The Best Supreme Court Justice is Also the Most Diverse

At about the time of the Harriet Miers fiasco a few years ago, I got into an online debate with someone over the intellectual prowess of Clarence Thomas on the U.S. Supreme Court. My position, at the time and today, is that Justice Thomas has a better understanding of constitutional law than anyone on the Court, including Justice Antonin Scalia.

The guy who I was arguing with couldn't disagree with me more, repeating the tired trope that Thomas was Scalia's waterboy who simply signed off in agreement with every opinion Scalia wrote. Ignoring that this guy, who was not a lawyer, probably never even read any of Scalia's or Thomas' opinions, I politely challenged him to back up his assertion. He couldn't do it, of course, and resorted to rhetorically asking me if I was serious in my suggestion that Justice Thomas was the best Justice on the Court.

Looking back, it's too bad Supreme Conflict by Jan Crawford Greenburg hadn't been released, or maybe even written, when I got into this debate. If Greenburg's excellent book had been around, I could have referenced the passage where it was revealed that Justice Thomas had changed Justice Scalia's mind on two different cases - within the first few weeks of Justice Thomas taking his hard fought seat on the Court.

All of the above is kind of an introduction to a short New York Times article I just read about the law schools that Supreme Court Justices hire their clerks from. As therein noted, since 2005 about half of all the clerks who have worked for a Supreme Court Justice went to law school at either Harvard or Yale. Everyone else usually came from exclusive law programs at the University of Virgina, Stanford, Columbia and the University of Chicago. The lone exception to this hiring trend is Justice Thomas, who has expressly said his preference is to look for clerks from non-Ivy League schools, which the Times notes includes a place like Creighton University (which is in Nebraska). Justice Thomas' reason for this preference is simple: clerks should come from a wide range of backgrounds. For a so-called "conservative" whom many on the Left continue to wrongly accuse of not having the intellectual wherewithal to be on the Court, this is pretty "progressive," outside of the box thinking. I like it.

I've Had It. Good Bye.

Today I did something that had some personal significance. I re-registered to vote so that I could change my party affiliation from Republican to Decline to State. It's something I've been thinking of doing for a while, but never really got around to. What finally pushed me to do it, though, was what I kept reading from several "insider" Republicans about GOP U.S. Senate candidate Carly Fiorina during her first, and probably last, debate with current Senator Barbara "Don't Call Me Ma'am" Boxer. These "insiders" kept saying, via Facebook and Twitter, that Fiorina was "pro-life," and wasn't it wonderful how she didn't waver from that position.

The major problem I have with these people's assertion about the pro-life bona fides of Fiorina is that it's totally disingenuous. Yes, Carly Fiorina has expressly said she's against abortion. What she has not expressed, however, is a belief that abortion is far from being a valid right under the Constitution. Fiorina has also never said whether she at least supports enacting laws which would restrict abortion access. For all anyone knows, the stance that Carly Fiorina has on abortion mirrors the famously logic challenged/contorted stance of former New York State Governor Mario Cuomo: personally against abortion, but supports the legal right to choose abortion.*

Adding to my frustration is that none of these "insiders" I have asked who actively supports Carly Fiorina has even tried to refute the gaping holes I have poked in the suggestive assertion that Fiorina believes abortion should not be a legal right, or at least an extremely limited one. These people basically just ignore me thinking that in doing so I'll go away. Well, they're right. I have gone away. But not too quietly.

*So much might even be inferred from the partial response Fiorina gave in her debate with Boxer to a question of whether she supports the overturning of Roe v. Wade. Fiorina said that since California voters have determined abortion should be a legal right, she is prepared to trust the voters' judgment.

John Paul Stevens: Dumbest Supreme Court Justice Ever?

Matthew Franck at NRO's Bench Memos blog nicely refutes a kind of homage by Yale Law School instructor Linda Greenhouse to the recently retired Supreme Court Justice, John Paul Stevens. The context of Greenhouse's fawning is a case involving a display of the 10 Commandments on the walls of a couple of courthouses in Kentucky.

[Greenhouse] particularly admires one of Stevens’ worst notions, noting that he was “the only justice willing to articulate the position that laws incorporating the view that life begins at conception are theological exercises that should be invalidated on Establishment Clause grounds.” The “only justice” indeed. No other justice ever joined Stevens in this view, probably because it is one of the dumbest ever pronounced by a justice of the Supreme Court.

Stevens first expressed this view, to my knowledge, in his opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part in Webster v. Reproductive Health Services, 492 U.S. 490 (1989), 560ff. The Missouri law at issue in that case had declared that every human life “begins at conception.” Justice Stevens professed himself incapable of seeing any “secular legislative purpose” in such a declaration, and held that therefore the law expressed a purely “theological” point of view and was thus a violation of the establishment-of-religion clause of the first amendment. But of course the “purpose” of the Missouri declaration was obvious on its face. It was intended to state, and did state, a fact as a predicate for the statutory requirements to follow. Standard textbooks in embryology, then as now, unequivocally declared the scientific fact that every human life begins at conception. What an embryology textbook cannot tell us, as a matter of biology, is what to do about that fact–what moral requirement, if any, that fact should impose on us. This is what the Missouri legislature, quite reasonably, sought to do.

You can read the entirety of Franck's excellent blog post here. There's even some St. Thomas Aquinas thrown in.

Obama Stimulus is the Economic Equivalent of Red Bull

On some of the news commentary shows I've seen, partisan Democrats are trying to put a positive spin on the Commerce Department's downward revision of the country's 2nd quarter GDP rate. What these party hacks are basically saying is that despite the fact that the economy isn't growing as fast as they'd like, there's still growth. As such, Obama's economic policies, e.g., the $800 billion so-called "Stimulus" bill, are working.

This is utter and complete hogwash. The truth of the matter is the big recovery Team Obama assured us would occur if the "Stimulus" bill was passed has not been close to being realized. For instance, Obama's economic advisors claimed that if the "Stimulus" didn't get put into effect, the unemployment rate would surpass an unacceptable 8%. As you're no doubt aware, unemployment has been well over 9% for a while now. At best, the economy as measured by unemployment is just about where Team Obama said it would be without the "Stimulus" bill.

What economic growth that has occurred and can be attributed to Obama's "Stimulus" policies is entirely unsustainable. They are basically like Red Bull. You may get a noticeable energy boost, but it doesn't last for very long. A recent illustration of this point is the home buying tax credit which expired this past spring. Although this credit did spur some demand for homes, once it was gone so too were the home buyers. We know this by the news that previously owned home sales plummeted almost 30% from June to July.

