Here's what the powers behind Jeff Sessions expect - and, IMHO, want - by Tom Gilroy, from HuffPo yesterday -

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tom-gilroy/sessionss-hate-speech_b_232246....

Much of the progressive blogosphere is aghast at the embarrassing Republican strategy of putting Senator Jeff Sessions, a man with a history of racially insensitive statements, as the central interlocutor of a Hispanic woman. Could they really be that stupid -- again?

Stupid? No. More like strategic. There is a subterranean agenda here has nothing to do with the confirmation of a Supreme Court justice, and subterranean agendas are what the GOP is always about.

Just as torture was not about getting information but about intimidating our foes and exacting false confessions to justify an Iraq-al Qaida link, just as attacking ACORN was not about investigating voter fraud but about intimidating people from going to the polls, and just as questioning science was not about embracing Creationism but about discrediting climate change so polluting corporations could continue their global plunder, Sessions going after Sotomayer's non-existent "bias" is not about vetting a potential Supreme Court justice.

It's about making you afraid.
It's about making the media afraid.
And it's about making the Obama government afraid.

The point of putting a "racially insensitive" white man up to question a Latina has nothing to do with bad GOP planning and everything to do with intimidation. Republicans know she's getting confirmed; what they really want to do is intimidate the White House, the media, and me and you from embracing progressive views.

So, if you're going to embrace affirmative action, feminism, equal rights, economic fairness, civil rights, -- Jesus, even empathy -- you stand warned you will be attacked. It has nothing to do with defeating Sotomayer and everything to do with discrediting what most Americans believe and intimidating us from expressing it. It's also a signal to their dwindling base -- disenfranchised, uneducated whites -- that the GOP is still the party of the cluelessly and inarticulately disgruntled.

Hence economic fairness is "a special interest," universal healthcare is "socialism," and believing in a right to privacy is "judicial activism;" all of it bullshit, but all of it useful.

That's the goal here; keeping ignorance alive so you can cajole it to the ballot box, the streets, in front of David Letterman's studio, at the local Board of Ed meeting or the commencement at Notre Dame.

Or outside Dr George Tiller's women's health clinic or the Holocaust Museum -- carrying a gun.

After David Duke lost his bid for Louisiana governor in 1991—despite having won a sizable majority of the white vote—LSU professor and NPR commentator Andrei Condrescu wondered aloud just which of any white person he saw on the street could have done what was unthinkable to him: vote for a man who openly preached race hate, denied the Holocaust, had been a Ku Klux Klan member since he was 17, and was infamous for wearing Nazi uniforms while a college student. But vote for him they did. Why also would Alabama voters send to the U.S. Senate a man like Jeff Sessions, whose nomination by Reagan for a federal judgeship did not even reach the Senate floor for a vote because he was too stupid to keep his bigoted mouth shut. Sessions, besides his unabashed racial intolerance, has also “earned” a zero rating for his voting record on the environment, and supported exempting the CIA from bans on torture. It is just incomprehensible to believe that there actually are such people whose minds are so narrow that they can conceive of having this man represent them. But the South has always existed in an alternate universe, or maybe just a very large fishbowl. I can’t explain it; maybe someone else can.

Thus hearing those drawls critical of any hint of racial “preference” or “pride” from Sonia Sotomayor can only be but nauseating hypocrisy. But such hypocrisy isn’t just the prevue of Southern bigots—the "mainstream" media has lent a “helping” hand. For example, nearly all the coverage that allegedly progressive newspaper the Seattle Times gives to Latinos has something to do with illegal immigration, ICE raids, violence, drugs and murder; at least African-Americans get some “positive” coverage on the sports page. Not that the Times has any “choice”; most of what else there is to cover (other than the Sotomayor nomination) is racism, discrimination and prejudice; since the media (like the Times) actively colludes in poisoning people’s minds (in the name of "newsworthiness"), they have no incentive to expose themselves and society. Media coverage does have a rotting effect on people’s minds; reader comments on the Times’ webpage on any story that has anything to do with Latinos is full of ignorance, stereotypes and hatred in general. In this kind of atmosphere, what is it that people expect to happen?

Even though I sometimes refer to the two political parties as Demublicans (some prefer Republicrats, but I prefer Demublicans because it makes them sound dumber) I think it's foolish to deny that there are vast differences between the two political parties.

