It’s not just TNR — the entire Village is out in force against the horrors of a female or non-white SCOTUS nom. Digby finds Tweety suggesting that picking a Latina judge would be a “cookie cutter” move:
Will he go to the usual cookie cutter. He’s supposed to pick a latina, a hispanic woman, would be a woman. Would he do that just because that’s sort of the unfilled void in his patronage plan so far?
[….]Matthews: Even if she was involved in a case which involved firefighters and the old question of the white firefighters fighting for their position and holding to what they have against the new breed guys, the people of color coming along? That’s the kind of fight that goes on all the time.
His patronage plan? Naming an African-American AG and giving a few women cabinet positions is not what I call a patronage plan. You know what a patronage plan is? It’s Jack Murtha getting his nephew millions of dollars of contracts, it’s making Michael Brown the head of FEMA, it’s the Jack Welch “Lost Boys” program (yeah, believe Bob Somerby’s conspiracy theories on that one). For God’s sake, it’s giving nearly every important job in this country to a wealthy white guy for the past 250 years.
But, oh, the horrors of a few civil service jobs going to black people! Richard Cohen has an incoherent screed about this today too:
As the time approaches for President Obama to choose a successor to Justice David Souter, the term “litmus test” will be heard throughout the land. The White House will deny applying any such thing, but the nominee will undoubtedly be chosen according to where she stands on abortion, unions and other issues beloved by liberals. This is fine with me, but what I want to know is where she stands on Frank Ricci. He’s a firefighter.
He is also the lead plaintiff in a case recently argued before the Supreme Court. It was Ricci’s misfortune to take — and pass — the New Haven, Conn., fire department’s exam for promotion to lieutenant and captain, and then have the job denied him because he is white. Others will argue — fatuously and, when they are before St. Peter, with heads bowed in shame — that race had nothing to do with what happened to Ricci, but the fact remains that had he been black, his uniform would already sport a lieutenant’s bar.
[….]ill Clinton tried to square the circle of affirmative action in his “Mend It, Don’t End It” speech of 1995. It was a moving and eloquent address in which he recounted his region’s history, reminding us of the depth and ferocity of racism in the South and elsewhere. Trouble is, the New Haven case proves that affirmative action was not mended at all. It remains noble in its ends and atrocious in its means, and it now provides Obama the chance to use his own family’s history — indeed his own history — to show why it ought to conclude.
Now, I understand that affirmative action is something that reasonable people can disagree about. I realize that there are anecdotal problems with its implementation that can be maddening. But how does Cohen know that there is a real constitutional issue with this case (he makes no real effort to argue this)? And why are the evils of affirmative action so obviously more important than issues like abortion and unions, which he casually derides?
I think there are a variety of reasons why the Village is getting all hot and bothered about affirmative action type issues. One is that, with most other “cultural issues” fading away, it gives them a chance to attack liberals for being “out of touch” with “regular Americans.” Another is that a lot of the stronger affirmative action policies involve civil service jobs (personally, I think this is very smart — you’d have to be crazy not to think having an integrated police department is incredibly important), which are likely to be pursued by ethnic white northerners, and the punditocracy consists almost entirely of white ethnic northerners. As with many things, it’s all about Chris Matthews’ cranky uncle.
But the most disturbing reason is that these idiots really believe that they themselves have risen to the top of a brutally competitive meritocracy. The reality is that, aside from Nero and maybe Kim Jong Il, there has never been anyone in human history who deserved his high place in society less than Richard Cohen and Chirs Matthews do.
gwangung
I sure as hell AM A REGULAR AMERICAN. And I’m not white.
Take that and cram it down your throat, Cohen, York, et al.
Hunter Gathers
In a perfect world, there would be no need for afirmative action. But we don’t live in a perfect world. Even in the year 2009, it is still very much a Good Ol’ Boys Network of a world.
Fixed because i can’t even get my Arrested Devopment jokes right anymore.
God I suck.
jlo
This line is awesome and I fully expect it to be quoted by Kos before noon today.
Michael
The new mantra:
“Because middle aged, harrumphy white guys are the only ones who know anything….”
cleek
note that Cohen is not-so-subtly linking the prospect of a non-white-male nominee to Affirmative Action. because we all know white men are the only people smart enough to get a SCOTUS job on their own merits. anything else is patronage.
Tonybrown74
The real problem is that, due to the election of the Great Black HopeTM, all racism and discrimination is dead in America, according to Mayberry Machiavellians …
We don’t see color, they all screan, without a hint of irony.
All the people in their circle being white and all …
Alan
I don’t care what gender or race as long as he or she isn’t Catholic. The court has enough friggin’ Catholics.
gbear
What place in human history does Matthew’s actually deserve?
I’ll say salesman of the month at South Suburban Chevrolet and third-term president of the Rotary Club.
edit: Harrumph!!
wait
What exactly do you mean by “white ethnic northerners”? Or “ethnic white northerners”? if you mean that the police departments and fire departments in the urban northeast have typically been Irish and/or Italian, just say so.