Because of its high caffeine and sugar content, Red Bull has a negative impact on one's health when used. So too with the "Stimulus" on the financial health of the nation with respect to increased debt and the burden placed on future generations to pay it back.

The bottom line here is that when you hear or see Obama and the Dems try to put a happy face on what they have done with the economy, don't buy it. Their policies are nothing more than a short fix that have failed to account for long term consequences.

Killing Fields in Afghanistan

The inestimably insightful John Hinderaker at Powerline has posted some thoughts on our impending departure from Afghanistan, and the picture he paints isn't very bright. It's bad enough that Obama foolishly announced to the whole world when U.S. troops were going to be pulled out of Afghanistan, because he basically signaled to the Taliban, our enemy, how long they needed to try and stay low and in hiding. Obama, in other words, gave the Taliban a reason to try and survive.

What's even worse, however, is that once the Taliban does come back in full force without anything or anybody there to really stop them, the horrors they will likely inflict on most Afghan women and any man who is perceived to have cooperated with the U.S. military will be countless. To say that Afghanistan might become what Cambodia was under the Khmer Rouge when the U.S. pulled out of Vietnam in 1975 does not take a very big stretch of the imagination. In fact, it's more than likely going to happen. That we are basically going to allow this is truly disturbing.

A Tale of Two Endorsements: Why Sarah Palin is Starting to Piss Me Off

This past May, I posted my thoughts about why it was a mistake for Sarah Palin to endorse Carly Fiorina in the U.S. Senate Republican Party primary race here in California. Despite the fact that a proven conservative like Chuck DeVore was actually polling better than Fiorina in a head to head battle against Senate incumbent Barbara Boxer, Palin went ahead and threw her heavy influence behind someone whose conservative credentials are, at best, questionable (e.g., Fiorina backed TARP and has refused to say whether she is against abortion rights ).

Fiorina handily won the Republican nomination, and I believe Palin's well publicized endorsement played a big part in that. Chuck DeVore ended up finishing in third, only a couple of percentage points behind Tom Campbell, a liberal Republican and fairly well known former congressman from the Silicon Valley who several years ago had run for Senate against Dianne Feinstein. All things considered, DeVore did pretty well for someone who didn't have Fiorina's personal wealth or Campbell's built in name recognition.

With all this in mind, I got a little irritated when I saw this post on the Conservatives4Palin blog today which basically crows about the impact Sarah Palin had on the U.S. Senate Republican primary race in Washington State. The winner of that contest was Dino Rossi who, like Fiorina, isn't too forthcoming about his views on specific controversial issues, like abortion rights. Although, according to this local liberal rag in Seattle, Rossi does have a pro-life voting record in the Washington State legislature.

Sarah Palin, however, did not endorse Rossi. She endorsed Clint Didier, a political novice and former professional football player with the Washington Redskins. As noted by Conservatives4Palin, prior to receiving Palin's endorsement, Didier was running in fourth place in the Republican primary and polling in the low single digits - 4 percent. The final results of the primary show Didier winning three counties and over three times the amount of support he had been getting before being endorsed by Palin.

Didier clearly had a very slim chance of winning the GOP primary, even with Sarah Palin's endorsement. But her endorsement did make things a kind of interesting in terms of the final election numbers. Given the apparent impact she had in Washington, I don't think it's far fetched to believe that if Sarah Palin had endorsed proven conservative Chuck DeVore over highly questionable conservative Carly Fiorina in the California Republican primary, DeVore quite possibly could have won the GOP nomination. What makes Palin's endorsement decision even more infuriating to me is that DeVore had a better shot than Fiorina at beating Barbara Boxer. In a general election match up against long time Senate incumbent Patty Murray, I'm pretty certain Clint Didier never had as good a chance of winning than Dino Rossi. WTF with your endorsements Sarah Palin?!

Jerry Brown Sucks

If you know me or have read this blog before, my less than positive sentiment about the former governor who is trying to again become California's next governor should come as little surprise. However, my expressed belief in the overall "suckiness" of Jerry Brown has recently been underscored by the news that he is attending a private campaign fundraiser today at the Venice, California home of Jodie Evans, a co-founder of the odiously uncivil, anti-American/pro-terrorist political action group Code Pink.

How bad are Ms. Evans and Code Pink, you ask? Here's a sample from Debbie Lee, the mother of a Navy SEAL who was killed in action in Iraq:

In 2008 [Code Pink] barricaded the recruiting office in Berkeley with the blessing of the Berkeley City Council. We at Move America Forward had all we could stomach when we heard them tell the Marines they were unwelcome, unwanted intruders, not in Iraq or Afghanistan but on American soil in Berkeley, California. Americans from across the nation joined us in Berkeley to counter-protest these anti-war hippies. Numerous times they told me they support the troops but not the war, yet over and over when I asked if they had sent care packages, phone cards, written letters, or helped the families left behind in anyway, they conveniently couldn’t remember anything they had done. Yet they had a successful fundraiser to send $600,000.00 to our enemies in Iraq? Yet Jodie Evans and her Code Pink degenerates taunted me and made light of my son’s sacrifice telling me, “Your son deserved to die in Iraq if he was stupid enough to go over there.” It took every ounce of reserve in my body to not level these idiots to the ground. These same people who call terrorists “freedom fighters” says that my son, who gave up his life for their freedoms, deserved death.

By the way, don't interpret my contempt for Jerry Brown as an endorsement of his main opponent in the governor's race, Meg Whitman. The only reason I would ever cast a vote for Whitman is to prevent Brown from winning.

Why Gay Rights Activists May Not Want There to Be a "Gay Gene"

Joe Carter over at the First Things On the Square blog has posted a fascinating and thought provoking piece on natal eugenics, genetic engineering and homosexuality.

In his post, Carter notes the significant observation Francis Fukuyama made a few years ago about how most parents would select a medical procedure to significantly reduce the likelihood of giving birth to gay children, if such a procedure existed and was available. In light of this, it's worth asking gay activists* whether they'd oppose the inevitable development of genetic engineering technology that could alter or eliminate a "gay gene" should one ever be definitively discovered. Perhaps an even bigger question to ask is would gay activists support the legal right of a mother to abort her pre-born child solely on the basis of that child having the "gay gene"?

_______________

*By "gay activist" I basically mean anyone who believes same sex attraction is biologically natural and uses that belief as a basis for encouraging societal acceptance of the homosexual lifestyle.

