NoCalMike Posted November 8, 2018 Share Posted November 8, 2018 This is when I purposely don't build a bomb shelter so I can just go quickly. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Momma There Goes That Man Posted November 9, 2018 Share Posted November 9, 2018 15 hours ago, BenningRoadSkin said: I'm okay with that. One person should never have that much power. We shouldn't be sitting aside hoping that RBG dies/stays alive until 2020. I don't get that either. Seems like we would have a more practical and fair court situation if one maverick, rogue or ideologue on the SC couldn't swing the court so wildly for 30+ years. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bozo the kKklown Posted November 9, 2018 Share Posted November 9, 2018 2 minutes ago, Momma There Goes That Man said: I don't get that either. Seems like we would have a more practical and fair court situation if one maverick, rogue or ideologue on the SC couldn't swing the court so wildly for 30+ years. So many progressives are talking about packing the court with two new justices if Dems control executive and legislature 2020. I say pack with 10. If it becomes an arms race, so be it but this current system of waiting for someone to die or retire to drastically change the court is a mess. Especially since these are lifetime appointments. Ideally, I would love to have revolving judges selected by a bi-partisan commission to sit on the court each year but this country's constitution probably cannot change at this point. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Momma There Goes That Man Posted November 9, 2018 Share Posted November 9, 2018 Agree completely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted November 28, 2018 Share Posted November 28, 2018 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hersh Posted November 28, 2018 Share Posted November 28, 2018 The entire culture of the Federalist Society/Georgetown Prep is exactly the kind of garbage the right wing conspiracy theorists accuse the Deep State of being. A group of people in the shadows for the most part intent on doing whatever it takes to seize power. The irony would be comical if the Federalist Society wasn't filled with people that don't care about the rights of the citizens. 2 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted December 10, 2018 Share Posted December 10, 2018 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sisko Posted December 10, 2018 Share Posted December 10, 2018 Meh, just a sacrificial vote to say “See, we told ya Cavanaugh was cool.” Now they’ll be free to do their partisan ruling thing while pointing back to this vote for the next decades as “proof” of their fairness. If as I suspect Dump gets to nominate another justice, SCOTUS will be total gobbidge, zero credibility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted December 18, 2018 Share Posted December 18, 2018 🙄 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cooked Crack Posted December 21, 2018 Share Posted December 21, 2018 (edited) Edited December 21, 2018 by Cooked Crack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renegade7 Posted December 21, 2018 Share Posted December 21, 2018 I'm concerned what's under the tree for this country this country, a lot of **** coming to a head all the sudden. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumbo Posted January 28, 2019 Share Posted January 28, 2019 caught a story on ginnie thomas---clarence thomas's well-known way-right activist wife---visiting trump with her group at the wh....topcis being pitched were said to include how women in military was wrong becuase of less muscle and lung capacity, how gay marriage is ruining everything left that's decent, and similar vital concerns to conservative values....also, did ya know that ginnie is the head of staff for super rightwing whackjob louis gohmert?....she's not tired of winning Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted January 28, 2019 Share Posted January 28, 2019 No, I didn't know that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogofWar1 Posted January 28, 2019 Share Posted January 28, 2019 A major problem with SCOTUS is that they can basically say "screw the rules, we make them." So when Clarence Thomas' wife is involved in things that would be a major conflict of interest for any judge on a lower court, it's largely ignored. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumbo Posted January 28, 2019 Share Posted January 28, 2019 7 minutes ago, twa said: No, I didn't know that. well, you didn't hear it from me i don't need no more lawyers wives after me 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumbo Posted January 28, 2019 Share Posted January 28, 2019 @twa actually, when i first read it, i thought "that's twa's 'cute' way of telling me ginnie is not gohmert's chief of staff" then i thought, "nah, that's too <use you own term> for twa" so i was off, twice so fact correction: connie---whcih i read as ginnie---was there and she's gohmert's chief next time just provide the correction---i don't like errors Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted January 28, 2019 Share Posted January 28, 2019 Tell Connie I said hey.....good to hear she hasn't been sacked 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumbo Posted January 28, 2019 Share Posted January 28, 2019 are you a gohmert guy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted January 28, 2019 Share Posted January 28, 2019 Just now, Jumbo said: are you a gohmert guy? Nah, I'm a Cruz man.......Louie is my cousin's guy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumbo Posted January 28, 2019 Share Posted January 28, 2019 2 hours ago, twa said: Nah, I'm a Cruz man.......Louie is my cousin's guy i knew you were cruz...it's one of your most irredeemable conditions...admitting it's hard to settle on just one...and i hesitated to ask becuase that would be quite the twofer to deal with...i am not versed well enough---obviously---in the regional situation, so do louis and ted conflict? while there's obviously common cause, i thought they were of differing branches of ewwwww yuck 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted January 28, 2019 Share Posted January 28, 2019 (edited) New "issue" being pushed by the religious right: At least six states are pushing "bible literacy" legislation. USAT: Bible classes in public schools? Why Christian lawmakers are pushing a wave of new bills A look at one of the proposals, in Florida, describes the law as mandating that all Florida high schools must offer an elective. Fox13: Bible studies class proposed in Florida as elective Quote The bill is short on details but calls for "an objective study of religion," and an "objective study of the Bible, including, but not limited to, a course on the Hebrew Scriptures and Old Testament of the Bible; a course on the New Testament of the Bible; and a course on the Hebrew Scriptures, the Old Testament of the Bible, and the New Testament of the Bible." Right now, such courses are allowed to be offered in schools, but it is not mandatory for districts to offer them. Looking at that wording, does the law mandate that they offer three classes? One Old Testament, one New, and one both? Apparently, Trump (great believer in the moral code of the Bible that he is) is openly encouraging such efforts. I'm sure that this push is in no way a way of saying "Hey, we've successfully packed the Court with people who will now 'interpret' the constitution to allow our 50 year long effort to mandate that our nation's school systems teach the majority religion to succeed." I think I'd have a lot less contempt for Christianity's claim of moral superiority if it wasn't glaringly obvious that a fundamental part of said "morality" wasn't "pick an outright evil position that you want to push. Then lie about why you're doing it. Then if people don't buy that lie, pick a different lie, and keep pushing for it, until eventually you find people who don't believe the 7th lie, either, but they're willing to pretend that they do, so that you can achieve the evil goal that you've been working on for decades." Edited January 29, 2019 by Larry 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumbo Posted January 29, 2019 Share Posted January 29, 2019 teach em the rapture comes right after we build the wall 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted January 29, 2019 Share Posted January 29, 2019 Such bull****. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoCalMike Posted January 29, 2019 Share Posted January 29, 2019 So in Summary Kav is a made man now, a goodfella, and you can't touch him. 'Murrricaaa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sacks 'n' Stuff Posted January 29, 2019 Share Posted January 29, 2019 On 12/10/2018 at 3:31 PM, The Sisko said: Meh, just a sacrificial vote to say “See, we told ya Cavanaugh was cool.” Now they’ll be free to do their partisan ruling thing while pointing back to this vote for the next decades as “proof” of their fairness. If as I suspect Dump gets to nominate another justice, SCOTUS will be total gobbidge, zero credibility. Nah. Bart wasn’t put there for abortion. He was put there to side with corporations and funnel money upward. The whole abortion thing is just something they pretend to care about to get votes from people who are easily fooled & manipulated. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now