SCOTUS: Straight Talk With Sen. Thune
Via Steve Benen:
As [Thune] put it, the nominee has to be straight, otherwise the would-be justice "would be a bridge too far right now." Honestly, what the hell does that mean? Thune, as a practical matter, is establishing a litmus test — qualifications and merit are important, but homosexuality, regardless of any other factor, is more important. Why? Because Thune says so.
Well, I guess that leaves Big Gay Al out of the running.
How far over the edge have you gone when even Jeff Sessions runs away from your idiocy? I mean, honestly, that’s really saying something.
Gay bigotry. It’s not so super, thanks for asking.
Especially when you are talking judicial temperament.
Guess we all have a good idea where Thune stands on privacy rights, don’t we? Given his legislative voting record, I can’t say I’m shocked by this sort of sexual preference litmus test. Especially since Thune’s already used this tack in his last electoral fight.
It’s just that usually the bigoted and oppressive try to at least couch their crapola in more palatable terms. Hell, even Strom Thurmond knew to do that for the most part.
Let me just say for the record, I don’t care who the judge I’m arguing before sleeps with, so long as it isn’t opposing counsel.
If s/he does their job well, neither should you. How about we raise the bar on competence, justice and fairness instead of constantly trying to peek under people’s robes? Or is that just too much to ask?







I have this need to call Thune’s office tomorrow and ask whether the Senator has a problem with nominees of color, or women, or if his bigotry is restricted solely to homsexuality. And then ask the person whether the Senator is aware of Federal laws which, in many agencies and governmental offices, protect employees against discriminatory hiring practices for sexual preference.
You know, like the DOJ. Why do people learn nothing whatsoever from other scandals?
Against whom would Jesus discriminate, sir? SIGH