Kind of a Chinese St. Thomas More

I think I've found a new role model. His name is Wu Jingxiong, a.k.a. John C.H. Wu. John was a lawyer and writer from China who had served in the Kuomintang government prior to its collapse at the hands of the ChiComs and Mao Zedong in 1949. After leaving/escaping China, John would become a long time professor at the University of Hawaii and Seton Hall University.

A couple of additional noteworthy things about John was that he was the principal author of the constitution for the Republic of China (more commonly known as Taiwan), and he was apparently somewhat of a pen pal with former U.S. Supreme Court Justice, Oliver Wendell Holmes. His correspondence with and interest in Justice Holmes was such that John would end up writing a scholarly examination of Holmes' jurisprudence.

John was also a Catholic, who converted to the faith during his adult years at the inspiration of St. Therese of Lisieux. The admiration John had for the Little Flower was such that he wrote a short pamphlet about her teachings that you can read online here.

For more biographical information about John C.H. Wu, click through here (it's where I got almost all of the above). Like the author of the linked to blog post, I'm hoping at least one of the Catholic publishers like Our Sunday Visitor and Ignatius Press reprint John's written religious works. It'd be icing on the cake for me if some publishing company would reprint his legal/law writings.

Legal Tip (Not Advice) of the Day

For the longest time I was under the general belief that a living trust protected your assets, like a house, from creditors and lawsuits. I don't know where I got this belief from, but it's not really true. A creditor can make you pull an asset out of your trust for purposes of satisfying an outstanding debt you might owe.

Creditors of named beneficiaries to a trust, however, cannot touch the trust assets. This is possibly where I might have gotten things confused.

In any event, if you want to protect your assets from creditors beyond what the law may already provide, e.g., state homesteading laws, you should get insurance.

Clarification: The above is written in the context of a revocable living trust, wherein the trust creator or settlor is still living and the named beneficiaries possess only a future interest in trust assets.

The Gipper Goes Viral

An excellent video ad produced by the Republican Study Committee that's showing up on a whole lot of blogs, Facebook pages and tweets - at least the conservative ones.

I'm almost certain the clips of Reagan are from his 1964 "A Time for Choosing" speech.

It Seems Supreme Court Already Declared No Right to Same Sex Marriage [Updated]

How lawless has Judge Vaughn Walker acted in striking down Proposition 8? In 1971, the Minnesota State Supreme Court in the case of Baker vs. Nelson ruled that it was not unconstitutional for the government to limit its recognition of legally valid marriages to members of the opposite sex, i.e., 1 man and 1 woman.

On appeal by the losing parties, the U.S. Supreme Court in 1972 summarily dismissed Baker on grounds that the case lacked a "substantial federal question." That's literally all the Court said. However, as a matter of procedure, this summary dismissal by the Court was apparently the equivalent of a decision on the merits. If that in fact is what it means, then the ruling in Baker that marriages may be legally limited to people of the opposite sex is binding precedence upon all lower federal courts.

In his written decision, Judge Walker entirely ignored Baker v. Nelson, even though it contained identical issues and the case was raised by lawyers defending Prop. 8. As a matter of law, then, Walker's ruling should be overruled by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals without much discussion. Whether the most liberally activist and overturned court will do so, however, is a whole different question.

Update: Maggie Gallagher at the National Organization for Marriage lists some key excerpts from the emergency motion brief filed by Prop. 8 lawyers to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. The big takeaway is that Judge Walker was determined to strike down Prop. 8, even if that meant ignoring binding legal precedence and grossly abusing his discretion as a federal court judge. Regardless of whether you support legal recognition of same sex marriage as a matter of public policy, you should really be upset at how Walker has conducted himself in this case. I personally don't think it's too far fetched to suggest that Walker be impeached.

Is Law School Becoming a Fool's Errand?

That's the question Mr. Instapundit, Glenn Reynolds, addresses in this video with his fellow legal scholars John Yoo and Richard Epstein.

Having watched the whole 18+ minute video, I'm not exactly sure anyone ever suggested an answer. If you were to ask me whether law school is a waste of time, my response would be the same general response that lawyers tend to give to a question posed to them/us by a non-lawyer: it depends.

Putting aside the fact that many, if not most, states make possession of a valid law degree a prerequisite to taking their bar/licensing exams, I would say law school is generally a waste of time if all you want to be is a practicing attorney.

If, however, you wanted to be a legal academic like Messrs Reynolds, Yoo and Epstein, then law school would obviously be necessary.

Given these short answers, I suppose I wouldn't have been a very good guest on Instapundit's web show. Not that I would have been invited anyway, since I'm just a regular "working class" lawyer in a state where I understand there are more of us than in the entire country of Japan.

h/t Volokh Conspiracy

Gay is Apparently the New Black [Updated]

When asked by Chris Wallace where in the Constitution is there a right to same-sex (i.e., gay) "marriage," former Bush Solicitor General and co-lead attorney for the parties who challenged California's Proposition 8 answered with a rhetorical question that it exists in the same place where there is a right to interracial marriage. Of course, no such right is expressly stated in the Constitution, but the Supreme Court has previously determined within the context of state racial segregation laws banning interracial marriage that marriage in general is a fundamental right that is constitutionally protected.

OK, via Ted Olson's comments in the video below, we now know for certain that pro-gay "marriage" advocates are hanging their hats on the premise that same-sex attraction is race. I personally find this ridiculous, but I'd be interested in reading any defense for this position.



A couple of pet peeve house cleaning items: I wish people would stop referring to Proposition 8 as a "ban" on same-sex "marriage." The democratically approved state constitutional amendment simply provides a legally recognized definition. To "ban" something basically means to outlaw it. Proposition 8 outlaws nothing.

I also wish people would stop saying Proposition 8 prevents homosexuals from getting married. Again, it does no such thing. In effect, Proposition 8 limits a legally recognized marriage to 1 male and 1 female. Said male and female may either be heterosexual or homosexual. There is no exclusion from marriage on the basis of sexual orientation. Under Proposition 8, "marriages" between members of the same sex are not legally recognized. Such is true regardless of whether these "marriages" are between couples of the same sex who are homosexual or heterosexual. (Oh, can same-sex couples only be homosexual? Why?).

Update: In his interview with Chris Wallace (the above embedded video was edited by whoever posted it on YouTube), Ted Olson repeated the assertion in Judge Walker's written decision that lawyers defending Prop. 8 said they didn't have to prove or provide evidence of the procreative purpose of marriage. That assertion by Walker is patently false. For Olson to knowingly perpetuate Walker's false assertion really reflects poorly on his character.

