At the very least, remove Alito and Thomas for their already demonstrated political and ideological biases and penchant for accepting favors. Also, impose on Supreme Court justices the same code of ethics to which every other federal court judge must adhere.
Bryant, While I appreciate your thinking, their removal requires conviction by two-thirds of the Senate, a development I only would expect to see if I live for a very long time. As for imposing a code of ethics, if we can hold our 49 Senate seats, flip 1 Republican seat, and hold the White House, presuming we would need the VP’s tie-breaking vote, I believe our Democratic Senators finally are receptive to filibuster reform and/or cut-outs that would allow the legislation to move to the floor for debate and an up or down majority vote.
I believe you're right that this Senate would never convict Thomas or Alito, not when so many Republicans have already shown a willingness to support a presidential candidate who supported the Jan. 6 insurrection and is also a convicted felon. These are dark times.
Bryant, While you’re right about these being dark times, were we to retake the House, hold our 49 Senate seats, flip 1 Republican-held seat, and hold the White House, we would be on the cusp of immeasurable change. My assertion is based on my understanding that Democrats overall are far more receptive 1) to expanding the Court and 2) to reforming the Senate filibuster rule. This understanding is what keeps me in the fight.
I believe the Democrats, maybe early in Obama’s first term, had the numbers in both chambers to reform the filibuster rule and chose not to do it. Harry Reid seemed to think if the Democrats didn't abuse the rule while in charge the GOP would not repeat its abuse of it when it regained the majority. Seems the Dems never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity.
Bryant, I believe the Democrats honestly thought the republicans would not abuse the filibuster rule and they did. I hope Democrats eyes are open now that you can never trust the republicans to do the right and decent thing. Next time we have the majority, I hope the Democrats will use it to put guardrails back in place that republicans tore down back in Reagan's time.
I am a lifelong Democrat and have no plans to change. That said, those Dems who are currently in office and who have been for the past two decades remind me of Charlie Brown to the Republican’s Lucy, certain every time that the football won’t get yanked away at the last minute, going in for the kick, and landing on their collective posteriors. It’s my hope that they will figure it out the next time (we have the majority), if there is one.
Peggy, You might recall, Harry Reid, in 2013, due to Republicans filibustering nearly every one of Obama’s federal judge nominees, eliminated the filibuster for federal judge appointments. Regrettably, in 2014, Dems lost the Senate to Republicans and, once Trump won the presidency in 2016, McConnell retaliated by eliminating the filibuster for Supreme Court Justice appointments.
Bryant, Democrats, again, controlled both chambers in Biden’s first two years. Ultimately, when neither Sinema nor Manchin would agree to resuscitate the talking filibuster which eventually would have moved the Freedom to Vote: John R. Lewis Act to the floor for debate and an up or down majority vote, Democrats grew increasingly united around the need for filibuster reform. I’m quite confident we won’t blow it if we get another shot in November.
Barbara, It’s just my opinion, but I think Manchin was a Democrat in name only. I don’t know what his overall voting record was, but he seemed to thrive on sticking his finger in the eye of the Democrats as often as he could - especially if it meant more free TV time for him. And Sinema? Well, she seemed to have no beliefs or priorities at all. She was totally driven by money. When that green paper was waved in her face, she followed it like a sheep right off the cliff. Many people no longer subject themselves to a moral value system. Just witness the many Republicans in Congress who still support trump - a treasonous shell of a man. I guess my point is, the Democrats really never had control of the House - not with Manchin and Sinema in the mix.
Barbara Jo Krieger: Manchin was a wolf in sheep's clothing. He was a democrat in name only. I hope he and his coal mine rot; hopefully some place where they can do no damage.
“On January 20th, 2009, 57 Senate seats were held by Democrats with 2 Independents (Bernie Sanders and Joe Lieberman) caucusing with the Democrats...which gave Democrats 59 mostly-reliable Democratic votes in the Senate, one shy of filibuster-proof “total control.” Republicans held 41 seats.
The 59 number in January, 2009 included Ted Kennedy and Al Franken. Kennedy had a seizure during an Obama inaugural luncheon and never returned to vote in the Senate.....and Al Franken was not officially seated until July 7th, 2009 (hotly contested recount demanded by Norm Coleman.)
The real Democratic Senate seat number in January, 2009 was 55 Democrats plus 2 Independents equaling 57 Senate seats.” See:
The Dems did not have the control that the myth says they did.
It's true that the Dems could have should have done more with the power that they did have during the Obama years, esp. with hindsight, but they were often just shy of the votes they needed. As for Biden's 1st term, Manchin and Sinema really screwed the pooch.
Harry Reid could have and should have exercised the "nuclear option"
What raises hackles is that the filibuster requires a senator to stand at the podium and talk, till the clock runs out. Harry Reid and Chuck Schumer allow the Republicans to say "filibuster" and that is it.
Think about this. We are suppose to be governed by the constitution and laws, but we are really being governed by in house rules, made up by the Senate and the House. and in Marbury v Madison, Chief Justice Marshall placed himself (the Court) above the Constitution as the arbiter of laws, by establishing the doctrine of Judicial review., in which SCOTUS can declare a law illegal.
The Court found that Madison’s refusal to deliver the commission was illegal, but did not order Madison to hand over Marbury’s commission via writ of mandamus. Instead, the Court held that the provision of the Judiciary Act of 1789 enabling Marbury to bring his claim to the Supreme Court was itself unconstitutional, since it purported to extend the Court’s original jurisdiction beyond that which Article III, Section 2, established.
@dnkarr, Given the slate of increasingly younger and more progressive Democrats winning their primaries, many of whom are poised to win in the General, respectfully, I disagree. I would add these past 8 years of Trump are having an impact on much of our party, both its leaders and its constituents, that isn’t immediately visible.
I am with you Barbara, but the old establishment Dems, like Nancy and Chuck hate progressives with the passion of Rahm Emanuel who called us "fucking retards".
Nancy, in charge of the DCCC backed a homophobe against a gay, and backed Conservadem Joe Kennedy Jr, against progressive Sen <Markey of MA.
And she hates the Progressive caucus, especially the Squad.
There is a reason for this. Congress critters spend more time on the phone dialing for dollars, than they do,in their jobs, and where do they get the dollars? Millionaires, billionaires, corporations, Bernie showed that a progressive populist, a genuine one,could out raise those dependent on plutocrat money, but the DNC put their thumb on the scale in the primaries for Hillary.
