I just met a girl named Maria

It’s not the J-Lo comparison I was hoping for but it’s a start, from Huckabee (Ben Smith via Atrios):

The appointment of Maria Sotomayor for the Supreme Court is the clearest indication yet that President Obama’s campaign promises to be a centrist and think in a bipartisan way were mere rhetoric. Sotomayor comes from the far left and will likely leave us with something akin to the “Extreme Court” that could mark a major shift. The notion that appellate court decisions are to be interpreted by the “feelings” of the judge is a direct affront of the basic premise of our judicial system that is supposed to apply the law without personal emotion. If she is confirmed, then we need to take the blindfold off Lady Justice.—

Share On Facebook
Share On Twitter
Share On Google Plus
Share On Pinterest
Share On Reddit






168 replies
  1. 1
    Nora Carrington says:

    Because every Hispanic woman is named “Maria.”

    Sheesh.

  2. 2
    Joshua Norton says:

    Strange. When Bush floated Harriet Myers name for a SCOTUS appointment the meme was that she was “unqualified.” No one called her unintelligent despite the fact that a dying philodendron could checkmate her in 12 moves.

  3. 3
    Robin G. says:

    If human feelings and insight weren’t a value on the bench, then we’d have a Google term search of the Constitution make all the decisions. (“‘privacy’ not found. Did you mean ‘punishment’?”)

  4. 4
    Krista says:

    The appointment of Maria Sotomayor for the Supreme Court is the clearest indication yet that President Obama’s campaign promises to be a centrist and think in a bipartisan way were mere rhetoric.

    And Huckabee’s failure to do even basic research on the appointee’s NAME is the clearest indication yet that he is a blithering idiot who couldn’t find his own ass with two hands, a flashlight and a Sherpa.

  5. 5
    Flukebucket says:

    Radley Balko also reports that she has already been described as “a single mother” and “a child of immigrants”.

  6. 6
    InflatableCommenter says:

    The thread title is just a little too cute, even for you. At least you didn’t compare her to Dora and Boots.

    Anyway, the blurb cited above is hilarious. Like, we don’t have actually insane extremist nutcases on the court in the persons of Scalia and Thomas? America’s love affair with failed conservatism has left behind rubble that will take years to clean up. Looks to me like Sotomayor is just the person to start that cleanup on the big bench. She looks tough and sounds smart to me.

    I like the choice and I am looking forward to her being seated on the court.

  7. 7
    Laura W says:

    Shoot.
    When I saw the title I thought you’d met a girl who drinks too much and falls in love with hack bloggers.

  8. 8
    JK says:

    The always insightful Mark Halperin had a link to this quote from his stellar Page.

    More dumb Mike Huckabee

    You don’t like people from outside the state coming in and telling you what to do with your flag. In fact, if somebody came to Arkansas and told us what to do with our flag, we’d tell ’em what to do with the pole; that’s what we’d do.

    h/t Huffington Post http://www.huffingtonpost.com/.....82055.html

  9. 9
    Aaron says:

    /sigh

    Damn Obama and his lack of bipartisanship. Why can’t he just do everything Republicans want him to – that would be totally bipartisan! Oh yeah, and any pro-choice position is “extreme” or “activist.”

  10. 10
    Short Bus Bully says:

    This whole “activist judge” bullshit is just code for racist fear. It’s time for the Dems to grow a sack, call a spade a spade, and yell and scream about this shit. “Activist Judge” is referring to the long held plantation owner/aristocratic fear that the darkies/serfs will rise up and revolt. It’s code for “omg, them minorities is gonna take our jobs and rape our womens!” Nothing more, nothing less.

    What, are you going to try and tell me that after the last eight years the Repubs are dedicated to the rule of law and believe in strict adherence to due process?

    If you’re not angry yet it’s time to go ahead and get pissed.

  11. 11
    InflatableCommenter says:

    @Laura W:

    Bada-bing-ding!

    Rome and I had some good laughs over that earlier reference over the weekend. Luckily for Doug, we won’t share them here. At least, I won’t ;)

  12. 12
    Cris says:

    @Nora Carrington: Because every Hispanic woman is named “Maria.”

    And is married to a guy named Luis.

  13. 13
    Zandar says:

    Maria, says Ralph Huckabee.

  14. 14
    Laura W says:

    @Laura W: I probably should’ve linked to your post for reference or blockquoted the line:

    But what do I know, I’m just a hack blogger who drinks too much and falls in love with girls.

    or thrown in a winky emoticon or something. You know how people like to talk.

    You’re in Italy. It could happen!
    (HA! InflatableC!)

  15. 15
    MikeJ says:

    Radley Balko also reports that she has already been described as “a single mother” and “a child of immigrants”.

    Immigrant goes to America,
    Many hellos in America;
    Nobody knows in America
    Puerto Rico’s in America!

  16. 16

    Coming from a Hispanic family where all my Aunts are actually named Maria, I thought Rod Dreher was much worse:

    Given that we were certain to get a liberal justice out of Obama, I suppose one has to take comfort in knowing that Obama made a quota pick too, and did not choose a liberal justice who can match intellects with Roberts and Scalia.

    http://blog.beliefnet.com/crun.....rriet.html

    Sotomayor was PBK at Princeton and editor of the Yale Law Review, but she’s incapable of matching wits with Scalia because, well, Jeffrey Rosen.

    (via Sully)

  17. 17
    MattF says:

    True story… Friend of mine has a housekeeper, Maria, who always calls her “Mrs. Harrison”– which is not her name. Turns out that “Maria’s” name is actually Valeriana.

  18. 18

    @InflatableCommenter:

    I’m not gonna say shit! ;)

  19. 19
    InflatableCommenter says:

    @Rottenchester:

    Good catch. I consider this kind of rhetoric to be the equivalent of the “can’t talk with out a teleprompter” bullshit about Obama.

    Sotomayor will be attacked on intellect, and Obama will be attacked for making a quota pick.

    Is there anyone here who doesn’t recognize what this is? It is pure racism, and not even camoflaged, just right out there for all to see.

    I am going to call it what it is from now on, whether it’s Brick Oven Bill doing it, or some asshole pundit out there, or some fukhead Republican.

    I’ve basically had it with dogwhistle racism. It’s time to call them out for it whenever we see it.

  20. 20
    pseudonymous in nc says:

    They’re thankful that the first draft, where [NAME GOES HERE] was replaced with “That Brown Woman”, got caught before the intern hit “send”.