Let Them Eat Paella!

While unemployment in this country remains on the up tick, General (Government) Motors invests $500 million in a plant in Mexico, and forecasted retail sales fell short for a fourth straight month, First Lady Michelle Obama is spending a luxury filled 5 day vacation in Spain on the U.S. taxpayer's dime.

What a complete joke.

Update: Via Instapundit

Does Stephen Bainbridge Throw Like a Little Girl?

Or did he get his nerdy wine-swilling butt kicked a few time in high school by some lunkhead jocks? I ask only because of the apparent hostility the good law professor from UCLA has toward sports, as projected in the elitist-laden swipe he took at Sarah Palin in his blog post on the reasons why it's getting to be embarrassing to be a conservative.

Let's tick off ten things that make this conservative embarrassed by the modern conservative movement:

A poorly educated ex-sportwriter who served half of one term of an minor state governorship is prominently featured as a -- if not the -- leading prospect for the GOP's 2012 Presidential nomination.

Why pejoratively mention that Sarah Palin was an "ex-sportswriter," as opposed to a television journalist, if you didn't have some deep seeded antipathy to sports, right? At least give me credit for looking for a unique angle to Bainbridge's snooty comments.

h/t Ordered Liberty

Example #99823829 That Liberals Really Hate Democracy

In striking down Proposition 8, a state constitutional amendment regarding the definition of marriage that California voters approved by a clear majority, Federal District Court Judge Vaughn Walker proclaimed that "Gender no longer forms an essential part of marriage." Perry et al. v. Schwarzenegger et al.

To the extent that this foundational comment is completely without legal basis, as well as the fact that Judge Walker is an unelected public official, there should be no doubt left in anyone's mind - except for maybe the severely deranged - that the policies of liberalism simply cannot prevail in a democratic republic.

h/t NRO

Oh, and by the way, Judge Walker should be impeached for the illegal conflict of interest he had in this case, and for violating the First Amendment rights of Proposition 8 supporters.

Why America is Great: Part Deux

Everyone has an opportunity. Here now is the official campaign ad of Basil Marceaux, a Republican Party candidate for the governor of Tennessee. Have a nice day!



h/t Hot Air

Beyond Outrageous

Below is a video of Joseph Holland (in the striped blue shirt), a 25 year old graduate student at Northwestern University who, as you'll see, was peacefully praying the rosary outside of a Planned Parenthood abortion clinic in downtown Chicago. Although clearly not interfering with anyone wanting to enter the clinic, it appears that Joseph was criminally charged for this behavior under the pretext that he was engaged in "disorderly conduct" in violation of the city's "bubble" law.

Outraged doesn't begin to describe my level of anger toward this situation.



h/t American Papist

Specious Reasoning and Ignores Prior Case Law

That is pretty much how Andy McCarthy at National Review Online describes Judge Susan Bolton's negative ruling on several key provisions of Arizona's controversial illegal immigration law. As a result of the ruling, police officers in Arizona will not be able to basically ask someone who they think is in the country illegally for identification which would tend to prove that person is here legally.

In her ruling, Bolton essentially bought the argument by Obama's Department of Justice that several provisions of the Arizona law are "preempted" by or violate the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution because they effectively prevent federal immigration laws from being enforced. However, as you and I know full well, federal immigration laws aren't being enforced, so why Bolton would buy the DOJ's laughable claim to the contrary is beyond bewildering.

As McCarthy points out, Bolton also totally ignores prior case law which pretty much says the states may enact laws which deter illegal immigration. In Plyler v. Doe, the Supreme Court stated:

Although the State has no direct interest in controlling entry into this country, that interest being one reserved by the Constitution to the Federal Government, unchecked unlawful migration might impair the State's economy generally, or the State's ability to provide some important service. Despite the exclusive federal control of this Nation's borders, we cannot conclude that the States are without power to deter the influx of persons entering the United States against federal law, and whose numbers might have a discernible impact on traditional state concerns.

Unless you're totally deluded or an open borders zealot (the two of which have a great deal of overlap) this sounds exactly like the Arizona law.

If interested, you can read Judge Bolton's ruling here.

Update: The above excerpt from the Plyler case is at Footnote 23 of the majority opinion.

BP Punks Obama

Remember that $20 billion escrow fund for oil spill victims in the Gulf that Obama pretty much forced BP to open? Well, being the relatively smart business folks they are who hire relatively smart tax attorneys and accountants, BP is planning on writing off as a cost about $10 billion of that fund on their U.S. taxes. Why is this significant, you ask? Because you and I are going to end up indirectly paying for half of that $20 billion that is sitting in escrow. Thanks a lot, Barry!

Test Post

Posting this via e-mail for the first time. Just want to see how it looks.

Why America is Great

Because everyone, no matter how loony you are/might be, has an opportunity. See, e.g., Al Franken, Alvin Greene, and this dude who is running for governor of Tennessee (who isn't actually the official Republican Party nominee).



h/t Ace

Democrats Vote Down Elimination of Death Tax

I give Senator Jim DeMint props for making the proposal, even though it had no chance of passing.

As the linked to article reports, super wealthy people like Bill Gates and Warren Buffet not only favor keeping the estate tax, but having it at a very high rate. Their rationale is that the tax encourages charitable giving. If you think about it, though, this is really condescending and twisted. Gates and Buffet clearly think that we are incapable of being sufficiently charitable with our money without the heavy fist of government hanging over our heads. They also obviously don't like children very much, since they'd rather see the estate of a parent taken over by the government than fully bequeathed to that parent's child or kids.

Alternate-Bizarro Universe

Sheila Jackson Lee, Democrat congresswoman from Texas, talks about the two countries in Vietnam living side by side in peace, and our undeclared military victory there.



h/t Powerline

I Don't Think That's Y

So it appears the Y.M.C.A. will be changing its name to just "the Y."

One of the nation’s most iconic nonprofit organizations, founded 166 years ago in England as the Young Men’s Christian Association, is undergoing a major rebranding, adopting as its name the nickname everyone has used for generations.

“It’s a way of being warmer, more genuine, more welcoming, when you call yourself what everyone else calls you,” said Kate Coleman, the organization’s senior vice president and chief marketing officer.