Unless you want to create a whole new class of white people that are somehow ‘ethnic’ and therefore somehow ‘not exactly’ white.
I doubt that’s your intention, but it’s certainly been done before.
ThymeZoneThePlumber
The thing about making a joke like that is, in order for the scheme to work, it has to be funny. So that’s a cute joke, but it isn’t a funny joke, and it’s not an accurate joke.
I mean, the existence of Tim Russert, to name just one of maybe twenty thousand choices, makes your list ridiculous. Russert epitomized the sorry state of the media and was far more influential than Matthews can ever be.
But anyway, look, the choice of a SCOTUS justice is a big deal, and people are going to talk about it, and give mountains of unsolicited advice. Let them. The takeaway is more revealing about the advisors than it is revealing about the court choices.
You can use my advice as an example. “Please pick more Ginsburgs and fewer Scalias.” Thank you, TZ the Citizen.
Mary Jane
They seem to forget that over half of “regular Americans” are female. It’s become a big issue because most of the (white, male) pundits are making it one. Maybe they’re quaking in their Guccis with the realization that merit might begin to be the deciding factor in hiring/nominating.
Woodrowfan
.
Did we forget the entire Bush family already?
Brick Oven Bill
We know that President Obama looks up to Abraham Lincoln. This is why his pick will likely not be Judge Sotomayor. Lincoln’s position was that women were biologically incapable of voting, let alone sitting in a judge’s chair. As President Obama went to the Ivy League schools, where they teach history, surely he was familiar with Lincoln’s politics before choosing to adorn the Oval Office with Lincoln’s image.
Here is Lincoln:
“It is a general declaration in the act announcing to the world the independence of the thirteen American colonies, that all men are created equal. Now, as an abstract principle, there is no doubt of the truth of that declaration; and it is desirable, in the original construction of society, and in organized societies, to keep it in view as a great fundamental principle.”
“But then I apprehend that in no society that ever did exist, or ever shall be formed, was or can the equality asserted among the members of the human race be practically enforced and carried out. There are portions, large portions, — women, minors, Insane, culprits, transient sojourners, — that will always probably remain subject to the government of another portion of the community.”
So these people who are all in a huff are most likely getting worked up over nothing.
Hunter Gathers
@gbear: Don’t make the mistake of badmouthing Rotary Club members. Angry Rotarians are a sight to behold. Or so I hear.
The Moar You Know
I also find this quote most awesome, but it extends to the entire punditocracy. These people aren’t good for anything, not even as animal feed.
Scott
As long as we’re picking the proper place in human history for useless pundits, I’d say Cohen strikes me as a bit of a mall cop.
Will
Supreme Court demographics…
1/9 women
1/9 non-white
5/9 assholes
affirmative action for assholes! Unless assholes are 5/9 of the general population, I haven’t bothered to check the Census.
jake 4 that 1
Drat that new breed of humanoid, the African-American! Why, they’ve only just landed on our shores and already they’re trying to take jobs from the elder race!
Jesus Christ on a moped. I’d be willing to bet my ancestors were here long before 99% of the yahoos screaming Dey tukr jobs!
gbear
@Hunter Gathers:
I am sorry if my comments were misconstrued as a slight against easily insulted Rotary members. Perhaps they should just lighten up a bit and see what I was trying to say.
/Virginia Foxx
wait
Biologically incapable of sitting? Did our vaginas get in the way?
JK
Doug,
What a coincidence. I just copied and pasted Matthews quote in my comment to John’s thread on Jeffrey Rosen’s article.
Like others have previously written, I cringe when I discover Matthews has taken a position with which I agree. I don’t ever want to be on the same side of an issue as Matthews.
I think Chris Matthews has serious issues. On the one hand, there was the quote heard round the world when he said listening to Obama sent a “thrill up his leg”. On the other hand there was the gushing man love he constantly expressed for John McCain and Rudy Giuliani.
This quote from April 28, 2009 best sums up for me the breathtaking douchebaggery of Chris Matthews
jake 4 that 1
[Le Gasp!] But … isn’t that a lot like … like … Affirmative Action!? [swoons]
ThymeZoneThePlumber
@Brick Oven Bill:
Gotta hand it to you, that is one masterful piece of spooftroll right there. Now if you would elevate your game to that level every day, you’d really have something.
Seriously. That makes me wonder if you aren’t being written by DougJ.
gbear
@Brick Oven Bill:
Bill, your pron writing skilz are slipping.
Brick Oven Bill
I stand corrected wait. Lincoln probably understood females to be biologically capable of sitting in a judge’s chair, he just would likely not want them to open their mouths or write things down.
In this manner, I am suprised that the President Obama lionizes President Lincoln. This should give the angry protesters comfort, in any case.
LD50
And yet, if Obama nominates someone Jewish, we can feel certain that Cohen won’t call that ‘affirmative action’. Funny.
If past experience is any indication, I don’t think Obama’s going to worry unduly about what these Beltway dipshits think.
