HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » kpete » Journal

kpete

Profile Information

Member since: Fri Sep 17, 2004, 03:59 PM
Number of posts: 45,447

Journal Archives

Maybe Scalia is Too Black to Vote

Maybe Scalia is Too Black to Vote
by BooMan
Wed Feb 27th, 2013 at 09:41:16 PM EST

Things you can learn on the Internet:

Antonin Gregory Scalia is the only child of Salvadore Eugene and Catherine Panaro Scalia. His father emigrated from Sicily as a teenager and came through Ellis Island.


That's cool. One of my four great-grandfathers emigrated from the very northern tip of Italy through Ellis Island and settled in Hoboken, New Jersey. What's more, little Antonin Scalia grew up in Hamilton, New Jersey, which is only 15 miles from where I grew up in Princeton, New Jersey.

As everyone who has seen True Romance and believes Quentin Tarantino's version of history knows, all Sicilians are "part-eggplant." Ever since that movie came out in 1993, people have been debating the degree to which Sicilians really do have black ancestry. Try battling through the Google results to find any decent scientific data on the subject.

Maybe Antonin saw that movie. Maybe he's overcompensating a bit. Maybe we should have his mitochondrial-DNA tested to see if he's white enough to vote in Alabama.

I'd say that if Scalia is any more than 4% black, we should just consider him black and ask him to correctly tell us how many jelly-beans are in a jar before we allow him to register to vote. Maybe he doesn't know that at the time that Lincoln was running for president that one of the biggest constituencies that Republicans had to pander to were members of the Know Nothing Party who thought that Sicilians were no better than negroes and should be barred from entering the country.

- See more at: http://www.boomantribune.com/#sthash.VnzXwIeP.dpuf

Woodward Wets His Pants: "A Very Senior Person" At WH Made Him Feel "Uncomfortable"

Bob Woodward said Wednesday that a “very senior person” at the White House told the veteran journalist and author “you will regret” faulting the Obama administration for the present fight over sequestration.

“It was said very clearly: ‘you will regret doing this,’” Woodward said on CNN’s “The Situation Room.” “I’m not going to say who, a very senior person. It makes me very uncomfortable to have the White House telling reporters you’re going to regret doing something you believe in.”

....................

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/285423-woodward-claims-white-house-threatened-him

The White House denies it. A White House official tells us: “Of course no threat was intended. As Mr. Woodward noted, the email from the aide was sent to apologize for voices being raised in their previous conversation. The note suggested that Mr. Woodward would regret the observation he made regarding the sequester because that observation was inaccurate, nothing more. And Mr. Woodward responded to this aide’s email in a friendly manner.”
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2013/02/inside_the_woodward_fainting_couch.php?ref=fpblg

Dog shoots man.

Dog shoots man accidentally, police say
By JAY MEISEL | Highlands Today
Published: February 25, 2013

SEBRING --
It's a case of dog shoots man, not man shoots dog. Well, sort of.

A Frostproof man reported to Sebring police on Feb. 23 that he was traveling in his truck when his dog kicked a gun on the truck's floor, resulting in him being shot in the leg, according to a report.

Sebring police ruled the shooting accidental, and apparently the victim was not seriously injured.

Sebring Police Cmdr. Steve Carr said police did not arrest the dog or detain the animal, pending the investigation. He said he has never heard of a case like this.

http://www2.highlandstoday.com/news/news/2013/feb/25/dog-shoots-man-accidentally-police-say-ar-643226/

Notorious P.O.P.E.

OAKLAND RAPPER POPE EMERITUS THREATENS LAWSUIT
Posted by Andy Borowitz


Read more: http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/borowitzreport/2013/02/oakland-rapper-pope-emeritus-threatens-lawsuit.html#ixzz2M93vzh8l

“I don’t care who he is, I ain’t let nobody mess with my brand,” said
Mr. Emeritus, who prior to 2006 recorded under the name Notorious
P.O.P.E.

While the Vatican said it was unaware that Mr.
Emeritus had already claimed the name seven years ago, the Oakland
rapper scoffed at that idea: “They should have done what I did before I
picked it out: Google it.”

