Changin’ His Black Robes to White

scalia kagan

Antonin Scalia feels safe enough to drop the mask:

Scalia: Voting Rights Act Is ‘Perpetuation Of Racial Entitlement’ 

WASHINGTON, DC — There were audible gasps in the Supreme Court’s lawyer’s lounge, where audio of the oral argument is pumped in for members of the Supreme Court bar, when Justice Antonin Scalia offered his assessment of a key provision of the Voting Rights Act.

And what, pray tell, was that? Watch Scalia’s mental processes at work, 2+2=5, unanimous is suspicious since it CAN’T be sincere, up is down and a Judge’s black robes are actually a white ones (minus, perhaps, a hood):

And this last enactment [of the Voting Rights Act, reauthorized in 2007], not a single vote in the Senate against it. And the House is pretty much the same. Now, I don’t think that’s attributable to the fact that it is so much clearer now that we need this. I think it is attributable, very likely attributable, to a phenomenon that is called perpetuation of racial entitlement. It’s been written about. Whenever a society adopts racial entitlements, it is very difficult to get out of them through the normal political processes.


Supreme Court (behind loons)

Parenthetical: “whenever a society adopts racial entitlements” is an extremely disturbing usage, implying either that the radical experiment in peoples of all races and creeds living in equality has been tried LOTS of times before (which is INSANE: we’re cutting-edge, folks), or else that “racial entitlements” means something entirely different and darker. It continues:

I don’t think there is anything to be gained by any Senator to vote against continuation of this act. And I am fairly confident it will be reenacted in perpetuity unless — unless a court can say it does not comport with the Constitution. You have to show, when you are treating different States differently, that there’s a good reason for it…. [emphasis added]

In other words, them darkies gots de white massas in Congress so ASKEERT that no one would DARE vote against reauthorization of the Voting Rights Act.


If you have a better translation, I’d like to hear it. Unanimity denotes coercion? (How many unanimous SCOTUS decisions are there every year, Mr. Injustice? Are they ALL now suspect and obviously coerced? And, if so, who is coercing you? Your Grand Kleagle?)

pirate john

This is not hyperbolic. This is a dark and noxious sophistry, turning unanimity into something dark and ugly, meaning its OPPOSITE, and ONLY the Supremes can SAVE America from this dark, coercive force of racial entitlement.

perpetuation of racial entitlement

After all, racially entitled Emmett Till  framed all them White crackers by forcing them to murder him horribly, just the same way the decent White, Christian Gentlemen of Philadelphia Mississippi were tricked into destroying their lives and way of life for generations by those three racially entitled civil rights workers — some of whom weren’t even BLACK!!!?! — luring the White Christian Gentlemen into murdering them and burying their bodies in an earthen dam.

perpetuation of racial entitlement


Four hundred years of horrific abuse of Blacks (not to mention the treatment of all the OTHER racial, ethnic and religious groups, because, in fact, we never DO) is now over and the darkies is UPPITY! In forty eight years since the 1965 Voting Rights Act, and in the face of blatant attempts to suppress the Black vote in state after state in the last, Citizens United-colored elections, Antonin Scalia has the temerity to mock minorities that have NEVER gotten a fair shake, yet, as “Racially Entitled”?

perpetuation of racial entitlement

He throws out a casual reference to reading about it, and I presume it’s a Regnery Press “best-seller” (i.e. all copies have been bought by a foundation as freebies to shove it up the bestseller charts) by the guy who wrote The Bell Curve.


But, for the moment, what we have seen is crazy, the unmasked beast snarling that, well, THEM NIGGAZ IZ ENTIZZLE!

Oh, Pizzle.

And, they have INTIMIDATED Congress into unanimous votes and America can ONLY be saved by Antonin Scalia in his white robes, riding with his Four Horsemen of the Cathocalypse.

Yee haw.

red mass roberts

I mean, this is worse than nuts: it’s nuts with the nut’s finger on the trigger of a .223 assault rifle.

perpetuation of racial entitlement

Two plus two equals five, Mr. Smith. You see that now, don’t you?

scary 1984 math in tour poster

We have at least one Supreme Court Justice who has vacated the Real World for a grander estate in Ideology Wonderland.

cofcc_250x117 banner ad

The case? One of the counties in Alabama with one of the WORST records in civil rights, one of those very counties the original Voting Rights Act was written to deal with has brought a suit all the way to the Supreme Court claiming that their (and I quote from the audio I heard earlier) “sovereign State’s Rights” are bein’ REPRESSED and the evil ol’ gum’mint needs to be stopped. (Sounds secesh to me.)

perpetuation of racial entitlement

Southern GOP

Scalia? Those entitled racialists have intimidated the Congress into reauthorizing the 1965 Voting Rights law.

Holy crap, Batman.

vote north and south

Speaking of unanimous decisions:

The Supreme Court decided unanimously to screw the Securities and Exchange Commission regulators by deciding that the clock starts running on the Statute of Limitations when the crime occurred and not when it is discovered, which was what the SEC was arguing.  Yea team! Go CROOKS! Rah! Rah!

(Ever notice how this is like the Warren Court for Corporations? Always expanding the rights of the accused corporation, but restricting the rights of the accused individual?)

Your Owners

Of course, by Scalia’s formulation, it was a coerced decision. (Wonder who did the coercin’?)

Except that the Supreme Court can’t save us from that.

Wonder how that outfit looks with the hood.




About these ads


Filed under Uncategorized

2 responses to “Changin’ His Black Robes to White

  1. Yeah, the SCOTUS we have….wow, checks and balance? Not so much. Fat Tony needs to go.

  2. Wild Bill

    What can you expect when the corporatists own all three branches of govt.?