constitution.

    Toma

  3. On what exactly are you guys basing your opinion of Sotomayor?

    (Talk about irrational hatred! Sheesh!)

    JMJ

  4. Dav Lev says:

    An amusing article. I understand that the Supreme Court has reversed 4 opinions that she participated in.

    Or as David Brooks said, should the shape of one’s genitals determine
    whether they are selected as a candidate for the court?

    What would a transvestite’s chances be?

    Hopefully, the Republicans will get their act together, and stop
    bickering among themselves long enough to challange this
    appointment intelligently.

    What strikes me since Nov 4, is that Obama not only flip flops on virtually
    all his campaign promises, but he seems naive about most everything.

    There is something else that bothers me, as a conservative Jew who
    thought 6m of my brethren who were murdered during WW2, seem not
    to have taught those of us who survived that war any lessons., despite
    Steven Spielberg’s movies.

    We voted for Obama/Biden overwhelmingly. The Muslim community
    was split as far as I know. (I suggested to my comrades the same
    pattern to strident criticism).

    Does Obama, Biden, Rohm and Axelrod really believe the Arab-Muslim
    world is ONLY concerned with “natural growth” or building within the
    5 major settlement blocks, created after 1967? Does he believe
    he can make the Arabs love US, despite the immense trade with them
    both military and economic (we give 2billion/year to Egypt only, not
    to forget the tens of billions that go to Saudi Arabia in petro dollars).
    In fact, our relations with the Arab-Muslim worlds are excellent..except
    of course our support for Israel, “The Jewish Zionist state”, as they put it.
    (Israel was created by the UN in 1947, along side an Arab Palestinian State).

    We are killing Muslims in 3 countries..Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan.
    With all that Obama is trying to accomplish (really?) getting out
    of those countries is really where it’s at.

    If Muslim wants to kill Muslim..so be it. It’s none of our business
    frankly.

    From GM, to the S.C. nominee, to AGI, to the Bank of America,
    to No. Korea, to Syria, to Iran, to the M.E. conflict..he simply
    has failed miserably. I give him an overall F.

    Therefore, what can we do to stop the damage?

    Well for starters, write your legislators folks AND the office of the
    President. Secondly, remind them that in 2 years there will be
    new elections…allowing us to throw the socialists out of office.

    To my fellow Jews, so goes Israel, so shal the rest of US.

  5. Wow. Not one single solitary example of Sotomayor making any bad decision. Amazing. All hateful BS – no substance. No wonder people say the things they do about conservatives.

    JMJ

  6. Eagle 6 says:

    OK Jersey, I’ll take the bait! Where is the hatred in calling her selection “tokenism” or a prelude to Obamunism? I think the criticism stems not from what she has done, but maybe because of what she has NOT done, ergo the call for tokenism. You are right – there isn’t a great deal of empirical data that show whether she was on or off in her earlier decisions… yes, there are reports of 6 or more decisions reversed, but I’d like to see analysis – 6 reversed out of how many…what are the details…how do these reversals compare with other judges, et al. We’ve already heard the “theme” of her self-promotion through the years as being proud of her Latina heritage, which now really has me confused because most New York Puerto Ricans I remember didn’t ascribe to the “Latino” brand, preferring Hispanic or simply Puerto Rican…and her outrage about the cartoon with the sombrero and pinata because they are Mexican not Puerto Rican, but both are considered Latin American countries… so who cares about culture; let’s look at the record

  7. REWHBLCAIN says:

    Jersey McJones, La Raza. You know, the tan klan that she is a member of! You know the one, The race, all for us nothing for them! Any more dumb questions?

  8. REWHBLCAIN says:

    Jersey McJones,

    Writings Reveal Sotomayor’s Controversial ‘Wise Latina’ Remark Not Isolated
    The five boxes of files delivered to Capitol Hill gave senators a fuller picture of Sonia Sotomayor’s background and record, as well as of how President Obama came to nominate his first Supreme Court choice
    Sonia Sotomayor told the Senate on Thursday that the White House never questioned her about cases or issues she might have to decide as a Supreme Court justice, a disclosure gleaned from reams of documents that reveal she has spoken repeatedly about how her gender and Latina heritage affect her judging.