The problem is the two party system, which not only enables, but requires, like water to a mammal, money in politics.
I keep hearing about this so-called “insurrection “. This is a leftist propaganda narrative. If it truly was an insurrection, why hasn’t anyone been charged with that crime?
Ok it's been a couple of hours now. Been really searching for my fake smile mask. 🤡🤠 Dr. Fake Smile - please help me. Getting desperate. What medical insurance do you take?
I have read and reread Article III of the Constitution parts 1, 2 and 3. The only thing in it that mentions conduct is that they shall serve during good conduct.
Article III section 2,Constitution saysArticle II, Section 2, Clause 2:
He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.
There is nothing in the Constitution,other than impeachment, about the removal of cabinet members and judges. In Meyers v United States
The United States Supreme Court affirmed the lower court's ruling and held 6-3 that the that the power to remove appointed officials rests solely with the president.
It has been subsequently intepreted, by whom?, that the rulin doesn't include judges.
That falls in the same category, even less, than the headnote, not the ruling, in Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific, written in by a law clerk, himself a former president of a Rail Road company, that corporations are persons, and has been used by SCOTUS in other cases like First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti and Buckley v Veleo which led to Citzens United.
The house has no role in ratifying the appointment of judges and cabinet members
And in my opinion, there is nothing in the constitution or law that prohibits the president and the senate from removing a federal judge, including the Supreme Court, such a decision CANNOT reside in SCOTUS, it is a profound conflict of interest.
And there is nothing that requires impeachment or even a trial. A simple vote will do
Hmmm... I'll have to think about this one a bit... there's a lot there to think about.
Just BTW... If we follow the supposed Conservative principles of textualism and Originalism, the SCOTUS doesn't have the right to judge if a law is Constitutional or not. CJ Marshall gave the Court that power.
At present the Supreme Court has 9 justices, a fact that would make the Alanta Braves jealous. Odds would figure a pretty even split between conservatives and liberals. This was how things sat pretty much until Donald Trump loaded the court with 3 new "conservative" members that so far have done as they've been told. SCOTUS is being controlled by a 3rd part's influence, one that holds no elected office but still wields leverage over the court. The past is over, and the new court will be rendering decisions based upon a fool's errand for some time to come. Thank you so very much Mr. Trump, stupid is as stupid does.
Donald Trump isn't stupid. Actually he is a self preservationist, he does not care one whit about anything other than himself, and every action he has taken has been to protect and advance himself.
He knows that we have the best government money can by, he knows that the political power resides in that money, and that the money uses and even exacerbates the anger and angst of what is now his cult
He gives the money, tax cuts and deregulation, they give him free publicity and money, to bullshit the cult, gives the cult what they demand, the necks and blood of their hated enemy. And his success is assured.
The indictments, the trials, all bumps in the road, Trump is pissed off and wants revenge, but is undeterred because he knows that in the end he will be victor and dictator, with the help of Muslims, Hispanics and black men. That's right the very groups that he has threatened, are the ones that will elect him, by either sitting out the election, voting third party or even, gasp, voting for him.
Paul, Hence the reason we must hold our 49 seats and flip 1 Republican-held seat with the VP (presuming we hold the White House) casting the tie-breaking vote. Clearly, I’m also presuming some form of filibuster reform, for example resuscitating the talking filibuster, to ensure legislation eventually moves to the floor for debate and an up or down majority vote.
You are hallucinating after having drunk a LOT of psychedelic kool-aid: Particularly: 1) There was no steal, that is just a lie made up by Trump and promoted by believers like you because you don't want to admit Trump lost plain & simple. So far he has never been the choice of the plurality of voters. Never. You just wish he was and just keep lying about it thinking if you repeat it enough it will somehow become true. No such luck for you.
2) Those unvetted immigrants are unvetted like our ancestors were unvetted when they walked off the boat. Times have changed, but you're still trying to change the rules on them. Going by the stats of crime rates, we'd be better off with them than with the crowd you hang out with.
3) Because of our low overall birthrates, and the fact that many native born true-blood types seem to be retarded, we're going to need all those immigrants to pay for OUR retirements and to keep America competitive.
Turns out Liberal Democrats are the only truly decent people left in the country. No wonder you call us all those nasty names, you've got nothing else. Just a lot of ugly negative feelings and a bunch of fictional stories Rightwing media has fed you. And you think you and your kind should run the country...?!?!?! You must be drunker than a skunk. You can't even run a section of the country the right way... let alone the whole country. You do not qualify and never will.
What planet do you live on? Certainly not THIS plant earth. So I’ll ask. What’s your code of ethics? Do you actually have any? Fortunately for you, you survived Covid. Ask yourself, why did more right wingers percentage wise die of Covid than those on the left? Because they were told not to believe their own eyes and ears. I’d call that natural selection. Survival of the smartest. Did Trump refuse treatment when he fell ill or forgo his Covid shot? Nope to either. But he told you not to do so. Why is that? As to Ukraine. Who invaded who? It’s pretty clear. As my very conservative father would say, if you think it’s so great in Russia, move there. And I’d concur with his statement, especially in your case. I do agree with you though that the border is a mess. So why did republicans stall when they had a chance to do something about it? And last I looked, Steve Bannon is going to trial for stealing money from guys like you who gave to support the wall. Oh, wait, it takes WORK to actually govern. Something republicans have not done since the early 2000’s. Instead, grift makes them more money.
The Old Left splintered when Stalin’s crimes became understood, and those who hoped for something better in Russia saw the truth. I thought the bitter and closed-minded Russia worshippers went extinct. Not so! Their grandchildren worship Putin now.
Yep! I think back to when I was old enough to think about politics and that was when Goldwater was running. That far right came around once again. And here we are. But even more stupid than before.
Goldwater was a decent American. His political views differed from mine now. But remember, Hillary Rodham was once a “Goldwater Girl” back in the day. I think he would have been on the forefront of cleaning up the wreckage of his party. He and Bill Buckley threw out the rabid Birchers, so that nobody would confuse Republicans with utter lunatics and scum. It’s been sixty years of watching the sewers back up. Remember when Nixon was the low-water-mark for the Party?