Hunter Gathers
@gbear: No matter. Rotarians are permanently pissed off. These people still pine for Nixon.
@wait: Don’t take the B.O.B.’s bait. It will only encourage he/she/it.
LD50
Also, 5 Catholics.
3 of them in Opus Dei, I think.
If only Mel Gibson’s dad had a law degree, he’d be a perfect fit.
Zifnab
Well, DougJ, that depends on your priorities. If you want a reliable force with minimal bias that can relate to the community, sure. But if you want to keep the talented Mark Firman on your staff, not so much.
Short Bus Bully
This.
It is without a doubt the secret to Obama’s popularity, sanity, and correctness of vision.
Hunter Gathers
@ThymeZoneThePlumber:
I’m fairly certian that DougJ could come up with better crap than him.
ricky
Mr. Cohen attacks “white liberalism” for being out of touch because of the way he portrays affirmative action, a “white liberal” policy, being applied in the New Haven fire department promotions. He says it unfairly discriminated against those who had the highest rank ordered scores on civil service exams. Of course, using rank ordered scores on civil service exams was itself a white liberal policy designed to eliminate favoritism, patronage, nepotism and other employment abuses. It too, of course, discriminates against some people.
Mr. Cohen laughingly launches into “fire science” as a defense of test taking in fire department promotions. I would presume most of the positions primarily involve the day to day leadership of other employees, not fire science.
A very real question is why we are not asking if rank order testing as a means of promotion has as much relevance as it once did as a means to insuring a quality public sector workforce. Of course only a very smart columnist would see that. I am sure Mr. Cohen got his job because he scored high on “column writing science” questions.
J.A.F. Rusty Shackleford
@Brick Oven Bill:
Lamest Penthouse Forum letter ever.
LD50
I don’t think Lincoln should have ended slavery. It made American agricultural products uncompetitive in the international market.
JK
@The Moar You Know:
I can think of dozens of names to add alongside Matthews and Cohen. For starters, Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, Lou Dobbs, Joe Scarborough and Bill O’Reilly. For scribes, I’d add Maureen Dowd, Ana Marie Cox, Mark Halperin, Howard Kurtz, and Dana Milbank.
To me, all these people are malignant media carcinogens who are dumbing our society down to death and poisoning the blood stream of our body politic with their lies, half-truths, and distortions.
@ThymeZoneThePlumber:
I think you’re selling Chris Matthews short by playing down his influence. Sure, Hardball isn’t as high in the pecking order as Meet the Press was when Russert was alive. Hardball is still pretty damn important. Matthews gets all the important movers and shakers on his show.
During the presidential campaign, Matthews’ own conduct made him a major media story between his over-the-top attacks against Hillary Clinton and his listening to Obama sent a thrill up my leg.
Matthews was also co-anchor on the nights major primaries were held.
So don’t tell me that Russert far overshadowed Matthews. Matthews casts a pretty goddamn big shadow himself.
El Cid
I’m sure all these people were screaming about how Bush Jr. let the State Department be taken over by darkies and womenfolk, and how Colin Powell and Condi Rice were completely unbrilliant and inexperienced in the field of diplomacy and statecraft.
Right? Right?
gwangung
@ricky:
Any bozo who talks about this and prattles about “the most qualified candidate” shows that they are eminently UNQUALIFIED to determine that candidate.
A) The job ALWAYS encompasses more skills than can be measured by a single test. They’re always ignoring important qualifications by talking “most qualified.”
B) They almost never realize that their qualifications are accurage—but not precise. That is, you can tell a person is good, but not necessarily if one candidate is better than the other if they’re close.
Hell, in sports, it’s often difficult to figure out who the best players are, even though we have reams of stats and hard data of stuff that’s actually objective, because of those two factors (for example, GMs taking a .310 hitter over a .300 hitter–the .010 difference isn’t that big of a deal—and often times they’ll ignore that the .310 hitter is a crappy fielder and the .300 hitter a superb defender that’ll win you 2-3 games by himself).
tripletee (formerly tBone)
@Brick Oven Bill:
Unless they were recording an order and then repeating it back before scurrying off to their rightful place in the kitchen, you mean.
Little known fact: “Get your bitch-ass back in the kitchen and make me some pi-ah” is a verbatim transcript from Lincoln’s last visit to the Supreme Court chambers.
Kirk Spencer
@Brick Oven Bill: BoB? I slapped you for that quote once before. That’s Lincoln quoting Mr. Clay so as to then REFUTE WHAT HE SAID. Here’s the opening, again (my emphasis):
mvr
So you look at the Supreme Court and you see 8 men, 5 Catholics, 8 whites, and we worry that adding a woman or a Hispanic member shows that white men are going to be unfairly treated.
The recent case involving the school that strip searched the girl looking for an Advil that she didn’t have on the basis of an unreliable tip underlines the need for more women on the Court. Only Ginsburg seemed to get how humiliating an unwarranted that was. I find it hard to believe that it was an accident that the others seemed to take the whole thing so lightly were also men.
