Ah Faux Lesbians! Who doesn’t love ‘em in the movies? What RNC member doesn’t love ‘em at bondage-themed WeHo Nightclubs?
Of course they’re not likely to play Delibes there.
But when it comes to Real Life and the Supreme Court. . .
“Why is this even an issue? The people who won’t like Obama’s choice, whoever that is, on political/ideological grounds, would be the same people who would care about sexual orientation. And it’s not like this person would be the first gay Supreme Court Justice anyway.”
“It’s a journalistic issue because you shouldn’t be declaring the solicitor general of the United States to be gay unless you can prove that’s true. I don’t see why it’s relevant in any event, especially in light of the fact that Elena Kagan hasn’t yet become a Supreme Court nominee. Personally, I don’t know anything about her sexual orientation and I don’t care. But it is an undeniable fact that if Obama were to nominate an openly gay person to the high court, that would be a significant part of the story – as it was when the first black and female justices were named – and some conservatives would oppose a nominee on those grounds alone.”
Let’s Deconstruct, shall we?
“you shouldn’t be declaring the solicitor general of the United States to be gay unless you can prove that’s true.”
And what would constitute “proof”?
If she does the Full Oprah ?
If there are videos of her and another woman up on You Tube?
If Andrew Breitbart accepts the videos that are up on You Tube ?
“I don’t see why it’s relevant in any event, especially in light of the fact that Elena Kagan hasn’t yet become a Supreme Court nominee.”
What’s with the “especially” Howie?
Hell, what’s with the “in any event”?
A lesbian Supreme means something to you. Something just awful.
“Personally, I don’t know anything about her sexual orientation and I don’t care.”
(Of course you know what’s coming next)
“I don’t care” is right up there with “The check is in the mail” and “I promise not to come in your mouth” as one of the All-Time Greatest Fucking Lies.
Breeders claim not to “care” because they know perfectly well what it can mean when people in positions of power DO care.
“Clay and his partner of 20 years, Harold, lived in California. Clay and Harold made diligent efforts to protect their legal rights, and had their legal paperwork in place—wills, powers of attorney, and medical directives, all naming each other. Harold was 88 years old and in frail medical condition, but still living at home with Clay, 77, who was in good health.
One evening, Harold fell down the front steps of their home and was taken to the hospital. Based on their medical directives alone, Clay should have been consulted in Harold’s care from the first moment. Tragically, county and health care workers instead refused to allow Clay to see Harold in the hospital. The county then ultimately went one step further by isolating the couple from each other, placing the men in separate nursing homes.
Ignoring Clay’s significant role in Harold’s life, the county continued to treat Harold like he had no family and went to court seeking the power to make financial decisions on his behalf. Outrageously, the county represented to the judge that Clay was merely Harold’s “roommate.” The court denied their efforts, but did grant the county limited access to one of Harold’s bank accounts to pay for his care.
What happened next is even more chilling: without authority, without determining the value of Clay and Harold’s possessions accumulated over the course of their 20 years together or making any effort to determine which items belonged to whom, the county took everything Harold and Clay owned and auctioned off all of their belongings. Adding further insult to grave injury, the county removed Clay from his home and confined him to a nursing home against his will. The county workers then terminated Clay and Harold’s lease and surrendered the home they had shared for many years to the landlord.
Three months after he was hospitalized, Harold died in the nursing home. Because of the county’s actions, Clay missed the final months he should have had with his partner of 20 years. Compounding this tragedy, Clay has literally nothing left of the home he had shared with Harold or the life he was living up until the day that Harold fell, because he has been unable to recover any of his property. The only memento Clay has is a photo album that Harold painstakingly put together for Clay during the last three months of his life.
With the help of a dedicated and persistent court-appointed attorney, Anne Dennis of Santa Rosa, Clay was finally released from the nursing home. Ms. Dennis, along with Stephen O’Neill and Margaret Flynn of Tarkington, O’Neill, Barrack & Chong, now represent Clay in a lawsuit against the county, the auction company, and the nursing home, with technical assistance from NCLR. A trial date has been set for July 16, 2010 in the Superior Court for the County of Sonoma.”
Yes this still happens in the era of Neil Patrick Harris, Adam Lambert, and Prom Kings Derrick Martin and Richard Goodman.
And then of course there’s —
(Back to Mr. Sheri)
“But it is an undeniable fact that if Obama were to nominate an openly gay person to the high court, that would be a significant part of the story – as it was when the first black and female justices were named – and some conservatives would oppose a nominee on those grounds alone.”
Aha! So this is the Obamacare we’ve been hearing so much about. Obama cares that a Bottom-Feeding Scumbag has tried to “smear” his potential nomonee (and isn’t it odd that eveyone acts as if Kagan’s Nomination to the Supremes is a fait accompli) with an “accusation?
And now in honor of Clay and Harold, and Derrick and Richard (and Constance too) — Cue Sondheim