Here Comes The Judge

.
My fellow Americans,

President Obama has nominated his second Supreme Court Justice today, United States Solicitor General Elena Kagan.

Now, selecting a Supreme Court Justice is almost entirely a political thing - pandering to your supporters and extending influence into the Judicial branch.  But it's also about paying off political loan sharks and balancing the books on unspoken deals made over handshakes and whispered promises. This was particularly true for me during my presidency.

You need to realize that getting nominated for president in 1968 was very different than today. There were only a handful of open primaries and most of the delegates needed in the convention were awarded through seedy deals made in small, dark rooms filled with sweaty men chomping on cigars, knocking back slugs of bourbon, and telling jokes about Jews and Blacks. These repulsive swine were small-minded men with selfish agendas who would deliver the necessary delegates but only if you agreed to repay at an astronomical vig.  I had to supplicate myself in front of these cheap hustlers, hat in hand, and make a lot of promises - particularly to a group of racist old ward-heelers from the south.  And when it came time for me to name my first supreme court justice, these yowling rednecks demanded repayment.

I knew that the sort of person a Klansman like Strom Thurmond wanted as Supreme Court Justice would be anathema to the rest of the country.  So, I would nominate a Bircher, Clement Haynsworth, or a repulsive hack like G. Harold Carswell, knowing full well that they would be rejected by the senate.  But the hayseeds and bumpkins couldn't complain, because I had tried to give them one of their own.  That was the Nixon way.  Game the system by following the letter of the agreement but not the spirit.

It's through that sort of prism we must view President Obama's recent nominee.  While he didn't have to face the degradation of kowtowing to a gang of ruthless thugs, he still had to make a pack of promises. So, which debt does Kagan pay off?

At first glance, Kagan seems to be a very shrewd choice to address the concerns of the Orthogonians in the middle of America.  A dowdy old lawyer with an all-American story of achieving success.  Since she's not a judge she has no track record of decisions that opponents can use against her. About the worst that could be said about her is that she seems very much a Franklin; a pointy-headed Dean of Harvard Law school who sits in an overstuffed leather chair, parsing out the subtleties and nuance of legal philosophy.

There is little doubt that she'll be confirmed.  The Democrats will force a vote before the mid-term elections, guaranteeing that they have the support needed to pass her through.  It's a safe pick with a safe strategy.

The thing is, however, Obama will have at least one more nomination before the 2012 election.  Justice Ginsburg is in ill health, and likely to retire after the next session.  Had I been in Obama's position, I would have made a more bold choice for this nominee, especially knowing I had the votes needed to confirm.  Save the safe pick for next year when you may need it.  Because from here on out, things will only get more contentious.  Particularly when/if he gets to replace one of the Raging Right: Scalia, Alito, Roberts, or Thomas.

That's when the real fun starts

 

Nixon is: Contemplative  

Tradition

.
My fellow Americans,

The dog days of the 2010 mid-term election are starting to really heat up.  The normal sniping and random shots across the DMZ have started to become coordinated and targeted.  Individuals are being pointed out, names are being called, accusations raised, and challenges leveled.

I love the smell of politics in the morning.

Yesterday, the NRCC (National Republican Campaign Committee) fired a shot across the DNC’s bow by claiming that they were “playing the race card from the bottom of the deck” because they (the Democrats) are working to bring out the minorities to vote in November.   The sheer balls of that statement is bewildering!  And, very gratifying to this old race-baiter.

Now, you have to understand that using race as a campaign strategy is an exceedingly delicate proposition. Back in 1966 when I was laying the foundation for my presidential run in ’68, I saw that the nation was ripe for using race as a tool to stoke the fires of Dread and Revulsion burning in the hearts of white people. Had I tried this in either ’64 or ’65 I would have been flogged like a heretic in the Inquisition. Just look at what happened to Goldwater and his cadre of Birchers and segregationists. But by 1966 race riots had been popping up in cities all over, and the radicals like Stokeley Carmichael had begun to give the equal rights movement a bad name.  The glow of the Great Society and the Civil Rights Act had vanished as white people started to feel as if the minorities were ungrateful for all that was done for them. The tide was turning and the Orthogonians just needed a spark to come alive.

 

And I was there, manipulating the deepest and most vile nightmares of Joe Sixpack and Sally Lunchpail.  The Franklins snickered at me, saying that people were sophisticated enough to realize that the unrest within the minority population was due to economic inequalities and entrenched social injustice.  They scoffed at the notion that white people would quiver in terror over the idea of integrating schools.  They mocked the idea that folks would be so gullible as to fall for such obvious and depraved tactics as preying on the myth of hulking Negro men defiling the flower of pure white innocence.

