Lindsey Graham wins for being the biggest loser


Inspiration for this week’s Decree was a tie dominated by the South: between South Carolina senator Lindsey Graham and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, ultimately Graham’s harassment topped the SCLC’s hypocrisy.

I shuddered while watching Lindsey Graham heap condescension onto Sotomayor during the confirmation hearings with these words, delivered—compounding their nauseating effect—in his Southern drawl:

And the only reason I keep talking about this [Sotomayor’s wise Latina comment] is that I’m in politics, and you gotta watch what you say because one, you don’t wanna offend people you’re trying to represent, but do you understand ma’m that if I had said anything like that, and my reasoning is that I’m trying to inspire somebody, they woulda had my head. Do you understand that?

Thanks to Jezebel for their humorous translation of an otherwise simply depressing exchange.

And it gets worse:

That being said, I’m not going to judge you by that one statement. I just hope you’ll appreciate the world in which we live in—you can say those things, meaning to inspire somebody, and still have a chance to get on the Supreme Court.

Rather than pursuing a relevant inquiry, Graham seemed to indulge in patronizing for pleasure.There are just too many glaring idiocies here: for instance, why, if charitable Graham can get past what he calls Sotomayor’s “misspeak” is he devoting time to reprimanding her about how the world works?

Rather than boring you with the obvious points about why Graham’s hypothetical of mentioning being a white male to inspire people isn’t logically or historically parallel to what was said by Sotomayor, I’ll just let the footage speak for itself.

Sotomayor and Dr. Benjamin in the Media: An Open Thread

by Gabriela Salvidea
View profile »

Get Bitch Media's top 9 reads of the week delivered to your inbox every Saturday morning! Sign up for the Weekly Reader:

1 Comment Has Been Posted

All senators on the panel

All senators on the panel engage in some form of "patronizing for pleasure;" it seems disingenuous to characterize one person in a negative light while ignoring others. Even Al Franken talked to Sotomayor like she was an elementary school student by forcing her to answer questions like "Do the words "birth control" appear in the Constitution?" and "Does the word 'privacy' appear in the Constitution?"

Furthermore, Graham himself referred to her as ""not an activist," "generally in the mainstream", and said that she appeared to have a bright future.

You might not like him, but if you're attempting to paint him as the number one villain out of the Senate Judiciary Committee, you are either misguided by your personal distaste or you haven't been paying attention. Cornyn and Sessions would probably be better targets for your ire.

Add new comment