  21. 21
    DougJ says:

    @Laura W

    It was a reference to “The Third Man”!

  22. 22
    InflatableCommenter says:

    @Little Dreamer:

    Good morning!

    Did you see Sotomayor make her speech this morning?

    I was pretty impressed, this is a tough woman who sounds like she will have no trouble standing up to the pack of dogs the GOP is about to unleash on her.

  23. 23
    Laura W says:

    @DougJ: Of course it was, DougJ.

  24. 24
    Shawn in ShowMe says:

    And is married to a guy named Luis.

    Huckabee lives in fear of the day that the makeup of the Supreme Court resembles the human cast of Sesame Street. That show is for DFHs and their childen. Real Americans watch Howdy Doody.

  25. 25
    Zifnab says:

    What’s the female hispanic equivalent to “uppity black man”?

  26. 26

    Why is someone calling her Maria when her name is Sonia?

  27. 27
    InflatableCommenter says:

    @DougJ:

    Musta been a Major Calloway line. I’ve always thought you would be a Trevor Howard or a Claude Rains sort of guy.

  28. 28
    Dennis-SGMM says:

    @Cris:
    Aw crap. I must have married the wrong Latina. My wife is named Martha. She does insist on calling me Luis Jesus Santa Maria Fermin Arcadio Funes though.

  29. 29
    dmsilev says:

    Give Mike a break. Woman of Puerto Rican descent, living in New York, sister of a member of the Sharks. What other name could she possibly have?

    -dms

  30. 30

    @InflatableCommenter:

    Good morning back. Yes, I just caught her on CNN. :)

    I like the pick. I don’t like that people are already getting her name wrong. ::insert angry red pogo face here::

  31. 31
    Aaron says:

    @Short Bus Bully:

    SBB, while I agree with you, there is a simple beauty to coded language – plausible deniability. Of course Republican’s didn’t mean (fill in the blank) by that phrase, so why are you arguing semantics instead of issues.

    Coded language works so well because it is empty. When Reagan went on about “State’s rights,” everybody knew what he meant but no one could call him on it.

  32. 32
    Dennis-SGMM says:

    @Zifnab:

    What’s the female hispanic equivalent to “uppity black man”?

    Democratic nominee for the Supreme Court?

  33. 33

    @Dennis-SGMM:

    She does insist on calling me Luis Jesus Santa Maria Fermin Arcadio Funes though.

    How often does she do that? Poor woman!

  34. 34
    InflatableCommenter says:

    @Little Dreamer:

    It’s a reference to West Side Story. Not a very good one, but a reference anyway.

    Maybe Doug thought the judge looked like Natalie Wood?

  35. 35
    J.D. Rhoades says:

    Why is someone calling her Maria when her name is Sonia?

    Becuase they know nothing about her, not even her name. This was going to be the reaction to whoever Obama picked. They’re just phoning it in by now.

  36. 36

    @InflatableCommenter:

    I know what West Side Story is, but look at the quote in the post above:

    The appointment of Maria Sotomayor for the Supreme Court…

    It’s not JUST a reference to West Side Story…

  37. 37
    InflatableCommenter says:

    @Little Dreamer:

    Right. Those pundits and wingers are such fricking idiots.

    It’s not like they haven’t had a month to get the basic details right. Hell, the wingnutnoisemachine(tm) has been gearing up for Sotomayor for a while now.

  38. 38
    eemom says:

    They can call her Maria and a liberal and a quota pick till their heads explode and their tiny little brains leak out their ears, and it won’t matter squat. Barring some unforeseen skeleton there’s no way they can stop her being confirmed. And they KNOW it. Tee hee.

    So let’s all just sit back, relax, and enjoy the ride…..

  39. 39
    Comrade Darkness says:

    From the wikipedia:

    On June 25, 1997, she was nominated by former President Bill Clinton to the seat she now holds, which was vacated by J. Daniel Mahoney. Her nomination was approved overwhelmingly by the Senate Judiciary Committee, but became “embroiled in the sometimes tortured judicial politics of the Senate,” as some Republicans said they did not want to consider the nomination because elevating Sotomayor to the Appeals Court would enhance her prospects of being appointed to the Supreme Court.[21][22] An anonymous senator put a secret hold on her nomination, blocking it for over a year. Democratic Senator Patrick Leahy called the length of the hold “disturbing,” “petty,” and “shameful,” also noting that at that time, “[o]f the 10 judicial nominees whose nominations have been pending the longest before the Senate, eight are women and racial or ethnic minority candidates.”[23]

  40. 40
    Zifnab says:

    DAMN YOU SOCIALIST CONTENT FILTERS!

  41. 41
    cmohr says:

    All this hubub about “Sonia Sotomeyor” being the first Hispanic justice is really one of the most astoundingly clever gambits Obama has yet employed. How else better to disguise that he’s really picked the first woman of Serbian-Slovak descent for the court? (Everyone seems to be overlooking that Eastern European women are named “Sonia”, Puerto Rican women are named “Maria”). One can almost forgive Mike Huckabee’s confusion for being taken in by this clever gambit.

  42. 42
    Zifnab says:

    @Dennis-SGMM:

    Democratic SOCIA LIST PARTY nominee for the Supreme Court?

    Close, but I was looking for something more offensive. Like “activist wetback” but for the ladies.

  43. 43
    Michael says:

    She does insist on calling me Luis Jesus Santa Maria Fermin Arcadio Funes though.

    Ironically, I go through periods when I insist that my wife call me El Conquistador.

  44. 44

    @eemom:

    Which Republican is going to get her name out of committee?

  45. 45
    Jon H says:

    @Nora Carrington: “Because every Hispanic woman is named “Maria.””

    Hey, don’t be ragging on the quaint folkways of the heartland, where all Mexicans are called Maria.

    ;^/

  46. 46

    @cmohr:

    Now THAT I’ll accept. ;) Good work!

  47. 47
    Indylib says:

    @Rottenchester:

    I suppose one has to take comfort in knowing that Obama made a quota pick too, and did not choose a liberal justice who can match intellects with Roberts and Scalia

    I think Dreher has a problem with women (among other things). To him it wouldn’t matter who she was, as long as she is female she couldn’t possibly have the “intellectual” wherewithal to match legal wits with those testosterone laden conservative he-men on the Supreme Court.

    I hope she finds a reason at some point to knee Scalia where he carries his “intellect”.

