Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

It’s always darkest before the other shoe drops.

Let me eat cake. The rest of you could stand to lose some weight, frankly.

You don’t get rid of your umbrella while it’s still raining.

When I decide to be condescending, you won’t have to dream up a fantasy about it.

Thanks to your bullshit, we are now under siege.

All your base are belong to Tunch.

Impressively dumb. Congratulations.

Do not shrug your shoulders and accept the normalization of untruths.

You cannot shame the shameless.

if you can’t see it, then you are useless in the fight to stop it.

Insiders who complain to politico: please report to the white house office of shut the fuck up.

Sitting here in limbo waiting for the dice to roll

Just because you believe it, that doesn’t make it true.

“More of this”, i said to the dog.

This fight is for everything.

Teach a man to fish, and he’ll sit in a boat all day drinking beer.

No one could have predicted…

We still have time to mess this up!

Let there be snark.

When your entire life is steeped in white supremacy, equality feels like discrimination.

An almost top 10,000 blog!

If you tweet it in all caps, that makes it true!

The poor and middle-class pay taxes, the rich pay accountants, the wealthy pay politicians.

Americans barely caring about Afghanistan is so last month.

You are here: Home / Music / Open thread

Reader Interactions

66Comments

  2. 2.

    Ben Franklin

    Who are these ‘faithful’ who are cheering Benedict and lamenting his departure.

    Are they clueless about the Chief Pedophile?

  3. 3.

    Ben Franklin

    Who are these ‘faithful’ who are cheering Benedict and lamenting his departure.

    Are they clueless about the Chief Pedophile?

  5. 5.

    patroclus

    I’m still flabbergasted by Antonin Scalia and his disregard for the 15th Amendment and its legislative history. If 5 Republican-appointed Justices really do gut Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, there will indeed be a backlash. And Roberts will bear the brunt of it.

  6. 6.

    Zifnab

    The whole “racial entitlement” thing still has me floored. Is it possible to run a political campaign by focusing entirely on a Supreme Court justice? Like, if I ran for Senate on the platform “Will demand the impeachment of Justice Antonin Scalia” how many votes would I get?

  8. 8.

    beltane

    Who will be chosen first, the new pope or the new Italian prime minister? Perhaps Antonin Scalia’s unhappiness stems from the fascists’ poor showing in the Italian election on account of all the blahs voting.

  11. 11.

    Villago Delenda Est

    @Ben Franklin:

    Are they clueless about the Chief Pedophile?

    SASQ: Yes.

    It’s in their nature. They’re all Rick Santorum fans, too. You know. The non-smart people.

  12. 12.

    Omnes Omnibus

    @patroclus: @Zifnab: Looking back, I think Scalia shed what was left of his dignity, professional pride, and interest in the correct application of legal principles in favor of the being a full-time right wing asshole somewhere between November 4, 2008, and January 20, 2009.

  13. 13.

    Villago Delenda Est

    @Ben Franklin:

    I could have told Manning how well an offer against the deserting coward malassministration would go. The 60’s were over like 50 years ago, man.

  14. 14.

    eemom

    @patroclus:
    @Zifnab:

    Srsly, what an utterly disgraceful spectacle that was. I have not a word to say in defense of the SCt as an institution this time — not a one.

    Last year when my fellow HCHS alums and I had the honor of meeting with Justice Kagan and asking her questions, I asked something to the effect of how the polarized state of politics plays out on the Court, and her response was to the effect that, deep ideological differences aside, “we all really like each other.” And I have elsewhere heard how Justice Ginsberg, who I adore, shares a particular camaraderie with Fat Tony because they’re both opera fans, or something.

    But I have to say I don’t get it. For all the collegiality in the world, I don’t see how you could like or respect a creature so hellbent on hatefulness and destruction.

  15. 15.

    Villago Delenda Est

    @Omnes Omnibus:

    somewhere between November 4, 2008, and January 20, 2009.

    That “somewhere” was just after 8PM Pacific Standard Time on 4 November 2008. By an amazing coincidence, that’s when the deficit became the most important fucking issue on the national agenda, too.