Furious at what he is calling a clear case of trademark infringement,
Mr. Emeritus said that he has no intention of stepping aside for the
former pontiff: “He’s the one who should step aside. Call himself P.
Biddy or something. This is wack, yo.”

According to a source close to the Vatican, Benedict is likely to
choose another name for himself rather than risk a legal tussle with the
aggrieved rapper: “The last thing the Church needs right now is another
lawsuit.

..........

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/borowitzreport/2013/02/oakland-rapper-pope-emeritus-threatens-lawsuit.html#ixzz2M92Xjg4Y

DAN PERKINS, AKA TOM TOMORROW, ANNOUNCED 2013 HERBLOCK PRIZE WINNER

DAN PERKINS, AKA TOM TOMORROW, ANNOUNCED 2013 HERBLOCK PRIZE WINNER
February 26, 2013

WASHINGTON, DC, February 25, 2013 – Dan Perkins, pen name Tom Tomorrow, was named the winner of the 2013 Herblock Prize for editorial cartooning.

Perkins is the creator of the weekly political cartoon, This Modern World, which appears in approximately 80 papers, mostly altweeklies. He is the editor of the comics section he created in April 2011 on Daily Kos. His cartoons have been featured in The New York Times, The New Yorker, U.S. News & World Report and The Economist. He lives outside of New Haven, Connecticut with his wife and their son.

The prize is awarded annually by The Herb Block Foundation for “distinguished examples of editorial cartooning that exemplify the courageous independent standard set by Herblock.” The winner receives a $15,000 after-tax cash prize and a sterling silver Tiffany trophy. Perkins will receive the prize April 25th in a ceremony held at the Library of Congress.

http://www.herbblockfoundation.org/press-release/966
?1361999016
http://thismodernworld.com/archives/7734

TPM re: Scalia: Who does he think he is, Chris freaking Matthews?

It’s been clear at least since the Obamacare ruling that Scalia doesn’t believe all that stuff he’s written about the Court leaving lawmaking to the lawmakers. He’d grant that Congress was right to pass Section 5 of the act in 1965, when it was irrefutably necessary to protect the right of African Americans to vote. And presumably he’d say Congress was free to renew the law - for a while. When did that constitutional freedom lapse? Scalia implies that the only person fit to judge that is Scalia, with his unique, personal insight into American culture and racial politics. He’s been checking his watch and tapping his foot for 58 years, and now he’s decided that time is up on the civil rights era.

His choicest line today may have been this: “I don’t think there is anything to be gained by any Senator to vote against continuation of this act.” Who does he think he is, Chris freaking Matthews? Since when is it a Justice’s job to divine when the people’s representatives are acting from pure motives, and when they are moved by crass “racial entitlements,” as he describes the guarantees that allowed millions of African Americans to vote for the first time? Call that what it is, but it sure as hell isn’t originalism. It’s just lawless free-styling.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2013/02/chasing_scalia.php?ref=fpblg

Justice Sonia Sotomayor NOT Buying Scalia's Interpretation Of The Voting Rights Act

Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who asked many questions in defense of the law, appeared taken aback by Scalia’s insinuation. In the final moments of oral argument, she asked Bert Rein, the lawyer for the challengers, if he agrees.

“Do you think think Section 5 was voted for because it was a racial entitlement?” she asked. When he ducked the question, she asked it again. He did not endorse Scalia’s sentiment.

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2013/02/scalia-attacks-congress-for-renewing-voting-rights-act.php


**************

MORE:
There were audible gasps in the Supreme Court’s lawyers’ lounge, where audio of the oral argument is pumped in for members of the Supreme Court bar, when Justice Antonin Scalia offered his assessment of a key provision of the Voting Rights Act. He called it a “perpetuation of racial entitlement.”
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/02/27/1646891/scalia-voting-rights-act-is-perpetuation-of-racial-entitlement/?mobile=nc

New Documents Reveal U.S. Marshals’ Drones Experiment, Underscoring Need for Government Transparency

Source: ACLU

New Documents Reveal U.S. Marshals’ Drones Experiment, Underscoring Need for Government Transparency

By Naomi Gilens, ACLU Speech, Privacy and Technology Project at 8:12am
The use of surveillance drones is growing rapidly in the United States, but we know little about how the federal government employs this new technology. Now, new information obtained by the ACLU shows for the first time that the U.S. Marshals Service has experimented with using drones for domestic surveillance.