I’m a grumpy middle aged white guy and even I know I can’t complain about the unfair treatment I received in my life since most of it was in my favor.
These people who complain about unfairness to white men are so transparently insecure it is appalling. (Which is not to say I don’t understand the frustration of the fire-fighter who wanted the promotion. But the facts of the case at least make it plausible that relying on that test would also be problematic and possibly discriminatory.)
Martin
The village isn’t worried that Obama will appoint a minority or a female or an atheist or whatever – they don’t whether he will or won’t. The village is worried that Obama won’t appoint a white, male, Christian.
The village is really worried that Obama won’t apply their preferred form of affirmative action.
ricky
Which is why we must select people for roster positions based on their rank ordered score on written and oral exams. Otherwise there would be no more “scrappy” white receivers in football or Anglo American baseball ball players with “lots of good locker room chemistry” or slow white point guards with “high basketball IQ’s.”
And let us not forget the all important “coach’s son”
qualification in our meritorius world of sports aceivement.
gwangung
@ricky:
Ooooohhhhh…..sly one!
Brick Oven Bill
You are the wrong one on the interpretation Spencer. Douglas argued that slaves were not covered by the Constitution. Lincoln argued that they were.
Douglas accused Lincoln of asserting that ‘All men are created equal’ was a biological argument, to which Lincoln argued that it was an idealistic principle, not a biological statement. Lincoln, to make his point, aligned himself with Clay’s argument. To further clarify, here is straight-up President Lincoln’s words, Lincoln quoting Lincoln, from the link provided above:
“I think the authors of that notable instrument intended to include all men, but they did not intend to declare all men equal in all respects. They did not mean to say that all men were equal in color, size, intellect, moral development, or social capacity. They defined with tolerable distinctness in what respects they did consider all men created equal — equal in certain inalienable rights, among which are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. This they said, and this they meant.”
On this subject, President Lincoln and Reverend Wright agree. People are different.
Johnny Pez
I’m hoping this is all a great big head fake on Obama’s part. Get the Villagers and the Goposaurs all hot n’ bothered about Sotomayor, then when they least expect it, he comes out with the real pick . . . his wife!
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA!
ricky
“I can think of dozens of names to add alongside Matthews and Cohen. For starters, Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, Lou Dobbs, Joe Scarborough and Bill O’Reilly. For scribes, I’d add Maureen Dowd, Ana Marie Cox, Mark Halperin, Howard Kurtz, and Dana Milbank.”
I think this is unfair. Each of these persons was the highest ranked on the written and oral exams their employers gave when filling the position each now occupies. Just ask them.
They know how smart they are.
ricky
Gwangung, now you know how I lost my position behind the plate in Little League.
kth
The case about the white firefighters was covered fairly in-depth on NPR. New Haven gave an exam for officer candidates in the fire department. All of the people who passed the exam were white. The city of New Haven concluded that the test had a racial bias, scrapped the test, and (most crucially) did not give promotions to the firefighters who passed the test. It wasn’t a matter of giving one white guys’ job to a black guy; first, no one was promoted at all, and second, if the test results had been allowed to stand, the entire promoted group would have been white-only.
It’s a tough call any way you slice it; I probably would have opted to promote the guys who passed the exam, just this year, then scrapped it. But New Haven made the best they could of a bad situation, and though you can say they might ought to have acted differently, there’s no cause for the tubthumping of Matthews and Cohen. None of the options were nice.
Libertina
@Kirk Spencer: Smackdown, FTW. I thank you.
kay
Most of the Justices are too old.
My state ages out judges. Why doesn’t the federal judiciary?
It’s ridiculous. Open up a job for someone coming up, for God’s sake. Retire, already. They can write books, give speeches, do an apology tour, like O’Conner….
Dennis-SGMM
Do the math, damn it! (One black president)>(All the white guys in positions of power).
kay
And, no more discussion of their religion, please. I’m sick of that. We’ve completely crossed the line on that, with Bush and his religious litmus test.
It’s not relevant.
You’re not supposed to show your cards, judges, and as much as promise you ARE or are NOT going to be using religious tomes and edicts to decide cases.
At least tone it down. Show some restraint.
J.A.F. Rusty Shackleford
@Brick Oven Bill:
Bill, once again, your bigot is showing.
asiangrrlMN
Oh, for god’s sake! I’m going to have an aneurysm if the Village keeps this up. I can’t believe that Tweety has THE NERVE to talk about unearned privilege. I have had it up to HERE with whiny-ass white guys, who, by the way, are getting well-compensated for their endeavors cry like little boys over how fucking UNFAIR the world is to them and their ilk. Yeah, because NONE of the CEOs of the banks and such are white men. NONE of our presidents have EVER been white men. NONE of our congress people are white men. No, fucking none of them!
Shorter asiangrrlMN: Fuck you, overprivileged Village people.
