Nifty Chart Time!

In the spirit of my recent discovery of FantasySCOTUS, these neat-o charts published in the June 29th edition of the New York Times documents the voting record of the 2007-2008 session of the Supreme Court, including the ‘major decisions’ and those that were decided 5-4, are detailed. Frankly, I love the way that they subtly line the Justices up from ‘most liberal’ to ‘most conservative’ and show the gradual progression of decisions, with the moderate Anthony Kennedy voting in the majority in every major case. In fact, since he played the largest decisive role in this session, the NYT article actually calls this term the year of the ‘Kennedy Court’.

More interesting are some of the close cases, where you often have surprising combinations of Justices voting the same way, like Ginsberg and Thomas both being in the majority on two closely-decided cases. I love visual aids! <3

For those of us who balk at the idea of actually watching a football game, the idea of investing our precious time into constructing an imaginary team of players and tracking their seasons sounds not only ludicrous, but the opposite of fun. Lucky for us, there’s a nerdy alternative to Fantasy Football. No, I’m not talking about some role-playing video game, I’m talking about the hot new craze about to sweep through law schools across the nation – It’s Fantasy SCOTUS!

This website, brainchild of recent George Mason Law graduate Josh Blackman, is the law-and-politics buff’s answer to imaginary sports teams. The site currently summarizes every Supreme Court case of the season, and allows users to call the decision (Affirm/Reverse), the spread (5-4? Unanimous?), and pick the Justices in the Majority and Dissent. Best of all? It’s free for students and unemployed lawyers (thanks to the creator’s personal sense of social justice).

I personally have already predicted the first twelve cases argued this season, including the Citizens United case and the VFW Cross debacle!

Da qualche giorno è disponibile sul mercato italiano Restomyl® Supplemento, un metodo semplice e innovativo per migliorare l’alito dei nostri quattrozampe controllando la placca dentale.

Va aggiunto alla pappa quotidiana una volta al giorno mezzo misurino ogni 10 kg di peso corporeo.

Restomyl® Supplemento, interamente naturale, contiene un’alga raccolta nell’Atlantico del nord.

Uno studi clinico condotto con metodi particolarmente oggettivi e scientificamente comprovati, ha evidenziato che i primi risultati sono apprezzabili a partire dalla 3 settimana di trattamento.

Provare per credere.

Per maggiori informazioni visita www.innovet.it

Salvatore Romano- Labirintiche ninfe

Proprio pochissimi giorni fa, il nostro ormai amico Salvatore Romano, mi inviò questa sua opera, l’ultima, in ordine cronologico, che ha realizzato. La sua generosità è davvero da sottolineare, come anche la disponibilità nel lasciarmi portare anche qui, nel blog, tutte le sue opere in visione o accompagnarle a testi di mia scelta.

Quest’ ultima opera avevo deciso di metterla da parte per una evenienza particolare, volevo trovare dei testi adatti che ne sprigionassero la forza es-pressiva, la furia che resta in un involucro segreto, ma viva e a viva forza, in un attimo, sprigiona ciò che solo il sangue, o il battito cardiaco dice in un lampo.

…e l’occasione si è presentata oggi, quando ho ricevuto la presentazione di un libro di Paolo Fichera.Devo ammettere che non avevo letto nulla di questo autore sino ad oggi, ma riconosco senza difficoltà la mia ignoranza e mi  rammarico delle mie lacune. So che un’altra vita non mi basterebbe comunque a riempire i tanti vuoti di conoscenza di cui mi riconosco il peso e la mancanza. Ma. Una volta di più posso riaffermare che:- non è mai troppo tardi.- Ho cercato in rete gli “sbranati”, le parti del corpo di quel testo di poesia che ha una compattezza e uno scheletro che la struttura in modo potente e, per quanto ho visto sino ad ora, con un carattere particolare, di opera da portare sulla scena,  a mio parere, non solo da leggere in solitudine.

C’è terra e metallo, dolore e passione, che si fanno musica all’interno del corpo, come in un sistema di vasi comunicanti, una rete di radici sprofondate e abbarbicate alle aree vie del respiro, come una intera foresta.
C’è un fuoco coltivato come una pianta, un rosso sorbo cupo, un’arpa di  legni che crepitano e ruote di mulino che girano l’acqua di una vita scossa dal tronco, o troncata nel gesto in cui si compie. Un quadro, fiammingo, e uno surrealista, insieme, poichè salta da un’ era ad un’altra, dentro un cerchio di frammenti ricomposti da un linguaggio profetico: il re-spira le sue tra-me senza che nulla freni la sua corsa. Mi ha riportato, la parola di Fichera,  alle atmosfere di  Salvatore Romano in cui Eros e Thanatos convivono nel varco  del tumul(t)o, la stessa zolla ospitante, e si fa corpo del respiro,emanazione radiosa e radiante della terra, di un corpo che è fuso in un solo res-piro, un fu(o)co che pulsa e germina, sperma che ingravida e diffonde la specie, ed è specchio dell’intero.

Ringrazio perciò entrambi gli autori per questo ricco percorso che ci è stato concesso di attraversare insieme oggi.

f.f.