    The federal appeals court judge divulged new details about her finances and provided three decades of writings, speeches and rulings that give both supporters and critics fresh fodder for the coming debate on her confirmation. They include more instances in which she said she hopes a “wise Latina” would reach a better decision than a man without that experience.

    The comments in 2002 and 2003 echo a much-criticized remark she made in 2001 at the University of California-Berkeley law school that has prompted a furor among conservatives who say they suggest President Barack Obama’s first Supreme Court nominee brings a personal bias to her legal decisions.

    Obama has said he is “sure she would have restated it.” In fact, she said it almost precisely the same way in speeches to the Princeton Club in 2002 and one at Seton Hall law school in 2003, according to copies she sent the Senate.

    Click on kink for full story
    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/06/04/white-house-delivers-sotomayors-writings-records-senate/

  9. REWHBLCAIN says:

    http://www.judicialwatch.org/weeklyupdate/2009/23-judge-sotomayors-radical-connections

    From the Desk of Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton:
    Judge Sotomayor’s Radical Connections

    Judicial Watch’s investigation of Obama’s Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor continues. This week, our investigations team unearthed some interesting and disturbing information related to Sotomayor’s connection to the radical organization, Puerto Rican Legal Defense Fund (PRLDF). Sotomayor served on the Board from 1980 until 1992, which is a significant period of time.

    According to The American Spectator: “Among radical left-wing groups, [the PRLDF] has a fairly garden-variety agenda. A captive of identity politics, it pushes for enforced multiculturalism, diversity, bilingual public education, race-based gerrymandering of electoral districts, race-based employment quotas, tenants’ rights, and illegal immigrants’ rights.”

    Check out some of the group’s activities during Sotomayor’s tenure as the “top policy maker” on the PRLDF’s Board of Directors:

    In 1988, the Puerto Rican Legal Defense Fund engaged in a battle with the New York City Police Department over its “racist” promotion exam, ultimately presiding over a radical redesign to allow more minorities to achieve a passing grade. According to The New York Times: “The new test, a four-part exam prepared with the help of an expert designated by the Puerto Rican Legal Defense Fund…involved changes in format, including the addition of open-book questions and a video portion.”
    In 1990, the PRLDF attacked then-New York Mayor David Dinkins after the mayor labeled three Puerto Rican “nationalists” who shot five members of Congress in 1954 “assassins.” The radicals were members of a violent Puerto Rican terrorist group FALN (Fuerzas Armadas de Liberación Nacional). The PRLDF said the mayor’s comments “lacked sensitivity.” Reuben Franco, President of the PRLDF said: “[Mayor Dinkins] doesn’t recognize that to many people in Puerto Rico, these are fighters for freedom and justice, for liberation, just as is Nelson Mandela, who himself advocated bearing arms.”
    In 1981, the PRLDF filed a complaint against New York City Mayor Thomas Dunn following a City Hall directive requiring staff to speak English while on the job. In 1990, the organization also opposed a law to require merchants to post an English sign in the storefront explaining the nature of business.
    Trust me, this is a very small sampling of a very large universe of radical activity by PRLDF during Judge Sotomayor’s tenure. I’ve reviewed her responses to the U.S. Senate questionnaire in preparation for her nomination. The judge does not disclose much at all about her significant work the PRLDF. We aim to help fill in the gaps. And I will have much more for you in the coming weeks as we continue to delve deeply into Judge Sotomayor’s history and affiliations.

    Judicial Watch Probes Overseas Trips by DC Mayor

    Washington, DC, Mayor Adrian Fenty found himself in hot water recently related to two overseas trips that were bankrolled by foreign governments. (Even the liberal Washington Post took a swipe at the DC Democrat.) The first, a trip to China during the Olympic Games in 2008. And the second, an “unannounced trip” to Dubai February 15-22, 2009.

