OK you racist idiots JUST STFU--you're making the rest of us look stupid!

I would first like to say that this is not going to be one of my "G" rated posts, that's your warning.
I received an email a couple of days after the Zimmerman so called trial which began with the statement, "This is what Trayvon REALLY LOOKED LIKE"...and showed a photo of GAME, a rapper...you know, a black man that has tattoos on his face? Then the email went on and on about how evil Trayvon was and how vicious...and, OH NO...his worst crime? Serial murderer? Rapist? Shot an unarmed neighbor in cold blooded murder? No, it was the evil selling of marijuana..you know that drug that makes you think you can terrorize the neighborhood, if you can ever get off the couch...
Yes, anyone who is stupid enough to believe this crap...I don't know....is either a COMBINATION or just stupid, racist, hateful, way too high or way too drunk to understand basic human compassion and empathy...oh, and probably a white male(although I've gotten these stupid right wing lies from white women, I would say its 90% white male)...and if you are white and a male, notice, I used the term, "male", not man...I have a male dog, I had a male cat, but I married a man.
But when has it become OK to demonize the victim? We, as women, have went through it as rape victims, with the "what were you wearing? Why were you in a bar? Why were you out after dark?" and, some of that has stopped...but how can women look at this and not think, "Wait a minute....this is very similar to what we were put through as victims"? Too many of us women think that just cuz we're white, we're above the Frey.
On the other hand, how can anyone look at a young person, who just turned 17 and is being followed by a creepy guy and not think he did what we've all told our children to do? Evade, run, and, if no other course, punch his lights out(if  you believe the lies of the Zimmerman defense...where he was being beaten into the ground, but received superficial scratches). Why is it that racists feel that Zimmerman had the right to "stand his ground", but Trayvon, who was being followed by some pasty white guy who looked creepy, did not? Must be cuz Trayvon was black. All I see is a kid who just turned 17 and is acting like a teen...whether white or another color. Why hasn't the (very white)NRA came out with one of the stupid ad campaigns about if Trayvon had a weapon...blahblahblah...oh, yeah, he wasn't white so its better if "his kind" doesn't have anything to protect themselves...specially against white racist wannabee robocops.
And about all of those bad things that Trayvon did...well, what has Zimmerman been charged with? Oh, yeah, nothing big just attacking a police officer(but she was just a female officer...and racists are usually misogynists so that doesn't count), domestic violence(again a female, so for racists, that doesn't count).
I wanted to do a post that discounted the lies in the email I received, but as I read the email, it was just too filled with lies, hate and bigotry and I really felt ill that anyone with any sense could believe that crap...unless they, too, were filled with hate and stupidity...and I can only feel sorry for people who are so filled with hate and fear and stupidity. The only good thing? Many of these racists are over the age of 50 and will die out soon. But, until then, please white racists just SHUT THE FUCK UP...you know the old phrase? Keep your mouth shut so you don't look like a fool...I am so tired of saying, "just cuz I'm white doesn't mean I'm stupid", you're really beginning to make all of us look bad.

Zimmerman gets away with murder, and America Loses Again

I was watching one of my favorite shows on Friday, Real Time with Bill Maher, but I had to turn it off because of some of the racist/bigoted remarks of his guest from the Daily Caller(a right wing "white is best, white male is even better rag). First, the racist began with his whiny rant about black on black crime running rampant, which is racist speak for, "Don't look at the cracker killing a black boy". It also shows how shallow their intellectual ability is, considering that we have ensured a large majority of African Americans stay in poverty, by our laws, by our school policies, by our white ability to assimilate, but making sure our Black citizens must still play by "The Help" rules in many instances.

What is this about racist White males that wanna whine about black on black crime? Sure, lets not look at how many African Americans are treated in everyday white America(Driving while black, hey, now, even walking while black, stop and frisk, police harassment), just point your finger and yell, "SHAMESHAMESHAME" and say that we white liberals should talk about it? REALLY???? Cuz I know you don't want me to tell you what I think...well since you whined....

Black on Black crime happens because of how the majority white race has treated the black race since the beginning of our history--lynchings, mob beatdowns, tying black men to pickup trucks and dragging them for miles(and that was within this century)...and we white folks have no problem cannibalizing our own, we've treated Irish, Italians, Germans, Eastern Europeans the same way when they first came over, but its much easier to blend in when all you have to do is lose an accent and "Americanize" your name. Before we "White Liberals" need to speak on black on black crime, we all need to address how we've treated people of color since we stepped on Plymouth Rock...and how we treat the poor in rural White America. Or when we White Americans are going to address the problem of pedophilia, which is, for the most part, a crime of white married men who prey on children(over 80% of pedophiles are white married males). As a white person, I don't have the right to speak on Black and Black crime until there is equality in our economic/societal status. What does that mean? When both I and a black woman of the same age can enter a store and neither of us be followed by the store security, then maybe I can ; it's a fairly decent idea. 

But, then we're getting into white privilege...you know that whole thing that was stopped cuz of a very small affirmative action(there are no affirmative action tests or interviews). The reason that our white children can walk down the street and not be stopped, but black children can be harassed whether they are wearing the "ghetto look" or a tie and suit....both will be stopped because of the color of their skin. That's REALITY. 

