Stiffing "Spics". George Bush has nominated yet another WASP to the Supreme Court — just what we (don't) need.
+
Hispanics are now the largest minority in the Nation, but there has never, in the entire history of this Republic, been so much as a single Latino justice on the Supreme Court. Dubya had the chance to remedy that injustice, but chose not to.
+
Instead, he chose a white, heterosexual, Anglo-Saxon, (presumably) Protestant(?) man to fill a seat vacated by a white, heterosexual, Irish(, Catholic? — religious affiliation is a closely guarded secret nowadays, so it is impossible to know it unless someone has publicly stated a religious preference — and why is that, in this day of supposed religious tolerance, that people hide their affiliation?; it's contemptible) woman. The Republican Party has shown yet again, if any proof were needed after all these years, that it is indeed the party of WASPS — but nobody else.
+
How many more generations must Hispanics wait until some President puts a Latino on the Supreme Court? In an era when the name of the second-largest city in the Nation is "Los Angeles" and the largest minority is Hispanic, it is grotesque that not so much as one ninth of the Supreme Court is to be occupied by a Latino. Instead, Jews, a trivial 2% of the population — as against some 14% for Hispanics — have two seats on the Supreme Court: 22% of the total and 40% of a voting majority. Why is that?
+
Hispanics should pull out all stops to demand that the Senate reject yet another WASP and instead put a Latino on the Supreme Court. It is their due, and would give to us decisions that more people can accept as reflecting the genuine will of the people — despite the fact that 5 unelected individuals can say what "the law" is for 300 million people, against their will!
+
We stupidly call this judicial dictatorship "democracy". It is no such thing.
+
When "democracy" systematically excludes Latins, generation after generation, everyone must be concerned that the high-handed dictates of a uniformly Anglo Supreme Court might not be accepted by the people but be resisted by all means necessary, including violence.
+
Where, however, would trivial violence get us? There is no mechanism in the Constitution (at present) by which Congress (with or without the President) can override a Supreme Court decision, tho there should be. So how are we to undo the judicial dictatorship into which this miserable excuse for a democracy has fallen?
+
Latin Americans know that sometimes only revolution can make a needed change. So they may lead us to a new way of ousting dictators: the rope. It would be salutary to our "democracy" for a mob to storm the Supreme Court building, grab all the "justices", drag them out by the scruff of their necks, put ropes around all those necks, toss the loose end of those ropes over stout limbs of nearby trees or strong lite stanchions, then hoist those arrogant scumbags into the air, slowly, so they dance the dance of their death and of our liberation — at the end of their rope.
+
If the members of the Supreme Court don't want to be hanged, every last member without distinction (for they all deserve to die, some for some decisions, others for others), they had better stop trying to rewrite the Constitution and overrule elected officials.
+
Democracy requires not just that the will of the people be done but also that those who would void the will of the people be killed. To quote the state motto of Virginia, "Sic semper tyrannis."
+
(The current U.S. military death toll in Iraq, according to the website "Iraq Coalition Casualties", is 1,769.)
- posted by L. Craig Schoonmaker @ 5:24 AM