  48. 48
    MikeJ says:

    Which Republican is going to get her name out of committee?

    Hatch.

  49. 49
    Andy says:

    Maria, Sonia, meh.

    Reminds me of the joke during the campaign, about candidates’ wives’ favorite recipes. Cindy McCain’s quick-and-easy recipe for filet mignon: “Consuela, we’ll be having filet mignon tonight.’

  50. 50
    ricky says:

    That Huckster. Obviously he does not know the Puerto Rican people as well as those of us who have experienced the unique story of love and redemption that is West Side Story. Sotomayor is not Maria. She is Anita.

  51. 51
    Short Bus Bully says:

    @ Aaron

    I totally understand the plausible deniability angle, it all goes back to that famous Lee Atwater quote.

    My point is that the Dems need to start challenging the GOP on this shit and calling them out on their “state’s rights” and “activist judges” racist bullsit. This isn’t just a fight for a SCOTUS nominee, Obama has given the GOP enough rope to hang themselves with by demonizing this obviously qualified Latina judge. Women and Latinos are watching, the GOP will start stomping on their own collective dicks very soon, the Dems need to get brave and call them out along the way.

  52. 52

    @MikeJ:

    Hmmm, really? Somehow I just don’t see him doing that.

  53. 53
    JK says:

    Another stupid Huckabee comment from the presidential campaign:

    Appearing in front of about 6,000 gun rights activists, Huckabee’s speech was interrupted by a loud noise. The former Arkansas governor said, “That was Barack Obama. He just tripped off a chair. He’s getting ready to speak and somebody aimed a gun at him and he — he dove for the floor.” Huckabee took to his blog to apologize for the quip. “During my speech at the NRA a loud noise backstage, that sounded like a chair falling, distracted the crowd and interrupted my speech. I made an off hand remark that was in no way intended to offend or disparage Sen. Obama,” he wrote. “I apologize that my comments were offensive, that was never my intention.”

    h/t http://voices.washingtonpost.c.....s_fla.html

  54. 54
    Shinobi says:

    How do you solve a problem like Maria?

    Oh I know, call her dumb and brown. Stay classy republicans.

  55. 55
    El Cid says:

    GOP: ‘We are totally outraged by Obama’s ethnic-empathy pick of this intellectually inferior judge from Porta Ricka, that there Salma Hayek.’

  56. 56
    Dennis-SGMM says:

    @Zifnab:

    Close, but I was looking for something more offensive. Like “activist wetback” but for the ladies.

    They should expand their outreach to Latinos and Latinas by referring to Judge Sotomayor as a “mojada”. That will complete the suicide run of today’s GOP.

  57. 57
    Colette says:

    @ricky:
    @cmohr:
    She can’t really be Puerto Rican, because she isn’t a white person covered with brown-face makeup, like those gen-yoo-wine Puerto Ricans in West Side Story. If it’s in the movies, it must be true, right?

  58. 58
    InflatableCommenter says:

    “Unqualifed” and “radical” as stated by GOP talking point reader — David Shuster is having none of it.

    Anyway, those are the buzzwords they had ready for the cable shows this morning. Unqualified, and radical.

  59. 59
    ricky says:

    MikeJ @ 15

    Immigrant goes to America,
    Many hellos in America;
    Nobody knows in America
    Puerto Rico’s in America!

    My thoughts exactly. Hope somebody tells Lou Dobbs that, unlike Mexico, we kept all of Puerto Rico after that war.

  60. 60
    Cris says:

    @Aaron: SBB, while I agree with you, there is a simple beauty to coded language – plausible deniability. Of course Republican’s didn’t mean (fill in the blank) by that phrase, so why are you arguing semantics instead of issues.

    It’s even better than that. If you call out the coded language for what it means, you’re being paranoid, knee-jerk, overreacting, reading your own agenda into innocent language. The onus is moved from them to you.

    The epitome of this is the “race card” retort. They blow a dog whistle; you call them out on their racism; they respond that you’re simply playing the race card. They’re not racist, you’re just looking for an excuse to cry racism.

  61. 61
    Krista says:

    Why is someone calling her Maria when her name is Sonia?

    Because Huckabee is an idiot, and couldn’t be arsed to do basic research to find out her proper name, and so assumed that her name is Maria, because that’s what all Hispanic women are named, right?

    Don’t forget, this is a man who in all sincerity, congratulated we Canadians on our efforts to preserve our “national igloo”.

    Next in his series will be a profile on the Italian Prime Minister, Mario Berlusconi.

  62. 62
    ricky says:

    Collette @56

    Rita Moreno played Anita. As, I believe, did Chita Rivera.
    Natalie Wood was chsoen to play Maria despite her race because she could sing.

  63. 63
    Betsy says:

    @Zifnab:

    What’s the female hispanic equivalent to “uppity black man”?

    “Angry black Hispanic woman”

    Laughsob.

  64. 64
    JK says:

    National Review’s David Freddoso spins George Bush Sr’s nomination of Sotomayor to the federal bench

    A GOP Senate office also draws my attention to a 1992 article in the New York Law Journal regarding the circumstances surrounding her appointment by George H. W. Bush. She was actually the pick of the late Senator Daniel Moynihan (D., N.Y.). Bush chose her as part of a deal in which Moynihan and former Sen. Al D’Amato (R., N.Y.) split up seven of New York’s long-vacant district court seats.

  65. 65
    El Cid says:

    @Colette: Rita Moreno was in West Side Story, though apparently never as Maria.

    Judge Moreno’s experience on the Electric Company also disqualifies her from the Supreme Court, since they appear to believe that humor can improve education.

  66. 66
    Comrade Darkness says:

    @Krista: Next in his series will be a profile on the Italian Prime Minister, Mario Berlusconi.

    FTW! (coffee warning next time, please, have mercy on teh keyboards)

  67. 67
    MikeJ says:

    Natalie Wood was chsoen to play Maria despite her race because she could sing.

    Marni Nixon did all of her singing.

  68. 68

    Schumer just said it would be very hard for a congressperson of either party to vote against her… Haha! I’m sure Republicans will not agree.

  69. 69
    Dennis-SGMM says:

    @Krista:

    Because Huckabee is an idiot…

    Huckabee/Palin 2012, because what one doesn’t know the other one doesn’t know either.

  70. 70

    Prop 8 was just upheld. OMFG!

  71. 71
    InflatableCommenter says:

    Sad but true, California Supreme Court upholds Prop 8.

