Congratulations, Palin

I’m sure the nation is grateful for your efforts.

The sheriff blamed the vitriolic political rhetoric that has consumed the country, much of it occurring in Arizona.

“When you look at unbalanced people, how they respond to the vitriol that comes out of certain mouths about tearing down the government. The anger, the hatred, the bigotry that goes on in this country is getting to be outrageous,” he said. “And unfortunately, Arizona, I think, has become the capital. We have become the mecca for prejudice and bigotry.”

Giffords expressed similar concern, even before the shooting. In an interview after her office was vandalized, she referred to the animosity against her by conservatives, including Sarah Palin’s decision to list Giffords’ seat as one of the top “targets” in the midterm elections.

“For example, we’re on Sarah Palin’s targeted list, but the thing is, that the way that she has it depicted has the crosshairs of a gun sight over our district. When people do that, they have to realize that there are consequences to that action,” Giffords said in an interview with MSNBC.

Thought of the day

Tobacco is a deadly Class A carcinogen that has no place in a pragmatic, rational society. Unfortunately, a lot this country is rather ideological. For that reason I offer a new national motto, borrowed and modified from the fine state of New Hampshire:

Live free and die.

I’m still waiting for the ideologues to explain how they’re able to spread the liberty they love so much to people who are dead.

Worst. Justice. Ever.

Here is what Section 1 of the 14th Amendment says:

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Contrast this with what Justice Scalia believes.

Certainly the Constitution does not require discrimination on the basis of sex. The only issue is whether it prohibits it. It doesn’t. Nobody ever thought that that’s what it meant. Nobody ever voted for that. If the current society wants to outlaw discrimination by sex, hey we have things called legislatures, and they enact things called laws.

Actually, someone did vote for that: the 1971 Supreme Court. But then Scalia, in a purely political effort to support his all-around bigotry, is an originalist. For those paying attention, that’s just code that lets him pretend the principles espoused in the Constitution are only to apply to the times when they were first written. But then if that was true, we wouldn’t really be talking about principles anymore, now would we?

Worst. Justice. Ever.