    Of course, these trips provoked a number of questions. What was Mayor Fenty doing on these trips? Were these elaborate vacations or was the mayor on official business? Why were two foreign governments so keen on paying for Mayor Fenty to travel overseas?

    Judicial Watch filed a Freedom of Information Act request with the mayor’s office earlier this year. Recently we obtained documents from the Office of the Secretary for the District of Columbia that shed some light on the matter.

    Included among the documents is the original “application to approve donations” from the Office of Partnerships and Grants in the mayor’s office detailing the $25,000 February 13th in-kind donation made by Yousef Al-Otaiba, United Arab Emirates Ambassador to the United States and Mexico, to cover the mayor’s travel expenses during the Dubai trip.

    The documents describe the Dubai trip as follows: “Cultural and economic exchange, including the Mayor’s travel and accommodations for the official portion of his trip to Dubai, UAE, during which he will be representing the District of Columbia and acting in his official capacity at meetings with UAE local government and business leaders.”

    Mayor Fenty sustained heavy criticism for making the “unannounced” trip to Dubai in February after he attended the Dubai Tennis Championships, where a female Israeli tennis player was prohibited from competing in the tournament. As a member of the DC City Council, Fenty had harshly criticized then-Mayor Anthony Williams for taking overseas trips, many of which were funded by foreign governments.

    The documents obtained by Judicial Watch, also detail a separate trip made by Mayor Fenty to China during the 2008 Summer Olympic Games.

    Mayor Fenty’s trip to China, which cost $11,300 according to the documents uncovered by Judicial Watch, was paid for by the governments of Shanghai and Beijing, as well as the Chinese People’s Association for Friendship, a Chinese government entity.

    One letter, signed by the Director General of Beijing’s Foreign Affairs Office states: “…The City of Beijing will, as always, attach great importance to the sister-city relationship between our two cities, and will further enhance this relationship in an effort to promote our common prosperity and development.” At the time, Mayor Fenty described the Beijing trip as a “private vacation.”

    The bottom line is this: Mayor Fenty works for the taxpayers of Washington, DC, not the UAE or the Communist Chinese government. His decision to take these donations through his office from foreign governments demonstrates an appalling lack of judgment. The Mayor ought to be taking vacations on his own dime.

    Judicial Watch Briefs: Border Security and Bailouts

    I will close this week with two brief takes on two very important issues:

    Obama Administration Asleep at the Switch While Situation at Border Deteriorates

    As I’ve told you in recent weeks, the Obama administration seems completely tone deaf when it comes to the chaotic and dangerous nature of the nation’s southern border.

    Just a few weeks ago, Judicial Watch recently released a U.S. Customs and Border Protection report titled, BorderStat Violence, FY 2008 Year in Review, which documents a sharp increase in violence on the U.S. border with Mexico. Here’s just one statistic: Illegal incursions into the United States by members of the Mexican military and/or police are up an astonishing 357%.

    And now this from The Washington Times:

    “U.S. counterterrorism officials have authenticated a video by an al Qaeda recruiter threatening to smuggle a biological weapon into the United States via tunnels under the Mexico border, the latest sign of the terrorist group’s determination to stage another mass-casualty attack on the U.S. homeland.”

    In the face of what is obviously an indisputable crisis on our border with Mexico, what has been the Obama administration’s response?

    Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano recently turned down an offer for increased funding from the Senate Committee on Homeland Defense to address the problem of violence on the southern border. The Obama administration also rejected an appeal from Texas Governor Rick Perry and Arizona Governor Jan Brewer to deploy 1,000 National Guard troops to help quell border violence. Instead, the Obama administration announced a plan to temporarily send 360 federal agents to the border, a plan which has little chance of succeeding. And then the president rolled out the welcome mat to illegals by announcing support for an amnesty program.

    I hope it doesn’t take a catastrophic terrorist attack to convince the president that he must take drastic measures to secure the U.S. border with Mexico.

    Lobbyists in the Obama White House

    The Obama administration finds itself in an inherently corrupt situation now that the president has seized large stakes in private corporations.