  16. 16.

    aimai

    This song link reminds me of a great scene in Justified this week. The anti-hero white trash, Harlan red neck Boyd faces off with the white collar, upper class, rulers of Harlan and wins the battle hands down with the cold remark “You fellows are criminals…but I’m an Outlaw.” Meaning: cheap chislers and cowards break the law and fear getting caught. Outlaws are simply outside these considerations and won’t hesitate to kill you.

    I thought about it when I started reading this Woodward crap–you do realize that he is suffeirng from a mad loss of manly man war correspondent street cred. He’s covering washington gossip, for g-d’s sake. Of course he felt the need to puff off his courage by inflating a gentle correction into a “war” between him and Obama. But he’s nothing but a white collar coward. He ain’t no outlaw.

  17. 17.

    patroclus

    @Zifnab: Indeed. As I see it, the Scalia issue is far more important than whatever Bob Woodward is saying. The Voting Rights Act could well be gutted in little more than three months time – and with it the 15th Amendment. Saying that voting is a racial entitlement is outrageous, and to hear/see it coming from an Associate Justice of the USSC is astounding. He really should be forced to resign.

  21. 21.

    ranchandsyrup

    Our society is addicted to playing the victim. It’s just another tool in the furtherance of tribalism. But what really pisses me off is that there are real victims out there whose stories may be delegitimized.

  22. 22.

    Omnes Omnibus

    @eemom:

    I have not a word to say in defense of the SCt as an institution this time — not a one.

    I’ll wait for the decision, but I am not optimistic. I suspect that if Section 5 survives, it will do so solely because of a political calculation by Roberts.

  23. 23.

    rdldot

    I need a new career and am thinking of becoming a real estate agent. Does anyone here do that? And what do you think? I think the housing market is coming back for various reasons, but are there already too many agents sitting in the wings from the last downturn?

  24. 24.

    Robin G.

    @Omnes Omnibus: The fact that Scalia’s now made it explicitly about race, rather than implicitly, makes it more likely Roberts swings to support, IMO. Dude cares about his legacy.

  26. 26.

    Zifnab

    @eemom:

    Last year when my fellow HCHS alums and I had the honor of meeting with Justice Kagan and asking her questions, I asked something to the effect of how the polarized state of politics plays out on the Court, and her response was to the effect that, deep ideological differences aside, “we all really like each other.” And I have elsewhere heard how Justice Ginsberg, who I adore, shares a particular camaraderie with Fat Tony because they’re both opera fans, or something.

    I mean, they’re coworkers. I’ve had super-wingnut coworkers to work with before. Mostly, you just don’t talk about politics and you get along fine.

    How SC judges do it, when its their job to talk politics all day? I imagine the politeness is all that more critical. They all know that they need each others’ votes to get any kind of consensus, so its all the more critical to play nice and smile on the off chance a justice comes around.

    I’m personally convinced the PPACA survived because Judge Roberts got put in some kind of snit by his fellow conservatives. It’s one reason I’ve got a bit of hope for the Voting Rights Act. I can honestly see Kennedy or Scalia going back behind close doors and saying something to the effect of “Better not Lib-out on us like last time you damn hippie”, and having him run into the waiting arms of Sotomayor and Kagan because fuck these assholes.

    I’d find it a laugh-riot if they just struck down the language declaring the Voting Rights Act applies exclusively to the South and opened the law up to the rest of the states as well.

  27. 27.

    Roger Moore

    @Zifnab:

    Like, if I ran for Senate on the platform “Will demand the impeachment of Justice Antonin Scalia” how many votes would I get?

    You shouldn’t get any votes running for Senate on that platform, since the Senate doesn’t have the power of impeachment. The House impeaches (i.e. indicts) and the Senate holds a trial. You might promise to convict if he’s impeached, but that’s only likely to make a difference if the impeachment seems plausible.

  28. 28.

    Omnes Omnibus

    @Robin G.:

    The fact that Scalia’s now made it explicitly about race, rather than implicitly, makes it more likely Roberts swings to support, IMO.

    You may well be right, but that isn’t particularly good for the Court as an institution. I guess the hit for that is less than the hit for overturning Section 5 under Scalia’s “logic.” It is depressing to me that this is even an issue.

