My Lord What a Court!

by Ruth A. Sheets

I am not sure how many people watched the Senate “hearing” for Brett Kavanaugh after his nomination to the Supreme Court by Donald Trump a couple of years ago.  I was pretty sure Trump would pick people for the Court who were somehow problematic, and the hearing exposed what kind of problematic guy he picked. 

Trump had already, with the help of Mitch McConnell, shoved through Justice Neil Gorsuch, someone they hoped would be “ordinary” enough to placate non-conservatives and throw them off the track of what would come next.

From the beginning of the Kavanaugh “hearing” we who actually paid attention knew there was a problem with what was going on, the disrespect shown Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, who had accused Kavanaugh of attempted sexual assault, the childish behavior of Kavanaugh and his pathetic answers to sensible questions, the ignoring of the other women who had legitimate complaints about the nominee’s behavior, his whining about beer. 

We didn't know at that time that the FBI, our high-quality law enforcement agency in the Department of Justice was cheating all of us of the knowledge of what was really going on around Kavanaugh.  The FBI is supposed to thoroughly investigate all nominees for high-level positions.  This time, they didn’t.  Inquiring minds want to know why.

I have read different accounts of how many tips related to Kavanaugh came into the FBI that were not followed up.  I am guessing it is somewhere between the low of 400 and the high of 4,000 tips.  How is that possible?  Was there interference with the FBI by the administration, from the Justice Department,  or from within the FBI itself?  In any case, that does not bode well for the FBI being separate from a current administration.  It’s like going back to the “good ole days” of J. Edgar Hoover whose corruption of the FBI was massive and generally permitted by each administration for 50 years.  Pick and choose who will be investigated and which evidence to present.

Without addressing the “tips” that came into the FBI related to Kavanaugh, he should never have had a hearing at all.  The information was not available so senators could make an informed decision about putting him on our highest court.  No problem, right?  Republicans in the Senate with Mitch McConnell in the lead chose to ignore everything negative about Kavanaugh because they wanted to own the Court.  Qualifications or past behavior for them seemed irrelevant as long as the candidate was a guaranteed vote for whatever corporate America wants.  Republican senators never had to state their purpose to put women, the poor, Black voters, and others who are not rich white men and corporations in their place.  That was a given.  And, that is not a new Phenomenon either, although highly developed under Mr. Trump.

We can expect that presidents want to put justices on the Supreme Court who reflect their own understanding of “fairness,” their own ideological position.  And, it is possible to learn quite a bit about a president and the people he surrounded himself with by the nominees he has chosen for the Court. 

Lyndon Johnson punctuated his position on Civil Rights by appointing Thurgood Marshall, the first Black justice, a Civil Rights icon.  George H.W. Bush appointed Marshall’s successor, of course, Clarence Thomas, a Black man, but one who would take the “majority” position related to race whenever possible, and a sexual harasser too, and a Catholic, a conservative bonus when religion comes before the Court.    Bush chucked the Black community under the chin with Clarence Thomas, clearly implying, “see I appointed a Black justice for you.”  (So what if he has little experience and erroneously thinks he got where he is totally without help.)

In case Americans weren’t aware of his deep racism, Richard Nixon attempted to appoint to the Court two judges, Clement Haynsworth and G. Harrold Carswell, who had histories of racist positions while on the lower courts.  Fortunately, the Senate rejected both, a very rare occurrence for any Senate.

Ronald Reagan nominated Judge Antonin Scalia, who believed that somehow he could discern what the Founders would decide about everything brought before the Court (originalist) and that this was the only way to rule on cases.  That, of course is nonsense since the Founders weren’t always sure what they themselves meant.  It made it seem that his pronouncements were straight from the minds of James Madison or Alexander Hamilton or . . ..  Since by the time Scalia was nominated, Reagan was already seriously impacted by Alzheimer’s it is unclear who put Scalia forward.  Reagan was OK with it though.  Scalia was brilliant, you know, not too fond of rights for women, immigrants, minority citizens, but brilliant.

