I greeted the news of Harriet Oleson's nomination with both giddy elation that a womyn was chosen to replace Sweet Sandy, and the unbridled, feminine hysteria of a progressive who has seen far too many of Bush's Fourth Reich cronies handed positions of power.
Although I would have preferred someone who transcends the constrictive binds of gender identity, a female justice would at least have a grasp of the issues that consume the every day lives of most American women - namely gay rights and abortion on demand. However, one glance at her unimpressive list of credentials reveals a shocking truth. During her entire career, Oleson never once held a membership in any human rights organizations, such as MoveOn.org or Dykes on Bikes. Also curiously absent from her resume are records of any pro bono work for civil liberties groups like NARAL or NAMBLA, and she has been heard speaking less than enthusiastically about abortion on at least one occasion. In fact, there's significant doubt that she has ever had an abortion herself, or even recommended one to a friend. Add up all these strikes against her and one has little choice but to conclude that Harriet Oleson is incapable of defending our Constitutional rights as they exist, let alone conjuring new ones up out of the ether.
One of the most basic of those Constitutional rights is a Woman's Right to Choose; monumentally important, yet so fragile that the Framers wrote it in a secret code to protect it from strict constructionists who would seek to strike it down. Like the Right to Privacy, Right to a Living Wage, and Right to Free Wireless Internet Service, there are hundreds of such secret rights hidden deeply within the seemingly undecipherable words of the Constitution, just waiting for another Harry Blackmun to come along and awaken them from their centuries-old slumber.
While someone unfamiliar with the laws of the land will be less likely to interpret them literally, I'm afraid that Oleson's doesn't have the necessary background, abortions, or lesbian sexual encounters to effectively stare at the Constitution like a Magic Eye poster until those secret rights suddenly materialize. Therefore, I cannot in good conscience endorse her nomination.
Are you sure about the lesbo thing? She's 60 and never been married. Duh...
Posted by: Oil Man | October 03, 2005 at 08:26 PM
Hot Damn! George has gone and done it again.
Those carpin' Birkenstock Lesbo tree huggers can't say nothin' now. He's hired a woman to be on the Supremo Court. He's broken that hard-packed dirt with his plow and cut some more Bush and named the first woman ever to the court. It's history. And we should know; we're re-writin' it every day. Nothin sacred about twistin a few ideas here and there as long as it 'Gits 'er Done!!!"
They keep talkin about 'croonerism' or such truck in pinko circles. I don't know about the Prez' singin or playing a piccolo. I just know them damn reefer snortin-commie-queernut-libruls think there's some sort of 'good ol' boy' network goin on. What about the woman he named to Court of El Supremo! What's 'er name? Whatever. They can't say that about her.
She's qualified even if she ain't been a judge. Hell, Judge Roy Bean was never a real judge. But he shore acted a lot like one. That's all that matters. So you commie fags better not say Bush hires 'crooneys' (whatever) or people unqualified to places in government. It'd be a damn lie!
Posted by: Semanticleo | October 03, 2005 at 09:24 PM
Larry
You left out the part about her going to Church every Sunday!
You know, you can't sugar coat these things!
Posted by: tom faranda | October 03, 2005 at 09:31 PM
Don't forget that other right hidden in code: the individual right to bear arms for personal and civil defense. It's so well hidden that many politicians, lawyers, and judges still haven't found it.
Posted by: Gullyborg | October 03, 2005 at 11:03 PM
She probably doesn't even believe in the constitutional right to wi-fi.
As far as the lesbian sex goes, I won't believe she's enjoys the sapphic pleasures of forbidden love until I've seen the video evidence, with lots of close-ups, played several times in extreme slow motion.
Posted by: Bubblehead | October 03, 2005 at 11:44 PM
Once again our Pee-Resident ignores the talents of Sean Penn!