Tattoosydney, brush off your law degree, fake-hubby. I’m applying for SCOTUS.
/apoplectic screed
P.S. It really says something of the prevalent mindset that still exists in this country. Default position is white male. Any deviation is affirmative action.
sparky
if i were running a pundit shop, i would be working on replacing pundits with rats. the rats learn to generate the appropriate response (read: proper response = reward) more quickly than pundits do, and they don’t need summer cages. also, they are more fun to pet. and when they start repeating themselves you give them over to some Jack Russells.
ppcli
“The reality is that, aside from Nero and maybe Kim Jong Il, there has never been anyone in human history who deserved his high place in society less than Richard Cohen and Chirs Matthews do.”
.
William Kristol?
Indie Tarheel
@Scott: I’d say Cohen’s more like the loser who looks at the mall cop and aspires to become him.
gwangung
@asiangrrlMN:
I admire your restraint.
Shygetz
Shorter Chris Matthews: “Nominating a Hispanic woman is so played out. You know what would be a radical move? Nominating a white guy!”
Kirk Spencer
@Brick Oven Bill: BoB,
You’re changing the argument. Let us revert to point. You quote a section of a speech (actually a debate position) made by Lincoln as being Lincoln’s position. The section you quote is preceded by “Hear what Mr. Clay said:” and ends with the statement, “This is the entire quotation brought forward to prove that somebody previous to three years ago had said the negro was not included in the term “all men” in the Declaration.” You then claim that this is Lincoln’s belief.
Bah.
I despise those who play such solipsist games. Find a quote that is Lincoln speaking for Lincoln and I might agree.
Further, you mis-state the section of the argument. He was refuting the claim that Clay said the Declaration of Independence did not apply to Negroes. “I have before me an extract from that speech which constitutes the evidence this pretended “Old-Line Whig” at Chicago brought forward to show that Mr. Clay didn’t suppose the negro was included in the Declaration of Independence.”
Now, they’re in the midst of a debate about slavery, and the necessary portion to refute the other side’s point includes an irrelevant element about women and minors and such. To exclude it while claiming it as a quotation is to automatically destroy his legitimacy. Here, over a hundred years later you wish to take this secondary element – a statement not of Lincoln but of the man he is quoting – and claim it as LINCOLN’S STANCE.
Now, I’ll make a counter-quote. From Basler, The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln, Volume I, p 48 “I go for all sharing the privileges of the government, who assist in bearing its burdens. Consequently I go for admitting all whites to the right of suffrage, who pay taxes or bear arms, (by no means excluding females.)” In fairness I’ll note the parenthetical of this two-sentence paragraph from a letter to the editor of the Sangamo Journal is taken by some historians as a toss-off joke, though many others take it as meaning what is said. There is no definitive statement either way. However, we have a specific quote from Lincoln and we have him quoting someone else. Lacking other evidence to weight the statement it is generally assumed that direct statement beats quoting the words of others, particularly when weighting in the primacy of the subject of the material in which the relevant portion is made.
If you’re going to say “Lincoln meant” and want to be taken as being intellectually honest, stick to his words and not his quotations of what others have said.
LD50
.
Jonah Goldberg?
(PS, yeah, I know his place in society isn’t really ‘high’)
asiangrrlMN
@gwangung: Thank you. I’m trying to be more judicious as to improve my chances of being the next SCOTUS. Is it working?
SGEW
Kirk Spencer:
Much as I applaud you for the historical insights (and as much as I deplore Bill’s admitted misogyny) I have to point out that it doesn’t matter. The 14th and 21st amendments overrule anything President Lincoln might have “meant.”
Women are equal under the law, no matter what you might want Bill, and your position lost the argument generations ago. Deal.
Dulcie
@LD50: It IS wide, though. Also.
djork
Way OT, but someone here could have fun with this:
CONFERENCE CALL WITH MICHELE BACHMANN
Tuesday, May 5, 3 – 4 p.m. CT
Congresswoman Michele Bachmann invites you to a conference call to discuss “What’s on Your Mind”. Be prepared to share your thoughts and to ask questions about what’s happening in Washington that will impact you and your business. Call in number is 1-877-229-8493 (PIN: 13533)
JL
Police and fire fighters should represent the communities they serve. At times affirmative action might be necessary to achieve these goals.
El Cid
Great. More idiot gameplay from such as BOB on differing uses of the word “equal”, which at times is used for “identical” and at other times used to represent “treated with equal value by the law”?
Man, what is this, a middle school philosophy discussion?
Stooleo
OT. NPR interview of military psychologists justifying the use of harsh tactics.
DanSmoot'sGhost
@JK:
I’ll take your comments on Matthews under advisement, but my real beef is in the competancy department. Given Russert’s position and stature, his journalistic competancy was appalling AFAIC. He sat there and let the big shots just walk all over him in interviews. He appeared to be trading access and status for journalistic practice. His failure to follow up and drill down into detail was … jaw dropping.