  29. 29.

    Hill Dweller

    Chuck Todd actually posted this on twitter: This Woodward-WH story is proving a media stereotype that I hate but can’t disprove: that we’re too self-absorbed. It’s not about us!!!!!!!

  30. 30.

    Mandalay

    @Villago Delenda Est:

    “Hi, my name is Booby Woodward and I’m an attention whore! Look at me! Look at me!”

    Hi, my name is Bobby Woodward and I posted a load of lies about sequestration over the weekend, so let’s quickly change the subject and talk about how Gene Sperling threatened to rip my liver out with his bare hands.

  33. 33.

    mouse tolliver

    Someone needs to get George Lucas to do a special edition of All The President’s Men where they swap Robert Redford for that guy from Ally McBeal who had the remote control toilet. Redford was miscast.

  34. 34.

    shortstop

    @Zifnab:

    How SC judges do it, when its their job to talk politics all day?

    The thing is, it’s not their job to talk politics all day. It’s their job to opine on the constitutionality of laws, which often, perhaps more often than not, has political ramifications — whole different thing. Far from being an ethical jurist with political opinions, Nino has given up any pretense at solid jurisprudence in favor of blatant politicking.

  36. 36.

    mouse tolliver

    @Ben Franklin: The rot starts at the top and goes straight to the bottom. Catholics at every level are complicit. In that HBO documentary about sex abuse at a school for the deaf, one of the victims told his mother and got smacked down because you’re not supposed to say things like that about a priest. There were DA’s who knew about the allegations, but only did half-assed investigations because they were devout Catholics.

    Another victim confronted the pedo priest decades later and got it on tape. The nurse who was taking care of the elderly pedophile father scolded the victim for not being a good Catholic.

    They all know about it, but it’s something they can overlook. Sometimes you just need to keep walking, I guess.

  37. 37.

    eemom

    @Robin G.:

    Dude cares about his legacy.

    I think that’s right, and that it very likely is what saved the ACA.

    One man’s ego stands between us and and the devastation that would be wrought by an unabashedly politicized majority. Kinda sad I guess, but you avert disaster with the fifth vote you have, not the one you wish you had.

  38. 38.

    shortstop

    @Robin G.: Which by itself is just another political move and not an ethical or professionally tenable reason for an opinion. This is why so many of us were deeply discouraged after the ACA ruling, despite it going our way. We’re very glad we won it. We’ll be very glad if the Voting Rights Act stands. But we’re not happy that we’re dealing with a clearly corrupt court and that so many rulings, favorable to us or not, depend entirely on some of the justices’ egos and political calculations.

  40. 40.

    balconesfault

    Was just listening to Rush in a pique of masochism while driving home for lunch …

    Seems that David Gergen on CNN saying that Obama is partially responsible for the sequester is proof positive that the liberals are turning on the Administration.

    Seriously.

  41. 41.

    dmsilev

    @mouse tolliver:

    Someone needs to get George Lucas to do a special edition of All The President’s Men where they swap Robert Redford for that guy from Ally McBeal who had the remote control toilet Jar Jar Binks.

    Fixed for additional Lucasosity.

  42. 42.

    eemom

    @Omnes Omnibus:

    It is depressing to me that this is even an issue.

    The good news is that fucker ain’t gonna live forever, and, while I am totally not into 2016ing, I think the chances are reasonably good that a Democratic president will appoint his successor, and perhaps Kennedy’s, thereby STFUing Thomas and Alito for the rest of THEIR despicable natural lives, yay.

  43. 43.

    dmsilev

    @Hill Dweller: I think Obama made the same prayer as Voltaire:

    I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one: “O Lord make my enemies ridiculous.” And God granted it.

  44. 44.

    Face

    Dude cares about his legacy

    No chance. The ACA was a one-time anomoly for Roberts. He owes his conservatives and fellow GOP a huge bone here, one that, if executed correctly, could sweep the GOP back into power as the Southern legislatures restict voting to one district in one corner of each state where only crackers can live.

    Kennedy already sold his soul with his intent to toss the ACA, so he’s no swing vote. VRA out, poll taxes in!

  45. 45.