Bill Clinton nominated Ruth Bader Ginsburg who had a lot of experience and a long history of standing for human rights, women’s rights in particular.  Clinton was trying to show his acknowledgment of women’s importance in society, possibly to make up for the scandals he had been caught up in.  When Ginsburg passed, Trump was president, a well-known misogynist.  Just as Bush Senior got Thomas onto the Court to slap down Black Americans with one of their own, Trump nominated an inexperienced woman, Amy Coney Barrett  who could be counted on to rule against women whenever possible.  She is a good little Catholic too and will stand with the patriarchal Church to do their bidding, particularly against women’s right to choose.  She was barely investigated at all because McConnell and his Senate allies had to push her approval through in case he wasn’t majority leader after the election.  He just made up the rules as he went along, impacting the Court for years.

George Bush the younger nominated Samuel Alito, the son of immigrants who believes only the “right” immigrants should come here and those on the Southern border are not they.  A Catholic too, he can jump in to see that Catholic plaintiffs or defendants will get exactly what they want, most of the time.  That LGBTQ thing is still a thorn in his side, though.

My Lord what a Court, probably no better than the Court was throughout most of our history.  That is not a compliment, though because we now need thinking, caring people on the Court no matter whether conservative, liberal or neither.  What we now have is a 6-3 conservative majority, 6 Catholic members, 2 Jewish members, and 1 Episcopalian, not exactly representative of the United States religious population.

The religion of the justices should not be an issue, but alas, it is and has seriously impacted the justices’ rulings.  It is sad for all of us because the American Catholic Church has become more and more conservative over the past 40 years or so, threatening to ex-communicate any Catholic who does not agree with their oppressive stances in issues from women’s rights to immigration, to Black history to religious freedom/separation of church and state, to the environment and more.  Our Founders were worried that religion could have an outsized influence on our government.  Their worry may be justified with our current Supreme Court, not representative of the American people.  Well, maybe it is, 2 men legitimately accused of sexual harassment, a misogynistic woman, an immigrant-despising son of immigrants, a couple of careful thinkers who are blanked by the biases of the others, a couple who had working-class upbringings. 

However, in other ways, the Court is quite different from the American people, Nearly all the Justices attended one of two law schools.  In addition, all are in some way privileged.  7 are white, 3 are women, 1 is Hispanic and 1 Black.  That is not the configuration of the United States.

Poll after poll reports that the American people want the right of women to choose regarding reproduction.  We want sensible gun laws and do not believe money is speech.  No one should be above the law and global warming is real so corporations need to stop polluting with greenhouse gas.  Voting should be an automatic right of all US citizens.  The conservatives on the Court go along with none of these things, probably because the corporations who helped nurture them do not and because their church does not either.  Too many rights for the unworthy.

I hope the Court can be enlarged and that terms on the Court are limited to 18 years when the justices can either retire or move to another of the Federal courts.  That would hopefully help us to get more variety on the court with decisions that increase or enhance the rights of more Americans than just rich, straight, Evangelical or Catholic white men. 

Sometimes, I think our Supreme Court is a bit of a joke played on the American people, that is not very funny:  a Black justice who hates Black people; a conservative woman who hates women and is just about as confining to women (except herself, of course) as some Medieval rulers; a man whose family were immigrants but because Italians are now seen as white, resents and wants to exclude non-white immigrants; a Chief Justice who claims to care about the rights of citizens while he stands against voting rights - Oh, he's pretty racist too; and a sexual harasser- possible abuser - who never was fully checked out by the FBI or anyone else for that matter except perhaps the Federalist Society, not a good judge of judges’ quality, just political ideology. 

This week, the Court ruled the Centers for Disease Control had no right to set a moratorium on evictions, even during a pandemic with a 6-3 decision, and you can guess which 6.  Yep, rich justices saying a health organization can’t decide how to keep people safe during a pandemic because landlords don’t like it.  I can’t wait to see their rulings on mask mandates.

My Lord what a Court!

OPEN LETTER TO SENATOR PAT TOOMEY

by Ruth A. Sheets

Hello Sen. Toomey. 

Well, you've got all the Republican talking points down related to your opposition to the voting rights act HR/S1.  One might think that since you are retiring you might want to leave a legacy of civil rights but alas, that is not in the cards, is it?