    From The Detroit Free Press:

    General Motors Corp. began canceling contracts with outside lobbyists Tuesday but made clear its intention to maintain its in-house advocacy corps, beginning a delicate balancing act between GM and its soon-to-be majority shareholder: the White House.

    “It may cause some unique situations,'” said Dave Wenhold, president of the American League of Lobbyists. Complicating the relationship are President Barack Obama’s own set of tough standards for dealings between the administration and federal lobbyists.

    While setting rules that attempt to make dealings between the two sides more transparent, he now finds himself in a position of controlling more shares in GM than anyone else.

    As the nation’s largest shareholder in GM, the company’s lobbyists are now working for the Obama White House! That means the government will be lobbying itself! Ford, which has not yet been nationalized, is at an obvious disadvantage. Ford won’t have White House officials acting as their lobbyists. And nor will the “foreign” auto companies that employ tens of thousands of Americans.

    Does anyone remember the Executive Order signed by Barack Obama on January 21st effectively banning lobbyists from serving in his administration? Not worth the paper it was written on, obviously, as it seems this policy will not apply to the president’s auto companies.

    The fact is the White House has no business – none whatsoever – seizing large stakes in private enterprises. This unprecedented government intervention is a fundamental attack on our constitutional and economic systems, and is a recipe for disaster.

    And as I reported to you just a few weeks ago, there was nothing voluntary about the government’s scheme to “bailout” the nation’s largest banks. Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson told these companies they had no choice but to take the deal. Details are still emerging as to how the GM deal was made, but it has all the hallmarks of government action unrestrained by law and ethics. I will have updates regarding this ongoing crisis as events warrant.

    Tom Fitton
    President

    Judicial Watch is a non-partisan, educational foundation organized under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue code. Judicial Watch is dedicated to fighting government and judicial corruption and promoting a return to ethics and morality in our nation’s public life.

  10. Finally!

    Eagle,

    “Where is the hatred in calling her selection “tokenism” or a prelude to Obamunism? I think the criticism stems not from what she has done, but maybe because of what she has NOT done, ergo the call for tokenism.”

    Not done? She’s been in the business for THIRTY YEARS! She’s just spent TEN YEARS on the circuit bench! She was top of her class at Princeton! She’s received SIX honorary law degrees! She was editor of the Yale Law Review – you know, the school Bush went to and averaged a C! She’s sat on huge cases! She’s handled thousands of federal appeals, written hundreds of opinions!

    She’s stood solidly in defense of property rights against the state. She helped the NFL secure it’s fantastic draft system. Stood solidly with employers and the state on the use of equipment and materials belonging to those entities. And she stood WITH the 1st amendment right of people to say stupid, racist things (as “REWHBLCAIN” does below) without suffering retaliations from employers or other entities unrelated to that speech. She even UPHELD that STUPID Bush administration policy to restrict anything abortion-related from coming anywhere near foreign aid and programs.

    You’d think you guys would almost love her!!!

    What planet are you living on, man???

    REWHBLCAIN,

    (what a strange moniker…)

    “Jersey McJones, La Raza. You know, the tan klan…”

    Anyone who calls La Raza “the tan Klan” is a racist and a fool and I will not consider a single further word a nasty, inconsiderate, louse like that would say. The Klan, huh? You mean the Klan that terrorized black Amercians since the late 19th century? The Klan that lynched black men, raped, terrorized, beat, robbed and murdered families, drove people from their homes, burned crosses on families’ front lawns, bombed, kidnapped, threatened, abused blacks, Jews, Catholics, asians, hispanics and everyone else that didn’t fit their flimsy definition of an “Aryan” white person, whatever the hell that is? Anyone who would compare La Raza to the Klan is a piece of human feces, not even fit to eat dung beetle dung. An animal. Pure garbage.

    And that’s what this whole anti-Sotomayor thing is. Pure Garbage.

    JMJ

  11. Toma says:

    Finally.

    Some real hate. Atta boy Jers show us how its done.

