Wednesday, July 15, 2009

The Shining City

So, last night as I was lacing up my old New Balance for another risky run among the silent Priuses of Cleveland Park, I had the TV on and was flipping through the news to see what new absurdities/monstrosities had been worked by homo sapiens. The remote alighted for a moment on Katie Couric, soon plunging me into a vexed meditation on the question: is banality always evil? Katie read moronic questions to one Jeff Greenfield, whom I had never realized was such a clueless asshole. But then again, he's a highly paid journamalist on TV, which like being a professional wrestler, a televangelist or a kiddie-porn lover is very strongly correlated with being a flaming asshole, so....

Anyway, I was struck, within a few seconds, by just how far toward the Fascistic we've drifted. Here, about the Sotomayor confirmation heerings, is the key exchange between these two stooges:

Couric: Having said that, as the aforementioned Sen. Graham said yesterday, unless she has a complete meltdown, she'll be confirmed. Do you still think that's the case?

Greenfield: I think so. I think key here is they were not able to find – except for the Ricci case – a smoking gun in her decisions. An appeals court in California once said "under God" had to be stricken from the Pledge of Allegiance. If she had written that, which she didn't, that would be a smoking gun. So is she going to get the kind of votes Justice Roberts did when half the democrats voted for him? Is it going to be more like Samuel Alito when 42 of the 46 democrats voted against him? I don't think we know yet. I think the hands of Orrin Hatch and Lindsey Graham lies whether or not all of republicans are going to be moving against her or not. We don't know where they stand yet.

First of all, the Ricci case is, in a rational world, no kind of smoking gun. Only to dickheads like Greenfield is Sotomayor's reluctance to stand up for the kind of reverse-affirmative action that got W (and Greenfield for that matter) his job, a strike against her. But worse, much worse, why is the notion that "under God" makes the the Pledge of Allegiance a prayer even slightly controversial? Greenfield is clearly entirely comfortable with that exercise of reason being deemed a thought-crime, and he puts that notion into the national discourse blithely, as if it were recieved wisdom. Moron. Hack. Asshole.


Post a Comment

<< Home