Where are there those darn WMDs, anyway, did they move them to Syria? Give me a FUCKING BREAK, how could any high school newspaper staffer sit still for crap like that?
gwangung
@asiangrrlMN: If it improves your chances of going nuclear with Thomas and Scalia, I hope so.
tc125231
I am a white male who entered the work force about the time affirmative action got serious.
It may have cost me some promotions. I say “may” because who really knows? I’ve done OK. I also say, “Who cares”?
The world has changed so much since assholes used to tell my mother that male teachers should –a priori –be paid more. For my wife, becoming an architect before the changes took hold was an endless subjection to bullshit.
My grand daughter will have a much better life. The fact is, it’s a better country because of this.
So those clowns can put that in their pipe and smoke it.
TenguPhule
Why not ask bank robbers why they rob banks while they’re at it?
tc125231
TenguPhule
Can Bachmann prove she has the necessary qualifications for this discussion?
eemom
@kay:
yeah, it’s a real pity that Justices Stevens and Ginsburg weren’t “aged out” while Bush was still president.
Not to mention that, for all we know, they may have WANTED to retire…..but hung on for the sake of the country and all of us and the future generations for whom the occupancy of those nine seats is of such mindblowing importance.
A little respect, please.
Thankovsky
Richard Cohen, yes. Chris Matthews, from what I’ve seen, is a genuinely smart guy who knows politics on a lot of fronts; the problem is, he’s entirely clueless on a lot of other fronts. This, unfortunately, is one of ’em. I try to forgive him, though; he’s old. Old people don’t get racial stuff. Or gender stuff. Or sexual orientation stuff. :p
Kirk Spencer
@SGEW: An outstanding point. However, BoB pushed one of my buttons. I despise the techniques of lying by telling the truth – the most frequent means being partially quoting something and implying it’s the whole (or wholly relevant). As I stated the first time we’ve actually been through the ‘right’ of his quote before, which made me fly off the handle.
JGabriel
As long as those are white male rats, the punditry should approve. After all, white rats are far more likely to have gone to college than black or brown rats.
.
WereBear
This was my favorite. Because we just saw some kind of video several threads back where a Faux News shill was claiming just that.
My favorite point about this came from an elderly woman music teacher. She said when she was growing up as a music student, orchestras were 90% men. Women turned up on the flute or the piano occasionally, but it was sworn on stacks of Bibles that women just “didn’t have it.”
Then they instituted the practice of having tryouts with the person sitting behind a screen, so that all that could be heard was the music.
And suddenly the orchestra was a much more diverse place.
I know a lot of jobs can’t have this kind of “screen” put into place, but the more we can do so, the better off we will be.
The waste of human potential is more than we can afford.
Calouste
I have argued this before, but pundits are exactly where they are because they don’t have the skills to get to their position on thier own. The media owners need some well paid shills who are scared to death that they will lose the position they don’t deserve so that they make more effective mouthpieces for tax cuts for the rich.
If pundits actually got to their postion on merit, by being really good journalists, they wouldn’t give much about their position or their income because they would be able to make a decent amount of money with the skills they have anyway.
CJ
@kth:
The firefighter mess didn’t and doesn’t have to be so complicated. If New Haven didn’t like the way the test turned out, they should have changed it, but only AFTER the class in question was promoted in due course. As in most things, changing the rules while the game is under way is bad form. New Haven should have sucked it up and admitted their mistake.
asiangrrlMN
@gwangung: God. I would pay money to see that. Or rather, pay money to be that. I would make life a living hell for those two, yes, indeedy, do. Is it too late for me to get my law degree?
WereBear, I love that example, and I have ever since I first saw it. See, many people think an ism is always an evil, palpable thing. “Oh, I can’t be a racist because I’ve never shot a person of color”. Yes, some of that exists, but it’s the pervasiveness of stereotypes that really cripple society. I don’t know how to have screen-audition-type interviews across the board, but we need to find a way to make interviews more fair.
ThatLeftTurnInABQ
Word.
These pundits make me want to reach through the TV screen and shake them, while yelling ” At least three quarters of Americans are either female, black, latino, or otherwise conspicuously and to their long term disadvantange in life not like you, Mr. Pasty White ‘I represent Real America’. Take that stat and shove up your privileged white male ass. And then tell your producers to go get somebody to put on the TV for whom a brain scan and a colonoscopy are functionally distinct categories of medical procedure.”
Shinobi
I really think this screencap says everything that needs to be said on the matter fairly eloquently.
TenguPhule
But they’d breed like rats. Can you imagine what would happen if the species mixed?
Zifnab
@Shinobi: It’s like they’re immune to irony.
Zifnab
@TenguPhule: Sam Donaldson might still have a full head of hair?