    Toma

  12. Eagle 6 says:

    Jersey, Good quick research on all the things she’s done – top of her class at Princeton is truly an exceptional feat…the honorary law degrees and editor of Law Review remind me too much of some other flake, but I’m not sure what his grades were because they are sealed…but you are right – she has contributed signifcantly with her oral and written opinions…not that I haven’t provided my fair share over the years, but I don’t suppose my input has had near the impact on society… your response handled nicely the latter part of my question (implication of what has she done – and time will determine how solid her record is). I still don’t see the hate…I know, she has been on the bench for 30 years and is really sensitive about a cartoon depicting her as a pinata…but again, the cartoon was more directed at the salivating elephants than at her.

  13. Was that a compliment, Toma?

    Well, Eagle, about half of it I already knew, but anyone with five minutes on their hands could look this stuff up. And I don’t recall her reacting to that picture (perhaps I’m mistaken?). I think that was some other group. I didn’t think the picture was all that bad either. But it does get to some hypocrisy on the left when it comes to sensitivity. Just as what she said about latinas being better judges, so to speak, would have been considered outrageous had it been a white man saying that about white men. Fair enough. And while I don’t think she was being all that serious, nor do I think Bill Frist was all that serious when he made that comment about Strom Thurman, and look what happened to him. There’s plenty of hypocrisy to go around. But that doesn’t make it okay. Either Sotomayor was a “token” pick or she wasn’t – we’ll never know. The point is that it doesn’t matter, as she’s certainly qualified – and certainly at least as if not more qualified than the other allegedly “token” pick in recent history, Clarence Thomas. Two hypocrisies do not make a sincerity.

    JMJ

  14. Eagle 6 says:

    Jersey, Fair enough. I’m somewhat hamstrung at work because the military has so many firewalls, I can’t look things up…and by the time I get home, I’m playing with the grandkids, kids, or my wife…the latter not so much anymore… 🙂 It’s tough to rely on TV, so rather than go with fair and balanced, I usually watch CNN to keep up with the “other” side…

  15. Well, you have good reasons, Eagle. We wouldn’t want you guys playing Tetris while guiding a missile on the battlefront! LOL!!! (Could you imagine? Hey guys, look, I just scored 1,000,000 by getting a missile to fit a Four Column through that bunker!)

    Rather than CNN, though, I would suggest the NewsHour or tuning in to NPR when you can. It shouldn’t be so much about which “side” or the other, but simply getting good information. Besides, CNN is not representative of any “side,” really. They just try to get ratings as best (worst?) they can by presenting “both sides” of whatever’s the useless sensational story of the day, for whatever that’s worth, which isn’t much, as in life there are rarely only two sides of anything. (Remember when Jon Stewart destroyed Crossfire? Just for that I consider him an American hero!)

    I mean, hey, I do the “two-sides” thing too. I catch CNN, FoxNews, MSNBC, etc. But when I want unfiltered information, I go straight to the source – CSPAN, published reports from sources, etc – or to the most unbiased sources, like the NewsHour, disipline publications, etc.

    Say, how’s the military these days? The rank and file always seemed pretty ambivilent about whatever civilian administration was in charge at any given time. Have times changed in that regard? (God, I hope not!) I fear this ridiculous partisanship we’ve seen over the past thirty years may be seeping into some dangerous cracks. Is this fear unfounded?

    Thanks, JMJ

  16. Toma says:

    Jers,

    Again I remind you that getting personal and name calling is ill-mannered. Don’t be so quick to dismiss REWHBLCAIN as all the things you called him. Remember when I dismissed Jon Stewart and the Galofalo woman? You jumped on me like a toad on a bug. To quote, “Who cares what other people think? YOU SHOULD. a closed minded fool listens only to what he wants to hear. Every body’s opinion matters.”

    Eagle, Jers makes a good point about the military mind-set. Any insight would be welcome.

    Toma

  17. Micky 2 says:

    Only in this day and age can we hear people say white and then get away with telling the whole world they meant to say black.
    I mean really, its gotten so ridiculous I just want to rip off heads and crap down necks.