I agree with your #1. Trump & Graham, who were actually caught on tapes pressuring election officials to change votes to favor Republicans, & no doubt they & other Republicans did the same successfully in many other races that gave Republicans the win in all 10 tossup Senate races & all 27 House races (the odds of this happening by random chance is 1 in 75 trillion), & Trump in a number of states by much larger margins than predicted, mainly in states whose electoral apparatus was (& still is) controlled by Republicans & which use the problematic ES&S voting machines that are owned & managed by Trumpsters & manipulable remotely, as well as those members of the Trump administration & Republicans in Congress involved in the attempt to illegally overturn the legitimate election results &/or planning, organizing & inciting the Capitol Insurrection & attempt to assassinate the VP & SOTH, should all be expelled from this country as traitors. Get rid of these liars, cheaters, demagogues & traitors!
So, a code of conduct to you is simply an extra-judicial means of retaliation? You must love the Enabling Act of 1933. It did everything you would want, and more. Frustratingly, the supporters were some of the first to hear the knock at the door. NO FAIR!
I’m reassured you’re not “playing dumb by pretending not to see the evidence.” I think you’re the real deal, through and through. You don’t like people who “believe in COVID?” That’s a code of ethics? Expelling people who don’t love the New Soviets as much as you do?
Is 65% 2/3rds? Registered Trumplican Traitors make up only 35% of the electorate! (I was, bafflingly, a year ahead in math in high school, so I took none in college. I forgot AAAAAAALLLLL of it!)
Democrats aren’t even committed to imposing a code of ethics/conduct on SCOTUS. We need new leadership that is committed to DOING not just ranting and fundraising. Why aren’t they in favor of term limits for Congress and SCOTUS? POTUS has term limits since 1951!
The Supreme Court Has Already Given Us The American Civil War Fought Over Slavery (Later called States Rights ). These Clowns 🤡 wear Robes to present and pretend to be Impartial But it’s Just Window Dressing toMake The Confidence Game seem to Be More Than Just a Plain Confidence Game of Crooks and Deception of The RUBES with costumes…
Citizen, What role did the Supreme Court play in the civil war.
From what I know, it came about because Congress refused to legalize slavery throughout all the states, especially the new states in the west that were joining the union.
The cotton kings of South Carolina perceived that as a threat to their economic well being, power and wealth, and seceded from the union, citing slavery as the cause, followed quickly by Arkansas and other states.
I know of no involvement by SCOTUS, but I am open to new info.
The refusal of the SC to Actualize the the Constitution all men are created equal and to allow The States to decide What’s the constitution means to them. The decision to allow slavery without justification and deny the humans to be just property…
The result was to let the mostly Southern
Slave owner to exploit humans as they were animals . Slaves were actively Used to breed more new baby slaves for the long term benefit of the owner of the humans treated as property.
Yep, all you say is true, However the constitution did not say All men are created equal, point of order that was the Declaration of Independence, and it said men, not persons or people,
The Constitution was drawn up by a different group of men, Thomas Jefferson is created with writing the Declaration of Independence
In that era only men had rights, property owning men at that British common law prevailed, and was carried over into the newly formed country.
Property owning black men did have the right to vote, in states that did not preclude them from voting, which of course were the slave states. The only state that I could find where property owning black men voted was New Jersey and until until 1804, when the state passed a law.
The problem is from the beginning, that all powers not delegated to the Federal Government, are relegated to the states, and that includes voting, civil affairs, taxes and even military affairs (National Guards aka state militias)
Joseph, The logic of your call, notwithstanding, the Constitution provides conviction by two-thirds of the Senate as the sole recourse for removal of a Supreme Court Justice.
Daniel, While you make good points, because our framers made it difficult to edit them, I’m not convinced a criminal conviction and detention invariably would result in their removal from the bench. Case in point: were Donald Trump sentenced to jail time, he still could become President.
If those crimes - perjury and accepting bribes were adjudicated as felonies, and they were found guilty, those Justices would be disbarred. You cannot be a lawyer with felony convictions - at least, that is my understanding. So, if you are disbarred, can you still remain a Supreme Court Justice? I don’t think so!
Barbara, I have read Article III of the Constitution and it does not say any of that, it only says that a justice will serve during good behavior, it has no remedy for removal of judges.
Article II says that the President will appoint and the Senate confirm.
Therefore he who appoints can also remove,it doesn't even provide a requirement for a trial or other procedure.
Peggy, I agree and, frankly, stay in the fight convinced, that if Democrats succeed, this November, to control both U.S. Chambers and hold the White House, we will have a shot at enacting reforms that would be truly transformative.
I want to hear Biden say he will expand the Supreme Court if the American people will give him the House of Representatives and the Senate in enough numbers to eliminate the filibuster and to end this criminal and corrupt court’s reign of terror. This is war people and the Republican terrorists in our own country are winning.
Nancy, I understand increasingly more Democrats in both U.S. Chambers plus the President have become increasingly more receptive to expanding the Court. However, were they to announce their intent before the election, they would be subject to the potentially fatal criticism of wanting to pack the Court, despite the fact that in 1869 the number of justices was set at 9, each assigned to one of the 9 U.S. federal courts of appeal; today there are 13.
Steve, To be clear, the Dems opposed to ending the filibuster are receptive to resuscitating the talking filibuster and/ or filibuster cut-outs. Either way, the point is the increasing receptivity to ensuring legislation eventually moves to the floor for debate and an up or down majority vote.
As for the Court, the point that still is in question is whether term limits can be imposed without having to amend the Constitution requiring a two-thirds majority in both U.S. Chambers ratified by three-fourths of the States. To the contrary, expanding the Court, presuming some reform to the filibuster, would require simple majority votes in each Chamber signed into law by the President.
So suppose it's passed. It's contested and goes before the Supreme Court. SCOTUS could say it's unconstitutional and a constitional amendment is required.
It seems the bottom line is this:
a rogue SCOTUS can't be stopped if if has the backing of over a third of Senators.
Maybe the framers of the Constitution got it wrong on this.
Steve, I would note, while I’ve heard Brennan Center President and CEO Michael Waldman assert that term limits could be imposed without having to amend the Constitution, I’m not thoroughly convinced. On the matter of the filibuster, I imagine the public would welcome the resuscitation of the talking filibuster and occasional carve-outs on matters relative to fundamental rights like voting. Such a reform would return the Senate to its original purpose—to be a truly deliberative body.