I love it when Franklins underestimate me.  My instincts were true.  The Orthogonians are sheep, easily led by exploiting their most primitive fears, and before you knew it the feeding frenzy was on.  The result was that Republicans had won the day in the ‘66 elections on the back of pure and unsoiled racial fear.

Now, as then, my fellow Republicans are turning to race, just as they have whenever things looked bleak over the past 40 years.  And once again the time is right.  Just look around: the bigotry, hatred, and prejudice among the right is close to boiling over.  Teabaggers are flaunting the same segregationist KKK slogans we used so skillfully in the 60’s – only more artfully disguised.  Propagandists are working overtime to insinuate ethnic causes for problems around the country.  And the disgust among conservatives regarding a non-white president is mouthwatering to someone clever enough to channel that Anger and Loathing for their own use.

So, the strategy of the NRCC attempting to whip up some reaction among white people by painting the Democrats as racist for working to get out the minority vote is the sign of returning to the tried and true – much the way a dog returns to his vomit.  And of course it doesn’t matter that it’s absolutely prima facie absurd.  In politics (like advertising) perception is reality.  It helps that the Orthogonians already believe these things. They just need someone to verbalize the lie to justify their hate and soothe their nascent consciences, so they can go out and act on their instinctive racism.  And trust me when I tell you that there are more of them than there are of you.

It’s nice to see that the Hebrews aren't the only ones with a sense of tradition.

Nixon is: Energized

Behind the Veil

Behind .

My fellow Americans, there has been a drawn-out brouhaha over in France regarding the whole question of mohammedan women wearing their face-scarves, and whether this somehow steps all over their rights.

There is a definite parallel between the upheaval in France today and the Negro uprisings we had in the late 60’s.  Both are instances of minorities not appreciating the society in which they live, nor comprehending or showing sufficient gratitude toward the inherent compassion and tolerance of the European mind.  It seems as if the more a government does for these people, the more they want, and the more violently they demand it.

The bleeding hearts, hippies, and liberals will certainly cry about all this and twist it into something to do with race.  They’ll wail that the face covering is a part of the mohammedan religion, and that forcing these people to discard it somehow treats them as not equal since it is okay for Hebrews to wear their beanies, or Christians to wear a cross.  This is, of course, nonsense and the sort of gobbledygook typically spouted by privileged left-wing Franklins. Neither beanies nor crosses hide one’s face (though those wild beards some orthodox Jews have come close). The left always seems so concerned about the rights of some minority group or other that they neglect the rights of the rest of us.  And unlike others, I stand with the good, honest, law-abiding citizens of both the United States and France.

Now, before you paint me as some sort of Bircher, let me just be perfectly clear: I supported the Civil Rights bill of 1964. And I supported the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Nixon was always a friend to the Negro, and in fact, some of my acquaintances were Negroes. But at some point enough has to be enough. When the Negroes in the 60’s began to riot that line was crossed.  And now, like then, the mohammedans in France have to realize that their demands can not infringe on the rights of Frenchmen, and that actions carry consequence.

Living in a civilization based on law and order requires compromise and tolerance.  And the French mohammedans, like the American Negro, have to realize that they must compromise by giving up on their outrageous demands in order for the rest of the Americans and Frenchmen to be able to tolerate them.

Nixon is: Frustrated

God Hates You (and Jesus thinks you're ugly)

.
My fellow Americans,

I’ve never been a fan of prostituting my religion for political gain.  It’s always seemed to me to be the most base, vile, and repulsive way to pander to the rubes.  I always preferred aligning myself with the Orthogonians; exploiting the latent racist and xenophobic fear of the people through insinuations and implied threats.  My bread-and butter was always to side with the average stupid and lazy American by claiming that the other guy doesn't understand them, and is actively threatening the safe, soft, middle-class lifestyle of the people.  It worked because Joe Six-Pack and Sally Lunchpail will always be terrified at the thought of communist takeover, or by the horror of filthy, dope addicted hippies overthrowing the nation and raping the women.

So, whenever I see current politicians try to bring God into things, I naturally shudder.  But it’s become the trendy choice for politicians today.  Oh, they don’t come right out and say they are chosen by God – that would be not only too much an ostentatious display of arrogance (on par with the patronizing air of the East Coast elite Franklins), but also just feel too Jewish.  No, the politicians have come up with a much more sinister way of linking themselves with God’s favor.

