Laura Bush Loses It.

Former First Lady Laura Bush appears to have lost her @#$%# mind.

The website,irishcentral.com is reporting that Mrs. Bush opposes the new Arizona immigration law because her Irish immigrant ancestors faced discrimination. No doubt immigrants -past and present- have encountered prejudice, but I'm assuming her ancestors entered the country legally. Like far too many people, she confuses legal immigration with illegal entry into the country.

Another example of Mrs.Bush early senility is her support of Elena Kagan as Supreme Court Justice. Does she support Kagan because of Kagan's vast judicial experience? Of course not. Laura Bush wants to see Kagan on the court because she's a woman.

"I think it's great," she said, "I'm really glad that there will be three - if she's confirmed. I like to have women on the Supreme Court."

Qualifications be damned......it's identity politics at it's finest.

Finally, Mrs. Bush told Larry King that she supports legalizing gay marriage as well as keeping abortion legal.

Are there any other surprises in the making? I wouldn't be surprised to hear soon that the former First Lady is a Muslim. Stranger things have happened.

Who is Elena Kagan?

In a column from last week, Washington Post writer Ruth Marcus put in her 2 cents worth concerning the burning question, "Who is Elena Kagan?".

Immediately, Marcus attempts to assure her readers that Kagan is not gay. That issue preoccupied the minds of the Progressives last week. While Conservatives lamented the fact that Kagan has not left a paper trail that would give clues as to the sort of Supreme Court Justice she would be, the Left spent a good deal of time looking into Kagan's sexuality.

Marcus would have us believe that she is uncomfortable discussing the reasons why Kagan has never married......then proceeds to discuss that very issue. Marcus tells us that Kagan, rather than being a lesbian, is a smart woman with fewer choices. In Marcus' view, while men may not be turned off by intelligent women, men are turned off by women who are smarter than they are. Got it?

Marcus writes, "The smarter and more successful the woman, the more complicated the dating dynamic: how to leaven that intellect and competence to make the package a bit less threatening."

Obviously, men are pigs. We are horrible creatures because we would never marry a woman smarter than we are ........ let's not mention the fact that a woman may not want to marry a man who isn't quite as smart as she. It's a one-way street, I suppose.

Marcus also writes of the "brutal fact" that an unmarried man in his fifties can have a change of heart and marry a women in her 20's or 30's , but a woman in her fifties doesn't have the same choice. There is a great deal of truth in that. I know several men who are married to women 15, 20 or even 25 years younger. Heck, I'm one of those guys myself. You're unlikely to see many fifty-something year old women with thirty-something year old husbands.

Like many "inequalities" between men and women, this one has a biological component. A healthy man in his fifties can still father children; a woman the same age cannot get pregnant. Even with men who claim to have no desire to have children, this biological component has to have some affect, if only subconsciously.

Of course, there are other, more obvious reasons why Elena Kagan has never married, but I won't go there. At least not in this post.

An Email.

I received the following as an email this morning. I believe it is worth sharing. The writer says he desires no credit, so he will remain anonymous.


Bob, I put this together this week. If you deem it worthy, share it as you please. I desire no credit.

Several people have asked my opinion on Elena Kagan's nomination to the highest court of this nation. I will give it my best shot. You and I may view our republic from different perspectives, but I trust that you will take my comments as my honest assessment of the situation.

Before I address the specific question, please allow me to explain my assessment of President Obama. I honestly believe that I am neither racist nor bigoted. However, I feel the election of our current president, together with the stranglehold on congress held by Reid and Pelosi and their minions could prove fatal to our republic as it was designed and has been for over two hundred years. I do not condone his expressed intent to "spread the wealth around" Where does he get the authority to tell you, me or any other citizen that "at some point you have made enough money?" These are not the ramblings of some right-wing talk show host. They are indisputable objective facts and words from his own lips.

He is hailed as the historic "first black president." Not only is that claimed distinction an inherently racial classification; but also it is an outright mischaracterization of reality. True, his skin color is darker than many in this country, and I feel certain that single physical trait led millions of "black" voters and many liberals suffering from "white guilt" to vote him into the presidency. Genetically, he is just as much white as he is black He is the chance biological result of a sexual encounter between a young white woman ideologue and a radical Kenyan rogue. That rogue somehow came to marry her when she was three months pregnant with with the current President of the United States. Culturally, he is far more non-black, having been abandoned by his father during infancy and reared by his mother, her parents and his Indonesian stepfather.