Posted by: Menstrual Rainbow | October 04, 2005 at 02:46 AM
I went to my local Women's Right To Choose Clinic yesterday and the children they were sticking into cryogenically-safe plastic bags were ALL up in arms about this pick of SCOTUS-Selected ChimpFace Smurky Dumbya Bu$Hitler!! "What the f**k is she trying to do? Destroy our only job?!", they told me telepathically as the kind doctors and nurses used pain-free methods of ending their otherwise useless lives. I love it how KKKarl Rove and other member of the Reich-Wing Re-Thugg-li-KKKan Party can see into the future so they can tell which children will be useless and should be aborted so their body parts and stem cells can be put to good use on really productive citizens. All Praise The Great Sith Lord!! Now someone has to tell this chick from Texas to toe the Party line!!!
Posted by: Bush4Ever | October 04, 2005 at 03:18 AM
"he shore acted a lot like one"
He 'shore' did.
Posted by: SemanticMenstrual | October 04, 2005 at 03:24 AM
I've never gotten over how mean Harriet Oleson was to the Ingall's children, and that alone disqualifies her nomination. I also remember where she once tried to cheat Ms. Ingall's out of a fair price on eggs because some of the eggs were brown. This proves Oleson's a racist since she believes brown things are worth less than white ones of the same type.
Nice try, Chimp, but until your ready to nominate Robert Byrd, let's steer clear of genocidal racists who've never known a woman's touch for our Justices, shall we?
Posted by: Moonchild | October 04, 2005 at 04:54 AM
I greeted the news of Harriet Oleson's nomination...
Just goes to show to what lengths the Bush Junta will go to turn back the clock on judicial progress. In his theocratic world, it's 1880 Minnesota!
Before we reject her nomination, there are a few crucial questions that must be answered:
Will Harriett subject her fellow justices to her incessant henpecking as she did to poor Nells? Will Merlin Oleson make guest appearances to offer the viewpoint of a tortured, yet masculine soul? Will Shannon Dougherty be able to cope with rural life, or will she move to a different zip code? And just how did all those people go blind?
On a side note: As a Sportster rider, I'm an honorary member of Dykes on Bikes, and I can honestly say that they do great work.
Posted by: Che | October 04, 2005 at 05:18 AM
Damn you, Moonchyld! A thousand curses be upon your house!
Posted by: Che | October 04, 2005 at 05:21 AM
I think you need to sell a vowel.
Posted by: aelfheld | October 04, 2005 at 05:57 AM
How can she possibly legislate from the bench and change the social structure of America if she isn't a Gaia-fearing lesbian or hadn't aborted a potential progressyve daughter?
Too bad Semanticleo wasn't aborted, it would have save a lot of bandwidth.
Posted by: libmeister | October 04, 2005 at 06:26 AM
Now we see the true deviousness of Bu-shaitan's MLB-ordered SC(R)OTU(MLE)S(S) pick: while everyone on the left and Reich is up in arms over this alleged nomination, Shrub goes out and adds another celebrity to his body count... and an African-American icon, no less. I ask you... did Nipsey Russell die during the Clinton administration? No! This is just more proof of *'s racism.
Posted by: Bubblehead | October 04, 2005 at 06:28 AM
Hey, Semanticleo! Just saw at demoncraticunderground.com that NAMBLA is having a membership drive. You seem like the kind of guy who secretly gets off on that kind of stuff with all your self-righteous huffing and puffing. They said they'd even waive the membership fee for anyone whose screen-name starts with "S". You must be getting tired of the sheep and goats by now so here's your chance!
Posted by: libmeister | October 04, 2005 at 06:35 AM
"Just goes to show to what lengths the Bush Junta will go to turn back the clock on judicial progress. In his theocratic world, it's 1880 Minnesota!"
That Taliban group and the Wahhabists may be ignorant savages without indoor plumbin' but you can say one thing about 'em: at least they know politics ain't no good unless you bring religion into it. Politicians are godless, slutchasin', moneygrubbin secularists who need a little push now and then, from the SUPER RIGHTEOUS/SEXOPHOBIC/CHRISTOFASCISTS. Hey! That has a ring to it. I'll say it again;
SUPERRIGHTEOUSSEXOPHOBICCHRISTOFASCISTS.
