Well, this is my first diary entry, and as it may be short, this is mainly because I am at "work" and can't spend too much time on it.
I just got done with lunch, and as always, I like to try and read the op-ed section of the San Diego Union Tribune. The SDUT is an official member of the "liberal media", and likes to sneak in some blatantly conservative (most often completely ridiculous/retarded/republican) editorials. This particular one today regarding the Senate confirmation of Janice Rogers Brown into the U.S. Court of Appeals really pissed me off.
The good part's below the fold...
Here's my [least] favorite part:
Considered the farm club for the U.S. Supreme Court, the D.C. appeals court would be a tough place to get to for any sitting judge. And yet, we can't help but think that one reason it was especially tough for Justice Brown has to do with the fact that she's a black female conservative as well as (and this is what really terrifies liberals) an independent thinker.
Man, does that mean that I, being a progressive-minded person, and represented by the Democratic Senators who opposed Ms. Brown's nomination, am racist, too? Hmmmmm....
NO!!!!!!! Nor am I against independent thinkers, but not when they are a JUDGE and their independent opinion should stay the hell out of a court decision. What, really, the hell is wrong with these people??? That is one of the stupidest freaking arguments I have ever heard, and completely insulting. And ignorant. And downright baseless. I know that countless diaries will include these thoughts, but I just had to point out this specific editorial, and see if anyone else might like to raise their blood pressure a few clicks by reading it. Here's the whole thing, in case the link doesn't work:
After several months of particularly bitter debate during which she endured more than her share of unfair personal criticism, Janice Rogers Brown of the California Supreme Court was finally confirmed Wednesday to sit on the prestigious United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.
Considered the farm club for the U.S. Supreme Court, the D.C. appeals court would be a tough place to get to for any sitting judge. And yet, we can't help but think that one reason it was especially tough for Justice Brown has to do with the fact that she's a black female conservative as well as (and this is what really terrifies liberals) an independent thinker.
Of course, Senate Democrats and their accomplices - including those predictably left-leaning advocacy groups such as People for the American Way - will never admit that. How politically correct would that be? So instead they tried to label Rogers Brown a "judicial extremist." But even that didn't hold up. Democrats couldn't come up with much that Rogers Brown had said or written from the bench that sounded extreme. So they were forced to improvise and play to the hilt things that Rogers Brown said off the bench in speeches. Suddenly, the issue was no longer the nominee's capabilities or her judicial temperament. Rather, it became her personal views on controversial issues like affirmative action, natural law and the role of government.
Those are views to which this nominee - and indeed any nominee - is fully entitled. Someone doesn't give up his right to engage in free speech, or participate in the civil discourse, because he puts on a black robe. Besides, a handful of speeches don't tell us a thing about how a jurist would rule on any given issue in any given case on any given day of the week. One would assume that would have something to do with the facts and the law.
Senate Democrats must understand this. So what were they really up to in opposing so forcefully the nomination of Janice Rogers Brown?
The answer is obvious - and ugly. We've been down this road before. Most memorably, in October 1991, Senate Democrats savagely attacked the character of another black conservative - Clarence Thomas - in an attempt to derail his nomination to the Supreme Court. At the time, Thomas correctly termed it a "high-tech lynching for uppity blacks," and the Democrats' motives for doing it were transparent enough. They must have realized they couldn't afford to let Thomas get to the Supreme Court, without impugning his reputation somehow. If they did, and President George H.W. Bush and the Republican Party got the credit for putting an African-American on the high court, then black voters might begin to look more favorably at the GOP in future elections. Democrats act like they have a monopoly on enhancing racial diversity and promoting the professional advancement of Hispanics and African-Americans, and they are willing to fight tooth and nail to keep it.
That's the real reason Democrats fought so vociferously against the nomination of Janice Rogers Brown. In the end, they lost. And for that, the country should be thankful.
I keep wondering if the editors let Rick Roberts (local village idiot right-wing radio talk show host extraordinare) guest-write a column because the editorials are not credited to any one particular writer.
Anyway, it just sickens me to see this "liberal media" bias everyday, and figured I'd diary about it so I can get it off my chest, so I can get back to work without thinking about all the lies and misinformation that plague our airwaves and print media every waking second of every friggin day, to the disadvantage of every citizen of this country, based solely on the greed and selfishness and lack of "caring-for-any-other-human-being-that-inhabits-this-earth-except-for their-damn-selves" of the conservatives/republicans/dubasses of this country.
ARGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
No more ranting. Must work.