*   *    *

Da Nel respiro- Paolo Fichera- L’arcolaio Editore-2009

…

ciò che termina

la maceria, l’olfatto

che il preludio sentenzia

a ogni respiro un codice,

un rito celebrante

adorante

la neve ombra corrode

l’infante, la tomba tace

il corpo bruciato, l’alito

sigilla la croce

alto il fumo erode

stanza 4

reparto B3,

tumulo di fossa 710

31-5-1939

ora 7-9-2007

altri non hanno il corpo

sono fisso nel segno

e non sento il dolore

neanche la terra ora

innesta alla terra il dolore

il seno

ogni divario schermato d’ombra

l’essenza-assenza

il seno

che la crepa smuove

il seno della fossa,

di ogni fossa

nel battito che nasce dalla fossa

l’ibrido ramato nella piaga

nell’ascolto che la piaga

rende nodo e vagito

ascolta e resta carne

nel legno

che la parola fissa e annida

e chiara rende la luce

ora che la luce

ha scavato la penombra

ora che l’ha resa

sperma

ora che la notte ha sete

e l’umanità è il battito ampio

di un vagito che si perde

ora

la maceria è distesa

ora e da sempre

ora

che il calice è versato

e l’acqua si smembra

morirò nel battito

e tu con me, e con te chiunque

l’orlo, cucito dall’ombra

albero padre, ramo padre,

pane padre, acqua padre,

vento padre, respiro padre,

sangue padre, stanza padre,

la pietà e l’umanità a terra

si dibatte, chiede pietà

il sorriso di carità

riduci il respiro

a una stele infissa

in sabbia di arti e polpa

e sangue e polpa e vena

e tu sei

la crepa

che l’ospite nutre

ti lascio e pongo l’acqua

alle labbra secche

l’organo reagisce in gesti

senza pensieri

caro padre, la tua mano,

la vita tessuta come l’incanto

lo sguardo alto, il cielo alto

e quieto, l’armonia del ferro

padre mio, mio compagno

i passi della vita

sono gli stessi della morte

padre mio, la musica, l’armonia

le note le ali, la vela nera

della barca che non hai mai solcato

ti chiudo gli occhi

ora che il nervo

premuto a premere

ora che il nervo premuto

non preme

e gli occhi danno alla lingua

il seme

vagina e lacrima

il seme umido

il cuore germe di mio figlio

che ogni parola sia umanità

e vagito d’animale e lacrima

di mondo e cellula e grumo

racchiuso e fondo ampio sazio

germe solco

vena carezza

non più sapere o non sapere

indossare la tunica

che lo strazio lambisce

e rende orfano

non più orfano o non orfano

non più mondo o realtà appesa

pensiero

che freme

e reagisce al tocco di mani

e pensiero

tu avvicini la sera

dove nudi cani accompagnano i morti

il corteo spelonca

la coltre lambita da lamine secche

la vita distesa nel solco di un frammento

scissa in cadaveri d’albe

flusso dove la neve freme

inno divelte inno placido e santo

mensa che il cielo disperde

dolce rame andando in dolce rame

ossa

corolla

pulpito

lama

pupilla organo

ciabatte occhio specchio

padre la resa padre pane

figlio la sete figlio fame

figlio l’utero figlio vena danza

cibo

richiamo

eco che nel trapasso

gli occhi distende

e il grumo brucia

raccolto nell’orda

*  *  *

Notizie sull’autore

Paolo Fichera è nato nel 1972 e vive a Sesto San Giovanni (MI). Dal 2003 dirige, insieme a Mauro Daltin, la rivista “PaginaZero-Letterature di frontiera”. E’ stato incluso in diverse antologie collettive, tra cui “Il presente delle poesia italiana”, a cura di Carlo Dentali e Stefano Salvi. Nel 2005 ha pubblicato presso la casa editrice LietoColle la raccolta poetica “Lo speziale”, finalista nel 2005 nella sezione inediti del Premio Montano e segnalata nella sezione editi del Premio Montano nel 2006. Le sue poesie sono apparse su numerose riviste, tra cui: “Poesia” , “il Domenicale”, “Atelier”. E’ presente nei principali siti di letteratura, tra cui: Nabanassar, FuoriCasa Poesia, LiberInversi, Agli incroci dei venti, l’Ulisse n.1 e n.4, El Ghibli. Alcune poesie sono state tradotte in inglese, francese, spagnolo e arabo.

Riferimenti:

http://cattedrale.wordpress.com/

http://www.vialetrastevere.org/newpage42.html

http://oboesommerso.splinder.com/post/19591124

http://rebstein.wordpress.com/2009/01/18/nel-respiro-di-paolo-fichera/

My life in the tango world moves on, getting ever better. The Monday class at Chester is growing into a strong community, and Viv and I now have a definite job to do. Maybe this is not why we started but it gives us a sense of belonging and it is always nice to feel needed.

We now arrive quite early at Stanley Palace, despite it being a working day, the joy of being involved somehow overcomes any need for a sleep. Anyway it is not a late night so for these few days I can survive on five hours. While Sharon gives some private tuition I set up my music in the second room and Viv sets her stall for collecting the money.

When the beginner’s class starts again we have too few women, I have said this before, but I still find it strange that Chester is the only place where the men outnumber the women. First Viv is called to help out, then so am I, Roberta rides again, but not for long. Soon we have some more women arrive and we have even numbers, then another and it is goodbye to Roberta. 

I return to the other room as more dancers arrive, I can play some music for them, and make tea. (Charperson now is it). I also now collect the money as well. Actually the music has to stop as the class spills out into the other room. The class has got too big now for any move to be practiced, so the better leaders move out to create more space. At least this gives me a chance to see what is happening, until they move back that is.