Yep, those Islamofascists got nothin' on us.
They blow a lot of stuff up with bombs, it's true.
But we've got George Bush. He don't need no stinkin' bombs! He's establishing his Thewocracy the peaceful, christlike way. He's not lyin' or stealin' or cheatin'. I knew you were gonna say that. He ain't the one doin' that stuff. He hires people he truly beleives are good folks. Then what they do after that. Well....that's between them and god. He don't have nothin to do with such underhanded things as givin' the pharmaceutical industry a monopoly over the american people. He was tryin' to reform Medicare. Anyway that FDR bastard shoulda been impeached before he came up with that Social Security crap. Them poor old folks, widows and orphans oughta' pull their own weight without stickin their grubby fingers into MY pockets.
George Bush is tryin' to do the right thing. Why don't some folks want to understand he is a good, decent man of god. Some people are even talkin' about impeachin HIM! Can you beleive that shit?
Well, I don't claim to know the law. But one thing I do know. If a man is gonna stand trial for something he has to be found competent to stand trial. So, I guess they are gonna be outta luck on that one.
Posted by: Semanticleo | October 04, 2005 at 06:42 AM
She don’t need no stinking credentials. I have it from sources high up the crude chain in the Bush(praise be his name) administration that she has the only pre-requisite necessary…she in on the board at Halliburton.
Posted by: Oil Man | October 04, 2005 at 06:58 AM
I'm still trying to absorb the news here.
Posted by: NO BLOOD FOR TAMPONS | October 04, 2005 at 07:44 AM
Let's not forgot how oddly Harriet Oleson's dressed her children. ALbert with his dreadfully passe' suspenders and Nellie with her circa 1800's ringlet curls. Does a woman with such poor fashion sense have what it takes to sit on the highest court in the land?
Posted by: Liberal Larry | October 04, 2005 at 08:25 AM
Isn't there a constitutional right not to be exposed to Bush-beatification?
Awaiting its discovery, I'd like to exercise it right now.
Posted by: Brutha | October 04, 2005 at 08:29 AM
A hidden code in the Constitution?!?!?!? Do you know what this means? This means another National Treasure quest to define rights. Harriet Oleson will have her work cut out trying to jam the frequencies of the other
Code Talkers who define these rights via the Progressyve
Dialectic by legislating from the bench.
Posted by: Cr'Q'T | October 04, 2005 at 08:50 AM
Why don't some folks want to understand he is a good, decent man of god. Some people are even talkin' about impeachin HIM! Can you beleive that shit?
Believe it? I brought the idea up to Howard Dean!
He told me it was unlikely to happen, though because, being the minority party by 29 seats in the House, we'd have a hard time bringing Articles of Impeachment against him. With an eleven seat minority in the Senate, we'd have a hard time making the charges stick.
It doesn't seem to me that it's very American that Republicans should control thirty more seats in Congress than we do, and I demanded that they be redistributed so everyone has an equal amount of votes, preferably with us having a more equal amount than the repugs.
Dean said he was working hard on that, but he said something about "shrill, incoherent moonbats driving the mainstream out of the party." I wasn't really listening, though. Someone over at D.U. found proof that Bush is a direct descendant of an illegitimate Hitler-Mussolini love child.
Posted by: Che | October 04, 2005 at 09:02 AM
I always thought Harriet Oleson was kind of hot. That tight bun and the way she controlled her man......nearly dominatrix!
Posted by: Libby Gone™ | October 04, 2005 at 09:05 AM
"Are you sure about the lesbo thing? She's 60 and never been married. Duh..."
Ralph Nader is 71 and he's never been married. It doesn't mean he's gay. It just means that he's TOO MUCH MAN for most women to handle.
Posted by: Liberal Larry | October 04, 2005 at 10:12 AM
From the notebook of The Nipster:
Bush was told to pick a judge
He made his pick and would not budge
KKKonservatives yelled "Who crossed your wires?
Why did you pick Harriet Miers?"
Then...he died.
Posted by: Bush4Ever | October 04, 2005 at 10:15 AM