There are many examples that could be given, but Obama's nomination of Dr. Regina Benjamin for Surgeon General of the United States is a good example. Dr. Benjamin could have made big money as a big city doctor but chose devote her talents to providing medical services to people in rural Alabama. Dr. Benjamin is the founder of a Gulf Coast medical clinic that has been rebuilt twice after hurricanes.

But I often wish the differences between the two major parties were greater. Here's a case in which well connected Democrats are working on the dark side.

http://www.democracynow.org/2009/7/14/headlines#7

Honduran Coup Regime Hires US Lobbyists with Clinton Ties

Meanwhile, new details are being revealed about American lobbyists that have been hired to support the coup. The New York Times reports the coup government has hired a public relations specialist with ties to former President Bill Clinton. The specialist, Bennet Ratcliff, was part of the delegation that met in Costa Rica last Thursday. According to the New York Times, the delegation, including the installed Honduran president Roberto Micheletti, “rarely made a move without consulting” Ratcliff. An official close to the talks said Ratcliff wrote or approved every proposal that was submitted at the meeting. Meanwhile, the Honduran branch of an influential Latin American business group has hired Lanny Davis, the former White House special counsel to President Clinton. Davis is leading a lobbying effort to muster up support for the coup on Capitol Hill.

One thing about this country where people (and the people who own or run corportations) have never had to own to is the fact this land, which was essentially stolen from the original inhabitants, was never subjected to real tyranny, not in the way the reat of Europe was; in fact it was viewed originally as a haven for religious freedom, and then as an opportunity for economic exploitation by individuals. The pioneers who ventured into the wilds of virgin forests found the only obstacle to freedom was the occassional Indian, who was shot if he stood in the way of the excercise of that freedom. The French Revolution was unlike the American Revolution in that it was a bottom-up revolution, not a top-down revolution run by leaders who were for the most part more interested in the freedom to pursue their own personal agendas. Likewise, the revolutions of 1848 in Europe gained momentum from the urban and rural poor. In this country, even when people want change, they don't want to do the work needed to do it, if it means a loss of freedom to do whatever they want, or it costs money.

There is no respect due to President Obama for his Administration’s handling of Justice issues. I hate when politicians lie.

Quark!

Thank you so very much.. Very kind of you to respond with this information.

John Berlau offended by death sentences for corporate entities inflicting malfeasance upon the public BUT not flesh and blood folk. Corporatists disturbed by defined longevity for artificial constructs BUT readily argues for humans having the right to die because they can’t afford insurance. What happens once a corporation finally becomes sentient? Will John Berlau finally turn against them, too?

What about cyborgs? When is a human sufficiently inhuman enough to live?

Help! What was the name of that movie that caller was talking about regarding that movie with the footage of the tuna getting caught in the fishing nets? She was same caller that mentioned the book 'My Year of Meat' - or did I not get that name right either- I wish people would speak with more emphasis when giving out these important references.

Caller now talking about Food INC should also see The Garden and Fresh

Thom,
I have little doubt that I will never hear another talk show host correctly use the term "Precautionary Principle" on the air. This is a term that could only come out of the EU, where they actually care about their people. See the academic work of Cristina Ruden for more insight.

You say you have the best listeners in teh world, I say we have the best host in the world.

KEEP SPREADING THE WORD AND INFORMING THE PEOPLE!!!
West

Hi Mark,

Thank you for the report on Senator Maria Cantwell. She seems to be taking on a few important issues in health care reform, but not the big one.: Actually providing decent health care to all Americans. The exchange system sounds a bit like the co-op system which many people have right now, and doesn’t work, doesn’t it? Do you think the Washington State Senators Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell are worried about rocking the boat of welfare recipient Bill Gates, who lives in Seattle? He might not like the idea of the tax money required from the very rich for a public option? I worked hard for both of Cantwell and Murray in 2004 while I was living in Longview. It makes me very mad!

http://www.portlandia.etsy.com

Thom,

We "evolved" humankind have continued to poop in our own "sandbox" since we left our hunter-gatherer ancestors behind. It seems inevitable that the sandbox will eventually "fill up." That was the choice and the trade-off.

Maybe Higgins has a suggestion...

Does anyone have the link to the FT article aboht how Repubs are wrong in opposing Obama's health care reform Thom was reading from in his first segment?