Sure, that's the reason. Changing the name has nothing at all to do with the organization wanting to distance itself from the words "Men" and "Christian." That would be too politically correct, and maybe bigoted.

h/t First Thoughts

Be an Eagle, Not a Pigeon

That's kind of what I remember my former high school civics and AP American history teacher, Wayne Bantau, saying to me and my classmates oh so many years ago. I know the "eagle" part is right, and as you can probably guess, it was used as a metaphor for excellence. Yeah, it was kind of corny, and some of my classmates cynically dismissed it, but I personally found it to be a source of motivation, especially with respect to learning more about politics and the law. I'm not entirely sure, but I think I aced both of the subject classes I took from Mr. Bantau.

I mention all of the above because I just came to learn that after more than 50 years of teaching service at my old high school, Mr. Bantau is retiring. There will never be, in my admittedly biased opinion, another teacher like him at North Torrance High School, and that is truly a shame.

Keith Olbermann Needs to go Back to Only Doing Sports Highlights

He just keeps showing how thoroughly unqualified he is to do serious news commentary.

For those of you who haven't been following, earlier this week, Keith Olbermann mocked Nevada Senate candidate Sharron Angle for saying of Abraham Lincoln, "He lost quite a few. But he won the big one." For this, Olbermann called her "obtuse" and insisted Lincoln only lost one election. Yesterday on this blog, Jeffrey Lord patiently explained why Olbermann was wrong, and his post was picked up by National Review's Daniel Foster. At this point, it caught Olbermann's eye, and the MSNBC host named Foster the "Worst Person in The World." Rather than acknowledge his error, Olbermann took the weasel's way out with a semantic loophole, embarrassingly insisting that he really meant that Lincoln only lost one popular election. As you know, at the time, there wasn't direct election of U.S. Senators.

But while Olbermann would like to discount several of Lincoln's losing political campaigns to bolster his case against Angle (including the 1858 Senate campaign), that's clearly not how Lincoln himself viewed those defeats at the time.

More here.

The Divorce Contagion

Brown University researchers have apparently discovered that if you are currently married your chances of getting a divorce are increased by 75 percent if you have friends who have gotten divorced. That's pretty dramatic.

The researchers describe the effect as 'divorce clustering' - and believe that break-ups within friendship groups force couples to start questioning their own relationships.
They say that a friend's divorce can also reduce the social stigma of splitting up, even when children are involved.
The findings come from a continuing study into the lives of more than 12,000 Americans living in the New England town of Framingham since 1948.

I'm curious to know what the percentage increase of divorce is, if any, for married attorneys who focus in the area of family law. If you know a study out there on this, let me know.

h/t National Catholic Register

Kagan Suggests the Catholic Church Would Have Been Banned From Recruiting Harvard Law Students

Of course Kagan doesn't say this directly, but it's clearly there when you watch the video below. This exchange between Kagan and Sen. Lindsey Graham (who's pretty much of a squishy Republican) is within the context of questions about Kagan's tenure as Dean of Harvard Law School and her banning of military recruiters from campus. Kagan allegedly imposed the ban because she believed the military's "don't ask, don't tell" rule violated the school's non-discrimination policy. Talk about a pretext for hostility. Too bad neither Graham nor the other Republicans on the Judiciary Committee pressed Kagan harder on this.



Video via CNSNews h/t Creative Minority Report

Happy Independence Day!

Hopefully, you know what it's all about.

Obama's "Science" was Actually Kagan's Political Hackery

The following video is part of a speech that then Senator Obama gave to Planned Parenthood in 2008. Obama here is specifically blasting the Supreme Court's ruling in Gonzales v. Carhart where the Federal ban on partial birth abortion was upheld. As you'll see and hear, the crux of Barry's criticism centers on the supposed failure of the Court to give full acknowledgement to a report by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) which concludes that partial birth abortion is medically appropriate in some cases. As we've recently learned, however, it appears that would-be Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan, who has absolutely no scientific background or credentials to speak of, inserted this conclusion into the ACOG report.

Think Barry knew this before he nominated Kagan?



h/t Powerline

Equal Protection Under the Law is for Suckers

Former U.S. Dept. of Justice attorney J. Christian Adams writes about his experience with the New Black Panther case that the Obama had dismissed despite clear evidence of voter intimidation. At least part of the reason for the dismissal was racial.

Some of my co-workers argued that the law should not be used against black wrongdoers because of the long history of slavery and segregation. Less charitable individuals called it "payback time." Incredibly, after the case was dismissed, instructions were given that no more cases against racial minorities like the Black Panther case would be brought by the Voting Section.

h/t Lex Communis

Joe Biden is as Thinned Skinned as Barry

Nice way to talk to your constituency. Not. If it had been me that Joe had called a smart ass, I would have reminded him that he works for me as an American citizen, and that I have a right to express my opinion to his face whether he likes it or not. Then I would have charged Joe $20 for the ice cream just because I think he's an asshole.

Correction: Frozen custard, not ice cream.

Drill, Baby, Drill!

Just ran across this informative website which promotes oil drilling in the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR). According to the site, oil drilling in ANWR could have the effect of creating as many as 80,000 jobs in California. I ask this rhetorically: Why aren't we doing this?

Starbucks-like Lingo

I don't remember what her name is, but one of the Fox business reporters I saw on Hannity tonight made a great analogy to illustrate the inherent deceptiveness of the never before heard of "jobs saved" measurement that Obama keeps using to try and convince everyone that The Stimulus™ (aka Porkulus) is working. In short, the Obama measurement of "jobs saved" is kind of like what Starbucks calls the smallest cup of coffee you can buy at one of their stores: the "Tall" size.

BP Oil Spill Thoughts

Powerline's John Hinderaker posts some interesting thoughts about why he doesn't really think a provable lack of focus by the Obama Administration in the regulation of offshore drilling is a cause of the BP oil spill, and that it makes little sense the government would necessarily care more than BP about preventing spills.

Sort of along Hinderaker's line of observations, I'm wondering if BP had never been a self-identified and committed green company, would it still have conducted off-shore oil drilling as far out and deep in the ocean as it was when the oil rig exploded (notwithstanding stupid federal prohibitions on offshore drilling in shallower waters and on land in places like ANWR). I honestly believe BP would not have, in which case, a significant chunk of blame for the Gulf oil spill of 2010 - the problems of mitigating the damages it has caused in particular - has to be laid at the feet of left-wing political environmentalism.

Revenge of Ralph

Warning: The F-bomb is dropped a few times. As funny as it is (Ralph Macchio is 48?!) this mock trailer makes a pretty insightful criticism of Hollywood culture and values.

