BLOGGING via TYPEWRITER.

Welcome to the bleeding heart liberalism, Yankees fandom, Trekker and Lego geekdom and science nerdery and newshoundishness of BLOGGING via TYPEWRITER, praised by no less than ThinkProgress and Time Magazine and Buzzfeed and Comedy Central and Funny Or Die and it's all true! Read all about me.

Home
Movie Score A Day
Ask me questions!


Site Meter

 RSS Me!

Jon Stewart is going after that Tea Party sleazebag Sean Hannity with a vengeance and it is just such a joy to watch.

  • Jon Stewart is, as usual, on point tonight with his latest takedown of Sean Hannity, but his bon mots like “guilt by musician,” “Arby’s: The Hannity of Roast Beef Sandwiches,” “USA-theist” and “Sriracha bukkake” are just tops.
This is a screencap from a new “Milk Life” commercial.
You mean to tell me that the folks who made this commercial didn’t realize that that “propeller” back there looks a little like a Nazi swastika?

This is a screencap from a new “Milk Life” commercial.

You mean to tell me that the folks who made this commercial didn’t realize that that “propeller” back there looks a little like a Nazi swastika?

“The Vatican library is digitizing its archives. So the next Dan Brown novel will just be Robert Langdon alone with an iPad.”

STEPHEN COLBERT.

Heh.

Jon Stewart tears down Sean Hannity and Fox “News” over their unabashed support of Cliven “I don’t recognize the federal government” Bundy.

Today’s decision eviscerates an important strand of our equal protection jurisprudence. For members of historically marginalized groups, which rely on the federal courts to protect their constitutional rights, the decision can hardly bolster hope for a vision of democracy that preserves for all the right to participate meaningfully and equally in self-government.

I respectfully dissent.

Supreme Court Justice SONIA SOTOMAYOR, concluding her forceful, data-driven dissent in Schuette v. BAMN; her dissent begins on p. 51.

The Supreme Court on Tuesday upheld a Michigan voter initiative that banned racial preferences in admissions to the state’s public universities.

“This case is not about how the debate about racial preferences should be resolved,” Justice Anthony M. Kennedy wrote in a controlling opinion joined by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., and Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. “It is about who may resolve it. There is no authority in the Constitution of the United States or in this court’s precedents for the judiciary to set aside Michigan laws that commit this policy determination to the voters.”

Justice Sonia Sotomayor read an impassioned dissent from the bench. She said the initiative put minorities to a burden not faced by other applicants to college.

“The Constitution does not protect racial minorities from political defeat,” she wrote. “But neither does it give the majority free rein to erect selective barriers against racial minorities.” Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg joined the dissent.

In earlier cases, including one from June concerning the University of Texas, the court has said that race-conscious admissions policies can be constitutionally permissible in states that wish to use them. The new decision concerned the question of whether and how voters may prohibit affirmative action programs.

The vote in the case, Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, No. 12-682, was 6-2. Justice Elena Kagan recused herself, presumably because she had worked on the case as United States solicitor general.

The New York Times, "Supreme Court Upholds Michigan’s Affirmative Action Ban"