Your fake worries about not being able to remove voters who have died or moved is just that, fake.  Republican governors and secretaries of state are not purging roles just to get rid of folks who have died or moved.  They are working hard to target voters of color who maybe haven't voted in a while or don't get mail delivered to their homes and those who use P.O. boxes.  I am sorry, but purging over 200,000 in one state and 180,000 voters from roles in another is unacceptable.  Not that many voters have died or moved that have not been reported.    

Your worry that votes will be "harvested," another word to stir up the Republican base has happened so rarely there is only one case that anyone can cite and that was Republican cheating in North Carolina.  It was caught and corrected.  That is what would and has happened.  Then, claiming people signing to say who they are is a problem is another fearmongering tactic and you should know that.  But, if you are so concerned, put money in the bill that would help states to pay for and get state approved ID cards for everyone.  I suspect college ID cards are at least as good as gun licenses but look at the states that won't allow them but allow the other.  Your fears are nonsense!

Then you seem to be worried about integrity of the elections.  Sure you are!  Where were you when Arizona Republicans forced the state to allow a bunch of fools to recount votes, of course, from the county with the most people of color, sure those people had cheated when it was those allowed to recount the votes who were cheating.  And, now, the voting machines have been compromised and will have to be replaced, for a whole lot of money Arizona doesn't have.  I didn't hear you stand up and speak against that and realize that such nonsense will be taking place regularly without S1.  Would you be OK with that happening in our state?  Well another fool from a  nowhere county is trying to challenge the votes in Philadelphia, oh wait!  where a large population of voters of color live.  Are you noting a pattern here?

Then, there's campaign finance.  No Republicans nor the Supreme Court has been able to adequately explain how money is speech.  It isn't.  It's money and can be gotten in a whole lot of ways that are not above boards.  You know that, so why is it a person or corporation with lots of money should have more opportunity of speech than one of your poorest constituents.  You can't because this is America and is supposed to be a democracy where everyone should have equal say.  $400 million paid in elections as some Republican rich guys have done is far more speech than your poor and even middle class constituents can "speak."  How is that fair.  It isn't, but it allows lots of people to cheat and since that is the Republican MO lately, I guess it works for you.  That's a shame because you know it isn't fair but will go along because that is the party line. 

Then you are worried about 1.8 billion dollars as public support for candidates as a bad use of funds.  Are you kidding me!! You have ignored a lot of bills that would have helped people in need.  I know you always had an excuse, but you quibble over 1.8 billion to actually get more people involved in the election process.  Hmmm!

Then you just had to bring in state's rights!  Wow!  You really did get all the points.  States' rights is always used to protect states doing some kind of actions that would hurt some of their citizens, usually citizens of color.  That is what Republicans are doing right now, even in Pennsylvania, at least they are trying here, limiting the ability to vote of Black citizens and other citizens of color as well as young people, poor working people, disabled people, and others who can't run out and vote at the traditional times.  You know that's racist, but Republicans cling to their love of states' rights even with its dark history. 

I know this note will not reach you, but maybe one of your staffers might see that your positions are simply not reasonable.  Your positions and opposition to HR1/S1 may give you comfort as you stand against even discussing voting rights in the Senate, but as a Catholic, you should know that even lying to yourself could be considered a sin.      

Oh by the way, your positions on immigration are not fair either.  I get it you think your grandparents came here “the right way” but in reality, they were white and employers here wanted white folks from anywhere, even Ireland, before they wanted Black people even though Black people have been here for hundreds of years.  How is that more “right” than people coming here to escape violence and possible starvation?  I am sure you have an answer for that which works for you too.  

TYRANNY OF IGNORANCE

by Ruth A. Sheets

I recently read an article in “The New York Times” (nyts.com) “New Racism Won’t Solve the Old Racism” by Bret Stephens that stopped me cold.  It was an argument I don’t remember hearing before, but probably should have expected it. 