  72. 72
    gwangung says:

    Natalie Wood was chsoen to play Maria despite her race because she could sing.

    Which was why she was dubbed by Marni Nixon, eh?

  73. 73
    Comrade Kevin says:

    I would suggest staying away from the GOS today, they’re frothing at the mouth about two subjects: Jonathan Turley, and the California Supreme Court, which upheld Prop 8.

  74. 74
    ricky says:

    It ain’t the fact that all these High Spanics name their
    boy children Jesus and their girl children Maria that is confusing me. It’s that they let their images keep appearing randomly on food products without having the wisdom to collect royalties.

  75. 75
    InflatableCommenter says:

    @MikeJ:

    LOL. So the correct reference is, Natalie Wood got the part because Marni Nixon could sing.

    Marni also did Audrey Hepburn’s singing in My Fair Lady, did she not?

    Too lazy to look it up.

  76. 76
    Brachiator says:

    OT: The California Supreme Court has upheld Proposition 8, enshrining the will of the people, even when it is stupid and takes rights away from other citizens. Prop 8 sought to invalidate a previous court ruling that allowed gay marriage.

    Apparently, however, existing gay marriages will be allowed to stand.

  77. 77
    JK says:

    @Krista:

    Because Huckabee is an idiot

    Huckabee defended the flying of the Confederate flag over South Carolina’s statehouse, made a joke about Obama being shot at, and currently hosts a show on Fox News Channel. The evidence is pretty overwhelming that Mike Huckabee is a major league idiot.

  78. 78

    Consider the source. Mike Huckabee, being a young earth christian, believes the earth came into existence a thousand years AFTER the Sumerians invented ink.

  79. 79
    gwangung says:

    Personally, I’d ask any detractor of Sotomayor why she’s unqualified–and ask them specifically what in her apellate decisions supports them. 99% of the time, they’ll have no idea why, particularly when you hit them up side the head with Pappas v. Giuliani.

  80. 80
    NR says:

    You know, it’s looking more and more like the Republicans have given up on traditional methods of fighting against Obama these days and are now resorting to Jarate.

  81. 81
    ricky says:

    Mike J and Gwangung probably said the same hateful racist things about Audrey Hepburn for her role in My Fair Lady.

    You are right. She was not English, so she couldn’t have been expected to sing in that language without more dialect coaching.

    Besides, none of this explains why they picked that English lady to play the Austrian in the Sound of Music. Ruined the realism for me.

  82. 82
    InflatableCommenter says:

    @Brachiator:

    Yes, the idea that 50% +1 can decide basic rights is pretty sobering.

    It kind of explains why the right so often seems to support what amounts to mob rule. Unless “rule of law” works for their talking points on that day, and then they go with that.

    Whatever works. Rule of law, activist court, strict construction, family values, law and order, peace with honor.

    Proctor and Gamble has nothing on the rightwing marketeers, kids.

  83. 83
    Indylib says:

    @Flukebucket:

    Radley Balko also reports that she has already been described as “a single mother”

    That one might be hard to pull off, Sotomayor doesn’t have any children. But she has apparently been divorced for years, so I’m betting they’ll replace it with “lesbian”.

  84. 84
    Tsulagi says:

    What, no poems yet from the bard of the tards? Guess he’s just being a little slower than usual.

    @Dennis-SGMM:
    You’re hooked up with a latina too? I feel yer pain. j/k

    @Zifnab:
    I could post a pic of my SO, but…

    Latinas are great.

  85. 85
    Indylib says:

    @Betsy:

    “Angry black Hispanic woman”

    The phrase I’ve seen used already is “hotheaded” Latina.

  86. 86
    MikeJ says:

    You are right. She was not English, so she couldn’t have been expected to sing in that language without more dialect coaching.

    God damned dutch with their wooden shoes, always cutting people’s doors in half, changing the acidity of chocolate…

  87. 87
    JK says:

    @Dennis-SGMM:

    Huckabee/Palin 2012

    Palin/Bachman 2012 is a more balanced ticket.

    Huckabee and Palin both have executive experience from having served as governors but Bachmann has experience as a legislator.

  88. 88

    Orrin Hatch is on MSNBC via telephone stating he doesn’t like Sotomayor’s “Legal Realism”. He’s giving reasons not to support her, I don’t see him getting her name out of committee, sorry.

  89. 89
    Betsy says:

    @Indylib:
    Ah yes, or “fiery” or “quick-tempered.” Because you know, those Latinas, so passionate and emotional and all! No brain-thinking for them, nope nope.

  90. 90
    Cain says:

    @Dennis-SGMM:

    Aw crap. I must have married the wrong Latina. My wife is named Martha. She does insist on calling me Luis Jesus Santa Maria Fermin Arcadio Funes though.

    That’s a long orgasm.

    :)

    cain

  91. 91
    ricky says:

    Krista and JK are so off base about Mike Huckabee’s intellect. I challenge anyone to fry squirrel on a hot plate and then call him stupid.

  92. 92
    Bill E Pilgrim says:

    “Sotomayor” so that would be like the opposite of Guiliani, right?

  93. 93
    Krista says:

    Consider the source. Mike Huckabee, being a young earth christian, believes the earth came into existence a thousand years AFTER the Sumerians invented ink.

    The Sumerians didn’t count as real people, though. Not like that nice Jesus with his white skin, excellent dental hygiene and light brown hair.

  94. 94
    Comrade Darkness says:

    @Brachiator, seems like this whole thing was a well-needed wake up call. It only takes 50% +1 to flip it back, no?

    And for those who like politics, there’s sport!

  95. 95
    InflatableCommenter says:

    @Little Dreamer:

    Hatch: I voted for her in 1998, but this is the most important court on earth. This is different.

    I think that we are looking at a great progressive opportunity here. The GOP is not going to be able to really oppose this nomination without infuriating women and Hispanics and driving the GOP’s demographics further into the septic tank.

    Let them fight, let her be confirmed, and let’s have an election next year.

    Heh.

  96. 96
    LD50 says:

    Krista and JK are so off base about Mike Huckabee’s intellect. I challenge anyone to fry squirrel on a hot plate and then call him stupid.

    It’s better than that – he and his college buddies fried squirrels in a POPCORN POPPER.

  97. 97
    Michael says:

    Don’t worry about Radley.

    Like a good little libertarian, he’ll fold like a cheap chair. Cato and Reason have expressed conniptions on behalf of their current paymasters of the Religious Right/Corporate Interest rump of what’s left of the GOP, and Radley will be toeing the line. Again.