In the intermediates I am again banished, but like last week I have a number of the beginners to coach. I enjoy this part of the evening, everyone wants to soak up as much as they can, and I get to be the big man. (This is Great for my ego).

Our French lady is back, I enjoy it when she says “so you do not move yourrr ips” I enjoy it so much I tell her to say it again, but she tries to sound more English. I have to tell her not to loose the accent, it sounds so sexy.

Again we have a number of new comers, and again the standard is amazing, if we keep this up we will need bigger premises. A lot are staying for the practica as well which is a really great sign.

A few start to congregate in the kitchen, tea and coffee are on offer. While they danced I made sure that there was hot water, but now I have my chance and I am not about to waste it. I dance like crazy with as many women as I can until Viv drags me off, telling me I must get up in the morning. Still it was nice while it lasted.

I cannot make Shrewsbury this week and there is no tango the weekend, hopefully though we are in for a couple of weeks of quite intense tango. If I cannot go to Buenos Aires then I fully intend to make the most of my time off.

On another point some of you may remember my post http://tangogales.wordpress.com/2009/05/13/new-friends/#comments where I first met Janis Kenyon in Maipu 444; it was to have been a birthday celebration of an old milonguero called Alito. Well I had news today from Janis that Alito was thrown out of his place that night and has lived on the streets since then. This is no life for an 80 year old and my heart goes out to him. Unfortunately that is all I can do, offer my sympathy. We are not out there and I have no place to offer. Hopefully Janis will keep me informed, even though I don’t know him personally, he is a kindred spirit, and we don’t wish to loose another old milonguero. Perhaps now that Tango has been declared part of the world’s Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity by the United Nations, grants will be available for descasamiento milongueros. We live in hope.

Inutile che mi guardi con occhio tremulo
La tua bocca puzza più’ del tuo culo

Perro

Il tuo alito di zolfo mi spinge certo
A baciarti il culo indubbiamente,
Invece che la tua bocca fetente
Che pare una cloaca a cielo aperto

Vermiglio

Chi soffre di alitosi cronica spesso può curarla con rimedi naturali, e a quanto pare la terapia funziona ed elimina il problema per sempre. Attualmente esistono apparecchi diagnostici come l’halimeter in grado di rilevare i gas maleodoranti presenti nell’aria espirata e di determinarne la quantità.

Solitamente la causa più comune di alito pesante è il cibo che rimane fra i denti a seguito dei pasti. Solitamente seguendo una dieta ricca di frutta e di verdure fresche si riduce la probabilità che insorga questo fastidioso problema.

Chiariamo subito che non esiste nessun farmaco per ovviare all’ alitosi persistente, rimane sufficiente un’ igiene orale ben eseguita, comprensiva di pulizia del dorso della lingua, per migliorare la qualità dell’alito.
Una pulizia dei denti tramite lo spazzolino, con un preventivo intervento di filo interdentale diffuso, può molto spesso essere sufficiente come corretta igiene orale.
E’ importante anche lavare la vostra lingua e parte del palato se desideriamo debellare ulteriori batteri eccedenti che possono annidiarsi.
Inoltre è consigliato smettere di fumare e di bere alcolici, in quanto entrambi sono cause dirette di alito pesante.

Rimedi naturali includono risciacqui e gargarismi con infusi di bacche di ginepro ottenuti con 10 gr in una tazza d’acqua calda.
In alternativa possiamo masticare qualche fogliolina di prezzemolo, che risulta estremamente utile contro l’odore di aglio o cipolla.
Strofinare alcune foglie fresche di salvia su denti e gengive dopo ogni pasto, meglio se dopo aver lavato i denti, in alternativa ha sempre un effetto rinfrescante.

Ricordiamo che è particolarmente importante un’alimentazione mirata alla prevenzione assumendo molte fibre cereali integrali, verdura (meglio se cruda), frutta (meglio con la buccia).

A volte però l’ alitosi non è direttamente causata da problemi parodontali bensì da problemi di scolo nasale posteriore, ricco di proteine dalla cui decomposizione si sviluppano i gas maleodoranti. In questo caso lo spazzolamento dei denti può non essere sufficiente ed è necessario rivolgersi ad uno specialista e affrontare una visita odontostomatologica.

More Senators on Sotomayor: Kyl, No. Graham, Yes

Once again, in the era of pettiness the Republicans have dragged us into, the Senate appears set to vote on a Supreme Court nominee with political results. Sonia Sotomayor is not a controversial nominee. She is a highly qualified nominee, a consistent and capable judge, and nothing about her background, demeanor, nor her “wise Latina” comments should derail her nomination. The “wise Latina” comments were suggestively racist, but the fact that she said what she said indicates that she is not by any stretch of the imagination a racist and does not allow her views on race to influence her decision making. Not like Senator Jefferson Beauregard “Jeff” Sessions III, a documented racist, and a judicial reject, who insisted on portraying her as a racist rather than, you know, inquiring into her judicial philosophy. The hearings were a farce, with the only real meat (not much) coming from the Dems, who were quite open about the fact that they thought she was a cool chica and had no intention of derailing her nomination.