Thankovsky
@asiangrrlMN:
I agree with you 100%, but just remember – a lot of these guys are from a different time and a very difficult context. People like Matthews remind me a lot of some of my relatives – aunts and uncles and sometimes even my parents. They’re older white folks who, back in their day (the 60’s and 70’s) were genuinely quite progressively-minded. But they kind of stopped learning at a certain point, and now they’re a little clueless about changes in racial dynamics that have happened since then. Obviously, that doesn’t make their viewpoints okay, much less valid. But it does make it easier for me to forgive them, even as I do my damndest to correct them. :)
Just to be clear, I’m not saying this is true about the whole pundit class. Far from it. But I genuinely do believe that Tweety’s heart is pure, even if his brain can’t catch up with his mouth a lot of the time.
To be fair, I could just be naive on this one, too. Wouldn’t be the first time. :p
jake 4 that 1
@djork: According to Steele, no moderates need call. According to Rush, Bachmann is pandering when she listens to constituents.
According to me, the very thought of the sheer lunacy that will ensue is LOLtastic.
TenguPhule
@Zifnab
And we’d be up to our eyeballs in him.
Wolfdaughter
Thank you, Kirk Spencer, for showing that BOB was playing semantic games with his “quotes” from Abraham Lincoln.
But, just for a moment, let’s assume that BOB’s “quotes” actually represent Lincoln’s thought. BOB states that Obama “lionizes” Lincoln. I don’t think that’s in evidence, even though Obama has made it clear that he respects Lincoln. Obama, unlike BOB apparently, is capable of respecting Lincoln or anyone else, while recognizing him or others as fallible humans, who may very well have expressed ideas with which Obama disagrees, as well as ideas for which he respects Lincoln et al.
BOB’s argument reminds me of what righties were saying when it began to be glaringly apparent that the Iraq war was a cockup of gargantuan proportions, with no significant WMDs being found. We libs/progs who were pointing this out were then told that we could NOT opine thus, because of Clinton. Many of us respected Clinton for certain things, had voted for him, perhaps had campaigned for him as well. Clinton had made statements regarding Saddam’s supposed WMDs while president that could be construed to mean that he supported the Iraq war. Therefore, in the minds of BOB and others, if we had supported Clinton in any other way, we HAD to agree that Bush’s going into Iraq was the right thing to do, even though it was being proven by actual events on the ground to be the wrong thing.
In other words, if we admire someone for whatever reasons, we MUST agree with everything that this individual has said, and if we don’t, our arguments are invalid. Typical authoritarian mindset. Can’t question the top banana.
WRONG, BOB. Grow up, dude.
sparky
@TenguPhule: i was thinking reality show spinoff. the winners eat the losers. true meritocracy.
kay
@eemom:
I don’t really buy that. Stevens could have made a graceful exit years ago, and allowed someone new, and newly liberal, on the court.
It’s not supposed to be a club. They have a job to do.
kay
We also wouldn’t run into the situation we did with Justice O’Conner, if we aged out judges.
Where she basically chose the President to fit her retirement schedule.
JGabriel
Richard Cohen (as quoted by DougJ at top):
Ah yes, here is the nugget of the Village logic / rage: “We elected a black man president! Obviously there’s no more discrimination! We need to end, end, end affirmative action!”
Jackasses.
.
TenguPhule
And Bush would have packed the courts by now if we had aging out.
TenguPhule
Hah! Sure, Bush would have followed precedent and not abused his position.
Can I interest you in a Bridge to Brooklyn?
jake 4 that 1
@JGabriel: Wha, family history?
Step 1: American white woman marries a man from Kenya.
Step 2: ???
Step 3: Ponies!
Yes, obviously the smart thing to do is assume our own personal experiences translate to everyone with whom we share certain characteristics.
asiangrrlMN
@Thankovsky: I know that they grew up in a different time, blah blah blah. Here’s the thing–if they are spouting this kind of crap to their friends and family and blogging about it–so be it. It’s the fact that they are given national platforms to spew this bullshit and no one will call them on it. Tweety was brutal to Clinton when she ran, and he’s pretty damn misogynistic in general. No one is willing to stand up to him and say, “Tweety, you are full of shit,” so he gets to disseminate this bullshit all he likes. Then, the rest of the Villagers pick it up and spread it all around. Now, the question of the next SCOTUS is framed so that if Obama picks anyone BUT a white guy, he’s picking the affirmative action choice.
In other words, if Tweety actually felt any consequences for his words, then I would feel more sympathetic towards him. But, he doesn’t, so I don’t. If he can’t catch up with the times, then he needs to be off the air.
@ThatLeftTurnInABQ:
I would like to return the compliment.
This was full of win.
Mnemosyne
@cleek:
Ding ding ding ding ding. This is why conservatives and Republicans keep referring to Obama as the “affirmative action president” and claim that the only reason he did so well at Columbia and Harvard was that he got a break because of his skin color.
They literally do not believe that there is such a thing as a woman or minority candidate who is equally as qualified as any random white male, and there certainly isn’t a woman or minority alive who’s more qualified than any random white male. Therefore, if a white guy didn’t get the job, the only possible explanation is discrimination because a white guy is always more qualified than anyone else.
(Edited ’cause I felt like it.)