You Guys Call Yourselves "Colored People," Right?

The Los Angeles Chapter of the NAACP somehow hears "black whore" instead of "black hole" in a graduation greeting card with a solar system theme. A shame Hallmark caved in and pulled the cards, thereby giving legitimacy to the L.A. Association of COLORED PEOPLE'S unsubstantiated claim.



h/t Matt Bramanti

Update: Racist! Racist! Listen carefully, they're saying "black whore"! Racist!

Cool Civil War Video

I'm kind of a buff of the era, especially anything to do with Abe Lincoln. The total number of casualties that were incurred during the war are mind blowing, even by contemporary standards.

Update: In case you don't catch the quick flash of introductory text at the beginning of the video, it basically says 1 second of video equals 1 week of the war.



h/t The American Catholic

Chuck DeVore at Israel Solidarity Rally

Pretty awesome. Sure hope he wins Tuesday.



h/t RedState

Dude, You're an Effing Idiot

Ashton Kutcher lays the blame on "Drill! Drill! Drill!" Republicans for the BP oil spill in the Gulf. Mr. Demi Moore is obviously ignorant of the fact that the guy he probably supported for President also favored offshore drilling before the BP accident occurred. He's also probably ignorant of the fact that this oil spill and its resulting damage could have been significantly reduced and eventually stopped much easier and far sooner if companies like BP were allowed to drill in shallower waters. Thanks, however, to anti-drilling environmentalist groups, the likes of whom Ashton Kutcher probably mindlessly supports, the Federal government doesn't allow near coastal drilling.

It's a darn good thing that Ashton Kutcher is considered a good looking guy, and Hollywood places a great deal of value on his looks. Because if Ashton Kutcher had to heavily rely on his acting ability and intellectual prowess, he'd be out on the streets starving or some aging rich cougar's kept man. Well, he's kind of in the latter situation, but since Hollywood pays Ashton Kutcher a boat load of money just for his looks, he isn't dependent on Demi Moore to put a roof over his head. At least I don't think so.

Helen Thomas is a Moonbat

I mean this literally. First of all, there is no recognized nation state called Palestine. And to basically suggest that there were no Jews in Israel prior to the late 1940s is, well, moonbatty. How bad must the journalistic profession be if an ignorant hack like Helen Thomas is able to attain a high level of recognition within it?



Update: More disgusting Helen Thomas video. Driven by her obvious hatred of Jews, Thomas here basically berates Baghdad Bob Gibbs for the Administration's failure to condemn the IDF raid on the flotilla where pro-Hamas "demonstrators" attacked Israeli soldiers. h/t Matt Bramanti

America's Greatest Patriot Denounces IDF Raid on Pro-Terrorist Flotilla

I am, of course, referring to Ron "I Don't Want To Be Financed by Stormfront, But I'm Keeping the Money They Give Me Anyway" Paul. The hostility he has toward Israel can be palpably discerned from his outright mischaracterization of the Gaza blockade as a planned denial of food and medicine to Palestinians. Paul also distinctly says "Palestine" a couple of times, as if there is currently a sovereign country with that name. There isn't.



h/t Hot Air

History Denied

This should have been an unprecedented third perfect game in one season, let alone within a month. I do give Jim Joyce, the umpire who blew the call at first, credit for later admitting he made a big mistake. Who knows, maybe Major League Baseball, i.e., Commissioner Bud Selig, will correct this obvious wrong for the record books.



Update: As you've probably noticed, the above video has been taken down by You Tube. Whatever. In consolation for the unofficial perfect game he threw, Chevy gave Galarraga a new Corvette. Sweet.

Reason No. 892832932 to Keep Your Kids Out of Government Schools

I can't believe this middle school in New York state actually suspended a student for outwardly wearing rosary beads around his neck. Even more outrageous is that the school regarded the beads as a gang symbol. WTF?!

Ms. Ardent Catholic Claims Her Favorite Word is The Word

Given her untenable position on issues like abortion, I would have taken Pelosi more seriously in the video below if she had broken out into a song from one of my all time favorite movies growing up.



h/t Ann Althouse

Mass Scale War Crimes That You Probably Never Knew or Learned About

Hat tip to Stewart Baker at The Volokh Conspiracy who points out an intriguing investigative report on the biological warfare that Japan waged against China 70 years ago.

Jiang, a 70-year-old farmer, can’t remember a time when flesh-eating ulcers didn’t cover his legs. “They never go away,” he tells me. “They just get drier. Sometimes they hurt less.” He doesn’t know for sure how he got them, but his father told him that the wounds first appeared in July 1942, soon after the Japanese army passed through his village. His entire family developed the festering sores. His mother and younger brother died in unbearable pain a decade later as the untreated, mysterious infection crept up their legs.

Jiang is one of 15 elderly Chinese men and women whom Zhu is treating in his simple village clinic for what locals label “rotten leg disease.” A definitive diagnosis is no longer possible so many decades after the initial exposure and secondary infections. But Chinese, American, and other Western physicians who have examined the survivors, documented their histories, and photographed their wounds claim that they are victims of the most gruesome biological warfare attacks in modern history.

According to the article, Japan has only minimally acknowledged that it used bio-weapons, and the government has never apologized for doing so. Incredibly tragic, but also infuriating given the amount of noise Baker notes that many politicians and courts in Japan have made about how the use of nuclear weapons by the U.S. on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was a war crime.

Update: Thanks to the Age of Google, I've discovered there have been a handful of books written on the subject of Japan's history of biological warfare. The very earliest appears to be Unit 731: Japan's Secret Biological Warfare in World War II, which was published in 1989.

Pauline Sisters Diddy

Kinda catchy. h/t American Papist

Rendering the Term "Pro-Life" Meaningless

Larry Kudlow is the latest right-of-center pundit I've seen to repeat the assertion that U.S. Senate candidate Carly Fiorina is "pro-life." No, she's not. At least not until she comes out and expressly says she does not believe there ought to be a legal right to abortion.

Obama Topping Himself in Bad Judicial Nominations

Meet Robert Chatigny, Obama's new nominee to the U.S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals:

"But looking at the record in a light most favorable to [Michael] Ross, he never should have been convicted. Or if convicted, he never should have been sentenced to death because his sexual sadism, which was found by every single person who looked at him, is clearly a mitigating factor...He can sit on his hands and sit mute and he may find not only that the death sentence is set aside, he may find the death penalty has been abolished. He may find that he gets the life sentence that he has repeatedly said he would take in an instant if it was offered to him."