What bugs me most about this is that we have a good nominee who is going to get only 60-70 votes because of pissants like Sessions and Kyl. Just a few decades ago it was the norm for a Supreme Court nominee to get between 90-95 votes, unless they were a real screw up. You can blame the Dems for getting the ball rolling, as I have to point out that a 78-22 vote for Roberts was not in any way justified. The man, like Sotomayor, was experienced, well qualified, highly recommended, and possessed no identifiable opinions that would cause him to be a poor candidate for the job. Maybe 10 votes against a non-court member being selected for the Chief Justice position, but 22 against was a pretty lame attempt at politicizing something that had no business being politicized in that fashion. Alito is slightly different, and I really don’t think that he (like Scalia or Thomas) has the caliber of mind to serve on the court, but 58-42 still is a bit much for a lackluster nominee.

If anything it represents this mentality, started by the Republicans, fanned by the Republicans, and under Bush embraced by the Dems as well, and now being perfected by the GOP, that you can oppose and oppose and oppose and eventually you will get what you want, and you don’t even have to be in power. It undermines the very democratic process we value so much as it seeks to negate the very concept of a majority/minority dynamic, and the Dems and Obama are playing into it. Sotomayor deserves more votes than she will receive, and we have the GOP to thank for this.

Michael

President Obama wants Sotomayor, naturally, to bring a fresh perspective to the court. It was a disgrace that W. appointed two white men to a court stocked with white men. And Sotomayor made it clear that she provides some spicy seasoning to a bench when she said in a speech: “I simply do not know exactly what the difference will be in my judging, but I accept there will be some based on gender and my Latina heritage.” Dowd is forgetting Bush’s initial choice for the Supreme Court vacancy eventually won by Samuel Alito: Harriet Miers, female. There’s hypocrisy there, given that Dowd was less than supportive of Mier, who quickly stepped down in the teeth of questions from both left and right about her lack of qualification. Dowd wrote of Miers in an October 5, 2005 column:
There are only so many supremely powerful jobs to give to women who are not qualified to get them.
If Dowd cared so much about keeping white men off the court, then why did dismiss Miers so abruptly?

Sonia Sotomayor completed her testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, making way for the testimony of witnesses.  The most anticipated of those witnesses was Frank Ricci and Ben Vargas, two New Haven Firefighters who filed suit against the City of New Haven for throwing out test scores that were considered to be discriminatory.

Today’s testimony was much like the previous day’s, with Republican members and their witnesses harping on race, guns, and abortion.  It become a joke, really, and they will likely pay a political price with women and Hispanics.  There were several Republicans who stated that they had no desire to filibuster her nomination, which is a good thing considering  that they were talking civil war during the Roberts and Alito hearings, when Democrats threatened a filibuster.

There should be a committee vote on Sotomayor’s nomination early next week, and the full Senate should vote shortly after.  I don’t know how many Republican votes she will get, but she will certainly be confirmed prior to the August recess.

Sigh.  Another non-issue brought to the forefront as if it was the most important thing in the universe.  Supreme Court Justices Samuel Alito and John Roberts were asked more than a few of these same questions during their confirmation hearings, and gave similar responses.  Though to be fair, Democrats did not like the silence of Roberts and Alito on many of the questions they asked, so I suppose it is all the same.  A waste of tax money and time, but they sure look busy. 

Sexy brainiac blogger Glenn Greenwald has had some insightful things to say about Sonia Sotomayor’s confirmation process.

The best that most bloggers can do, in my estimation, is to make you think of something in a new light, to present an angle that the mainstream media are not presenting; most bloggers can’t act as news gatherers because most of them, myself included, don’t have the resources.

However, research via the Internet is easy enough, and I’m surprised that in all of the discussions of Sotomayor that I have seen on the Internet thus far, no one has bothered to include the latest photographic group portrait of the U.S. Supreme Court, which shows that seven of the nine justices (including the recently retired Justice David Souter, whom Sotomayor will replace) are white men. That one picture, which is whiter than a Repugnican National Convention, speaks thousands of words, methinks.

Here’s what you’re also not seeing in the mainstream media’s coverage of Sotomayor: 

In one recent post, Greenwald reminds us that Sotomayor’s appeals-court ruling affirming affirmative action — out of which the Repugnicans have been trying to make a lot of political hay for the Joe the Plumber set — was not really a minority opinion (bad pun fully intended). Writes Greenwald:

In light of today’s [U.S. Supreme Court] ruling, it’s a bit difficult — actually, impossible — for a rational person to argue that Sotomayor’s Ricci decision places her outside the judicial mainstream when: (a) she was affirming the decision of the federal district court judge; (b) she was joined in her decision by the two other Second Circuit judges who, along with her, comprised a unanimous panel; (c) a majority of Second Circuit judges refused to reverse that panel’s ruling; and now: (d) four out of the nine Supreme Court Justices — including the [one] she is to replace — agree with her.

Put another way, 11 out of the 21 federal judges to rule on Ricci ruled as Sotomayor did.  It’s perfectly reasonable to argue that she ruled erroneously, but it’s definitively unreasonable to claim that her Ricci ruling places her on some sort of judicial fringe.

What I like even more is this nugget of information from Greenwald (links and emphases are his):

At his Senate confirmation hearing, [George W. Bush's nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court, Samuel] Alito used his opening statement to emphasize how his experience as an Italian-American influences his judicial decision-making (video [and full transcript] here):

“But when I look at those cases, I have to say to myself, and I do say to myself, ‘You know, this could be your grandfather, this could be your grandmother. They were not citizens at one time, and they were people who came to this country….