Whenever asked about a possible candidacy, or about strategy, policy, or position on the issues, the politician will now answer that they have prayed on it, or are waiting for God to provide guidance.  The logical conclusion being that whatever the candidate then does is not only sanctioned, but ordained by the Big Cheese, and thus beyond question or criticism.

I admit, I admire the subtlety of this strategy.  Not only does it convey divine blessing, but has the added bonus of hinting that The Supreme Being isn’t a fan of the other guy.  Yet despite it's advantages, it still isn’t right for me.  I much prefer rolling up my sleeves and diving into the cesspool of slander and calling someone's personal integrity into question.  It would have been easy for me to prey on the fear of subservience to the Vatican by hinting at a Roman Catholic president kissing the Pope’s ring.  But seeing as how it depends too much on the voters being very stupid, easily manipulated, and prone to outbursts of righteous violence, religious exploitation will never be as effective as us-vs.-them tactics. 

Except in the South, that is.

Nixon is: Not Impressed

Whore: A Definition by Example

.
My fellow Americans,

There are very few things that can make me turn my head and fight the primitive reaction to vomit in disgust.  Student protests are one.  Smug, pompous, privileged, Harvard-educated Franklins are another.

But sadly, neither of those things is the cause today.  I've just found that one of those miserable Palin kids will be on some saccharine television program preaching the importance of abstinence (I can't recall her name - something like Bottlecap, or Whiplash.  Anyway, she's the unwed high-school mommy).

For a moment, lets leave aside the incredible hypocrisy of using a girl who spread her legs like butter on toast to tell others to not give in to their throbbing biological urges.  This is yet another example of Caribou Barbie's ludicrous insincerity in terms of using her mewling spawn as fodder for her political ambitions, while at the same time loudly wailing whenever any of her litter is then mocked by the press.

Now, I understand the need to employ an aggressive campaign strategy by constantly attacking a straw-man, and the need to adopt creative means to maintain some semblance of public attention while not in office.  However, my choice of straw-men were hidden communists, and my choice of maintaining public attention was to continue to bolster my already impressive foreign relations experience by taking trips around the world to visit different leaders and further reinforce the perception that Nixon is a man who understands what is Really Going On.  Something a vapid backwater semi-governor who somehow equated proximity to a foreign country with foreign policy might consider.  But what I would never do is pimp out my daughter, Tricia, for the cameras and gain exposure vicariously through her.  Unlike candidate Milf, I have limits to my degradation.

When I consider what has happened to the once proud Republican party - the party of Teddy Roosevelt and Ike - it makes me more depressed than the summer of '76 when I spent my days all alone, wandering along the beaches of San Clemente, collecting bits of washed up seaweed and wishing I had another chance at how to tackle the whole Watergate thing.

Nixon is: Revolted

Confusion

.
My fellow Americans,

There has been something that has been bothering me recently.  It's the spate of shockingly contradictory statements and actions most often voiced by otherwise sensible people.

Take, for example, Samantha Bell, the daughter of Joseph Stack (the terrorist that slammed his small plane into the IRS building in Austin, TX).

Evidently, this poor woman is a mess.  On the one hand, she calls her father a hero for doing what he did:

"Yes [he is a hero]. Maybe now people will listen [...] I think too many people lay around and wait for things to happen, but if nobody comes out and speaks up on behalf of injustice then nothing will ever be accomplished."

Without a hint of betraying the complete incongruity, she then said that what he did was wrong. Further (and even more disturbing and indicative of a new spoiled, entitled attitude I usually associate with effetes who summer in Hyannis Port ... you know, Franklins) she contradicts her statement with her actions, as she goes on to describe how she had to leave the United States in mid pregnancy for the much more socialist country of Norway because Medicaid would not take care of her.

It's difficult for me, a man who tends to agree with her small-government ideology, to reconcile the fact that she then betrays that belief by going to a land where the government manages healthcare.  And I'm somewhat an expert in compromising my morals, ethics, beliefs, and integrity in order to make a point.

My fellow Americans, is this the best we can do?  Is this poor display of incompetent thought what conservative philosophy has degraded to?

Even worse, she seems to agree with the idea of her father taking action against the IRS.  That is something I could never condone.  Violence against a government agency is terrorism, as sure as if it were done by Carlos the Jackal or Yassir Arafat.  Besides, in my day the IRS was a very valued government insitute.  It served me as a very strong weapon in my attempt to battle my enemies.

It wasn't like this in my day.  It wasn't like this at all.

Nixon Disapproves