A Third of the Supreme Court Now to Be Jewish? NO!!! President Obama has INSANELY chosen a Jew for the Supreme Court seat being evacuated by Justice Stevens. There are already two Jews on the Supreme Court, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer. Jews are at very most 2% — 1/50th — of the U.S. population, but are already 22% of the Supreme Court, and 40% of a majority. Now Obama wants to load the Court with a third Jew, so that Jews will constitute 33% of the Court overall — 16× their proportion of the population — and 60% of a majority — 30× their proportion of the population! NO. Absolutely not. It's not a matter of bigotry but of fairness to everyone ELSE.
+
Let's take this process of gradual Jewish aggrandizement at the expense of everyone else to its "logical" extreme. Why not have EVERY member of the Supreme Court Jewish? And every member of the House of Representatives? And every member of the U.S. Senate? And both President and Vice President? Why NOT have a hugely diverse, predominantly Christian Nation ruled absolutely by Jews, without any chance of Christian values being considered, much less prevailing? That is not democracy, and not representative of this country's diversity.
+
Why not an Oriental — Chinese or Filipino — for the Court? or a gay man? or American Indian? Eskimo? Asian Indian? Chicano? West Indian? MOSLEM?
+
Jews have vastly too much power in the United States without a third seat of the Supreme Court's mere 9, and they have abused that power hugely, to produce U.S. actions in the Middle East that have made us hated, detested, by much of the Moslem world, and made us indeed ongoing targets for violence, as shown very recently by the failed bombing of Times Square — in a city with a Jewish mayor. Is the fact that the Mayor of New York is a Jew irrelevant to that particular city's being targeted over and over for violence by Moslem extremists? Hardly.
+
California is "represented" in the U.S. Senate by two Jews, only. That is, the one state that is arguably the most diverse has absolutely no diversity in its "representation" in the Senate. Only California's Jews are truly represented in the Senate; everybody else gets the tail end of their Senators' concerns. Israel is first, American Jews second, everybody else third — a distant third.
+
The Senate overall is 100 members, so it's very easy to figure the percentage of the Senate represented by any given group. However many members there are of that group, that is their percentage in the Senate. There are 13 Jews in the U.S. Senate: 13% of that body, held by 2% of the population. Plainly, Jews are grossly, grotesquely overrepresented.
+
Wikipedia figures the Jewish population of the United States as 1.4% of the general population, not 2%. I guess they count people who are active members of some synagog. The Jewish Virtual Library estimates that Jews are 2.2% of the U.S. The Adherents.com website, however, counts self-identified Jews as 1.3% of the Nation's population in its table of the top twenty religions, but only 1% in the table about self-identification as found by the Pew Research Council. Adherents.com explains why the numbers vary:

Unlike some countries, the United States does not include a question about religion in its census, and has not done so for over fifty years. Religious adherent statistics in the U.S. are obtained from surveys and organizational reporting.

If one regards Jews as adherents (which would of necessity be self-identified) of Judaism, their number is closer to the 1.4% that Wikipedia used. That puts all the figures for the overrepresentation of Jews on the Supreme Court even higher: 33% of the total court would be more than 23× the number they 'should' have; 60% of a majority would be 43× — not 43% higher, but 4,300% of what they should have!
+
In the House, the math is more complicated, but it has been done for us. Unfortunately, the same article in Wikipedia gives two different figures, one in a table (8.4%), the other in the text immediately following the table (7.8%). If we round down from the table and up from the text, we get 8%, which is 4× the largest number for Jews in the general population (2%), and nearly 6× (600%, a 500% overrepresentation) the 1.4% figure Wikipedia gave in the article on the Senate.
+
For every OVERrepresented group, there is an UNDERrepresented group. Be it South Asians, East Asians, homosexual men, Puerto Ricans, American Indians, lesbians,* the disabled, Mexicans — you name it — the seats hogged in the House and Senate by Jews are not available to other groups, and those other groups' points of view are unheard and unincorporated in legislation and public policy. The United States Government's grotesquely Radical Zionist stance in the Middle East is NOT representative of the general population's attitudes but of the grotesquely too-Jewish Congress that the President must get his legislation, on all matters, past.
+
Indeed, U.S. policy isn't even what most American Jews want for the Middle East! The organizations that are heard from and that influence U.S. Government behavior are not really representative of American Jewish opinion.
+
Would U.S. public policy be different if the Congress were only 2%, or 1.4% Jewish? You can bet your ass it would be.
+
Incumbency matters. Who one is determines how one thinks. That is why Sonia Sotomayor was completely right when she said, long before her confirmation, that her being a Latina gave her a point of view and empathy that non-Latinas/Latinos might not have. Of course, she recanted that view for the confirmation hearings, in an act of blatant dishonesty that should have barred her from the Court. One hopes she has found her integrity again, now that she has passed the gauntlet of fire that was her confirmation hearing.
+
Now we are to have another gauntlet of fire for the Jewess Elena Kagan. How many members of the Senate will have the courage to say that we already have two Jews on the Supreme Court; there are only 9 members to that Court; Jews are already hugely overrepresented, and to add a third would make their overrepresentation not just grotesque but criminally unfair to everyone else? Who will have the integrity and intestinal fortitude to say they are not going to be intimidated by accusations of "anti-Semitism" for saying that 22% of the Supreme Court for a 2% or 1.4% minority — any such tiny minority — is far more than they are entitled to, and it must not become 33⅓%?That a democratic government must be truly representative, in its membership, experiences, and worldview, of the society it claims the right to dictate to? That a Supreme Court dominated by Jews cannot represent a country that is almost not at all Jewish, and that we risk widespread defiance of rulings that are clearly impelled by the Jewish members of the Court AGAINST the predominantly Christian country they seek to control? The Supreme Court is already hated. How far from the people can it get before the people demand that governments whose popular laws are voided, refuse to obey the rulings of the Supreme Court?
+
Christians, MOSLEMS, atheists, and others must DEMAND that Elena Kagan be REJECTED by the Senate. Obama should indeed withdraw the nomination, or Kagan herself withdraw from consideration. The history of Germany must be seen to be instructive. Overreaching gave Jews too much power in Germany, and the German people reacted with HATRED. Jews here seem not to remember that part of history, and think that a violent reaction against the Jews cannot happen here. Yes, it really can. Back off. Two seats on the United States Supreme Court is at least one too many. Demanding three is asking for trouble. Very serious trouble. Push too far, expect pushback.
____________________

* I had not yet, when I wrote that sentence, seen a picture of Ms. Kagan. She may or may not be a lesbian, but her haircut is decidedly dyky. If she's not a lesbian, she should be severely criticized for false advertising.
+
(The current U.S. military death toll in Iraq, according to the website "Iraq Coalition Casualties", is 4,397 — for Israel.)
- posted by L. Craig Schoonmaker @ 8:45 PM