Let's don't forget his "mentor" in Hawaii, Frank Marshall Davis, an admitted member of the Communist Party USA. Let's don't forget his 20-year attendance at the raging, virulent sermons of Jeremiah Wright. Let's don't forget his long association with William Ayers, an admitted terrorist bomber of public buildings. Ayers was the husband of Bernardine Dohrn, who worked at the prestigious Chicago law firm, Sidley Austin. She held a law degree. but because of her terrorist criminal conviction record, she could not be licensed to practice law; so the firm hired her as a paralegal. By the way, Obama was a summer associate at that firm; that's where he met the lovely Michelle, who was then an associate lawyer there. Is it at all reasonable to wonder whether coffee breaks at that firm might have been somewhat conducive to enhance one's radical orientation?

I think he knows that the Supreme Court, as presently constituted, will not allow him to shame the Constitution with his radical ideas, I think he fears that the the Court will act as it did when it threw out several of FDR's New Deal programs in the thirties. He is trying his own modern "court-packing plan. He has already placed Sotomayor, "a wise Latina woman, who can make better decisions than some white man who has not had her life experience."

Now it is Kagan, who, just as he, has no real experience in the real world. Her only accomplishments were to ban the ROTC recruiters from the Harvard law school (a ruling later overturned by the Supreme Court) and to argue unsuccessfully before that court in favor of a federal statute which was clearly violate of the First Amendment. In oral argument of that case, CITIZENS UNITED, she actually argued that a pamphlet, which is "pretty classic" electioneering" could be regulated by the federal government. The Court, of course, ruled against her on that, leading to Obama's shameful public insult to the court members at the State of The Union address. They attended as a matter of courtesy, yet had to sit there while being ridiculed to their faces.

You might have gathered that I am not a huge fan of these people, especially Barack, The Wicked Witch of the West and Dirty Harry Reid.

DAMNED RIGHT I AIN'T !!!!!!

Obama's Latest Supreme Court Nominee. Part Two.

OK, I admit it. I don't know a heck of a lot about President Obama's Supreme Court nominee, Elena Kagan. From what I gather, though, not knowing a heck of a lot about her seems to be pretty much the standard response as to whether or not she should be confirmed as a Supreme Court justice.

According to an article in the Washington Post written by Michael Gerson, Kagan is a mystery even to her closest friends and supporters. Gerson quotes Tom Goldstein, a Kagan supporter, who said,

"I don't know anyone who has had a conversation with her in which she expressed a personal conviction on a question of constitutional law in the past decade."

We'd have to assume that Obama knows where Kagan stands on the issues most important to him. Are we to believe that the President is going to put someone on the Supreme Court ......someone who can influence the direction our country will take for decades to come ...... and yet not have a clue as to how she thinks?

I know, Obama claims to have sat in the pews listening to Rev. Jeremiah Wright without hearing a word he said, but is anybody buying that?

The fact that Obama wants her on the Supreme Court is reason enough for me to say I don't. I don't like where Obama is trying to take this country; Is anyone surprised that I'd be opposed to his choice on who will replace Justice John Paul Stevens?

The identity politics have already started. The Left has launched the first volley in the cultural battle that always surrounds the Supreme Court. Ben Smith is reporting in Politico.com that Cathy Renna, a consultant for the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation, is upset over the Wall Street Journal's putting a 1993 photo of Kagan on it's front page .......a photo of Kagan playing softball. In the bizzaro world of Liberal identity politics, seeing a photo of Kagan playing softball will lead the American public to conclude that Kagan is a lesbian. The folks in GLAAD would love to see an openly gay Supreme Court justice, but they are fearful that Kagan's chances of getting on the Supreme Court will crash if she's thought to be a lesbian.

Somehow, I've missed something. I had no idea that women playing softball equals lesbian.

Like others, I am confused as to why the WSJ would choose this particular photo.
Jenna Lowenstein, communications director for the National Stonewall Democrats said,

"I think it's strange that you'd go back 17 years to dig up a photo of someone who's one of hte [sic] most photographed women in the world today."

I wouldn't go so far as to say Kagan is one of the most photographed women in the world. I could name hundreds who've been photographed more often. I would say, however, that the photo of Kagan playing softball is probably the most flattering photo of her I've seen. It's certainly more flattering than the photo of her I posted yesterday.

We don't need to manufacture reasons to oppose Kagan. As I said, the fact that Obama likes her is reason enough for me to oppose her. This tactic of the folks in GLAAD is just an attempt to stifle any opposition to Kagan by implying that those of us who do not support her are against her simply because we think she might be gay.

Obama's Latest Supreme Court Nominee.

In a surprising move, President Barack Obama has nominated Saturday Night Live alum Jon Lovitz to replace retiring Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens.

Lovitz is the first nominee in almost 40 years without any experience as a judge.

During his announcement of his pick for the Supreme Court, Obama stated,
" I hadn't even considered nominating anyone from the long list of actors who had previously worked on Saturday Night Live until Al Franken was elected to the U.S. Senate and I witnessed first hand just how valuable this group can be towards the advancement of my agenda."