  98. 98
    Brachiator says:

    @InflatableCommenter:

    Yes, the idea that 50% +1 can decide basic rights is pretty sobering.

    The California Supreme Court server is down, so I can’t get to the opinion itself. But those who are physically present and got paper copies (take that InterTubes!) read it as being narrowly technical. That is, Prop 8 is allowed to stand because it was a “revision” to the state Constitution. If it were viewed as an “amendment,” it would have required 2/3s approval.

    However, the sad thing is that the content of Prop 8 was not considered.

    Conservatives are already upset that 18,000 existing gay marriages were not also rendered null and void. But they are crowing about the “will of the people” being upheld. Morans.

    It kind of explains why the right so often seems to support what amounts to mob rule. Unless “rule of law” works for their talking points on that day, and then they go with that.
    Whatever works.

    Bingo! Whatever works. The old way used to be to have a narrow clique write legislation, and then when someone came to court for justice, these goons would point to a dry legal code book and bleat, “It’s not us. It’s the law.”

    But now, it’s not that laws should be consistent and soberly considered, it’s mob rule all the way baby!

    It only takes 50% +1 to flip it back, no?

    The principle needs to be settled. Otherwise, gay people who want to get married never know where they stand or whether their families will be protected against the folly of mob rule.

  99. 99
    Michael says:

    The Sumerians didn’t count as real people, though. Not like that nice Jesus with his white skin, excellent dental hygiene and light brown hair.

    Don’t forget the blue eyes or his flowery King’s English.

    The King James version is the only one that reflects the actual words Jesus used, y’know. At least, thats what they told me in my fundie school in the 8th grade.

  100. 100

    @InflatableCommenter:

    Let them fight, let her be confirmed, and let’s have an election next year.

    Could be interesting. ;)

  101. 101
    JG says:

    Actually Natalie Wood was at least partly chosen because she could sing, and because she was dating Warren Beatty who was being considered for Tony. They later decided to dub Marni Nixon and Wood was apparently pissed about it (she didn’t know until after filming).

    …And Chita Rivera played Anita in the original Broadway and West End productions of West Side Story while Rita Moreno was in the movie…apparently Anita is pretty reliably non-white – including Debbie Allen in the 80s revival while the others are ok as whities in brownface.

  102. 102
    El Cid says:

    @The Grand Panjandrum:

    Consider the source. Mike Huckabee, being a young earth christian, believes the earth came into existence a thousand years AFTER the Sumerians invented ink.

    Oh yeah? If that’s true, then how come the Sumerians didn’t write it down when they watched God create the Urf in 6 days? Huh? Huh?

  103. 103

    @Brachiator:

    That is, Prop 8 is allowed to stand because it was a “revision” to the state Constitution. If it were viewed as an “amendment,” it would have required 2/3s approval.

    Sounds like Activist Judges to me.

  104. 104
    Tonal Crow says:

    If she is confirmed, then we need to take the blindfold off Lady Justice.

    …and cover her tits. Oh, wait, we already did that.

  105. 105
    InflatableCommenter says:

    @El Cid:

    Preciseamente!

    Or in the words of the Creationsist, “Were you there?”

    No, as it turns out, I was not. Popular opinion here notwithstanding, I was not.

  106. 106

    Rush Limbaugh called Barack Obama and Sonia Sotomayor “Reverse Racists” – WTF?

    Keep it up Rush, brick by brick the Republican party falls. ;)

  107. 107
    MikeJ says:

    However, the sad thing is that the content of Prop 8 was not considered.

    That’s sort of the point of a constitutional amendment, isn’t it? Of course the court didn’t consider the content. They’d already ruled on it once, found a right to SSM. 8 overturned that.

    It’s a shitty way to run a state, but from what I’ve read the court decided correctly. That is, in accordance with the laws and constitution of California, not with what is moral.

  108. 108
    Tsulagi says:

    @Michael:

    Don’t forget the blue eyes

    You beat me to the blue eyes, but you both forgot the cute little button nose.

  109. 109
    MikeJ says:

    The principle needs to be settled. Otherwise, gay people who want to get married never know where they stand or whether their families will be protected against the folly of mob rule.

    I predict: In the next five years someone will file a follow up to Loving v Virginia. Sometime in the five years after that it will get to the USSC. In somewhere between 2 and 10 years there’s a good chance same sex couples will have the same rights nation wide that interracial couples do today.

  110. 110
    KG says:

    @96: you got revision and amendment backwards, but otherwise, yes.

    I managed to get the opinion online – 185 pages including concurring and dissenting opinions. Not the decision I was hoping for. Moreno has an interesting concurring and dissenting opinion – basically says if a simple majority can deny basic civil rights to a suspect minority, then equal protection has no meaning. That makes a great deal of sense to me.

  111. 111

    @InflatableCommenter:

    Popular opinion here notwithstanding, I was not.

    Ha! You may be a cranky old curmudgeon, I don’t think anyone considers you ancient. ;)

    I can personally attest to the fact that you’re not THAT old. ;)

  112. 112
    Written Off says:

    @InflatableCommenter: Yep. Marni dubbed Audrey & Natalie. Natalie was originally chosen to do the vocals, but they decided her voice wasn’t quality enough and put Marni over her.

  113. 113
    Xel says:

    About Prop 8: At least they didn’t annul any marriages – the world is getting a little better. Don’t worry too much but never think you aren’t perfectly right to be angry.
    Only by demanding a perfect world today can we achieve an adequate world tomorrow.

  114. 114
    Indylib says:

    From the AP article –

    “In a sense, petitioners’ and the attorney general’s complaint is that it is just too easy to amend the California constitution through the initiative process. But it is not a proper function of this court to curtail that process; we are constitutionally bound to uphold it,” the ruling said.

    Christ on raisin toast, I’m glad I don’t live in California any more. This is the same initiative process that allows the voters to say they don’t want funding cut for most everything under the sun, but on the same ballot that they don’t want their taxes raised to fund what they don’t want to see funding cut for.

  115. 115
    Llelldorin says:

    @Brachiator:

    The principle needs to be settled. Otherwise, gay people who want to get married never know where they stand or whether their families will be protected against the folly of mob rule.

    Under the madness that passes for a constitution of this state, the principle cannot be settled.

    Ever.

