Non-Sequiturs 08.21.09
* Maybe this dude thought that displaying the mental aptitude of child would make it okay for him to look at pictures of naked children. He was wrong. [Roll On Friday]
* Facebook — good for cheaters and divorce attorneys. [Long Island Press]
* If you want to shoot at beautiful wild animals for “sport,” there’s a lawyer willing to help you. [Legal Blog Watch]
* Maryland’s chief Public Defender might want to get an employment lawyer. [Underdog]
* Are “wimpy local counsels” out for themselves more than their clients? [What About Paris?]
* If you take away the color of her skin, is Sonia Sotomayor still “diverse”? [Blackbook Legal]
* Notes from the late Justice Rehnquist’s poker buddy. [BLT: Blog of the Legal Times]
* Open Letter to VH-1: Please familiarize yourselves with the term “vetting.” That is all. [Popsquire]
* More about skanks, from Kash! [True/Slant]




Comments
Comments hidden for your protection. Show them anyway!
How you like me now?
Does no one ever mention what a shitty fucking asshole the guy from "what about clients (or my asshole ego)" is? Because he seems like a real fucking douche.
3rd - four hours in. Obviously an epic fail of a post.
"Maybe this dude thought that displaying the mental aptitude of child "
thats really rich coming from you, MysTTTal
Check out the safari law guy's pics... who shoots a zebra? What a d bag.
Hispanic skin color? I undertand that most of America thinks there is something called an Hispanic race -- but let's try to educate ourselves on this common erroneous point (just like people often believe Philly is the cap of Pa). Sotomayor does not have "dark" skin. I have also seen pictures of her family. She has significant amounts of European heritage -- and maybe some American Indian heritiage too. Italians have more in common with European Latinas since Italian is a Latin based language -- even closer than Spanish. Cardoza was a "Latino" but because he was Jewish "that didn't count" -- American racial politics really has become quite amazing -- amazingly stupid and baseless. I don't think we have ever had a Slavic Justice -- so a slavic pick would be more noteworthy than a Latina pick (Cardoza, Scalia and Alito by my count were the first 3 Latinos). Most of America (most who post on these boards) absolutely supports preferential treatment -- what exact historical basis is there for such treatment for somebody of Sotomayor or Obama's background? Of course there is no basis -- and in fact it ends up being strangely ironic that Obama (unlike the vast number of "whites" in the U.S.) has white slaveholding ancestors -- but no black ancestry that were American slaves (or even victimized by Jim Crow). Sotomayor's family moved to the U.S. when the most popular TV show in the U.S. starred "A Latino" (Dezi Arnaz). Obama and Sotomayor's alleged struggles are considered equal to what Clarence Thomas went through (which was segregation, the Klan and an ancestry who were slaves). Hispanics were amongst the greatest oppressors in history -- while the Irish were amongst the most oppressed -- yet here in America policy (and educational political correctness) attempts to brainwash us into believing that living in NYC as a Puerto Rican was some "great struggle" in the 1960s and 1970s. Yeah, Sotomayor sure had it hard -- she received preferential treatment (and deserved to attend merely good schools instead of great ones based upon her test scores). She became a federal judge at 37 -- 37! How common is that -- would that have happened to her if she was a white man -- no way. And yet she is "wise" because of all the struggles she faced. Next, people on this board will insist that JFK, Jr. had to overcome his circumstances.
Elie--Any of your fire-breathing commenters have names? WAC has lots of writers--a couple of them king-hell douche-bags--but all of them have names. Your readers mainly CIA operatives? Chinese dissidents? Or just the spine-challenged. Dan