DanSmoot'sGhost
@ThatLeftTurnInABQ:
Where the hell have you been?
bago
Ana Marie Cox brought ass-fucking into DC discourse. Respect
Persia
@TenguPhule: That interview scared the shit out of me. Proof that torturing people really does fuck up the torturer’s brain too.
kay
@TenguPhule:
It would work out. Republican, Democratic Presidents, one and two terms, it would all wash out, over time.
I read those charming stories about Ginsburg and Scalia playing cards, year after year after year, and I just don’t have the “aw shucks” reaction that other people have.
It’s a job. Shake it up a little.
Joel
@gwangung: Jim Bowden and Steve Phillips are out of the league now.
eemom
@kay:
what is the mandatory retirement age you have in mind?
Thankovsky
@asiangrrlMN:
You might be right about him needing to retire sooner or later; at the very least, though, the damage that he might do to the national discourse on issues like gender- or race-relations is minimized by the fact that he’s on MSNBC, as opposed to one of the major network channels or Fox News. I think most of his audience just rolls their eyes whenever he says something sexist or racially insensitive. Still, if he’s not able to keep up with the shifts in culture anymore – and no one is able to do that forever, anyway – then you’re probably right; it’s probably time for him to retire from the mainstream media.
All that said, as doddering as he seems three-quarters of the time, he has a knack for making right-wing idiots self-destruct on his show. Zell Miller, Michelle Bachmann, Tucker Bounds, Tom Delay…I haven’t seen anyone deconstruct these lunatics to their face as completely as Tweety has. So I have to give the man SOME credit. ;)
gwangung
@Joel:
But Bill Bavasi is still in…
Hm. Are Bowden and Phillips consulting for the Republicans? I know George Will is….
Suzan
Of all the talking heads on TV, Matthews sometimes knows what he’s talking about. Search YouTube using “Matthews appeasement” for an example. (I didn’t pay attention to the lesson on how to post links here and live in terror I will do it wrong.) His style sucks but at least he knew why Bush/Cheney saying Obama was like Chamberlain was nonsense.
asiangrrlMN
@Thankovsky: Your latter point is true. He did allow Michele Bachmann enough rope to hang herself. He gets half a point for that. If she had been ousted, I would have given him a full point.
However, Tweety is also the one who said W. was a manly man and that Americans love them some manly men. I deduct a quarter point right there.
Thankovsky
@asiangrrlMN:
True dat. He’d earn some major points from me if he came out and said, “Looking back, I can see that I was 100% wrong about Bush, and the fact that so many other Americans were so wrong about him as well just means that I need to do my job better.”
Brick Oven Bill
Wolfdaughter says:
“Thank you, Kirk Spencer, for showing that BOB was playing semantic games with his “quotes” from Abraham Lincoln.”
Out of respect for this forum, the Lincoln excerpts presented were very mild and non-controversial. The people distorting Abraham Lincoln are the modern left. Here is the Lincoln-Douglas Debate from Quincy, I will let the man speak for himself without comment. This is because making your own judgments after reviewing the source documentation is a grown-up activity. Dude.
DougJ
Relative to Richard Cohen, yes.
MNPundit
Scum! Nero could be a great emperor. His conduct in regards to the Persians was an excellent move for the Empire that prevented war for 50 years! Moreover he was so beloved that after he died a False Nero arose in Persia and the Iranians refused to hand him over to the Romans for execution because they FUCKING LOVED THE GUY.
He also recalled the governor of Britain who crushed Boudicca’s rebellion because he was being far too brutal for Nero’s comfort and replaced him with a more conciliatory governor.
Compared to Cohen or Matthews Nero was a FUCKING GENIUS.
slightly_peeved
This is one of the most condescending things I’ve ever seen.
I guess it’s understandable, considering the only qualification Matthews has for his job is a full head of hair and the ability to happily say whatever dumb shit results from his two neurons banging together, but why the hell (since we’re talking about affirmative action here) does he think a hispanic judge or woman judge is going to be at all different from any other kind of judge?
I get the impression that in Chris Matthew’s weird fantasy world, this latina judge would enter the court accompanied by a mariachi band and would wear a giant poncho instead of judicial robes.
Obama will pick someone who’s a competent judge who represents Obama’s interests for the direction of the court. If that person happens to be non-white and non-male, the assumption that affirmative action is the reason is just plain bigoted.
El Cid
I think I would be completely for that.
El Cid
What’s so weird about this type of Chris Matthews bullshit is that if he were in fact the god-damned patriot he likes to pretend to be, he’d emphasize what a fucking fantastic country we have that so many people are qualified to be a Supreme Court Justice that the President is able to choose from people of backgrounds who’ve never been Justices before.
But, no, instead Matthews has got to revert to the Bush-worshiping, 9/11 pants-pissing, woman-bashing right wing leg humper he so often becomes.
Porlock Junior
@Sparky
Yeah, but you still need pundits (and lawyers) for an oft-cited reason: there are some things you just can’t get a rat to do.