I think Steve's point is that the Democrats will be subject to intense political pressure to back off from increasing the number of justices on the SCOTUS. Many will see it as "packing the court" regardless of any other argument. Some of the weak knee Democrats may decide not to support. Ditto the filibuster. These important changes will not be a "walk in the park" for the Democrats and may cost them Congressional seats in later elections.
Tim, My view is if we’re in a position to expand the Court, it will be incumbent upon us to make the case so the project isn’t viewed by reasonable people as court-packing.
I guess you mean make the case after the election since you said previously an intent signalled before the election would subject it to the fatal criticism of packing the court. I agree with that.
After the election pack the hell out of the court making the case to the public, as far as I'm concerned.
Polls: Garbage in, garbage out. If polls decided the election, Trump would have been re elected and there would have been a blue wave, and Hillary would have been President.
Polling companies are profit and ideologically driven,.and questions are constructed to push, not determine, opinions.
My under graduate Statistics professor had us study How to Lie with Statistics, and he used that book to create the exams.
Nancy, that's the kind of messaging President Biden needs to send out on the campaign trail. Speak the truth about the supreme court, the monopolistic corporations and their greed being the reason the cost of living is so high, the republicans voting no about IVF, and the cancer that is trump taking down their party. It is war and we have to put up a better defense. Once we've put up a defense, we need to go on the offense! We cannot wring our hands and cry 'What can we do'? There is plenty we can do. Talk to people, get people to register and vote, send post cards, sign petitions. Speak the truth constantly to the MAGA followers and those sitting on the fence. It is possible to win some of them over. We cannot afford to be complacent! Vote Blue, America!!
I agree. One concept I read yesterday by a man who has started a web for people leaving MAGA is not to call them names but to be kind and respectful. Like Mrs. Obama said, “When they go low, we go high.” The man was a rabid MAGA until he started hearing the other side. That’s his advice, which makes sense. It isn’t easy, but I am working on that. I am always surprised at what MAGA people think. There is hope.
Elizabeth, it surprises me, too, when someone who was all in on MAGA suddenly realizes he/she had blinders on! When you talk to them it is important to remember how fervently they believe the lies trump has fed them. When they actually look at both sides, it is heartening to see that awakening! You are right, we must be respectful and it is important NOT to say it's about time you came to your senses. More often than not, the MAGAs that open their eyes are embarrassed at what they had supported.
Oh please..."reign of terror"? Corrupt? Boy, you progressives get very dramatic when things don't go your way. Our SCOTUS swings like a pendulum do. At the moment, it's autocorrecting from too many years on the left.
That is reality, Walter. It is the life many Americans have now after the Las Vegas massacre, Marjory Stoneman Douglas killings, & hundreds more; young children raped & impregnated, women forced to carry a dead fetus to “term” because she can’t have it removed medically — which would prevent her becoming infected & threatening her life. People are your family, Walter. Women & children & men deserve to be free of authoritarian oppression that reduces our humanity to less than an animal’s. Compassion is not a sin.
Correct, all those situations are horrific. Just as the drug cartels that control our border and extort money and human trafficking to people trying to get to America. I'm sure you've heard of Rape trees. We've lost about 100,000 souls to fentanyl every year for the past 5 years. Twice the number of soldiers we lost in Vietnam. I am unaware of anyone being forced to carry a dead child. Maybe you can provide a link or reference to investigate. Compassion certainly is not a sin. However, killing developing children, let alone viable, doesn't sound like compassion to me.
Pat, nothing bad happens to people like Walter (he thinks). Bad things happen only to people he doesn’t know (but hates anyway, and they must have deserved it). People like Walter are incapable of imagining empathy.
This is Donald’s gig. He understands Divide And Rule. Bring everyone together to do his will, then peel them off one at a time and call them enemies. The Gulag made it to 20 million, just one at a time. And the suckers never wise up.
Correct. People who use the phrase “virtue signaling” honestly think decency is always an act, because that’s how they operate — they are always pretending they aren’t terrible, but anybody who supports Trump is obviously quite awful.
You can always tell when a phrase cuts too close to the truth. Progressives hate that term, and others like (try Woke) because it's true. Progressives take what they believe to be the high, moral and correct perspective. Anyone who chooses to disagree, MUST be attacked, cancelled and ridiculed. Disagree with any element of the LBGT+ community? You're a homophobe. Question the wisdom or lack of research on chemical or surgical transitioning of children or adolescents? Your transphobic. If you're black, and "don't vote for me", you're NOT BLACK. "Put ya'll back in chains"
You know the drill. Saul Alinsky wrote the book. Hillary did her thesis on him. Obama worked in one of his "activist organizations.
Rule #5 and 13 seems to fit. So, your reaction to the phrase "Virtue Signaling", tells us all we need to know about you as well. Truth is truth.
Huh? “Don’t disagree” seems to be an error. Actually, the reply that would have impressed me is along the lines of “Pat, thanks for pointing out those examples. I will think about what you say. “
Could you be more dramatic? Why can't you formulate a position without attacking the character of the person you disagree with? There are almost 400,000,000 guns in the USA. More guns than people. Our problem isn't guns, it's mentally disturbed people. Machine guns have been strictly controlled and illegal for citizens since 1934. We've had semi-automatic pistols and rifles since the 1880's. When I was in HS, it wasn't unusual for someone to have a gun hanging in a rack in their pickup. Schools had shooting teams. If you want to end homicides, most of which happen in drug related conflicts, do something about the drugs flowing across our borders. By far handguns are involved in about 80% (approx. 8,000/year) of murders. Long guns very rarely by comparison.
Great question. Let's think about this. Other than China (totalitarian) and India, we have the third most people in the world. India has strictly limited who can own a gun, and what kind since 1959. Combine that with their deep poverty until fairly recently. Of course, India has a long record of internal conflicts between religions where taking a life was usually done with a club or knife.
The US has always had the second amendment. So, ownership here has been a right. Our history has been expanding into an often-hostile wilderness where guns were a necessity. Lastly, since 1965 when we redefined our immigration policies to encourage more people from South America, Africa, Asia etc., we've had introduced cultural differences. A simple look at the statistics of our homicides and other crimes of violence shows the non-European segments of our population are heavily overrepresented. Prior to 1965, the US was 90% European. Today that figure is about 60%. So, the lack of gun violence we have seen in the EU up until recently I think may be due to their culture being homogeneous with shared values. Of course, the last ten years of massive immigration from North Africa and the ME is changing their situation as well. Different cultural values, religious values, attitudes to the concepts of human rights. etc.