“When I get a case about discrimination, I have to think about people in my own family who suffered discrimination because of their ethnic background or because of religion or because of gender. And I do take that into account.”

Greenwald comments:

Did Alito’s Italian-American ethnic background cause him to cast his vote in favor of the Italian-American [firefighter] plaintiffs [in the Ricci case]?  Has anyone raised that question? 

Given that he himself said that he “do[es] take that into account” — and given that Sonia Sotomayor spent six straight hours today being accused by GOP senators and Fox News commentators of allowing her Puerto Rican heritage to lead her to discriminate against white litigants — why isn’t that question being asked about Alito’s vote in Ricci?

As I asked yesterday:

When is the last time that a white male nominee for the U.S. Supreme Court was admonished against allowing his whiteness or his maleness or his “personal background” influence his rulings?

So I’m exceedingly glad that Greenwald provided a specific instance in which a white male nominee for the U.S. Supreme Court explicitly stated that his personal background influences his rulings and yet he wasn’t called to the carpet for this as Sotomayor has been called to the carpet for having the gall to be a — gasp! — Latina.

Racism, thy name is Repugnican.

Misogyny, you too.

Hypocrisy: Ditto.

1.  “member fulfills misprision of treason code duties by delivering 9/11 nano-thermite evidence to CA Superior Court”

http://www.911blogger.com/node/20635

2.  “Senator Dick Durbin Says He’ll Consider Terminating Bush’s Declaration of National Emergency on 9/14/01″

http://www.911blogger.com/node/20633

3.  “Defending the indefensible settlements

A former insider at Aipac has spilled the beans on a major secret initiative by The Israel Project (TIP) designed to counter opposition in the US to Israeli settlements in the occupied territories. Douglas Bloomfield, former chief lobbyist for Aipac, writes that TIP, a group dedicated to promoting Israel’s positive image among the US media and policymakers, has circulated a 140-page primer designed to prompt supporters in their exchanges with US journalists and key decision-makers when they are arguing in favour of the settlements:

If you can’t convince ‘em, accuse ‘em. That’s the advice from The Israel Project (TIP) for pro-Israel activist. … Rather than try to defend Israeli settlements, change the subject. If that doesn’t work, try accusing those who advocate removing Jewish settlements of promoting “a kind of ethnic cleansing to move all Jews” from the West Bank. TIP calls that “the best settlement argument” in its 2009 Global Language Dictionary.

You read the full document posted on Newsweek’s site [PDF], and includes a preface by its author, the Republican pollster and spin doctor Frank Luntz. What is especially instructive about the document is that it concedes that Israel is on the defensive here in the US.
…

Bloomfield notes another specious argument in the TIP manual: “It falls back on the old and disproven argument that ‘the settlements are necessary for the security of Israel.’”

By no measure can anyone claim that the settlements improve Israel’s security. In fact, violence perpetrated by extremist settlers against Palestinians is a continuous source of friction, which forces thousands of IDF personnel to be stationed there to protect Jewish residents as they pursue their campaigns. Palestinians see the settlements and the occupation in general as painful reminders of their disenfranchisement. This in turn fuels acts of terrorist violence against settlers, which are often repaid in kind by Jewish extremists. Security? I think not.

Americans for Peace Now’s Ori Nir places the issue in a broader context, also contradicting the TIP claim. “American Jews increasingly realise that settlements undermine Israel’s ability to survive, long term, as a democratic Jewish state and that they undermine America’s national security interest in a stable, peaceful Middle East,” he told Bloomfield.

Barack Obama sees the settlements in this light, which is why he has made a full freeze a centrepiece of his policy. Generally, congressional Democrats, even those known to side with the Israel lobby in the past, have adopted the administration’s position on the issue. All of which must be a painful reminder to TIP of how low its fortunes have sunk in the current domestic political environment.”

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2009/jul/13/israel-west-bank-settlements-obama

4.  What a hilarious title!

“CIA Lies and Other Redundancies”

http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php/usnews/election/1397

5.  Neocons are not only delusional, as the quote describes, but murderous:

“I do agree with this part completely:

The neocons’ democratist ideology should be treated as just another example of fuzzy-headed utopianism. Bringing “liberal democracy” and “democratic capitalism” to the entire world should be added to the category of ridiculous, never-going-to-happen ideas. The best argument against the neocons is that they are delusional. They are the eggheads dreaming up sentimental, utopian schemes, not us.

Couldn’t have said it better myself. Nonetheless, we will gain nothing from adopting the language and posture of the neocons and their fellow travelers. Non-interventionism’s only “tough-guy problem” is the widespread attachment to a mindset derived entirely from dumbass action flicks, which are about as useful a guide for foreign policy as romantic comedies are for romance.”

http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2009/07/13/dont-fck-me-up-with-peace-and-love/

6.  “Mandatory Swine Flu Vaccination Alert

It’s crucial to understand that these vaccines are experimental, untested, toxic and extremely dangerous to the human immune system. They contain squalene-based adjuvants that cause a host of annoying to life-threatening autoimmune diseases. They must be avoided, even if mandated. It’s also known that vaccines don’t protect against diseases they’re designed to prevent and often cause them. They should be banned but proliferate anyway because they’re so profitable, and if globally mandated to the greatest extent ever.

