1 1
JoeWeber

The Supreme Court is our biggest problem

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, airdvr said:

And there's your problem.  Abortion notwithstanding you guys get butthurt over everything.  In the noise some of us can't tell if you're more upset about abortion or the definition of a woman. 

That's because you are trying to not understand.

On the plus side, when liberals get upset they don't invade the Capitol, try to kill cops, try to kidnap and kill the vice president, literally shit on the floor, and loot and vandalize the US government.

I'll take "butthurt" over "violent felons" any day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, airdvr said:

And there's your problem.  Abortion notwithstanding you guys get butthurt over everything.  In the noise some of us can't tell if you're more upset about abortion or the definition of a woman. 

Now you’re just lying and you know it. Again, at what point does that make you stop and think about what you’ve done?

 

And honestly, can anyone match the Republicans on their ability to get insanely butthurt over the tiniest things? Remember they’ve passed laws banning schools from teaching kids about reality they n case it makes any of them feel mildly uncomfortable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, BartsDaddy said:

im no way a religious person. but its a pretty bad ideology that equates beastality as the same as prayer.

I'm a lot less offended by beastiality than I am by the SC deciding that it's ok for a person in a position of power and authority at a PUBLIC, TAX PAYER FUNDED school being allowed to coerce children into joining into a religious prayer ceremony.

And, a blatantly public performance that flies in the face of the teachings in the Bible that they love to wave around so much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, wolfriverjoe said:

I'm a lot less offended by beastiality than I am by the SC deciding that it's ok for a person in a position of power and authority at a PUBLIC, TAX PAYER FUNDED school being allowed to coerce children into joining into a religious prayer ceremony.
 

And that the Conservative justices so clearly know that as a matter of law they should have found against the coach, they had to flat out lie about the facts of the case in order to justify their theocratic decision.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Valerie Hopkins Landis said:

 

The election WAS stolen.

Well, you're here in the nick of time. Assuming you are the lawyer, and not another last minute sock puppet, please enlighten us with what 61 judges could not.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, billvon said:

That's because you are trying to not understand.

On the plus side, when liberals get upset they don't invade the Capitol, try to kill cops, try to kidnap and kill the vice president, literally shit on the floor, and loot and vandalize the US government.

I'll take "butthurt" over "violent felons" any day.

Oh, he doesn’t mean that anymore than anything else. He’s simply following the R playbook and prepping himself for regretfully supporting Jim Jordon this year and Trump again in 2024. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the interesting things I think about is that one of the issues during the Kennedy/Nixon campaign was whether we wanted to be ruled by the Pope. I guess that’s not an issue now.

Wendy P. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, kallend said:

A political cartoon IS commentary.  Are we expected to explain them?

Nope.  But a comment along the lines of "to answer what MNealTX was saying . . ." or "compared to Europe this is what the US looks like to the world"  would be nice.  That way it's not just a "who can post the most memes, fastest" game.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, wmw999 said:

One of the interesting things I think about is that one of the issues during the Kennedy/Nixon campaign was whether we wanted to be ruled by the Pope. I guess that’s not an issue now.

Wendy P. 

Hi Wendy,

I was 19 during those campaigns.  It was the first presidential campaign that I really paid any attention to.

IMO the Pope is less involved today than we feared then.  IMO it is the Catholic Church that is the problem, not the current Pope.

Jerry Baumchen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, wmw999 said:

One of the interesting things I think about is that one of the issues during the Kennedy/Nixon campaign was whether we wanted to be ruled by the Pope. I guess that’s not an issue now.

Wendy P. 

I still remember my parents raging about a Catholic POTUS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, JerryBaumchen said:

IMO the Pope is less involved today than we feared then.  IMO it is the Catholic Church that is the problem, not the current Pope.

Jerry Baumchen

No, in this particular case (and I can't believe I'm about to say this) the establishment of the Catholic Church is not any part of the problem. It's the individual catholics on the court who refuse to separate their religious beliefs from their secular duty to fairly and impartially interpret the law.

 

Biden is catholic and makes no attempt (that I'm aware of) to impose his beliefs onto others. Surprise surprise, the right wingers have no such qualms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just look at these beaming asshats. OK everyone, now that we have women well on the way to wearing burkas and cancelled the idea of gun sanity what say we make voting a lot more difficult for certain Americans. What a disaster.