    The California constitution was designed precisely to avoid the old “Senator William MoneyedGuy (D-Union Pacific)” system that had run the state in our early years. Unfortunately, the “solution” was precisely mob rule, disguised to look like a government. I’m hopeful that we’ll get a constitutional convention soon, now that the mob has decided decisively that what we want is lots of services but no taxes, and more marginally that we’d rather not think about gay people because it makes slightly more than half of us go squick.

  116. 116
    MikeJ says:

    and more marginally that we’d rather not think about gay people because it makes slightly more than half of us go squick.

    LA Times says it’s already on the ballot for next year. So maybe California will have equality in the even years and bigotry in the odd.

  117. 117
    malraux says:

    @MikeJ:

    It’s a shitty way to run a state, but from what I’ve read the court decided correctly. That is, in accordance with the laws and constitution of California, not with what is moral.

    Some people say that the constitution isn’t a suicide pact. I’m pretty sure California is an exception to that rule.

  118. 118
    JK says:

    Glenn Beck’s Twitter post about the Sotomayor nomiantion:

    Does the nominee still have Diabetes? Could the Messiah heal her, or does she just not want to ask? What is protocal (sic) on miracle healings?

    h/t http://mediamatters.org/blog/200905260026

  119. 119
    InflatableCommenter says:

    @Little Dreamer:

    Heh. After wrenching my back over the weekend putting a machine together, I sure felt ancient. All I could do yesterday by late afternoon was take Tylenol and sit motionless on the couch and channel surf. If I moved anything, it hurt.

    But today I am much better. Just in time to go back to work tomorrow.

  120. 120
    Tonal Crow says:

    I love this GOP [1] about “activist judges”. There were never any judges so activist as the 5 in the Bush v. Gore majority, whose guilt was so all-encompassing that it leaked into the opinion itself, in the form of this remarkable admission:

    Our consideration is limited to the present circumstances, for the problem of equal protection in election processes generally presents many complexities.

    [1] In this context, the word “GOP” is an expletive, meant to evoke a particularly dangerous kind of toxic waste. It more accurately describes a detestable object than the common cuss-words, and has the further advantage of not impugning sex or excrement.

  121. 121
    Brachiator says:

    @MikeJ:

    That’s sort of the point of a constitutional amendment, isn’t it? Of course the court didn’t consider the content. They’d already ruled on it once, found a right to SSM. 8 overturned that.

    The problem is that in originally deciding in favor of gay marriage, the Court made a strong case that marriage was a fundamental right of all the state’s adult citizens, that could not be restricted without a compelling state interest.

    By ignoring the content of the proposition, the Court contradicts itself and says that the uninformed will of the people is superior to a Court’s responsibility to interpret the Constitution.

    The great public radio program Air Talk (KPCC, 89.3, available online or on iTunes) has callers giving their reaction to the ruling. One woman says that she supports the decision and is against gay marriage because … gay married couples would prevent her from teaching her kids morality based on Church principles. Her view is consistent with that of many callers who are against gay marriage. They want to see the state reinforce their moral opposition to homosexuality, and to restrict the ability of gays to live freely as equal citizens.

    And of course, I expect the Supreme Court nominee to be quizzed on her views about gay marriage, in addition to the old litmus test, abortion.

    Air Talk is now doing a segment on Sotomayor. Again, I recommend the program to those who can stream it or download it.

  122. 122

    @InflatableCommenter:

    So you’re going to finally let others see that new look you’ve been sporting? ;)

  123. 123
    dmsilev says:

    @JK:

    Glenn Beck’s Twitter post about the Sotomayor nomiantion:
    Does the nominee still have Diabetes? Could the Messiah heal her, or does she just not want to ask? What is protocal (sic) on miracle healings?

    Beck should be asking whether The One can use his powers to cure stupidity.

    Some things, though, are beyond the power of even the Messiah to fix.

    -dms

  124. 124
    TenguPhule says:

    Some people say that the constitution isn’t a suicide pact. I’m pretty sure California is an exception to that rule.

    Shouldn’t that be suicide *note*?

    It’s like a How-to book for destroying your government.

  125. 125
    Mnemosyne says:

    @InflatableCommenter:

    Yes, the idea that 50% +1 can decide basic rights is pretty sobering.

    Especially since it takes 2/3rds to pass a budget. That’s right, here in California we can make decisions about civil rights based on 50%+1, but two-thirds of the voters have to agree on taxation or nothing happens.

    Says a lot about our state, doesn’t it?

    (Though if the No on 8 people haven’t been quietly gathering signatures to get a prop on next year’s ballot to repeal Prop 8, they deserve every kick in the head they’ve gotten.)

  126. 126
    Colette says:

    @JG:

    Chita Rivera played Anita in the original Broadway and West End productions of West Side Story while Rita Moreno was in the movie

    True dat – I was only thinking of the dance numbers in the movie, where you can see the brown greasepaint starting to smear as the actors sweat.

    @Written Off:

    Natalie was originally chosen to do the vocals, but they decided her voice wasn’t quality enough and put Marni over her.

    So it takes 2 white women to equal 1 Latina?

  127. 127
    chopper says:

    Apparently, however, existing gay marriages will be allowed to stand.

    that just screams ‘equal protection issue’, dunnit?

  128. 128
    Jon H says:

    Time for the biggest, most fabulous convoy ever as California gays wanting to be married make a beeline for the Northeast.

  129. 129
    InflatableCommenter says:

    @Little Dreamer:

    Yep.

    Ready or not down there at the factory, here I come.

  130. 130
    Colette says:

    @Jon H:
    Is Priscilla, Queen of the Desert still available?

  131. 131
    me says:

    Some things, though, are beyond the power of even the Messiah to fix.

    Can god make a man so dumb, that even she cannot enlighten him?

  132. 132
    InflatableCommenter says:

    Just to be clear, this is my new look.

  133. 133

    @dmsilev:

    Beck should be asking whether The One can use his powers to cure stupidity.

    That was my thought exactly.

  134. 134

    @InflatableCommenter:

    I don’t see the whiskers, what’dja do with them?

  135. 135
    gwangung says:

    Can god make a man so dumb, that even she cannot enlighten him?

    Obviously, given the 29%, She believes in practice.

  136. 136
    InflatableCommenter says:

    @Little Dreamer:

    Uh, this picture was taken before they grew out …..

  137. 137
    Zuzu's Petals says:

    While disappointing, I don’t think the Prop 8 decision is that surprising. It was a novel argument made on narrow grounds, and decided on narrow grounds.