Get ready because that’s precisely what’s coming – universal orders to risk toxic vaccine hazards. In the coming weeks, the dominant media globally will get into high gear fear-mongering mode to convince people voluntarily to submit to jeopardizing their health and well-being. It’s essential to refuse and be safe and international law absolutely protects us.”

http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=14370

7.  “Why is it OK for Alito to decide cases based on heritage, but not Sotomayor?

Once again, we see that right-wing talk radio positions are not only wrong on their face, but amazingly stupid.

“Unasked Question about Sam Alito

At his Senate confirmation hearing, Sam Alito used his opening statement to emphasize how his experience as an Italian-American influences his judicial decision-making (video is here):

But when I look at those cases, I have to say to myself, and I do say to myself, “You know, this could be your grandfather, this could be your grandmother. They were not citizens at one time, and they were people who came to this country” . . . .

When I get a case about discrimination, I have to think about people in my own family who suffered discrimination because of their ethnic background or because of religion or because of gender. And I do take that into account.

Two weeks ago, Alito cast the deciding vote in Ricci v. DeStefano, an intensely contested affirmative action case.  He did so by ruling in favor of the Italian-American firefighters, finding that they were unlawfully discriminated against, even though the district court judge who heard all the evidence and the three-judge appellate panel ruled against them and dismissed their case.  Notably, the majority Supreme Court opinion Alito joined (.pdf) began by highlighting not the relevant legal doctrine, but rather, the emotional factors that made the Italian-American-plaintiffs empathetic.

Did Alito’s Italian-American ethnic background cause him to cast his vote in favor of the Italian-American plaintiffs?  Has anyone raised that question?  Given that he himself said that he “do[es] take that into account” — and given that Sonia Sotomayor spent 6 straight hours today being accused by GOP Senators and Fox News commentators of allowing her Puerto Rican heritage to lead her to discriminate against white litigants — why isn’t that question being asked about Alito’s vote in Ricci?”

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/

]]> http://bandalito.wordpress.com/2009/06/30/campeche-no-se-vendera/ Tue, 30 Jun 2009 21:36:19 +0000 bandalito http://bandalito.wordpress.com/2009/06/30/campeche-no-se-vendera/

Ellos dicen… pero Alito no lo piensa asi

En Campeche las denuncias de amenazas de las que se queja “La Piraña” Jorge González Valdez tienen que ver con su temor de perder la guardería “Chavitos” una de las subrogadas del IMSS en la entidad.

Aliado de Agustín Ortega Rubio y de Jaime Ruiz, “La Piraña” acusa y opera en contra de Mario Avila Lizarraga porque la llegada del PAN al gobierno los privaría de los pingües ingresos que han logrado a través de los contratos amañados que les han entregado los gobiernos priístas.

“La Piraña” logró que Fernando Ortega Bernés en el gobierno de Antonio González Curi le edificaran y amueblara un plantel educativo con todas las especificaciones legales, pero con dinero del erario público.

Víctor Méndez Lanz se encargó de darles las concesiones y el gobierno estatal ha mantenido los apoyos educativos con fondos públicos para un sujeto cuyos negocios incluyen bares y prostíbulos además del golpeteo infame y hasta imbécil desde el pasquín de su colega y patrón Alberto Arceo Corcuera.

“El Pirro” Ortega Rubio y “La Jaimocha” Ruiz cierran un círculo de complicidades que cada día más empobrece a los campechanos, más lesiona al pueblo y más los enriqueces como parte del grupo de los mismos que siguen haciendo lo mismo: robarle al pueblo.

Si votas por Fernando Ortega toda esta rapiña seguirá, toda esta inmundicia continuará y tú seguirás siendo el mismo viviendo en un estado podrido por la corrupción. De ti depende. NO VOTES POR EL PRI

Why can an Italian take pride in their hardworking immigrant parents and thats OK, but a Latino can’t?  They can, but those in power will only laugh because latinos can’t be hardworking (try working in the field Rush), and accuse them of racism, reverse racism, and more.

Latinos have a right to be just as proud of their heritage as do Italians or Jews, or anyone else.  This is what makes America great!  We can be proud of our heritage and still be American.  Plus, it’s these poor immigrants that are giving more of their own children to fight for this country than do the powerful politicians.  How many of the Bush twins went to Iraq?

Anyways, below is an excerpt from a larger article that goes more in depth on the Alito’s nomination to the Supreme Court… an interesting read considering it was written in 2006 before Obama and Sotomayor.

During the last months of 2005, as the nomination of Samuel Alito to the United States Supreme Court by President George W. Bush was ponderously discussed by members of the Senate Judiciary Committee, political activists and columnists, the background issue of Alito’s Italian heritage occasionally seeped into the discourse, but remained for the most part an issue vital only to those of Italian extraction who saw any criticism of Alito as being driven by antipathy toward his — and their — origins.  Anyone following the nomination process was aware, of course, of Bush’s obligatory nod to Alito’s immigrant provenance, with the usual acknowledgements of parental hard work and sacrifice so that the bright youngster, with his own appropriate self-starting and discipline, could achieve the American dream. And Alito kept to the script when he blandly addressed the members of the Judiciary Committee with opening remarks about his hard-working parents.

Even though one has nothing to do with the selection of one’s parents or ethnic heritage, there is nothing inherently wrong with — and there may be much that is right in —alluding to one’s forbears and directing an expression of gratitude to one’s parents. But what was really at work with the Bush-Alito homage to the nominee’s Italian roots was an unspoken awareness that he had risen above them and happily had forgotten the struggles and humiliations of his parents’ and predecessors’ generation of Italian immigrants and other new arrivals to this country.

