Tag Archives: v

Sotomayor’s Opinion Marks the Supreme Court’s First Use of the Term ‘undocumented immigrant.’

Posted by Audiegrl

ThinkProgress.org/Amanda Terkel—Yesterday, the Supreme Court “released its first four decisions in argued cases this term,” including one marking Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s debut.

In an otherwise dry opinion, Justice Sotomayor did introduce one new and politically charged term into the Supreme Court lexicon.

Justice Sotomayor’s opinion in the case, Mohawk Industries v. Carpenter, No. 08-678, marked the first use of the term “undocumented immigrant,” according to a legal database. The term “illegal immigrant” has appeared in a dozen decisions.

blank
More @

Sotomayor Draws Retort From Fellow Justice Clarance Thomas

New York Times/Adam Liptak—The Supreme Court released its first four decisions in argued cases this term on Tuesday. They were all minor, but one was notable for being Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s Supreme Court debut and for prompting a testy concurrence from Justice Clarence Thomas.

The case concerned whether federal trial-court rulings concerning the lawyer-client privilege may be appealed right away. Justice Sotomayor, with methodical reasoning and a formal writing style, said no.

Justice Sotomayor said that result was dictated by sound policy and was consistent with a law governing appeals.

The decision was unanimous, but Justice Clarence Thomas declined to join the part of Justice Sotomayor’s opinion discussing why the cost of allowing immediate appeals outweighs the possibility that candid communications between lawyers and their clients might be chilled.

In a concurrence, Justice Thomas took a swipe at his new colleague, saying she had “with a sweep of the court’s pen” substituted “value judgments” and “what the court thinks is a good idea” for the text of a federal law.

blank
More @

If your wondering about that sound your hearing? Don’t worry, it’s just Lou Dobbs’ head exploding. 😉

Leave a comment

Filed under Courts, Culture, Hispanic/Latino/Latina, Immigration, Justice Clarence Thomas, Justice Sonya Sotomayer, Law, Lou Dobbs, News, Politics, Supreme Court, Uncategorized, United States

Ed Schultz v. Jonathan Alter: Schultz Ends Up in His Own Segment of Psycho Talk

Posted by Audiegrl

Jonathan Alter of Newsweek

Jonathan Alter of Newsweek

Newsweek‘s Jonathan Alter stepped forward to educate MSNBC’s Ed Shultz on the normal legislative process involving the health care bill. Alter accused Schultz of misrepresenting the totality of the billl, telling Schultz that, “You have to deal with the world as it is, not as we would like it to be.”

Schultz’s take on the process was what our friend Ogenec would call ‘neo-progressive‘, and lacked understanding of what Alter called ‘the sausage making‘ involved in getting a bill through Congress. It was easy to see the direction the show was heading, when Schultz opened with a phone poll asking “Are you disappointed in the way President Obama is handling health care reform?Hit 1 for yes, and 2 for no. BTW, I took Ed’s poll, and after selecting 2 for no, they wanted to transfer me to a operator to discuss a time-share property. 😉

Neo-progressive opinions are nothing new, but are often exasperated by the 24/7 news cycle. The pundits and reporters don’t take time to understand the developments and the facts. Instead, must make a quick assessment of the facts, and make up the rest with speculation or half-baked ideas and opinions. This is not doing their viewers any favors and often unnecessarily leads to voters getting riled up, before they even know the facts.

So for me, I’m with Alter on this one. Even though he tried to explain (from experience) the long legislative process to Schultz, and all of the benefits that were in the new bill… but it was no use… To Shultz, everything hinged on the bill passing with Public Option, and anything other than that, was just a pile of junk.

Sorry Ed, but when you talk like this, you belong in your own segment of Psycho Talk.

Vodpod videos no longer available.

more about "msnbc.com Video Player", posted with vodpod

7 Comments

Filed under Bad Journalism, Barack Obama, Ed Schultz, Entertainment, Health, Health Care Reform, Jonathan Alter, Media and Entertainment, MSNBC, Neo-Progressives, News, Politics, Presidents, Public Option, Pundits (print), Pundits (television), Stupak Amendment, The Ed Show, TV Shows, Uncategorized, United States, Video/YouTube

Randall Terry Urges “Burn In Hell Protests”, Calls for Burning Pelosi and Reid in Effigy on Halloween

Posted by Audiegrl

RANDALL-large

Randall Terry


AP/Ann Sanner—Anti-abortion activist Randall Terry is calling on people to burn effigies of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid this Halloween, as part of a “Burn in Hell” video contest to protest the health care legislation in Congress.

Terry, founder of Operation Rescue, said Tuesday that the contest serves as a political and spiritual statement that “gives people a chance to peacefully vent their rage.”

If Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid force us to pay for child killing and they die unrepentant, they will burn in hell for this,” Terry said in a telephone interview.

A YouTube video of the contest instructions shows how to print a poster of Reid and Pelosi and construct a stand for it. The clip shows a person dousing the Democratic leaders’ images with flammable liquid. The next scene shows their picture going up in flames. People are then encouraged to take pictures, record and submit online the footage of their Oct. 31 protests.

No, this is not a threat to their body,” an unidentified man says in the instructional video, “but it is a threat to their soul.”

Terry insisted the contest was not a threat to Reid or Pelosi. He contended that the Democrats’ plan to overhaul health care would allow federal funding of abortion.

blank

More @ Associated Press

Operation Rescue Halloween: Nancy Pelosi Burn in Hell Contest

pelosi-reidsmiling

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid

Colorado Independent/John TomasicRandall Terry, the founder of fanatical anti-abortion group Operation Rescue, is sending around an email to supporters asking them to burn Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid in effigy as part of a national Halloween protest and video contest. The email and video rallying supporters is characterized by an ironic tone that serves only to heighten the threatening factor that has come to characterize the organization and its actions.

Of the many notable features of the Operation Rescue call-out is the explicit references it makes to major mainstream U.S. corporations FedEx Kinkos, Home Depot and Wal-Mart. The references have the feel of embedded advertising. Do the companies know Operation Rescue is sending them their “Nancy Pelosi Burn in Hell” business? Do they want that business?

FedEx spokesperson Jenny Robertson told the Colorado Independent that the company had no part in the video.

Fed Ex is in no way affiliated with [the Terry project] and did not provide permission to film the video in one of our centers. They probably took that video in the store very quickly and there was no time to stop it“.

And an ironical disclaimer on the video:

Legal Mumbo Jumbo: Obey local laws on open flames; be careful; if under 18, do not burn Nancy Pelosi in effigy unless your mom or dad is with you, and gives you permission, and strikes the match; do not burn yourself; do not burn another human being; do not burn small animals; do not burn large animals; do not burn anyone from PETA; and remember: this is not a threat to Nancy Pelosi’s or Harry Reid’s person…it is a prophetic witness of what awaits them when they die if they do not repent for this horrific sin.

blank
More @ colorado_independentlogo

Related Articles

Far-Right Activist Launches Nancy Pelosi And Harry Reid ‘Burn In Hell!’ Contest

Leave a comment

Filed under Abortion, Domestic Terrorism, Partisan Politics, Politics, Uncategorized, Video/YouTube, Women's Issues