But back to your question. We've always had some degree of nuttiness here. Let's face it, people who had it made in Europe and around the world didn't need to give up everything and take a gamble on coming to the new world. It could be argued our national DNA is more attuned to risk taking. Our founding documents provide lots more freedoms than other nations. But our craziness in wanting to kill strangers isn't as widespread as we might think. Again, dig into the crime statistics. Facts will show certain communities and cultures foment most of the violence you read about in the news.
The most frightening group now is white males. They’re the ones who walk into schools, theaters, churches etc and start murdering. What are we going to do to control these violent, outlaw Europeans?
The problem is that 90% of gun owners are harmless, and 10% need their weapons taken away. The big problem is that gun owners take offense at taking guns from people who pose a danger. If gun owners didn’t shill for the manufacturers, and contributed decent solutions, we might make progress. Switzerland has firearms in nearly every home, and have a very strict no-bullshit gun CULTURE. Contrary to many opinion, many countries have private ownership. What they don’t have is propaganda.
I agree to a point. I'd say 99% of legal gun owners are harmless. It's that 1% that shouldn't have a gun. But that like trying to pick the fly crap out of the pepper. Here in Cleveland, almost all violence with guns is centered on drug disputes in a very small segment of our population. Statistics don't lie
Well then, why the f*, Walter, aren’t the 90-something percent UP IN ARMS, so to speak, defending their reputations? They shill for the “NRA,” an Astroturf grass-roots phoney-baloney puppet of big manufacturers? The 2nd Amendment zombies howl on command when ANYONE is prevented from combat weapons ownership. We need the 90% to grow the hell up and be responsible Americans.
Dummy, fentanyl is fairly easy to cook, and a kilo gets you well over a million doses. Why do people see it as some mysterious foreign substance? I’m sure home-cooked fentanyl is taking off in the US.
I'm sure the drug cartels are working to move their operations into the US as well. Afterall, if they can get the raw ingredients here in the US, they can avoid the expense of the border. Besides, they're making too much money trafficking human beings. But let's not kid ourselves. For the past 20+ years our Opioid crisis has been related to drugs being brought into the country. Besides, just because someone can make a batch here in the US doesn't mean the problem should be ignored. 2023 110,000 people died from the stuff. And many of them unaware what they were taking was laced with that stuff.
Walter, the problem is US. The market in AMERICA for whores, especially underage whores, is the problem. Shady brown foreigners aren’t the ones paying to f* little boys and girls.
“Law authorities have led sting operations in connection with Super Bowl games. During the Super Bowl XLVIII, authorities arrested 45 pimps and rescued 25 child victims of human trafficking. During Super Bowl XLIX, authorities led a sting operation called National Day of Johns and arrested almost 600 people and rescued 68 victims. Publicity surrounding the Super Bowl provides opportunities for public awareness of sex trafficking.”
I don’t know about you, but I don’t go to many Super Bowls. People who like living large, who can drop $100 large every year on the Big Show, those are the ones buying baby prostitutes. Don’t point to some pimply Venezuelan whoremonger.
And fentanyl? Here’s a chill 4 U. It’s the WEAKEST synthetic opiate in its class. Some ones like sufentanyl go for a million doses in just 10 grams, a Chap-Stick container. Just one batch, and retire. Walter White was an under-achiever.
What the hell are you talking about? There has not been a liberal Supreme Court since 1969 and the maggots cheated and lied to get the Supreme Court the way it is right now
So then, what's your problem? If the court hasn't been liberal since 1969, we've lived these past 55 years with a court no different than how our court is structured today. So, why is this court suddenly so terrible?
You're the one who said they were autocorrecting. They're doing the opposite. The reason you didn't know that our court hasn't been liberal since 1969 is cuz you couldn't tell because Supreme Court Justices aren't supposed to have opinions. They're supposed to follow the Constitution. This court is helping the Nazi takeover
Who are you defining as a Nazi? Do you even know who the Nazi's were? I think you're misapplying a term. Are these so-called Nazi's building concentration camps for their enemies? Please stop with the easy buzz words that don't apply.
When your lord and savior Trump wins, he will be building and using concentration camps to hold the 11 million people he wants to deport, and the tens of millions more "liberals, Queers,and POC" that he has declared his enemy and upon whom he seeks revenge.
I'm defining those quoting Hitler like Trump for instance. And you must be deaf dumb and blind if you haven't heard about the concentration camps. They might not be building them right at this very second but they do have abandoned military bases they can use. Maybe they're working on those. Project 2025 is like all Nazi. Maggots just called a religious move. Taking away women's rights to their own autonomy is Nazi. I'm guessing you don't know what Nazi means. In fact I go as far as to say that you're one of those people who thinks the Holocaust never happened. Did your family come to America after World War II?
Funny you should mention concentration camps because that's what the fascists that have devised Project 2025 have in mind for people they want to deport.
Walter the problem is three specific jurists are pushing their views onto American society. Do you think Alito and Thomas would have dared to go against what Americans wanted if they knew it was a free unbiased court?
You'd have to be more specific, but as Obama said several times, "Elections have consequences". He also said he was going to "Fundamentally Change America", which certainly sounded ominous to me. No one or nation is perfect. but looking back over our history, certainly the "arc of justice" has been the defining principle since our Founding. All this court has done is apply the original intent of the Constitution to their decisions. They haven't created rights. But that's the beauty of our constitution and brilliance of our Founders. We have a congress empowered to create laws and fund directions.
What? Is there really a big difference between the Catholics and protestants (or Jews for that matter) when it comes to values? Christian values are largely formed from the Old Testament, Greek philosophy and Roman law. AKA and Western Civilization born from the Enlightenment. Would you rather live under Sharia law?
Yes there is a big difference between the Abrahamic religions. Protestants range from liberal to extremist, Catholics are ruled by papal edicts, or at least the ones that modern Catholics like, Jews don't actually bother anyone. The Jewish religion ranges from reformed to ultra orthodox, but they don't try to shove their religion down anyone's throat, nor make it the law of the land like Protestants and Catholics do.
Christian values are whatever the person who claims to be a Christian says they are, they use their god and their Jesus as a sock puppet.