    Omnes Omnibus

    @eemom:

    STFUing Thomas

    Like that takes a lot of effort.

    Unlike the ACA, I am entering this one with very low expectations.

  47. 47.

    Punchy

    @eemom: Let’s play a what-if….

    What if a Dem Pres is elected in 2016, and does indeed replace Fat Tony and/or Old Kennedy with solid young liberals. Knowing that he’d likely never see a ruling in his favor again, would Thomas stay on or resign? Part of me sees him as a lazy old fuck who just wants to cash paychecks and keep the bennies. But the other part sees a man who would never get to write an opinion and have any meaningful impact on any decision. Wouldn’t Thomas pack it up at that point?

  48. 48.

    catclub

    @Face: It strikes me that there is FAR, FAR less noise on the right about this case compared to the PPACA. They want to get it decided quietly,
    and so would not explode against Roberts if he failed to come through, as they did on the PPACA.

  50. 50.

    patroclus

    @Punchy: Justice Thomas promised in 1991 that he would screw us for 40 years and I fully expect him to fulfill that promise. He’s got 18 more years of screwing us with bizarre legal reasoning and pretending that the 14th Amendment doesn’t exist to go.

  52. 52.

    mouse tolliver

    @Face:

    Kennedy already sold his soul with his intent to toss the ACA, so he’s no swing vote. VRA out, poll taxes in!

    We already have a poll tax. It comes in the form of long wait times on election day. Nobody gets paid leave for taking time off to vote.

  53. 53.

    shortstop

    @patroclus: Wow, has it really been that long? It seems like just last week that a bunch of pompous men, including our current vice president (who has evolved very nicely), were making complete idiots of themselves interrogating Anita Hill. Meanwhile, Ted Kennedy, who’d developed quite a bit of self-awareness over the years, had the good sense to keep his head down and say nothing.

  56. 56.

    eemom

    @Punchy:

    But the other part sees a man who would never get to write an opinion and have any meaningful impact on any decision. Wouldn’t Thomas pack it up at that point?

    I think it would have exactly the opposite effect, in that it would WAY inflate whatever creepy-ass image he has of his own legacy as lone warrior against whatever — and actually he would GAIN in influence within the Court on Scalia’s and Kennedy’s demise, because he would become the most senior justice in what will presumably become a very frequent dissent-writing minority.

  58. 58.

    the Conster

    @mdblanche:

    Just watched the Italian movie Habemus Papam, and though it was released over a year ago, it’s like a documentary of what will happen at the end of the conclave. All the cardinals are praying to themselves while entering the Sistine Chapel “please let it not be me”.

  59. 59.

    eemom

    @shortstop:

    Meanwhile, Ted Kennedy, who’d developed quite a bit of self-awareness over the years, had the good sense to keep his head down and say nothing.

    dunno if it was so much good sense as glass house. It was remarked at the time that he basically had a paper bag labeled Chappaquiddick over his head.

  62. 62.

    Nora

    It seems to me that the Supreme Court is more politicized than it has ever been in its history. Sure, there were terrible decisions made in the past, but at least there was an effort made to pretend that they were following precedent, and that their decisions were based on constitutional principles and not naked political calculations. When I went to law school (graduated in 1984), we had to learn all kinds of things about the Supreme Court rules, how they choose to take a case, things like ripeness and mootness and standing, the “rule” that they not reach for a Constitutional issue if a case can be decided without it. I wonder what they teach law students these days.

  64. 64.

    SiubhanDuinne

    @Hill Dweller:

    I rarely see Chuck Todd’s MSNBC program, but because I’ve been on the road the last few days with a weird meeting schedule I have caught him a couple of times. Jeez O Peet, he is quite possibly the worst interviewer I’ve ever had the misfortune of seeing or hearing.

  65. 65.

    SiubhanDuinne

    @Nora:

    It seems to me that the Supreme Court is more politicized than it has ever been in its history.

    It is pretty politicized, but maybe not uniquely so. I remember far enough back in history to recall the song (to the tune of John Brown’s Body/Battle Hymn of the Republic) “Hang Earl Warren from a sour apple tree, His impeachment still won’t fill the bill for folks like me.”

Comments are closed.

Trackbacks