George Zimmerman lived at least on the edge of white privilege, Trayvon? Knew what it meant. In all probability, Trayvon understood how not to raise the deal about being in a white neighborhood, but he was just walking back from the 7/11...talking on his phone, doing normal teenage things until he noticed a "creepy guy" following him. Trayvon also had a GPA of 3.7, he'd won a full scholarship, something that George Zimmerman could only dream of. One that was on the phone to the police department, calling him a punk and a "f***ing c**n", yes, Zimmerman is the epitome of diversity...diversity of racial derision.

My son is bi-racial, he is my heart. But society? Well he "looks white"...to a point('cept for his hair- red and nappy), he's faced being called a "wigga" in our yuppie high school and other incidents; now, my son has his own issues(feels that "fuck" is the adjective for everything and has a redheaded temper on steroids), but he's also one that takes care of others, smarter than most and has a wicked sense of humor. But when he'd walk out my door, my heart would drop because I knew there could be an "incident". I don't think white mothers feel this as strongly, not that we don't, but we don't face half the trials that black mothers must face.

I know how society treats outsiders...as do, both Trayvon and George Zimmerman. Yes, both were on the outside looking in(just look at George Zimmerman-I know he was the kid that was the target of spit balls!), and although Trayvon had his brushes with "authority"(getting suspended for marijuana), I think he did better at acclimating and I think that was probably because of his parents' support and guidance, his parents loved him, cared for him, tried to raise him as a kind, knowledgeable young man. Was he perfect? Nope, not what I'm saying, but from interviews held in his school, with his friends, most remembered him as the one that had a smile and a good word. Zimmerman's parents? His father wrote a racist ebook...tells you where George got his views, doesn't it? Zimmerman already had some problems in the world due to his views(fired as a bouncer, failed police interview, etc.), seemed to feel fairly impotent at life in general.
Now, logically, I understand that the police/prosecution did a very poor job with the crime scene and other forensic information, but then, they weren't going to file charges, remember? It was only some black teen that got himself shot by a white guy. They were forced to charge George with something...I mean he was just doing his civic "whiteman" duty of protectin' the liddle wimmen, wasn't he? Again, I don't mean all white men, but we know the type, don't we? Well, this is what we project in American society.
And society's place in all this? Well, we're taught from an early age to be afraid of the "other"---whether that "other" be a different skin color, religion, ethnicity(how many derogatory terms can my white friends come up for different white ethnic groups?). We're taught, in society that it's OK to objectify/ignore people who are female, gay, old, young(well as in children) because they don't matter as much as white males(of a certain age). And white males that don't become "that certain age"? Whether its due to their inability to achieve(education, personality,etc.), what they choose to do(occupation of choice doesn't integrate with the skill set) or where or how they choose to live, this type(think most of Fox Noise personalities) find a way to blame everyone else for their shortcomings...and we allow it. Its time to make everyone act like adults and start shaming those that exist on stereotypes, ignorance and hatred. Obviously the blather about a "post-racial America" isn't worth the oxygen it uses to say it. 

