Friday, June 12, 2009
My Supreme Resume
The US Supreme Court, Chief Justice Judge Judy at center in front of Clarence Thomas
I'm a little peeved at President Obama. I sent him my impressive judicial resume and my name wasn't even mentioned as a nominee for Supreme Court justice. How is this possible? Granted, I'm not a Latina, but I do prefer Linda Ronstadt in her chubby phase. Granted, I don't have a law degree. But I could get one. It can't be that hard. And, hell, Robert Parker is a lawyer who has a lifetime position as Most Powerful Wine Critic, why not a Wine Guy for Supreme Court Justice? It makes as much sense. And I'm a judge. At Sonoma Harvest Fair, at the San Francisco International Wine Competition. You think it's hard to get along with Scalia, try judging with Dan Berger for a couple of days. I know why Clarence Thomas doesn't speak, I've been there. Not to receive even so much as an acknowledgment of my credentials to serve on the Supreme Court is quite a blow. So I'm bringing my case to the public, my devoted HoseMaster of Wine public. You be the judge.
Here are a few of the landmark cases that I have helped adjudicate in my distinguished career, and the highlights of my opinions in those cases. I'm sure many will seem familiar.
Cork v. Stelvin
With my panel locked in a four-four tie, I was asked to decide which closure should be favored by wine experts. This was a particularly touchy case, with more than a few echoes of Roe v. Wade. Should I come down on the side of pro-choice? Or should I land squarely in the pro-life camp and select corks? I knew that no matter what my decision I was in for a world of criticism and threats to my well-being. On the one hand, there is no denying that cork taint has ruined many a fine and expensive bottle of wine. On the other hand, cork is a renewable resource whereas Stelvins contribute to global warming, carpal tunnel syndrome and radical Islamist causes. I came down on the side of corks and wrote this memorable, if I do say so myself, opinion:
"The two sides in this case need to sit down and approach their differences calmly and creatively. Can't we agree that it might be better to simply prevent the necessity for the choice in the first place? Perhaps with more education and candor, and the widespread use of condoms on corks, we as a country can move forward to a place where the sanctity of the wine is foremost."
Interstate Shipping of Wine v. Three Tier System
You would think this landmark decision alone would have automatically qualified me for the Supreme Court, sort of like death guarantees an Oscar. Once again my vote was critical in a case. Would I come down on the side of the status quo and retain the wonderful Three Tier System envisioned by our country's forefathers when they wrote the Twenty-first Amendment so they could get stinko at Ben Franklin's 175th birthday party? Or would I vote in favor of allowing wineries to ship wine wherever the hell they want, including to underage alcoholics with a computer, Dad's credit card, and a link to Burghound so they know what to order? As if those cretins could even use a corkscrew. Here's what I wrote, file this one under Integrity:
"I live in California and don't really care if the suckers in Pennsylvania can't buy wines over the Internet. Philadelphia is the birthplace of freedom--NOT. I'm not shedding any tears for them, much less three tiers. Genius and innovation are what define the American success story--just look at Ron Popeil. Figure out a way to get the wines that skirts the damned laws and stop whining. Either that or move. It's your call. Meanwhile, I'll be enjoying that new remodel of my house paid for by the WSWA."
Parker v. Bloggers
When Robert Parker decided to sue every last blogger who had questioned his ethics, integrity, 100 point scoring system, and bladder control, I was called upon to render a decision. It was eBob v eBlobs, and the decision was a sticky one, not just because of the incontinence. Who was right? Parker, when he says that bloggers are misinformed, untalented, malicious, unethical and smell bad? Or the bloggers, who insist that they are right in calling Parker out for hiring a bunch of stringers with the ethics of a pit bull/Bernie Madoff mix and the integrity of maitre d' who moonlights as a papparazzo. This was easy.
"Not all bloggers smell bad, though most smell poorly."
It's not too late, Mr. President. I'm still available. Does it come with a matching 401K?