They couldn't live under the values of the Old Testament, the values are encapsulated in the 613 Laws in the book of laws, Leviticus.
And even your Jesus is blood thirsty, Luke 22:36, Sell your cloak and by a sword
Luke 19:27 Moreover, bring my enemies here who do not wish to have me reign over them and kill them before me!'”
And then there is the misogyny and gender apartheid of Paul
I am glad you mentioned Sharia, I have incurred much wrath from HAMAS loving and ignorant "liberals", because I am an Islamophobe.
I have studied the Quran, hadiths and biography of Mo by ibn Ishaq, and am more familiar with Islam and Islamic law than most Muslims, to the extent that Muslims call me an apostate because in their ideology if you know as much as I you have to be a Muslim.
Islam is like the other Abrahamic religions a death cult, intolerant, demanding, triumphalist, just like the Christian religions.
Christianity in the west is what it is today because of the enlightenment and democracy, because it schismed, but there are powerful forces that want it to return to it's roots, the Mosaic Law: Dominionism, aka Christian Reconstruction, aka Christian NAZIs and the New Apostolic Reformation, these people make the Taliban and Sharia law look liberal.
There is no chance that America will come under Sharia law, the fear and claim is frankly bullshit propaganda, but there is real threat that it will come under Mosaic law, even worse than Sharia, and it's proponents are not only politiicians like Mike Johnson and Mike Pence or Mike Flynn, but billionaires like Harlan Crowe and the two oil billionaires that actually run Texas. Tim Dunn and Farris Wilks
It's more extreme than ever. It's been reliably corporatist & anti-environmental for over 40 years, & now has become antidemocratic & anticonstitutional since the addition of the 3 illegitimate Trump picks & corrupt & flagrantly biased under the fascist extremism of Thomas & Alito.
I live in a city where the river caught fire back in the '70's. People are trout fishing there now. Please. I'm old enough to remember driving thru cities like Akron and Pittsburgh where the pollution was horrific. Now the skies are clear as is the water. Perfect? Of course not. Work to do? Of course. But you're throwing around some pretty heavy words there Jaime. Corrupt, fascist, extremist, illegitimate etc.
Just imagine, 1969? That means everything you've been blaming on liberals is due to what conservatives have been doing. Everything, since 1969. I was 14. When I went into high school that's when we started discussing how America would fall from within and it is unless we stop it but you won't. When I was 14 I could care less about politics. I'm guessing you're not 14. Very unfortunate, just like it's unfortunate that Trump isn't 14. Responsibility comes with being an adult and Trump isn't responsible or an adult
Trump made this scotus with the help of Mitch McConnell. He's the one who stopped Obama from appointing a scotus. This was planned before Trump became president. Just like they needed Bush Jr to be president so they could continue their plans. Who do YOU think took down the World Trade Center? Seems to me it's the same Nazis trying to take down the country right now. This plan hasn't stopped planning since 1945. Even before that. After all Hitler had plenty of time to plan while he was sitting in jail. Trump doesn't mock Hitler, he mimics Hitler. He mocks our servicemen, for instance. You know the people who gave their lives to stop Hitler. He speaks that way so people will give up and give in
We know who took down the World Trade Center. Islamic terrorists funded by Osama bin Laden. Who do YOU think brought down the towers? As for Obama's choice, who is now our Attorney General, based upon what I've seen of him so far, thanks god he didn't get on the court. And Biden's pick is so wise, she can't even define what a woman is because she's not a biologist. Yet she IS a woman. The Woke crap has got to stop.
Yeah Osama Bin Laden who played in The Playpen with George Jr cuz their fathers were business partners. See you don't even know what woke means. It means you got educated and just cuz you don't like the answer doesn't mean it ain't true. If Garland was on the court they wouldn't be sitting on these cases waiting for after the election. That's downright cheating. It's called helping a candidate which is totally against the ethics of the Court. It's all a game. People are getting laid off by people who want Trump to lower their taxes. It's their way of trying to get you to vote for him cuz they're going to blame it all on Biden who has nothing to do with whether or not you have a job or prices or anything else these corporations rule over
Fact check on Merrick Garland. Unlike those reactionaries who will defend him because he is attacked from the right., I castigate Biden for appointing him.
Obama was weak, A black executive of a country ruled by white, mostly racist men. He was opposed at every turn. His only achievement was the ACA and then only after he got the insurance companies on board by dangling profits in front of them, and indeed they wrote the ACA.
When a seat came open on the Supreme Court, the right wing telegraphed that they would thwart his nomination, so he asked the most Righit Wing Senator at that time Orrin Hatch R-UT for the name of someone that the right wing in the senate would approve and Orrin Hatch gave him the name of Merrick Garland.
Garland worked for the Federalist Society as a moderator, even then McConnell didn't want to give the darkie a win, so he refused to bring him up for a vote.
Garland has proven his right wing bonafides, time and again.
He never appointed a special counsel to investigate much less indict the seditionist coup plotters in congress, not even Lauren Boebert who kicked off the assault on the Capitol by tweeting 1776.
Only the pawns have been prosecuted, and even then 99 % have been given slaps on the wrist, and only the ring leaders prosecuted for felonies and given real prison time in years.
He jumped to appoint a Trump humping lawyer, David Weiss, to prosecute Hunter Biden. Weiss jumped in front of Garland and wanted the Job, badly.
Garland then used a phony excuse to move the documents trial to Florida claiming that is where the crime occurred. It occurred in D.C. when Waltine Nauta moved the documents from the White House to a truck and then to an Airplane.
Moving it to Florida enabled him to appoint a newly minted inexperienced Trump loyalist as the judge over the case.
He has used the excuse of the "wheel" named for the wheel of fortune, in which it is chance that determines the judge, but the wheel hasn't been used in decades.
Merrick Garland has proven to be a bonafide and loyal Federalist Society member.
And now the left is expected to defend him because he is attacked from the right.
That is a fools game, reverse psychology.
Trump also called the media, the enemy of the people, and he is absolutely correct. the media has given him millions of dollars in free air time (and there is no such thing as bad publicity), and thanks to the media he won the presidency, and they are at it again.
Trump also called for defunding the FBI, but the FBI is ultra conservative, and full of right wingers. It was investigating BLM and antifa up to the moment of Jan 6th, and I suspect stilll are. On their radar progressives, the left,liberals are the enemy and the Proud Boys, Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association and militias are heroes and patriots.