Alito was put forward as a candidate for the Supreme Court not as an Italian acutely aware of the past hardships and deprivations endured by his group, which had for many provoked a radical critique and active resistance to economic and political exclusion and exploitation. On the contrary, Alito was appointed because his record since his college days at Princeton, through law school at Yale, and into public life revealed that he had no awareness of, let alone compassion for, his own people or others betrayed by the American promise. For Alito, there was no resonance in his soul from the past, not from the historic strikes in Lawrence, Massachusetts, and Patterson, New Jersey, not from the Palmer raids and the subsequent forced deportation of Italians, not from Sacco and Vanzetti, not from the rich tradition of Italian socialist and anarchist writing and agitating. When George W. Bush submitted Samuel Alito’s name to the United States Senate, he knew that Alito was a white male fervently committed to the defense of capitalism, free markets, and imperialism managed by an imperial presidency, all now in their ascendancy.

via The Historical Amnesia of Samuel Alito, A Review of The Lost World of Italian American Radicalism: Politics, Labor and Culture.

Obama announced Sonia Sotomayor as his nominee for the next seat in the Supreme Court—a Puerto Rican racial activist for affirmative action (read: reverse racism).

When he made the announcement, I pointed out that Sotomayor is involved in a controversial case involving race, which was being re-evaluated by the Supreme Court itself.  Here was the summary:

As part of a panel, [Sotomayor] voted to uphold New Haven’s decision to throw out a set of fire department promotion tests, because no minority candidates made the top of the list. White firefighters who scored high but were denied promotion are appealing that ruling.

Well, the headlines just hit the press:

New York Times: “Justices Rule for White Firefighters in Bias Case”

The Supreme Court has ruled that white firefighters in New Haven, Conn., were unfairly denied promotions because of their race, reversing a decision that high court nominee Sonia Sotomayor endorsed as an appeals court judge.

Ouch!

How ironic that right when Sotomayor is maneuvering to get on the Supreme Court, the very court itself ruled against her decision-making on these racial issues.

Although, I don’t know what is more disturbing: the fact that Sotomayor is actually being considered for the high court, or the fact that her decision was only overturned in a 5-4 ruling!!  From the Associated Press:

“Fear of litigation alone cannot justify an employer’s reliance on race to the detriment of individuals who passed the examinations and qualified for promotions,” Justice Anthony Kennedy said in his opinion for the court. He was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Samuel Alito, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas.

In dissent, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said the white firefighters “understandably attract this court’s sympathy. But they had no vested right to promotion. Nor have other persons received promotions in preference to them.”

Justices Stephen Breyer, David Souter and John Paul Stevens signed onto Ginsburg’s dissent, which she read aloud in court Monday.

Maybe Sotomayor is exactly the type of material that half of the court is filled with, after all.

(Is it noteworthy that the headline didn’t instead read, “Sotomayor Overturned by Supreme Court”?)

So far my summer has been off to a busy start.  First of all, I got my grades back and I’m happy to report that I’ve earned the right to continue onto my third year of law school.  Yay for me and now it’s off to my summer semester.

The most of my worries – and I use that term lightly because I’m having so much fun – is moot court and law review.  In case you haven’t figured it out by now I am a research fiend.  I like it, I love it and I want some more of it.  Moot court and law review are feeding my desire to keep my research skills sharp.  Thus far the moot court brief is coming along, now I need to start putting my arguments into their proper shape now that the research is done.  Law review is proving to be rewarding because I get spend all day on WestLaw.  Yes, I know: NERD ALERT!  That’s me.

Too, I get to spend more time looking across the legal world about the areas of the law that I love.  Such as:

Federal Indian Law

An interesting blog post from TurtleTalk’s Matthew Fletcher discusses the current trend with the United States Supreme Court concerning Indian law cases now that Roberts is at the helm:

For the Roberts Court, Indian law cases are easy for a couple reasons.  First, state government interests always trump tribal interests, and every case in which tribes defeat states strongly attracts the attention of the Court.  The reverse simply is not true.  It is my sense that the Roberts Court is happy to rest on the fact that state sovereignty is strongly protected by the text of the Constitution, and tribal sovereignty is not.  Second, the long, complicated, and important history of federal Indian law and policy is utterly unimportant to the Roberts Court.  Longstanding practice, legislative history, and simple Indian affairs history does nothing to persuade a majority of the Court, with only Justice Stevens paying much attention to it.

That’s not good news however I should have suspected as much with one half of the SCOTUS leaning to the right.  Very fine legal history by Mr. Fletcher.  We’ll wait and see how the SCOTUS decides (or declines) certain cases and its impact on Federal Indian jurisprudence.

The Tribulations of John Yoo

John Yoo, former federal attorney (in)famous for writing the “torture memos” is now being prosecuted by Jose Padilla, a convicted terrorist.  Basically, Yoo writes memos to Bush & Friends saying that there is a legal basis for “enhanced interrogation” (not advocating that they should but just that it’s possible, in legal theory) and Bush & Friends implement these measures at places like Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo.  One such person victimized by these policies was Jose Padilla, a terrorist, who then brings a civil suit in the US District Court for the Nothern District of California for violation of his 5th Amendment rights.  Why Yoo as the defendant?  Because his memos were the basis for Bush & Friend’s actions which caused him harm.  Naturally, Yoo files a motion to dismiss but it was denied and now this lawsuit is actually going to trial.  As reported by the Wall Street Journal’s legal blog, Judge White of the ND of CA stated:

Like any other government official, government lawyers are responsible for the foreseeable consequences of their conduct.