Mr. Stephens claims that if our government or anyone else works to mitigate racism by targeting FOR ASSISTANCE the people who have been consistently discriminated against for hundreds of years, it is a new form of racism because race is the criterion used.  He claims that if there is a bill to help Black farmers specifically (You know, the farmers who had their land, what little there was allowed to be theirs, taken from them in a variety of violent “legal” and extra-legal ways, it would be discriminating against white farmers.  Also, if Mayor Lightfoot of Chicago proposed programs to specifically address the systemic problems of the Black community in Chicago, white Chicagoans would feel the sting of discrimination (racism, you know).

Wow!  The sheer ignorance of what racism is boggles the mind, or at least my mind.  Racism is the systematic discrimination through means such as segregation, inequality, abuse, etc., on the part of the race in power toward those of races not in power.  With that definition in mind, how is attempting to make up for past discrimination racist?  In a word or two, it’s not.  Mr. Stephens paraphrased Chief Justice John Roberts, not exactly a reliable source for knowledge and understanding of racism, “Thinking we can stop discrimination on the basis of race without discriminating on the basis of race” He doesn’t actually finish the thought because what Roberts and Stephens are trying to say or imply makes no sense.  Their “ignorance” of racism is what one might expect of people who know nothing of the law, BUT Roberts is supposed to be a legal expert. 

Such warped thinking generally accompanies those who see white as the superior race and maintaining that superiority as the most important thing.  They claim there might be a way to build up Black people at the same time they help white people, and that this is the only way to proceed.  Theoretically, it could happen, after all, Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid improved conditions for Black and white citizens, but due to job discrimination and other factors, the federal programs have never served all races equally.  That’s racism even if that was not the intent.  Also, tax breaks for the rich, mostly white folks rarely trickle down to anyone, particularly not to Black people, ever.

Whenever food stamps or other aid programs are expanded, the white base is carefully reminded that it is mostly going to Black people (which it isn’t) activating a racist response from white people who can’t imagine why funds are given to Black people who unlike them, are lazy, wasteful . . .  Again, white people are kept ignorant of the truth.

Ignorance reigns as a kind of tyrant in our society.  It probably always has, but lately, it seems to be deeply enshrined and gaining strength in the Republican party.   Members are quite proud of their ignorance, or at least the ignorance of their base which they have carefully cultivated with the tacit permission of that base.  All kinds of lies and conspiracy theories keep the ignorance alive and well and fully functioning.

Are Republicans really ignorant of what racism is and the levels of discrimination perpetrated upon people of color in this country?  Perhaps, but it is doubtful.  I believe They know perfectly well what racism is and know that what they are doing to their base is racist, telling vulnerable white people that they are the ones being discriminated against.  Their goal, make their base resentful enough to act as the leaders direct, too ignorant to even question.

Were Republican leaders ignorant of the probable impact of their anti-COVID vaccine stance or did they know exactly what they were doing?  If they knew, why did they encourage a whole lot of people to die of a disease we actually have a vaccine for, then vilify Anthony Fauci and others for telling the truth? 

Were Republicans ignorant of the lack of voter fraud in the 2020 election or did they use the Big Lie to manipulate the emotions of their base, speaking in hyperbole that incorrectly told them of a situation that didn’t actually exist?  Why did they need to produce (or share) over 400 bills in nearly every state to suppress the votes of vulnerable populations?  It is a plot to make sure the ongoing discrimination against people of color and the ignorance of the white base can continue unabated.  Republican leaders and their allies should have to prove without doubt  voter fraud is occurring and that their proposals will definitely improve people’s ability to vote in order to pass such laws , but they never seem to be held accountable for anything, and the conservative Supreme Court is right there with them.

Were Republicans ignorant of Russian interference in our elections of 2016 and 2020 or did they feel such a need to protect Donald Trump, they lied to promote the ignorance of a whole lot of people, while pretending their own ignorance of foreign interference?   

Are Democrats, including President Biden ignorant of Republican inability to work in a bipartisan way to help the American people or are they just willing to allow themselves to be manipulated to prove a point that anyone paying attention already knows, that Republicans can’t govern?  if so, why?  President Biden says that if the filibuster were gone, Congress would “be thrown into chaos and nothing would get done.”  OMG, nothing is getting done now because Republicans don’t know how to govern responsibly.  What is the difference?  And, without the filibuster, things would get done.  Mr. Biden should know better.