The above should be read within the context of Michael Ross having confessed to murdering 8 women, 7 of whom he raped. Also, Ross didn't want to stay his execution, but his attorney did it after being strong-armed by Chatigny.

And I thought Obama couldn't possibly nominate someone worse than Goodwin Liu. Sure looks like I was wrong.

h/t Ace

I'm Starting to Think Jonah Goldberg is Kind of Stupid

On May 8, 2010, Jonah Goldberg posted a message he got from someone about the controversial Arizona illegal immigration law. The message was purportedly from a legal immigrant who said he didn't always carry around his green card, and wondered whether just carrying his valid driver's license would be good enough. Jonah didn't provide an answer, because he obviously didn't know. However, anyone who has bothered to read the Arizona statute, particularly 11-1051 B, would clearly see the answer to this person's question is "yes," a valid driver's license is good enough. I e-mailed Jonah this information, but never got a response (not even a one-word thanks).

Curiously enough, Jonah's May 8 post no longer appears to be on the NRO-Corner site. Click here, then click the link "The Arizona Law." Why it's gone, I'm not sure. But if I had to guess, Jonah may have gotten a lot of e-mails like the one I sent him, and he realized his posting made him look foolishly ignorant.

Now Jonah is making himself look not too smart again by asking why it should be a scandal if it's proven the White House offered Joe Sestak a job in the administration in exchange for him dropping out of the Senate Democratic Party primary in Pennsylvania. This is really nothing short of incredible. Jonah Goldberg is either too stupid or ethically challenged to not recognize what is by all accounts an act of bribery. I kind of had a hard time doing so before, but now I really can't take Jonah Goldberg seriously.

Just a Whole Lotta Stupid Going On

As David St. Hubbins of Spinal Tap once said, "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever." The following from the makers of the Gringo Mask, a protest against the Arizona illegal immigration law, clearly falls into the former category. How so? For one thing, the Gringo Mask makers are assuming the Arizona law permits racial profiling, which it expressly doesn't. Also, William Jacobson at his excellent Legal Insurrection blog notes that wearing a mask is legal grounds for being detained and arrested in several states - but not Arizona.

Chicago Style Politics in D.C.

If Sestak is telling the truth about being "offered" a Federal job by the White House in exchange for dropping out of the U.S. Senate Democratic primary in Pennsylvania (which Sestak has since won), then a crime has been committed.



h/t Ace

Pac Man Fever

In honor of the 30th anniversary of the Pac Man video game, Google has a playable version on its home page today. Just click the "Insert Coin" button and start chomping away!

Below is purportedly the first episode of the game-inspired cartoon. Never really saw any of them when I was a kid, of course, because I'd usually be scrounging around for quarters to go to the arcade.

So-Called Americans?

Everyone's favorite impeached federal judge[now Congress critter], Alcee Hastings, rips all you "Americans" who have participated in the YouCut initiative sponsored by House Republican Whip, Eric Cantor. According to hizhonor, one of you participants is obviously Osama bin Laden.



h/t Hot Air

Happy Draw Mohammed Day!*

More info about it here, in case you don't already know what it's supposed to be about.



*That should actually be, "Happy Everybody Draw Mohammmed Day!"

So For the Sake of Consistency, L.A. Will Be Boycotting Itself or All of California

Right?

And hey, our "anti-immigrant" law, unlike Arizona's, doesn't even prohibit racial profiling!

California Penal Code §834b

a)Every law enforcement agency in California shall fully cooperate with the United States Immigration and Naturalization Service regarding any person who is arrested if he or she is suspected of being present in the United States in violation of federal immigration laws.

(b)With respect to any such person who is arrested, and suspected of being present in the United States in violation of federal immigration laws, every law enforcement agency shall do the following:

(1)Attempt to verify the legal status of such person as a citizen of the United States, an alien lawfully admitted as a permanent resident, an alien lawfully admitted for a temporary period of time or as an alien who is present in the United States in violation of immigration laws. The verification process may include, but shall not be limited to, questioning the person regarding his or her date and place of birth, and entry into the United States, and demanding documentation to indicate his or her legal status.

(2)Notify the person of his or her apparent status as an alien who is present in the United States in violation of federal immigration laws and inform him or her that, apart from any criminal justice proceedings, he or she must either obtain legal status or leave the United States.

(3)Notify the Attorney General of California and the United States Immigration and Naturalization Service of the apparent illegal status and provide any additional information that may be requested by any other public entity.

(c)Any legislative, administrative, or other action by a city, county, or other legally authorized local governmental entity with jurisdictional boundaries, or by a law enforcement agency, to prevent or limit the cooperation required by subdivision (a) is expressly prohibited.

We All Originated From "Slime" (circa 2002)

Been reviewing some of my first blog posts, and thought this was worth reposting:

It would appear as though at least one Bible translation does not contradict the Darwinist notion that man was made from slime. According to Genesis 2:7 in the Douay Rheims Bible: "And the Lord God formed man of the slime of the earth: and breathed into his face the breath of life, and man became a living soul." Of course, how man was made from the "slime" remains a point of dispute between Darwinists and so-called "Creationists".

Sooo 2002

It's been a long time since I've read anything at Eve Tushnet's blog, and it's interesting to see she's still using the same blog template she had in 2002.

I wonder if Eve planned it that way in order to eventually achieve a point of differentiation from all the other blogs that's now out there. Or maybe I'm just reading too much into it and trying to figure out why anyone would keep using such an obsolete template.

Miss OK is OK

I also personally think Ms. Woolard is a lot hotter than the pole dancing/might be a Hezbollah supporter gal who won.

Miss USA "Shocker"

Well, if she is Muslim, she's obviously of the more liberal variety.

AG Holder Won't Say "Radical Islam" Has Been A Cause For Terrorism

With so much supporting empirical evidence, you kind of have to wonder why.

New Blog Format

Hopefully soon.

Sarah Palin Shouldn't Have Endorsed Carly Fiorina

Actually, Palin really shouldn't have endorsed anyone in the California U.S. Senate Republican primary. Reason being is that it has predictably caused a riff among her supporters in California, many of whom are rightly suspicious of Carly Fiorina's conservative credentials. The fact that Fiorina was an advisor to McCain's presidential campaign and Chuck DeVore is the only bona fide conservative running in the GOP primary (who has as good a chance of beating Barbara Boxer as Fiorina and Tom Campbell) suggests that Palin's endorsement is less than sincere. I, myself, asserted in the com-boxes at the Conservatives4Palin blog that Palin's endorsement amounted to nothing more than cynical payback to McCain (oh, the flak I got for that!). Further support of my assertion can be seen in Palin's endorsement statement where she mischaracterized Fiorina's father as a humble "schoolteacher" of children (the late Joseph Sneed was a law professor at both Cornell and Stanford, and later the law school Dean at Duke).