Bastards.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, JoeWeber said:

Just look at these beaming asshats. OK everyone, now that we have women well on the way to wearing burkas and cancelled the idea of gun sanity what say we make voting a lot more difficult for certain Americans. What a disaster.

Bastards.png

Revised edition:

May be an image of 7 people, people standing and indoor

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or is it?

Some believe that the SC is working to stop judges from legislating from the bench and curbing administrative agencies from exercising power that they do not legally have. Those are two parts of the unelected bureaucracy that can, or have made, decisions that have a significant impact of the citizens.

Specific to the two references: the SC referred gun restrictions in four states back to judges for reconsideration making it clear that the original decisions are unconstitutional, and WVirginia vs EPA on coal plant operation.

One purpose of the SC is to serve as a legal check on power ambitious government. That is what they are doing, or so it seems. It will be interesting to watch what other items are addressed. Next opportunities may be the CDC and Federal Reserve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, billeisele said:

Or is it?

Some believe that the SC is working to stop judges from legislating from the bench and curbing administrative agencies from exercising power that they do not legally have. Those are two parts of the unelected bureaucracy that can, or have made, decisions that have a significant impact of the citizens.

Specific to the two references: the SC referred gun restrictions in four states back to judges for reconsideration making it clear that the original decisions are unconstitutional, and WVirginia vs EPA on coal plant operation.

One purpose of the SC is to serve as a legal check on power ambitious government. That is what they are doing, or so it seems. It will be interesting to watch what other items are addressed. Next opportunities may be the CDC and Federal Reserve.

You caught the overturning of Roe, yes? That was a 50 year precedent overturned at the first opportunity by 3 Justices that testified that it was settled law. Some believe that the SC is working......never mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, billeisele said:

Or is it?

Yes it is.

26 minutes ago, billeisele said:

One purpose of the SC is to serve as a legal check on power ambitious government. That is what they are doing, or so it seems. 

Then explain overturning Roe v Wade. They handed an enormous amount of power back to State and Federal government to clamp down on people’s rights, and according to Thomas’s concurrence they’re aiming at a lot more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, billeisele said:

One purpose of the SC is to serve as a legal check on power ambitious government. That is what they are doing

They are doing the opposite.  In the Roe v Wade decision they took power from the people and handed it back to ambitious governments.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
5 hours ago, billeisele said:

Or is it?

Some believe that the SC is working to stop judges from legislating from the bench and curbing administrative agencies from exercising power that they do not legally have. Those are two parts of the unelected bureaucracy that can, or have made, decisions that have a significant impact of the citizens.

Specific to the two references: the SC referred gun restrictions in four states back to judges for reconsideration making it clear that the original decisions are unconstitutional, and WVirginia vs EPA on coal plant operation.

One purpose of the SC is to serve as a legal check on power ambitious government. That is what they are doing, or so it seems. It will be interesting to watch what other items are addressed. Next opportunities may be the CDC and Federal Reserve.

You can't have a legitimate Federal election where the rules of the individual elections that make up the result are different for each state. 

For any conclusion that is based upon a set of data you HAVE to have a consistent set of rules to play by if the result is going to be valid. You can't have one set of data being generated in a different way to the others because it invalidates the whole data pool.

That's what the supreme court is TRYING to do. Do you really want to live in an America where every single election is rife with deliberate manipulation?

Edited by yoink
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, billeisele said:

Or is it?

Some believe that the SC is working to stop judges from legislating from the bench and curbing administrative agencies from exercising power that they do not legally have. Those are two parts of the unelected bureaucracy that can, or have made, decisions that have a significant impact of the citizens.

Specific to the two references: the SC referred gun restrictions in four states back to judges for reconsideration making it clear that the original decisions are unconstitutional, and WVirginia vs EPA on coal plant operation.

One purpose of the SC is to serve as a legal check on power ambitious government. That is what they are doing, or so it seems. It will be interesting to watch what other items are addressed. Next opportunities may be the CDC and Federal Reserve.

Keeping away from Roe, both New York and Massachusetts (which I’m personally familiar with) had their long-standing (I believe on the order of 80-100 years) gun laws overturned. How is that not being activist and turning it back to the people ?who elected those administrations).

Wendy P.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

1 1