As a teacher, it disturbs me that so many in our nation are standing for ignorance, even in our public schools, although in some disadvantaged communities, that has been a problem for a long time.  In 1925, a teacher, John Scopes was on trial in Tennessee for teaching evolution, an established scientific theory even at that time.  He lost in a crazy show trial where the ignorance on the winning side was fully evident.  Many supporters of state-approved ignorance are still trying to get some form of anti-evolution taught in our schools though our kids will be the losers.  Are those pushing for the anti-evolution programs ignorant of how evolution impacts our lives every day or are they employing their power to promote a set of thinking that they can weaponize, no matter how completely inaccurate and a crossing of the line between religion and state?

Ignorance has led states to make laws that “critical race theory” (CRT) can’t be taught in schools.  Do legislators even know what that is when they vote for the legislation?  I think not!  It has become a quick abbreviation (CRT) that communicates to their base that there must be some kind of  devious plot by people of color against white folks.  Again the base’s ignorance serves the Republican leadership well.  In reality, Critical Race Theory has until now mostly been a scholarly enterprise.  It attempts to look at the ways race has become and continues to be embedded in all aspects of our society and some ways to look at the challenges that presents to us today.  Some parts of that learning could be included in high school curricula, possibly government classes or sociology, not a kindergarten subject.  Children should learn our history in all its glory and tragedy as they are able to understand it, which is not critical race theory, just history.  Politicizing something one is completely ignorant about is disturbing and an ongoing challenge.  And, by the way, it’s also racist.

Trying to keep people ignorant through misinformation has been done before and continues to be part of life in many parts of the world.  It works because it stokes fear, anger and resentment that can be easily manipulated toward actions the manipulators choose.  January 6^th is an example of this.  We will be watching the trials of those who participated and their arguments, “Trump told us the election was stolen and we had to ‘stop the steal.’”  I always heard that “ignorance is no excuse in the law.”  I suspect despite their actions, most of the insurgents will be let off with a slap on the wrist because the powers that be are OK with ignorance, especially if it is white.

People have access to information if they know how to or choose to pursue it, even in many countries that promote ignorance.  That, of course, is what scares men in power.  The people may no longer want to wallow in ignorance.  It is human nature to want to discover things and learn what is real, what is true.  In response, the ignorance purveyors will employ even more sophisticated techniques and their judicial supporters will permit it because that is why they are in the positions they hold.

We are an open society.  Therefore, each of us has the responsibility to educate ourselves about what is going on, to acknowledge our ignorance, and to figure out how to acquire the knowledge to dispel that ignorance.  Our task is to help to lessen the ignorance of our children into the future.  Lying to them or allowing others to lie to them fearing they might feel some guilt and coddling them with comforting misinformation are a betrayal of our commitment to them.

We need to remove ignorance from its current throne and replace it with truth, knowledge, and understanding.  remember, ignorance is only bliss for the ones using it and benefiting from it. 

I Wonder

by Ruth A. Sheets

I’VE spent a lot of time THESE PAST 5 YEARS OR SO completing and signing petitions related to the issues I care about most.  One theme that comes up often lately in my responses is, “why am I begging for a right that all American citizens, all human beings should already have?”.  Recently, I realized there are a lot of things I am wondering about.

I remember back in my simpler days when I wondered why the sky is blue and what I would do over summer break.  Of course, today’s wonderings seem to me more complex because the answers can’t be found in a science text or resolved by my own choices.  These are some of my wonderings today.  Feel free to add to them with some of yours.

I wonder . . .   

- why we the people have to beg our representatives for the most basic right of being a citizen, the right to vote unimpeded by political partisanship so one party, (these days, the Republicans) can gather and consolidate power they have not earned. 

- How is it vote suppressors are allowed to get away with voter suppression.  I know part of it is that our Supreme Court  does not seem to be able to be trusted to do the right thing for anyone but rich white Christian (OK claiming to be Christian) men and their corporations.  I know that was not what the founders had in mind, but they who cry that they are originalists simply lie because what they are really deciding is what is comfortable for themselves and what gives themselves the most prestige with their masters, the rich white "Christian" men and corporations.  That doesn’t fully explain it, though, so I still wonder.