And again reverse psychology, Trump attacks and the left defends.
I successfully used reverse psychology to manipulate a recalcitrant, and defiant step son. He is still an asshole, and I didn't want to finance his college education ( I have three children of my own, who didn't have ODD), so I pressed him to study and get good grades, he did the opposite, and at 17 he dropped out of school and joined the Marines. I used reverse psychology to get him to do what he would resist as well.
And I voted for Goldwater in 1964, and now you and I are at the opposite ends of the pole, again Walter. There was no culture war in 1964 and 1968, but the MAGA culture war has apparently grabbed you by the gonads, and as Nixon said your heart and mind followed.
There was no culture war in 1968! Chicago Democratic National Convention? Anti-war movement. I was in college '69-'73. My home was less than 5 miles from the May 4th Kent State shootings. I remember a lot of culture war. You don't understand MAGA IMHO. I don't like Trump. But I believe his policies were directionally correct. Not being a politician, but being a narcissist, means he says things in a way that does put people off. Me included. He has turned half the nation crazy with TDS because he does all the things the rest of our pols hide. I mean, congress has paid out $18,000,000 in hush money from their private slush fund to cover up their behavior. Isn't that "election interference?". Yet Trump enters a non-disclosure agreement (legal) with someone and suddenly he is a criminal? Please. Trump has been attacked by the DNC and Rino's since the day he came down the escalator in 2015. While the Clintons, and Biden's skate with the aid of our MSM. Or a better name would be Pravda.
Harlan Crow is the cofounder of The Club for Growth, a group that advocates for conservative reforms. Crow “befriended” Justice Thomas when he threatened to quit the court to make more money. Justice Thomas did not declare the millions of dollars he received from his billionaire donor until it was exposed. And he didn’t recuse himself from cases that benefited Crow and The Club for Growth.
If Justice Sotomayor received millions from a progressive mega donor and didn’t claim it, would that be corrupt?
Another right winger joins the chorus. I was correct, as we get closer to November they will be legion. The word must be out on the right wing social media. There is one way to cure this problem Robert and that is to make this pay to post, which is most substack.
Common Bill. You want to life only in a bubble where people agree with you? We need dialogue. People need to hear the other side. Politely, yes. But I'm not calling you or anyone else here a danger to our society. To quote an old rock song, "it's only you and me, and we just disagree". (Dave Mason)
First of all don't call me Bill, we are not friends and no one calls me Bill
My situation is that I don't live in a bubble. I was a right wing extremist in 1964 and voted for Goldwater. I've seen life from both sides now, as the song by Zach Sobiech, Clouds, says.
I have not only heard your side but live it and then some, I was even visited by a recruiter for Aryan Nations.
A situational change in 1989 saved me from myself. But I knew too much to become a leftist as well, so here I sit forming my own opinions Neither left, right or center.
The world of ideas and politics is, to me, a buffet, a charcuterie, a crudité, I have sampled and take what makes sense, and leave that which leaves a foul taste in my mouth.
How about you. Looks to me like you swallow the whole hog, like an anaconda.
You are sure full of disgust, even hatred and fear of people of color, gays and trans. and yet none of them are a threat to you., well maybe to your perception of male superiority.
LOL, OK William. I see your mind is made up. I am neither afraid of, or hate POC, the gay community, etc. My family is a blended race family. I've hired and worked with numerous members of the gay community. And as a husband and father to a daughter and granddaughters, I fully embrace the fact females are the superior gender.
The pendulum has been on the right for 44 years, moving into fascist territory for much of the last decade, at risk of swinging into Nazi territory permanently should Trump & the republonazis get back in power.
I agree with the idea, but I think that kind of honesty would scare independents and cost Biden the election.
I believe we need to educate everyone to vote against this Supreme Court. The only way to reign in this court is if Dems win the Presidency, House & Senate. Biden is part of it, but if he loses, Trump could replace another justice.
Biden is a criminal. He is violating US law in continuing to send arms to the mass-murderers in Israel. WE DO have laws on how the nations who send arms to USE them.
Biden is a CRIMINAL. A nice guy, but a criminal. And probably too stupid or mentally gone to realize it.
And the lead criminal of the Na-Zi-onist regime is coming to town.
I agree Biden hasn't done his job as POTUS and am concerned he is a criminal. But not because of his support for the only democracy in the MENA. However, I feel about Hamas and all the other Iranian supported terror groups. They need to be treated like we treated Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan. Destroyed. As a US taxpayer, I'm perfectly find seeing our munitions used to end those monsters.
BTW, recent polls in Gaza show 70+% of Gazan's support Hamas and think Oct. 7 was right to do. They are the Nazi's.
The best descent against the bump stock was, if it walks like a duck, talks like a duck, and looks like a duck, then it’s a duck. The bump stock turns an automatic rifle into a machine gun PERIOD Have these Republicans lost their way or are they that stupid?
And perhaps worse than that. Perhaps looking forward to the fascist country they are creating, where only the brownshirts are carrying machine guns and the rest of us are ratting on our neighbors to save our own skins.
Under the Administrative Procedure Act, the agency is supposed to do fact finding. If they failed to do it, the remedy would have been to remand for a hearing. It's like NONE of the justices went to law school.
The trouble is, if you want it to be a chicken, you can always change your search terms. If it walks on 2 legs, has a beak, and is a bird, must be a chicken. That’s how our Formerly Supreme Court deals with the knotty issues of jurisprudence.
It's not about losing their way or stupidity. It's all about how stupid Americans are cuz it's all about lying. They depend on other people's stupidity. It's the same stupidity Germans had when their lives got taken over
Reubicans in Congress either chose not to run again or became subservient like there is a physical threat. It has to be more than merely monetary reward or reelection.
Your understanding is inaccurate. A bump stock does allow a SEMI-AUTOMATIC to be fired more rapidly. But certainly not as fast as an actual "machine gun". Fully automatic rifles and pistols are not legal for private citizens in the USA.
Wasn’t it in Arizona that when votes were recounted, at the insistence of republicans, they had to correct the tally because a few more votes for Biden had been discovered? Hardly anything to change the outcome, but the opposite of what they thought they’d discover. Look that up, it’s real.