    The lady plainly, flat out, repeatedly from a prepaired script, over the years has said that Latina women and their experiences allow them to make better decisions than white males.
    But noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo.
    When confronted with the obvious we are always subjected to these ridiculous PR campaigns that get launched everytime after stupid statements like Sotomayors come out that insult the intelligence of even the most mindless dolts out there. After another 2 weeks of this crap we’ll all be convinced amd brainwashed that she either “mispoke”, was having a bad day, doesnt feel that way anymore” or that its a “vast right wing conspiracy” and that all those speechs were taken out of context or the conservative dominated media has changed all the wording in all her speechs. Okay, I made the last one up.
    To top if off I havent even begun to touch on her decision over the Ricci case that has unequivocally blatant preferential racism painted all over it from head to toe, beginning to end.

    Would my years of dealing with drug lords and smuggling and dealing make me a better judge when it came to those kind of cases ? Sure, but the law is the law and no matter how much insight I have to a particular demographic or issue that is how decisions should be judged on.
    As much as my street sense tells me the guys a punk I still have to judge him according to whats tangible and legal.

  18. Eagle 6 says:

    Jersey and Tomas, There was the expected rumor mill and angst about the incoming CINC because many Soldiers were concerned that they wouldn’t get the support they got from the earlier administrations – same thing happened when Pres Clinton was elected. There were some serious outcries about veterans having to pay for insurance and or medical care when they got out for injuries they received in theater, but that was quashed immediately. There are a rash of suicides and “suicide ideations”, but those are likely the result of high optempo and the macho mentality that doesn’t allow for release…and you’ll think I’m a nut, but I also believe the American Legion and VFWs are great venues for veterans – ok, so the drinking sometimes gets problematic, but the military is so anti drinking and socializing these days, many Soldiers drink or drug alone instead of going someplace and talking – telling war stories, lies, and just being around others in a nonjudgmental environmnent.

    A number of Soldiers are concerned about the potential of gays in the military, but I am against don’t ask don’t tell and for allowing them. They serve openly in the British Army, and I worked with them for a while – no problems.

    I am not qualified to speak for the Army, but the Soldiers are quite flexible – yes, there are some concerns about the perception that the Constitution is being neglected, but most of the people I’ve discussed this with have a wait and see attitude. People who have the greatest problems with the current CINC are those about my age and experience – I hate the direction we seem to be going with foreign policy – I don’t like the apology tours, and I don’t like showing weaknesses to the Arabs, Communists, or French…but in reality, our CINC is in a tough spot. With the global economy and terrorism as such, he may be able to open doors with his apology tour, gain support from other countries, and lose support here, or he could maintain a tougher stance of isolationism, gain support here and lose a bigger battle in the world… I don’t care whether we make Islamofascists, commies, or the French mad, but I, too, have patience…

    I guess I could have answered your question much more concisely: some like him; some don’t. All support our CINC!!

  19. Toma, I’m sorry but I think comparing La Raza to the Klan is just plain low. You guys complain, and absolutely rightly so, when some libs compare the GOP to the Nazis, well this is EXACTLY the same thing. Totally un-called for, inappropriate, nasty, and yes, racist. First of all, “The Race” has a totally different meaning in Latin American Spanish then it would in American English given the historical context. “The Race” to which they refer, is complex mix, a heterogeneous class concept, not some singular racial identification. And what’s just silly, the Klan imagines some homogeneous “race” which unbeknownest to them is based on am Indo-Iranian linguistic group. Amazing. It was just soooooooo stupid. It was not a matter of opinion, but of fact. Comparing La Raza to the Klan is simply wrong and offensive.

    I apologize to our good host, though, and thank you for calling me out. I should have just left it alone. It’s not my place to personally attack people.

    JMJ

  20. Eagle, I need to ask you a question regarding a particular soldier who is a family friend. If you see this, please respond.

    Thanks, JMJ

  21. Eagle 6 says:

    Jersey, not sure whether it is appropriate to put my email address on here…if not, maybe eric, (small “e”) will strip it lest I violate lack of privacy issues!! al.fracker@us.army.mil

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.