- how Republicans believe they should have power even though they have to cheat and lie to get it, and no one seems willing to stop them, even Democrats.

- why we the people haven't risen to vote out the representatives at all levels who regularly lie to constituents.  Oh wait, their cheating, lying, and voter suppression may be giving them edges in certain states, like maybe Texas, Iowa, others while they challenge votes in states that have actually proven their integrity related to the vote.  This does not explain this completely either.

- why a president we just elected to right the wrongs of the previous administration has done so little, even in the areas where he has power.

- how it is that Donald Trump is never held accountable for anything he does.  This has led to a lot of likeminded people trying to follow his game plan, whatever that is to keep themselves from accountability too.

- how 74 million people voted for an impeached president who clearly committed the crime the Republicans in the Senate refused to acknowledge.

- why we, an enormously wealthy nation allow children to be raised in poverty, a condition that warps the spirit as well as the abilities of those who live it, then, we blame them for their condition.

- why medical care is not available to every person in this country.  Not covering everyone ends up costing more than if we did in work days lost to illness, and pro bono coverage by hospitals of those who are not covered.

- why we have allowed tech corporations to become huge and able to control all areas of life, nearly unregulated and with little evidence of any kind of positive ethics related to the people who use their services or are employed by them.

- why so little is being done related to the size and complexity of global warming, to stop its progress and reverse its effects, even in the face of massive wildfires, storms, and flooding.

- how it is we the American nation have not fallen under the weight of our own divisiveness, selfishness, and nationalistic foolishness.

- why so many people refuse to get vaccinated when it is clear that is the best way to protect oneself and others from a destructive disease.  They whine that they should have control over their own body and should be able to decide what happens to it.  OMG, isn’t that what women have claimed for generations about their bodies and reproductive freedom?  Perhaps that “right” only goes for men and conservatives, not those pesky women.  

- why white people are so afraid of everyone who is not white, so persist in trying to limit the rights and opportunities of people of color and won’t acknowledge that is what they are doing.

- why gaslighting (telling people they are not experiencing what they are experiencing) is so popular among leaders these days.  I am guessing it’s because it works, but I don’t understand why we let it work.  Republicans now claim the January 6^th insurrection was just some loving peaceful tourists visiting the Capitol (OK, even if that were true, due to COVID, tourists were not permitted in the capital building).  Can they not see what is in the videos taken even by their own attackers? 

- How Republicans get away with calling bills in Congress  and their PACs and organizations opposite of what the bill or organization actually does. (e.g., the “Freedom to Vote” bill was really the freedom to exclude people of color, young people, and students from voting act).

- how Christians can claim to be Christian while supporting leaders who don’t follow any of the teachings of Jesus:  do unto others . . ., welcome the stranger, give to Caesar what is Caesar’s, do good to those who hurt you, care for the orphans and widow (not deport them), love your neighbor as yourself, and so on.  They even support candidates who don’t even begin to follow the Ten Commandments which Evangelical Christians claim to love so dearly.

- why so many white men believe they need guns, not only in their homes to “protect their castle,” but also in their car, and in their pocket, but don’t want other groups to have the same privilege and are OK when police kill a Black man for having a registered gun.

- police officers believe they should be immune from responsibility for whatever they do on duty.  People in most other jobs don’t have that privilege, except maybe Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg, and the people who got pardoned by Donald Trump.  The police are supposed to be our employees, not our intimidators and killers.

- why so many white people claim they don’t have a racist bone in their bodies, then do or support racist actions, like voter suppression and denying funds to stop poverty.  I am thinking maybe it’s because they actually don’t have “a” racist bone, but a whole racist skeleton, and it is hidden inside, but I am not sure.

- why I am a chocoholic and don’t want to be relieved of my addiction.

I’ll keep wondering and hope you will too so we can bring our wonderings to our people in power.  I will not apologize for my biases in this set of wonderings because that is where I am right now and want change that will make a difference for all, not just the privileged few.