    The good news is that a future ballot measure can repeal Prop 8, add constitutional guarantees re SSM…and specify that its provisions may only be repealed by a 2/3, 4/5, or whatever % vote.

  138. 138
    Alan says:

    @JK:

    It’ll be interesting to see George Will’s take on the Sotomayor choice since he was a huge fan of Patrick Moynihan. And thought he would have made a great President.

  139. 139

    […] II: Blog post title copyright infringement, or evidence that lazy minds think alike. Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)To Curse or Not to Curse, that is the question. […]

  140. 140
    TenguPhule says:

    Can god make a man so dumb, that even she cannot enlighten him?

    G W Bush.

    I rest my case.

  141. 141
    Zuzu's Petals says:

    Mnemosyne @ 125:

    Actually, the 2/3 vote requirement for tax levies and the budget applies to the Legislature, whose job it is to pass those measures, not the voters.

    Occasionally, a ballot measure will contain a tax provision, but not because voter approval is required.

  142. 142
    Brachiator says:

    @Llelldorin:

    I’m hopeful that we’ll get a constitutional convention soon, now that the mob has decided decisively that what we want is lots of services but no taxes…

    “The mob” was largely correct here. Californians have had no problems voting tax increases in the past for state services. But part of the problem now is that you have state public employee unions saying “we don’t have to provide anything more than a sliver of services. Where are our permanent jobs, salaries and pensions?” And as the budget trickles down, you have teachers unions saying, “so sorry your kid didn’t learn anything. Where’s our salary increase?”

    But even if there was 100 percent agreement to raise taxes, there ain’t no money to be had because the tax base is shrinking. And still the legislators and the Guvernator continue to play fiscal games.

    … and more marginally that we’d rather not think about gay people because it makes slightly more than half of us go squick.

    I fear a state constitutional convention because I don’t trust these clods to do the right thing for all citizens, and I see room for a lot of mischief with respect to wingnuts seeking to restrict gay rights.

  143. 143
    FlipYrWhig says:

    Has anyone been pointing out that the current Supreme Court features _2_ appointees by Democratic presidents? With all the caterwauling about “activist judges” and what have you, I kinda like reminding people that Democrats have been getting boned on Supreme Court picks for _decades_.

  144. 144
    lysias says:

    I guess Huckabee must know that Dr. Maria Sotomayor, MD, dermatologist, Tampa FL is a member of the far left, and somehow have gotten the false impression that she was the one Obama was nominating.

  145. 145
    Polish the Guillotines says:

    @Zifnab:

    Like “activist wetback” but for the ladies.

    Wetbacktivista?

  146. 146
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Zuzu’s Petals:

    Actually, the 2/3 vote requirement for tax levies and the budget applies to the Legislature, whose job it is to pass those measures, not the voters.

    Nope. Bond measures and sales tax increases that are put on the ballot for a popular vote are also subject to the 2/3rds provision. Basically, any financial measure has to get a 2/3rds majority whether it’s in front of the legislature or the voters.

  147. 147
    Tonal Crow says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    Nope. Bond measures and sales tax increases that are put on the ballot for a popular vote are also subject to the 2/3rds provision.

    Initiatives (which include initiative bond measures and initiative tax increases) take effect when approved by a simple majority of those voting. Cal. Const. Art. 2 s.10(a).

    Basically, any financial measure has to get a 2/3rds majority whether it’s in front of the legislature or the voters.

    It’s more complicated than that. The legislature can raise taxes only on a 2/3rds vote, Art. 13A s.3, and can pass a budget only on a 2/3rds vote. Art. 4 s.12(d). Same with local electors for many (but not all) local taxes and debts. Art. 13A s.4; Art. 13C s.2(d); Art. 16 s.18(a).

    Because the legislature needs 2/3rds to pass a budget, but voters can pass bond measures by a simply majority, Californians tend to vote for lots of earmarked bonds, but not for the taxes needed to pay for them.

  148. 148
    kay says:

    Ugh.

    Yoo is now weighing in on this? The guy whose work was so poorly done it had to be withdrawn? That Yoo? He has the gall to climb out from under his desk and trash this woman? Does she have a piece of crap memo floating around that will follow her to her grave? Anything like the torture memos? I don’t think so, Mr. Yoo.

    Conservative lawyers have no sense of shame. None. Obama has it wrong. They don’t lack emphathy.

    They lack humility, and the ability to feel shame.

  149. 149
    asiangrrlMN says:

    Sigh. All my outrage was spent on the Prop 8 entry. For this, I have nothing but a big, wet raspberry for the right. I think it’s racism and sexism that they keep harping on Sotomayor being an intellectual lightweight. Prove to me that Scalia and whomever else they keep touting on the right are that intellectually hefty. I haven’t seen it yet.

    I think they are scared shitless that Sotomayor is gonna kick their asses, as she should. Is she going to shake up the SCOTUS? Hell, ya. It’s about damn time.

    P.S. I am not happy that she will be the sixth Catholic justice, though.

    kay, link or summary? Actually, summary, please. I don’t think I can stomach reading Yoo.

    Polish the Guillotines, ha! You made me laugh. Thank you for that.

  150. 150
    Comrade Darkness says:

    @asiangrrlMN: P.S. I am not happy that she will be the sixth Catholic justice, though.

    Hm, I just had a vision of her in Opus Dei, a la, bad movie Opus Dei.

    Kinda sexy, that.

  151. 151
    kay says:

    @asiangrrlMN:

    He says she was picked because of her “race”. Except she isn’t a different “race”, idiot, so his first paragraph is shoddy and sloppy, like everything else he does or says. Law is supposed to be about specificity in language, but don’t tell Torture Yoo.

    He was looking for “excellence”. Like those cringe-worthy memos he churned out in 11 minutes with Addington pushing his pencil? Like that?

    It’s not worth reading. A first year law student could do a better job. A marginally talented local newspaper reporter could turn out something that was at least accurate.

    I can’t imagine being him and writing that. Christ. The unmitigated GALL of them.

  152. 152
    kay says:

    @asiangrrlMN:

    He compares her unfavorably to Cass Sunstein, but I like Sunstein right where he is, under the radar, being liberal, and rigorous, and brilliant.

  153. 153
    Hob says:

    @Krista: I dream of Jesus, with the light brown hair…

  154. 154
    Hob says:

    @Brachiator: As a former public employee union member, with all due respect, fuck you.