Hint, hint Eric Holder.  Does this lawsuit have merit?  No.  Is Yoo the real person that needs to be sued for Padilla’s harm?  No.  Does the Obama Administration need to open up investigation into possible human rights violations and go after the real parties in interest?  Yes.

Obama’s Turn Around on Military Commissions

One of my current favorites of jurisprudence is Guantanamo Bay and the military commissions.  It’s a fascinating area of the law if you ever want to look into it.  Obama said he’d shut them down but then decided to re-open them.  I’m not surprised in the slightest because it’s typical politician fluff: say one thing to get elected, do another when you are elected.  Also, I think once Obama got into office and someone briefed him on the top secret stuff behind the War on Terror he had to change his tune.  Maybe the commissions are a great idea but Bush’s execution of them was wrong.  Maybe that’s why Glenn Greenwald, blogger on Salon.com, labeled these new tribunals the “kinder, gentler military commissions”:

There is simply no way to reconcile Barack Obama’s embrace of military commissions with the core criticisms made about Bush’s system.  Just consider what was said in the past about Bush’s military commissions by key Obama officials, Bush critics generally and, on occasion, even by Obama himself, and decide for yourself if this is anything other than a replica of one of the worst and most extremist abuses of the Bush era.

The idea of having a place away from the mainland of the United States to determine who is a genuine threat to the United States and who isn’t is a great idea.  It’s planning and execution, however was done with a neolithic disregard for due process – and that’s putting it nicely.

—-

Take care and thanks for reading!  I’m sure I’ll have more to gripe about as time passes, so I’ll talk at you later!

Recently, conservative SCOTUS justices Samuel Alito, Antonin Scalia, and Clarence Thomas in addition to Chief Justice John Roberts dissented in the SCOTUS decision—Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Co., Inc.—that determined a West Virginia judge should have recused himself, since “the Due Process Clause incorporated the common-law rule requiring recusal when a judge has ‘a direct, personal, substantial, pecuniary interest.’”

In this case, Chief Justice John Roberts “argued [in his dissent] that the ruling would damage public confidence in the judiciary,” since the “Court’s new ‘rule’ provides no guidance to judges and litigants about when recusal will be constitutionally required.”  However, the Court in this case asserted, “[T]he Court has identified additional instances which, as an objective matter, require recusal. These are circumstances ‘in which experience teaches that the probability of actual bias on the part of the judge or decisionmaker is too high to be constitutionally tolerable.’” The Court also provided this guidance: “The inquiry is an objective one. The Court asks not whether the judge is actually, subjectively biased, but whether the average judge in his position is ‘likely’ to be neutral, or whether there is an unconstitutional ‘potential for bias.’”

Chief Justice John Roberts also argued, “This will inevitably lead to an increase in allegations that judges are biased, however groundless those charges may be. The end result will do far more to erode public confidence in judicial impartiality than an isolated failure to recuse in a particular case.” Certainly, the courts can manage groundless charges, and I believe the dissenting conservatives justices in this case—including the Chief Justice—have done more to “erode public confidence in judicial impartiality,” especially since this case was about judicial impartiality. From Facing South:

After the Massey Energy coal mining company lost a $50 million verdict to a competitor, CEO Don Blankenship spent $3 million electing a friendly judge to West Virginia’s Supreme Court of Appeals who went on to cast the deciding vote in a case that overturned the verdict.

.       .       .

“At its core, the Caperton case was about the inherent conflict of interest when our elected officials depend on or are aided by large campaign contributions and excessive spending in the electoral process,” said Nick Nyhart, president of Public Campaign, a nonprofit that promotes public financing of elections. “Americans know that campaign contributions from wealthy special interests impact the policy decisions made by Congress on matters that affect the life and well being of all of us.”

Massey’s stock was down 6% in yesterday afternoon’s trading on the New York Stock Exchange, while other coal company stocks were down between 2 and 4%, Reuters reports.

The high court’s ruling is the latest in a series of recent setbacks for Richmond, Va.-based Massey. Last month Ohio State University President E. Gordon Gee resigned from Massey’s board under pressure from activists who argued that his promotion of sustainable energy was incompatible with Massey’s reliance on mountaintop removal mining.

And earlier this year, Santa Clara University in California divested its holdings in Massey because of the company’s record of environmental destructiveness. The company has also been the target of nonviolent protests over its environmentally destructive business practices.

White House photo by Paul Morse found here.

:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::

Si ricopre di maculata muffa
come una parete d’umida coscienza,
solo tempo che gocciola
da marroni tubature logore.

Logori gli scantinati del mio corpo.

Poi ci guardiamo
e un paradisiaco angolo di mondo
verde ci calma,
inondandoci come vermi.

Hai
grossi ingranaggi che tremano,
folti boschi inumiditi
che cantano
echi profondi di foglie fresche.

Non è alba non è meriggio,
è il peggio
il silenzio.

Alibi d’alito
che appanna l’inesistenza
dell’esistenza
del mio uomo.

22/5/’05