Just as I turned on the Sotomayor hearing, heard Lindsey Graham say “wise Latina woman”; turned off Sotomayor hearing.
But Jefferson Beauregard Sessions (by the way, that is the way he referred to himself before he became “Jeff” to run for the Senate) has helpfully posted his opening remarks online.
LEAHY BROUGHT BROWNIES! “I hope it will be viewed as the best hearing this Committee has ever held.”
SO THEY CAN HEAR YOU CALLED A RACIST OVER AND OVER: “I know your family is proud, and rightfully so. It is a pleasure to have them with us today.”
“I expect this hearing and resulting debate to be characterized by a respectful tone, a discussion of serious issues, and a thoughtful dialogue”. FIRST ACCUSATION OF RACISM IN 5,4,3...
DUDE, YOU JUST BLEW MY MIND: “our legal system is based on a firm belief in an ordered universe and objective truth.”
He warned of “a Brave New World where words have no true meaning...” I mean, “rhubarb” could mean “rutabaga”! It’s a madhouse I tell you, a madhouse!!! “...and judges are free to decide what facts they choose to see.” I was going to make a Fox News joke or something, but in a court, isn’t “deciding what facts they choose to see” actually called “applying the rules of evidence”?
“We have seen federal judges force their own political and social agenda on the nation, dictating that the words ‘under God’ be removed from the Pledge of Allegiance and barring students from even silent prayer in schools.” Putting aside that “under God” was a late addition to the pledge, any court ruling wouldn’t actually govern the content of the pledge, just what can be said in a secular public school. Also, in addition to the metal detectors that schools now have, which they didn’t have in my day, are there also telepaths to ensure that students don’t engage in “even silent prayer”?
“Judges have – contrary to the longstanding rules of war – created a right for terrorists, captured on a foreign battlefield, to sue the United States government in our own courts. Judges have cited foreign laws, world opinion, and a United Nations resolution to determine that a state death penalty law was unconstitutional.” Note that Sessions, in the sentence immediately preceding the one expressing his disgust with foreign laws, world opinion etc being mentioned in an American court of law, suggested that “longstanding rules of war” should have precedence over the United States Constitution.
CALL IT RHUBARB: “Call it empathy, call it prejudice, or call it sympathy, but whatever it is, it is not law.”
CLUELESS: “Could it be that her time as a leader of the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund provides a clue as to her decision against the firefighters?”
EMPATHY IS ALWAYS PREJUDICE: “It seems to me that in Ricci, Judge Sotomayor’s empathy for one group of firefighters turned out to be prejudice against the others. That is, of course, the logical flaw in the ‘empathy standard.’ Empathy for one party is always prejudice against another.” And there’s the Republican party’s philosophy encapsulated for you.
BECAUSE HE HATES US, AND WANTS US TO SUFFER: “I hope the American people will follow these hearings closely.”
A SLIGHTLY STONED, MELLOW JUDGE? “And, at the end of the hearing, ask, If I must one day go to court, what kind of judge do I want to hear my case?”
No comments:
Post a Comment