    I used to care for the sick in the public health system. My union was good at negotiating contracts based on the prevailing public-sector wages, so I was paid pretty well. I also worked my ass off, as did every nurse, nurse’s aide, ward clerk, porter, and everyone else I worked with – even the lazy ones, because there was just no way to be at that job and perform only “a sliver of service”. At the same time, the resources we needed to do our work kept getting scarcer, and the work conditions worse; unfortunately, the union was pretty crappy at negotiating anything *except* pay. The public-sector teachers I’ve known in California report pretty much the same experience, and given the resources *they* have to work with, you have some amazing balls to blame the teachers’ unions for kids not learning.

    Are there state employees out there who are lazy and greedy? DUH. Is that a good reason for you (and Schwarzenegger and every other asshole in his party) to insult the tens of thousands of hard-working people who keep things running in this fucked-up state? Why no it is not.

  155. 155
    Zuzu's Petals says:

    Mnemosyne @ 147:

    Possibly you are thinking of the 2/3 vote requirement for the Legislature to put a G.O. bond on the ballot. However, once on the ballot, approval is by majority vote of the voters.

    Tonal Crow is correct that tax increases are also 2/3 vote of the Legislature, majority vote of voters if on ballot. He/she also had some good links.

  156. 156
    Zuzu's Petals says:

    Sorry, that last was to Mnemosyne @146, not 147. My iPhone won’t let me edit.

  157. 157
    Hob says:

    (For #154, caught this too late to edit, not that anyone cares: I meant to say “based on prevailing *public*-sector wages”. The point is the same: SEIU is good at getting its members paid, but not necessarily anything else. They certainly were not able, in my experience, to negotiate a less insane workload.)

  158. 158
    TimO says:

    Not J-Lo its SO-SO!

    Viva So-So!

  159. 159
    jacy says:

    If Huckabee wants to be the king of inadvertent — or more probably advertent — stereoptypical names, I suggest we start referring to him as Cletus Huckabee to better capture the essence of slack-jawed yokel.

  160. 160
    Dennis-SGMM says:

    @Hob:
    Same thing in the University system. When people leave they are no longer replaced. This started long before California’s current budget debacle. My wife works for one of the UC’s and she works for her university after hours and on weekends because she actually believes in public education.
    On her behalf, Brachiator, FUCK YOU.

  161. 161
    scarshapedstar says:

    Geez, first we got a President named La’roi Washington and now we’re gonna have a judge named Maria?

  162. 162
    Zuzu's Petals says:

    @Brachiator:

    But part of the problem now is that you have state public employee unions saying “we don’t have to provide anything more than a sliver of services. Where are our permanent jobs, salaries and pensions?”

    Examples please. Be specific.

  163. 163
    Brachiator says:

    @Hob:

    As a former public employee union member, with all due respect, fuck you.

    Thanks. Back at you.

    … unfortunately, the union was pretty crappy at negotiating anything except pay.

    Thank you for making my point.

    The public-sector teachers I’ve known in California report pretty much the same experience, and given the resources they have to work with, you have some amazing balls to blame the teachers’ unions for kids not learning.

    Yeah, I do. My former high school once lost its accredidation. Magically, no one was responsible, no one held accountable. Some teachers mumbled something about how the school would be better if they were listened to, but backed off when asked for concrete proposals. And ultimately, they fell back on the standard, “teaching is hard, we do the best we can, pay us more money.”

    In some California schools, the dropout rate is approaching 50%. And yet, especially in the LAUSD, a teacher can be fired only if he or she is convicted of a crime. Otherwise, even teachers who have been removed from a classroom for every rational reason still get full pay.

    But I blame administrators as well, especially the clowns who spent millions on a faulty payroll system that shortchanged hundreds of teachers, and an insane system that insists on spending billions to build new schools even though the student population is decreasing.

    For what it’s worth, I did not insult hard-working employees. I said that fiscal mismanagement by the Governator and the state legislature has resulted in a system in which more goes for salary and pensions than for actual services.

    Zuzu’s Petals – RE: “Where are our permanent jobs, salaries and pensions?”

    The contract that the Governator’s people negociated with the SEIU guarantees the Union that no layoffs will occur for SEIU members during the period of the contract. On the other hand, the state budget analyst now predicts that the state will run out of money in two months.

    What is the logic of accepting that workers can be laid off in the private sector, but not in the public sector?

    Trickling down, even though it was running a deficit, LAUSD negotiated a deal with its union that guaranteed that for the rest of this year, active and retired L.A. Unified employees will keep their current benefits and won’t have to pay health care premiums. United Teachers Los Angeles president AJ Duffy is on the record as preferring layoffs of employees (thus reducing services) to revisiting pay and benefits.

  164. 164
    hal says:

    Reminds me of the Whoopi Goldberg role in Ghost, when she’s trying to fake like she’s talking to a hispanic woman’s dead husband’s mother: Consuela? Conchita? Fernanda?….Maria? Si!! Ah yes, Maria!

  165. 165
    Hob says:

    @Brachiator:

    Thank you for making my point.

    Wha? I said “the union was pretty crappy at negotiating anything except pay”… meaning that they did not have the ability to magically shield us from having to provide “more than a sliver of services,” which was the assertion you pulled out of your ass.

  166. 166
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Zuzu’s Petals:

    Then what was the point of passing Prop 39 saying that school bonds only had to meet a 55 percent majority instead of a 66.6 percent majority like other bonds if they only needed a simple majority the whole time?

    I think we may all be talking about different things here, but you guys are wrong about bond measures. Either that, or we passed a completely unnecessary amendment to the state constitution for a problem that never existed at all. Also, the state of California needs to stop putting out press releases that say untrue things like, “Measure S, proposed by the San Carlos School District, received 65.6 percent of the vote that is just short of the two-thirds voting requirement.” (second to last paragraph, emphasis mine)

  167. 167
    Tonal Crow says:

    @Mnemosyne: The difference is between local bond measures (some of which require 2/3rds of voters, and some of which require 55%) and state bond measures (which require only a simple majority of voters).

  168. 168

    […] solves the problem of why the Maria Sotomayo’s ruling in the Ricci case was not the Worst Decision Evah (his entire post on […]

Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. […] solves the problem of why the Maria Sotomayo’s ruling in the Ricci case was not the Worst Decision Evah (his entire post on […]

  2. […] II: Blog post title copyright infringement, or evidence that lazy minds think alike. Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)To Curse or Not to Curse, that is the question. […]

Comments are closed.