We learned this through documents we released today, received in response to a Freedom of Information Act request. The documents are available here. (We also released a short log of drone accidents from the Federal Aviation Administration as well as accident reports and other documents from the U.S. Air Force.) This revelation comes a week after a bipartisan bill to protect Americans’ privacy from domestic drones was introduced in the House.

Although the Marshals Service told us it found 30 pages about its drones program in response to our FOIA request, it turned over only two of those pages—and even they were heavily redacted.

Here’s what we know from the two short paragraphs of text we were able to see. Under a header entitled “Unmanned Aerial Vehicle, Man-Portable (UAV) Program,” an agency document overview begins:

USMS Technical Operations Group's UAV Program provides a highly portable, rapidly deployable overhead collection device that will provide a multi-role surveillance platform to assist in detection of targets.

Read more: http://www.aclu.org/blog/technology-and-liberty-national-security-criminal-law-reform/new-documents-reveal-us-marshals



ACLU Uncovers U.S. Marshal's Drone Project
http://www.talkleft.com/story/2013/2/27/145927/043

He said, 'everything's going to be ok, Dad, it's all going to be ok.' And it wasn't ok."

WASHINGTON - Neil Heslin, whose son Jesse McCord Lewis was killed in the mass shooting in Newtown, Conn., gave moving testimony on Wednesday during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on the assault weapons ban proposed by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.).

"As Jesse was getting out of the truck (the morning he died), he leaned in and hugged me," Heslin said, weeping openly as he held up a portrait of his son. "I can still feel that hug, and that pat on the back. He said, 'everything's going to be ok, Dad, it's all going to be ok.' And it wasn't ok."

The night of the shooting, Heslin said, "I waited in that firehouse until one in the morning, until I knew Jesse was confirmed dead ... I have to go home at night to an empty house, without my son."

Heslin's son Jesse was one of the 20 children and six educators who were shot and killed at Sandy Hook Elementary School in mid-December. A group of Newtown residents attended the hearing, and sat behind Heslin as he spoke. The hearing room was silent except for the sound of weeping.



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/27/neil-heslin-assault-weapons-ban-newtown_n_2774598.html

That a black man-born 1948 in Pin Point, GA-could be party to such a ruling simply boggles the mind

SCOTUSBlog warns us that we should expect another 5-4 ruling, one that strikes Section 5 from the books. That's their preliminary analysis after listening to oral arguments today. They don't think preclearance will be ruled completely unconstitutional, but the law will have to be redrafted somehow if we're going to salvage anything.

From the Shelby County argument

Following through on the deep constitutional concerns stated in its prior Northwest Austin decision, a majority of the Court seems committed to invalidating Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act and requiring Congress to revisit the formula for requiring preclearance of voting changes. The vote seems quite likely to be five to four. The more liberal members pressed both the narrow argument that an Alabama county was not a proper plaintiff because it inevitably would be covered and the broader argument that there was a sufficient record to justify the current formula. But the more conservative majority was plainly not persuaded by either point. It is unlikely that the Court will write an opinion forbidding a preclearance regime. But it may be difficult politically for Congress to enact a new measure. More analysis soon.

- See more at: http://www.scotusblog.com/2013/02/from-the-shelby-county-argument/

That a black man, born in 1948 in Pin Point, Georgia, could be a party to such a ruling simply boggles the mind and takes self-loathing to a level probably not seen before outside of an asylum.

- See more at: http://www.boomantribune.com/#sthash.4Hl3Fdoi.dpuf
http://www.scotusblog.com/2013/02/from-the-shelby-county-argument/
Go to Page: « Prev 1 ... 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 ... 1247 Next »