Letters

Letters 10-20-2014

Doctor Dan? After several email conversations with Rep. Benishek, he has confirmed that he doesn’t have a clue of what he does. Here’s why...

In Favor Of Our Parks [Traverse] City Proposal 1 is a creative way to improve our city parks without using our tax dollars. By using a small portion of our oil and gas royalties from the Brown Bridge Trust Fund, our parks can be improved for our children and grandchildren.

From January 1970 Popular Mechanics: “Drastic climate changes will occur within the next 50 years if the use of fossil fuels keeps rising at current rates.” That warning comes from Eugene K. Peterson of the Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Land Management.

Newcomers Might Leave: Recently we had guests from India who came over as students with the plan to stay in America. He has a master’s degree in engineering and she is doing her residency in Chicago and plans to specialize in oncology. They talked very candidly about American politics and said that after observing...

Someone Is You: On Sept 21, I joined the 400,000 who took to the streets of New York in the People’s Climate March, followed by a UN Climate Summit and many speeches. On October 13, the Pentagon issued a report calling climate change a significant threat to national security requiring immediate action. How do we move from marches, speeches and reports to meaningful work on this problem? In NYC I read a sign with a simple answer...

Necessary To Pay: Last fall, Grand Traverse voters authorized a new tax to fix roads. It is good, it is necessary.

The Real Reasons for Wolf Hunt: I have really been surprised that no one has been commenting on the true reason for the wolf hunt. All this effort has not been expended so 23 wolves can be killed each year. Instead this manufactured controversy about the wolf hunt has been very carefully crafted to get Proposal 14-2 passed.

Home · Articles · News · Random Thoughts · Supreme Women
. . . .

Supreme Women

George Foster - October 6th, 2005
First Lady Laura Bush was only partly right when she suggested the next Supreme Court justice should be a woman.
Come on, Mr. President. The U.S. has nine justices that serve on the highest court in the land. After Sandra Day O’Connor’s retirement, one woman remains. The fact that only two females have served in over two hundred years of Supreme Court rulings is shameful. Hundreds of male justices have been confirmed, but only two women?
The best solution is to appoint women for the next four openings on the bench. A five to four majority favoring female justices would help make up for past discrimination. The following are my choices for the next four Supreme Court vacancies.
Anita Hill. You may still remember Justice Clarence Thomas and Hill’s famous confrontation before the Senate committee that originally held hearings on his nomination. Hill accused Thomas of sexual harassment in the work place while Thomas could remember none of it. Supporters of each accused the other of pathological lying. Who was telling the truth? Anita Hill’s confirmation would assure us of one honest African-American on the bench. Hill’s place on the court would also provide guarantees that minimal porn would be circulated among the justices in the future.
Ann Coulter. With a law degree from the University of Michigan and a resume of impressive legal credentials, Coulter became famous after writing four best-selling books that prove liberal Americans are traitors. Coulter has the necessary conservative agenda (and then some) to appease right-wing pundits but might need a little refresher course in history. I actually heard her refer to Alexander Hamilton as a past president – Alan Dershowitz gently corrected her during a TV debate.
Hillary Clinton. The Senator from New York would make a wonderful Supreme Court Justice. She is a brilliant attorney and has earned bi-partisan respect during her one term in office for hard work and dedication to the job. Clinton’s nomination to the court would eliminate accusations from the Democrats that the Bush administration is only interested in putting Nazi-types on the court. The most obvious reason for her selection, though, would be to eliminate Ms. Clinton from contention for the presidency. Many Republicans and Democrats would love to see her out of the picture in order to serve their own presidential aspirations.
Anna Nicole Smith. I’m not kidding. The former Playboy Playmate and topless dancer will soon be attending a U.S. Supreme Court hearing with her attorney Howard K. Stern (you couldn’t make this up). The highest court has agreed to hear Smith’s case relating to her inheritance of $474 million from her deceased ex-husband who was 73 years her senior. Smith’s experience in the court system and ability to attain a law degree overnight from any number of mail-order universities should make her an attractive candidate to liven up that stuffy bunch of eggheads.
By the time you read this, President Bush will hopefully have nominated a female to replace Justice O’Connor. It had better be a woman or he has some serious questions to answer from the chief justice of his private domain: Mrs. Bush.
 
  • Currently 3.5/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
 
 

 

 
 
 
Close
Close
Close