Will this endorsement by Palin come back to politically hurt her? Maybe. At least in my eyes, though, her credibility as a principled conservative has been diminished.

Update: I just caught this from Palin's update to her endorsement of Fiorina: "And most importantly, Carly is the only conservative in the race who can beat Barbara Boxer." The issue of whether Fiorina is a conservative aside, Palin's assertion is most surely incorrect, as the Rasmussen poll I linked to above actually shows DeVore slightly ahead of Fiorina in a head to head contest against Boxer.

Happy Belated Star Wars Day!

h/t Darth Vader

Liu-dicrous Responses

Ed Whelan of National Review's Bench Memos blog has the following 4-part analysis of the responses given by Berkeley Law prof and 9th Circuit Court of Appeals nominee Goodwin Liu to written questions from the Senate Judiciary Committee:

Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4

I sort of quickly read through all four parts, and my general take is that Goodwin Liu either literally refused to say anything without good reason, or he effectively contradicted things he's said in the past and is hoping not too many people will discover (e.g., calling free enterprise, private property ownership and limited government code words for an ideological agenda that is hostile to environmental, workplace and consumer protections).

California Dust Bowl

It's a man (mostly Democrat) made phenomena.

On a springtime drive through the Central Valley, it's hard not to notice how federal and state governments are hell-bent on destroying the state's top export — almonds — and everything else in the nation's most productive farmland.

Instead of pink blossoms and green shoots along Highway 5 in April, vast spans from Bakersfield to Fresno sit bone-dry. Brown grass, dead orchards and lifeless grapevine skeletons stretch for miles for lack of water. For every fallow field, there's a sign that farmers have placed alongside the highway: "No Water = No Food," "No Water = No Jobs," "Congress Created Dust Bowl."

Locals say it's been like this for two years now, as Congress and bureaucrats cite "drought," "global warming" and "endangered species" to deny water to this $37 billion breadbasket through arbitrary "environmental" quotas.

It started with a 2008 federal court order that stopped water flowing from northern tributaries on a supposed need to protect a small fish — the delta smelt — that was getting ground up in the turbines of pump stations that divert the water south. The court knew it was bad law, but Congress refused to exempt the fish from the Endangered Species Act and the diversion didn't help the fish.

h/t Powerline

Goodwin Liu: Intemperate Defamer Extraordinaire

This hack really doesn't deserve to be a judge (via The Wall Street Journal):

Speaking of the nomination of now Chief Justice John Roberts, Mr. Liu opined that words like "'free enterprise,' 'private ownership of property,' and 'limited government'" are "code words for an ideological agenda hostile to environmental, workplace, and consumer protections."

On the nomination of now-Justice Samuel Alito, Professor Liu was even nastier. In a statement reminiscent of Ted Kennedy's slur against Robert Bork, Mr. Liu wrote that "Judge Alito's record envisions an America where police may shoot and kill an unarmed boy to stop him from running away with a stolen purse; where federal agents may point guns at ordinary citizens during a raid, even after no sign of resistance...where a black man may be sentenced to death by an all-white jury for killing a white man...and where police may search what a warrant permits, and then some."

Really, for Obama to nominate someone to the Federal judiciary who would make these sort of outrageous and reckless statements says something about the president's ability to evaluate character. But we kind of already knew that when he nominated the "Wise Latina" to the Supreme Court.

Democrats Have Absolutely No Sense of Self-Awareness

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy is bitching about Republicans allegedly "stonewalling" the confirmation hearings of unqualified ideological hacks like Goodwin Liu (who actually deserves to be filibustered). Leahy, of course, is ignoring the indisputable fact that Obama court nominees are getting hearings at a much faster rate than Bush nominees ever did. The craphead from Vermont (what is it with that state? - see, e.g., Howard Dean and Bernie Sanders) also doesn't seem to remember that he was instrumental in delaying the hearings of several Bush nominees, and voted to filibuster the nominations of Miguel Estrada and Samuel Alito.

So the only I thing I can take away from the hypocritical bloviations of Dems like Patrick Leahy is that they either have no sense of self-awareness, or they're counting on all of us to basically be stupid and not have a memory. Or perhaps it's a combination of both.

Goodwin Liu: Hypocritical Grievance Monger

Ed Whelan at Bench Memos lays out the obvious conclusions after providing remarks Liu once made about reparations for slavery (like a good liberal, he's all for them):

Let’s expose the game that Liu is playing. Just as Liu completely ignores the innocent victims of racial preferences when he urges the perpetual imposition of racial quotas as a remedy for “societal discrimination,” so he would make those who were not complicit in slavery pay the price of his grandiose reparations project. Moreover, he continues to use the term “segregated” so expansively that only the imposition of racial quotas will achieve the elimination of what he calls segregation.

Needless to say, Senate Republicans need to filibuster Liu's nomination.

Ewoks Crap Tribbles

Coffee Party = Democrat/Obama-bots Front Group

h/t Hot Air

Anti-Goodwin Liu

Obama has nominated Berkeley Law School professor Goodwin Liu to the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. NRO's Bench Memos has important and illuminating background information about Liu, an intellectually underwhelming Left-wing hack, here, here and here.

Although it's probably expecting too much, my hope is that Senate Republicans come together and filibuster this joker, much as the Dems filibustered Miguel Estrada into abandoning his nomination by Bush to the DC Court of Appeals. Of course, unlike Estrada, filibustering Liu here would be justified given Liu's stated judicial philosophy and less than impressive credentials in the legal profession.

Update: Ed Whelan at Bench Memos easily smacks down a couple of Kool-Aid drinking pro-Liu bloggers.

Meghan McCain

Is it really that far from the truth?



Update: I am, of course, assuming the woman in the video is not really Meghan McCain.

Before Tim Tebow

Several members of the 1986 Super Bowl Champion New York Giants, which included current CBS Sports announcer Phil Simms, expressly spoke out against abortion in this video produced by American Life League. This actually went beyond what Tim Tebow does in the Focus on the Family ad that will run during this Sunday's Super Bowl. Pretty awesome. h/t Kathleen McKinley