I have been casually following the confirmation hearings for Sonya Sotomayor. If you do not know this story already, here is an introduction. Several months ago, supreme court justice David Souter announced his retirement, thus prompting President Obama to make his first nomination to the supreme court.

Obama selected Sonya Sotomayor. Sotomayor, if confirmed, would be the first Hispanic and third woman to serve as supreme court justice. She appears to have a solid background, graduating second in her class from Princeton, and obtained a law degree from Yale. She went on to serve as an assistant district attorney and eventually a Federal district judge. In 1997 she was named to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. Over the last ten years as a circuit court judge, she has heard more than 3000 cases and made over 380 written opinions. From this body of work, she has been proclaimed a centrist by many notable law organizations. (note: this intro comes from wikipedia, and much more information can be found there regarding Sonya Sotomayor).

My interest in this story comes from the reactions and actions of the opposition party in the nomination process. The usual suspects including Rush Limbaugh, Hannity and most of Fox news have tagged Sotomayor as ultra liberal, unqualified and even racist. These sentiments, albeit somewhat less apoplectic, have been expressed by members of the Republican party. Notable among these Republicans is ranking senate judiciary committee member Jeff Sessions.

Sen. Sessions has made the most noise during the nomination process. He has clearly expressed his view that Sotomayor is not getting his vote, she is in his opinion not fit for the supreme court. One of Sotomayor's statements during an address to students has prompted the bulk of Sessions ire: "I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life."

Sotomayor has commented on her statement, saying her choice of words was poor, but the message in the full context of her speech remains valid. She considers herself to be the product of a system which uplifts everyone. She considers that Americans have diverse backgrounds and experiences from which to draw upon and excel. And in my opinion, when you look at the history of the supreme court in which of the 110 members, 108 have been white men, it can benefit from some diversity.

However, the republican party seems to have some serious problems with white men loosing grip on their long entrenched status. Their goal in the nomination process has been to smear Sotomayor and cry fowl over the lack of consideration for white men in the process. I find it apparent their goal is to cater to a group of Americans who would agree that white men no longer are given a fair shake in the process of running the country. That preference is given first to minorities and women, and white men are always considered last.

There is nothing to suggest that white men are loosing their grip on control of this country. There is also nothing wrong with giving opportunity based on merit, regardless of ones race, gender or demographic. But the fact that our country is gradually becoming more diverse would argue that white men would slowly be less represented in positions of power and authority. However this indeed is not what one sees. The senate, and most of our representatives are still white men. White men still predominate in power positions in industry and academia.

Thus the whole nomination process and the grumblings of the likes of Sen. Jeff Sessions are what truly are frustrating to me. Sen. Sessions spend much of his time berating Sotomayor over her one statement saying a wise latina woman would reach a better conclusion than a white man. He (and the republicans like him) seem indignant of the remarks that white men might actually not always be the best at everything. It speaks so much of the entrenchment of white male dominance of our society, that any infringement upon their power is met with this level of blowback.

And further, during this whole process Sotomayor has played within the rules set by the white male establishment. She did not react aggressively to Sen. Sessions grilling. She remained calm and measured. Her answers were conciliatory. She promised to perform as a supreme court judge in an unbias manor using the rule of law established in the constitution. And as mentioned above, her record proves her to be a centrist rather than an ultra liberal activist.

I applaud Sotomayor and her achievements. I believe she will make a fine supreme court justice. On the other hand I find the behavior of many Republicans poor and offensive. They have displayed their bigotry and childlike school yard bully behavior once again. America is a diverse nation and this diversity should be represented in all of its establishments. There are qualified people in this nation of all diversity. To say that any time a white male is not being considered is reverse discrimination is false.

I hope that playing to the fears and catering to the bigots of our nation will not be a winning strategy for the Republicans. In the near future, whites will no longer be a majority of the American population. That means by approximately 2050, white people will represent less than 50% of our nation. Should we fear that? Does this mean white people will be rounded up and stripped of all their rights? Of course not. I simply means that we will have to accept that more of our peers, our supervisors, our leaders will not look exactly like us. I think we can deal with that.

It was time for a change, time to step into the present and update the look of bothofus.org .

It is summertime and we are enjoying the bounty of nature. I think the new appearance of this web site, when fully functional, will reflect that feel.

For a peek at what this web site looked like a few years ago, see the post from March 13, 2006: Refreshing our look.

(July 13, 2009 Edit- I am still working on getting the new template to work right.)

(July 14, 2009 Edit- I think everything is working right.)

