The Supreme Court knocked down affirmative action this week and all around the nation people went crazy.
The problem seems to come from interpretation. Each of us having his or her own version of just what this law says and what it stands for. Eugene Robinson of the Washington Post gives us his well thought out version, in which he attacks the court’s decision, while Reverend Al Sharpton gives us his, attacking the decision and the judges.
Then we get the other side of the equation with former VP Mike Pence, who when asked his opinion by Jonathan Karl of the fact that California schools had seen a drop in black and Hispanic admissions since that state banned affirmative action, could only hem and haw, and then put out his normal line of uninformed bullshit that never answers the real question.
Pence never has an opinion on anything except his belief in some twisted version of religion. Was it simply his appeal to the religious right that made Trump pick him?
That becomes truly apparent when ignoring another of Karl’s questions, Pence rambles on with his praise of the military, even though the Military Academies were not part of the decision.
Pence digs his double-talking hole even deeper when asked about his naming of Putin as a war criminal despite Trump’s unrelenting support of the Russian dictator. As usual he backs off any attack on the criminal ex-President. Why the hell is this lily livered, punk running for President if he’s afraid to call out the clown running against him for the crook, he is.
The big question right now is why the Supreme Court took on the case of the designer who doesn’t want to design anything for gays. She says it is religion based, but it’s probably that she understands they’re better designers than she is. This is, after all, a hypothetical crime with no victim. There isn’t any evidence that this bimbo is even a designer, and no thought seems to have been given to the fact that no one asked her to design anything. So, why did the Court take it up? Do they have so few cases on their agenda that they can waste their time on baloney like this.
*****
Watched an interesting demonstration of AI last weekend and it became very clear that legislation is needed immediately that will limit and control the use of this branch of science in the media. Two things became instantly evident. The first was, it is almost impossible, in most cases, to tell, what is real and what is fake. With only a small advancement in the technology it will be impossible. The second is that because of the first problem it is essential that any programing which uses these techniques must be clearly labeled on any screen on which it is used.
It’s also important to understand that this cannot be left to the broadcast entities. It must be federal law, passed by congress, and the sooner the better.
Ai is something that is so dangerous, so effective, that it must not be ignored or sloughed off. Congress must act now. It should be easy to make this bipartisan. I know the current GOP loves to post the big lie, but this is so easy to use that even the most true-blue Democrats couldn’t resist using it.
****
Fentanyl is the new drug of death in the United States. More than 110,000 Americans overdosed and died of fentanyl in 2022. Everyone involved has a theory, but no one has a solution.
It comes from factories in China through the Sinaloa and Jalisco cartels in Mexico. It’s cheap, easy to make, and deadly. But after those three descriptions there is little agreement on what to do about it.
With all the problems we are having right now with China, there is very little in the way of talks that will stop them from making it in their labs. If we had better diplomatic relations with the Chinese, there might be a way to offer a financial plan to shut their labs down.
The same problem exists with Mexico. The Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, better known as AMLO just shrugs his shoulders. Everyone knows that he has no power over the cartels. Even the Mexican army is afraid to deal with them. Maybe what we need is some kind of paramilitary force working in Mexico that can control the cartels the way we did in Columbia.
If the flow of drugs can somehow be controlled or held to a smaller percentage of what it is now, the social solutions here would have at least a fighting chance of success. Right now, they are overwhelmed by a flood of material coming over the border and through our ports and airports.
*****
There’s been a lot of noise about the Supreme Court lately, and they’ve definitely earned it. They don’t seem to be able to control their desire to jump into areas where they really don’t belong. That added to the fact that Trump managed, with the help of Mitch McConnell, to stuff three young, conservative judges onto the court, really destroyed the balance. This has resulted in calls by the left for changes in the way the court is assembled and structured. Adding extra Justices is the most simplified approach, but limiting terms and demanding retirement are also in the works.
The left is screaming about the Court having been politicized, but the Court has been politicized as long as I can remember, and I am a very old man. The nature of the Court is to be political simply because the members are chosen by a politician, the President, and okayed by congress. The Court works best when it is made up of a progressive zealot, a far-right nut, 6 moderates, three from each side, and a swing vote. That’s ideal but rarely achieved. Right now, the Court is divided into thirds. Three far-right nuts, three liberals and three semi- moderate conservatives. If Alito and Thomas were to retire or die, thereby giving Biden the chance to replace them with a couple of liberals, the Court would be right about where it should be.
The problem with the Court right now, is that they are sticking their collective noses into cases which should not be attracting their interest. Roe V Wade was settled case law. They had no business getting involved in it. The same is true for the Affirmative Action decision, and the designer who hates same sex marriage is just a joke. I mean, no victim? Where’s the case?
Trump was so busy trying to stuff the Court that he paid no attention to who he was putting on it. There were better candidates, but he just didn’t care. All he wanted to know was that they were super conservatives. It’s exactly like the way he had local judges appointed. Forty percent of them were awful lawyers and another 40% were dumb as a post.
All Trump cared about was that they were fanatic conservatives.
Although she’s not a sexual predator like Kavanaugh, Amy Coney Barrett is the perfect example of who should not be a Supreme Court Justice. She has been a member of a religious cult since she was very young and as such she is required to do as the cult leader says, which means we have the leader of a religious cult making decisions on our Supreme Court. Now if it’s okay with you that some religious nut is making decisions that affect your life, and that of the country, you should probably be okay with that. But trust me when I say that there are those of us who look askance at the religious power structure having anything to say about anything that affects us. That means anything at all.