SCOTUS Gives us tidbits and takeths away Chunks of Liberty and Law

Yes, the Supreme Court found parts of DOMA unconstitutional...this means that if a state recognizes Marriage Equality, the United States will also, allowing gay partners both the burdens and benefits of marriage(income tax, inheritance, property, social security/Medicare, insurance benefits, etc.), but this is only in 13 states. SCOTUS did not find the whole law unconstitutional which means that if a couple are married in Iowa, but move to Indiana due to job or other circumstances, they lose their rights...which is completely against the Constitution's direction of equal liberty which is protected by the Fifth Amendment. But you'd never know that, watching the corporate media. First, let me be very clear. I am happy that SCOTUS did this much, that gay couples receive the same benefits as my husband and I do and I also believe that SCOTUS should have thrown out the whole law and made it clear that if I get married in IL, that marriage should be recognized in IN, whether its between consenting opposite genders or the same gender. Some figures I've thrown together...using the stat that gays are approximately 9-10% of the populace and that 13 states honor marriage equality, that roughly comes to about one quarter of the country, then that drops the actual "equality" of being able to see your loved one in the hospital to only 2-3% of gay couples....and that's not very equal...or even moral.
BUT I also believe that Roberts left this for last so he'd have cover for some of the other very corporate/racist...yes even on the brink of fascist decisions coming out of this court.
So, what am I basing this statement on? Read on:
First the Voting Rights Act demolition. Please remember that this law was reaffirmed in 2006 under George Bush overwhelmingly(98-0 in Senate, over 400 ayes in the House) and kept the more stringent sights of the DOJ on 9 states that have been known for their inability to play fair consistently(Alabama, Mississippi, Texas, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, South Carolina, Virginia). The Act was written(in 1965), to address the entrenched racial discrimination in voting rights across the country and banned any "standard, practice or procedure" that resulted "in a denial or abridgement of the right of any citizen to vote on account of race or color", and although this part applies nationwide, Section 4 addressed only parts of the country, those states that required literacy "tests" or other discriminating requirements to be able to register to vote. Section 5 states that voting procedures cannot take place unless the DOJ approves these changes. This part of the law was to expire in 5 years, but has been reauthorized several times, always with a large majority of congress backing the extension.
Now, the Roberts court comes to a decision that POOF! its unconstitutional. And think the Congress should rewrite Section 4...yes, this congress, the one that's voted to overturn ObamaCare 38 times, voted to take away reproductive choices and other rights of women over 300 times and not one vote on jobs/economy/etc.  They want the republicon controlled do nothing but whine congress to fix the Voting Acts Rights. And I do agree that this should be fixed, Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin, Indiana(all under teabaggercon control) have done the same shit as Texas, Mississippi and Alabama, but I truly doubt our ability to fix it at this time...so, The People lose. Oh..and of the 9 states that are involved, 6 of them already have legislation in the works to radically limit people's ability to vote.  Racists 1, We the People 0.
Speaking of racists, there are 2 other decisions that go for racists/bigots: VANCE v. BALL STATE UNIVERSITY is dealing with workplace harassment of a black woman by a white woman, who did have a higher job title, but was not her supervisor. Now, I'm not very sure about the validity of the case, it seemed that there was a personality issue between the two women, rather than overt racism(although the white woman could have known how far to take it without calling the other woman names), but the court ruled that as long as an employer did something about the harassment(as in tell one to play nice, I guess), and as long as the harasser could not hire/fire the person that was being harassed, it wasn't really an issue...again, looking at this case, I don't think it warranted a Supreme Court Decision, but then taking a "bad" case just to affirm less workplace remedies for employees wouldn't be below the Roberts court. Bigots/Corporations 2/1, We The People 0.
UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS SOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL CENTER v. NASSAR Again, we have discrimination, this time religious and national origin. The plaintiff, Dr. Nassar(hired in 1995) alleges that he was a victim of harassment by a supervisor(although not his immediate supervisor), Dr. Levine(hired in 2004). He being Arab and Muslim, she being Jewish and...Jewish; Dr. Levine going so far as to say, "Middle Easterners are lazy" and other blatantly bigoted comments. Dr. Nassar went to the head of the department, Dr. Fisk< and reported this and, in the end, negotiated a settlement that he would only work in the hospital, he would not teach classes(which is where Dr.Levine had the most control). Dr. Fisk decided that Dr. Nassar had aired his grievances too publicly and had hurt Dr. Levine's reputation and forced the hospital to refuse to hire Dr. Nassar. Now, Dr. Nassar won his suit in the lower courts, but SCOTUS again decided in favor of discrimination because, although they did not disagree that Dr. Levine was, in fact, a bigot and causing a hostile work environment, she had nothing to do with him losing the hospital job. Bigots/Corporations 3/2, We the People 0.
Also, FISHER V. U of T-AUSTIN: Ms. Fisher was not  selected for placement at UT-Austin and decided it was because of race, not other facts such as that she did not score as high on placement. In Texas, public colleges allow the top 10% of all high schools placement. In the year that Fisher applied, there were over 29,000 applicants for under 8000 seats. Texas' placement procedure is 2 pronged, first the top 10% of all high schools, a holistic metric of the individual student which includes grades, leadership and work experience, extracurricular activity, adversity the student has come through and, since 2004, race is included in this metric. This is what Ms. Fisher attacked; she did not measure up in grades(and within this criteria, she not only placed under 10% in her school, but many of the minority high school applicants).
Now, being fair, Texas' demographics in 2010 census showed that its population broke down, racially, as such: 45% white, 37% Hispanic, 12% African American. The University's population? 77% White, 17% Hispanic and 4.5% African American...Hmm, doesn't seem so bad for white folks, eh?
So, Ms. Fisher goes through the 2 lower courts and is denied by both courts, saying that the school did not base solely on race, the school's were doing the right thing. SCOTUS? Well, they did not affirm Ms. Fisher's claim, just decided that the lower courts did not scrutinize this race business well enough and threw it back to the Appeals court, where, it can be decided in the same manner and go back up to SCOTUS or the Appeals court can decide the way SCOTUS wants them to...and, no I didn't read Thomas' dissent...AKA a waste of paper. Bigots 4, We The People 0.
And let's not forget about drugs, no the real drug problem in America is MUTUAL PHARMACEUTICAL CO. v. BARTLETT involving generic drugs, you know the ones that all insurance companies require or you pay extra? Well, the "extra" for formulary just may have gotten cheaper, if you value your life. In this case, the Supreme Court concluded that generic drugs do not have to make the buyer beware of side effects if the side effects were discovered after the drug has entered into the generic market. So, we consumers must not only read all of the crap inside the box, but then go to the original medications website and check that? And that's good legal reasoning????  Corporations 3, We the People 0.
So, all in all, you can get married in 13 states if you are gay, but you can still be discriminated against in all 50 for being gay, female, of different color, of different religious preference and SCOTUS has limited those remedies...and if you end up getting ill from all of this crap? Don't take generic medication cuz SCOTUS decided that generics have the right to kill or maim you without discretion....lovely....
When the fuck is Alito and Scalia retiring?????