My cancer has brought the eventuality of death forward on some level. I think about the people that I have known that are now gone, and of people I did not know, but left some legacy of their passing. Authors and filmmakers come to mind, and images of actors immortalized on the screen live on long after the actors have slipped from this mortal coil.

I think one's legacy is an idea that most often concerns those in their twilight years. Some wealthy people leave endowments to the arts or a university. Parents of course leave their children in the world, a living legacy of sorts.

Unless one is Caesar, Joan of Arc, Shakespeare or someone else of such stature, a few years after we pass out of this world, most if not all trace of our passing is lost to the sands of time. It is an interesting proposition. Our lives seem so important while we are living them, but after folks die, the world keeps churning right past them.

Perhaps that is why when a popular icon dies, like Michael Jackson, people are reminded of the impermanence of life, and wonder about what people will say about them when they pass.

It is gratifying how little any of this matters, and how in the light of oblivion, the most logical thing to do is to simply enjoy your life.

As JSP wrote a week or so ago, our garden is growing incredibly. I snapped some more photos. To see them, click on the image at right.

Most people don't know this about me, but I follow the development of the Firefox browser very closely. I install the newest development build pretty much every day on my computer. I have been watching the development of their new Firefox 3.5 browser and it is really great. I advise you to download it and install it now. You may not notice the changes right away, but it is a great piece of software that will prepare your computer for the future of the web.

Firefox 3.5 has three key points going for it.

1. Firefox is the safest way to use the Internet.
2. Firefox has the most ways to customize your online experience specifically for the way you use the web.
3. Firefox is good for you: it stands for openness, innovation and freedom on the Internet.

Sorry for this commercial, but honestly the new Firefox is great.

I have been meaning to snap a few pictures of the garden and plants we have in the yard for some time. Finally had a bit of motivation to get out there because it all looks so vibrant.

First is the front yard. Last year we had a friend landscape the front and we put in blueberry, current and gooseberry bushes, along with several echinacea. Everything has grown very well in the last one and half season. The echinacea is blooming and teaming with bees, and the blueberries are loaded with growing fruit.

On the side of they house we have a hollyhock that we put in last year and over wintered. It is nearly 6 feet tall already and has an open bloom. In the background are blooming day lilies.


The vegetable garden in the back is thriving with the recent hot and humid weather. We have been harvesting spinach, broccoli, mustard greens, snow peas and picking herbs including fennel, basil, oregano, tarragon, sorrel, mint and rosemary.

The peas have grown very well, reaching nearly 4 feet tall. I expect with the hot weather they might start withering as they usually do.

We look forward to peppers, tomatoes, cauliflower, beans and eggplant in the upcoming months.

You might also notice some of the invaders that include several sunflower plants. I decided to leave them grow and will be happy when they start to flower in a few weeks.

This week JSP and I went to two events, a film: Training Rules and a play: Robots vs. Fake Robots. Both events hosted short talks with the audience after the main production.

Training Rules is a documentary about women's basketball at Penn State and was shown as a part of the Walker Art Center's Queer Takes: Standing Out series they are doing for Twin Cities Pride. The film shows how Penn State supported coach Rene Portland and her "No lesbians" policy on the Big Ten women's basketball team. It was remarkable to see this level of homophobia and abuse that went on until 2007. The film was well received by the audience and afterward The University of Minnesota's Mary Jo Kane, Ph.D., gave a short t alk about homophobia in women's sport. The audience engage in a questions and answer session that was revealing about how the University of Minnesota is now a leader in non-discrimination. It was an eye opening evening regarding how sports are perhaps the last bastion of unapologetic discrimination.

Robots vs. Fake Robots is a play by a Los Angeles, California native, David Largman Murray. The play received several positive reviews. I hated the play for the first 10 minutes, before I fell into the world of the play and began to see that there was more to the play than I was giving it credit for. The actors were committed to their roles and the somewhat strange language used in the play stopped being irritating and became interesting. Genuine character development on the parts of both robots and fake robots were convincing. The dancing, also an irritant to me in the first few minutes of the show, became entertaining and endearing. By the end of the show, I was won over, this script and this production are very good.

Thursday's audience at Robots vs. Fake Robots seemed very, unsophisticated, based on the manic laughter coming from various blocks of seats during some parts of the show. I imagine that there were several young people in attendance that came because of the title and had never before seen a live theatre production. After the show was over there was a short discussion including the playwright, who had flown in from LA; the director; the producer; and several actors. JSP did not want to stay for the discussion but I convinced him it would be short. It was short and and also illuminating to hear various opinions and experiences from those involved in the production.

Training Rules and Robots vs. Fake Robots were back-to-back, a pair of widely divergent cultural perspectives. Both proved enjoyable and insightful.