It happened multiple times, in Arizona, including the audit, in Georgia, & I think some other states, all after recounts or audits insisted by Republicans, all with a few more votes found for Biden. Just think what might've been found if some of the states whose elections were run by Republicans, whose voting machines were the corruptible ES&S machines, where Republican Senate & House candidates all won tossup races & Trump did significantly better than expected were investigated!
I think we all questioned the down ballot. At least everyone who wasn't a magnet at the time. Of course no one was going to do anything about that. There were too many people who got back in the office who should not have
Keith, I agree with your sentiment; however, Paul is a troll and he's trying to push your buttons. Scroll past and save yourself from raising your blood pressure! There will be an awful lot more in the next few months. We need you in the fight! Vote Blue, America!
Me, too! Sometimes I get so angry, I want to hurl my laptop into the nearest body of water!! When I start feeling that stinkin thinkin coming on, I get away from it for a while. I take a walk, play with my dog, do some gardening, just anything that keeps me from thinking about it for a while. That is what they want us to do. Have a meltdown, say to hell with it and don't do anything about it especially vote. If they can get enough people to throw up their hands and give up, they will achieve victory. We simply cannot let them have that. Vote Blue, America!!
America should open the opportunity for better candidates to enter the politics !
Serious political finance reform, total ban on lobbyists, specially foreign agents and foreign money under any disguise !
Right now, both major political parties are very deeply rotten or corrupted by big money and Supreme Court’s partisan decisions !
Reforming our Supreme Court may never happen and the nomination and confirmation process can be improved if America can put an end to all sorts of corruption in public life ! Congressional candidates should meet much higher standards in order to be a candidate ! Even our most Corrupt senior Senator complained during the recent election that the quality of the candidates was a serious problem for his party and I will add it is a problem for both major parties !
If a guy can let the murder of children, babies, mothers and grandparents go on for eight months and still send weapons, really WMDs …. I don’t know what to think of him ?
Unfortunately there are a few (Conservative) Supreme Court decisions like Citizen's United in the way. The Conservative Justices have equated wealthy special interest group money in politics as "speech" and protected by the First Amendment. Yes, I know, idiotic, but once again reforming our system requires a better Supreme Court. And even if we get a Court that will overturn decision like Citizen's United, all incumbents, Democrat and Republican alike benefit from wealthy special interest money so I am not sure very many Democrats in office really want to do away with it. But I agree with your sentiments that the influence of special interest groups is causing our government to govern in the interests of the wealthy, not the people, causing people to lose faith in democracy, and curiously causing people to somehow believe Trump is their savior.
But I also agree with your sentiments that the influence of special interest groups is causing our government to govern in the interests of the wealthy which is abundantly clear, not for the people, causing people to lose faith in democracy, and curiously causing some mostly republican people to somehow believe Trump is their savior.
This latest ruling of the Supreme Court is the height of pedantic idiocy. The next time someone uses a bump stock to commit mass slaughter they should be indicted as accessories to murder.
Given the make up of Congress, it is not practicle to focus on impeachment and removal. It just won't happen unless the Dems get the majority in the House and 2/3rds in the Senate. That is not happening unfortunately. And even if it did, the Dems are not noted for their ability to have the backbone to act at this level. So the only means forward is to create an enforceable code of ethics in the House should the Dems win the majority. Then expand the court to bring balance. And finally impose strict term limits. 10 years tops. Some have suggested 18 years. That is way to long. Almost an entire generation.
I would submit that the sole strategic choice in today’s poll is to reelect Biden, without whom we neither can impose term limits or expand the size of the court. As for impeaching Alito and Thomas, the two-thirds Senate majority required for conviction pretty much, certainly in the foreseeable future, nullifies that option. I make this point to redirect our focus to the challenge at-hand—hold the White House, retake the House, hold our 49 Senate seats, and flip 1 Republican-held seat. Were we to succeed, the transformative possibilities over the next 2 years would be immeasurable.
If one of those Justices had lost a family member to a random or planned shooting, would they have voted for bump stocks? Probably. They do not have hearts, just pockets.
NO-ONE should be guaranteed a 'job-for-life' - least of all justices, law-makers or presidents! Here in the UK we are implementing a maximum age of 80 for members of the House of Lords (Equivalent to US Senate). I would have preferred 75. Just think - if the US had an upper age limit of 75, neither of the current (unsuitable) presidential candidates would qualify for consideration, and you could also get rid of some of those ghastly justices. BTW I am a fit and healthy 80, and I don't see why anyone of my generation should still have responsible jobs. Give the youngsters a chance!
Retire at 75? I don't understand why anyone would want to work at all, much less up to the age of 75. Even 75 is too old to be working. 65 maybe 55 better 45 best
45 isn't too young to retire. People retire from the U.S. military younger than age 45. I don't see age bringing any wisdom from several of the current Supreme Court justices. In fact, just the opposite - stupidity.
Corruption, rather than stupidity, has nothing to do with age. Witness Matt Gaetz. US military members have physically demanding jobs requiring top physical fitness. These Supreme Court justices aren’t incompetent, they’re evil.
Term limits would help though in limiting the amount of time any single Justice can wreck havoc. Limits also should permit each president to appoint a Justice.
Yes, Re term limits, some opinion piece said, when Tucker Carlson got talked-at by Putin, with info about a 900 year history that supports road he has chosen and forever.
Opinion was—good thing about democratic routine of renewal, by way of elections—means old wood, individuals that imagine God and history, tribe, and “friends” favor them—it doesn’t matter, “Time’s-up,” or a mechanism like vote to dissolve, non-confidence based on a proposed budget, or impeachment (less subtle), works, for peaceful renewal.
Refreshing new ideas and vision from alternate new minds. If “your” ideas were good ones, others will champion them. Get out of the road, off the track, it is not Yours.
Monique, term limits would guarantee that court justices would be out after a certain period of time thus shortening the time they have to cause problems. Also, if the rules were made abundantly clear about impeachment, the justices would think twice about causing chaos.
Idea: since 1977, the Australian High Court (US Supreme Court equivalent) has had a compulsory retirement age: 70. All Federal judges have to retire at 70. That rule was brought it at a referendum due to activities of several older judges (including the Chief Justice at the time) rewriting things to suit themselves. Works in Australia. Worth thinking about in the US?
At the very least, remove Alito and Thomas for their already demonstrated political and ideological biases and penchant for accepting favors. Also, impose on Supreme Court justices the same code of ethics to which every other federal court judge must adhere.
Bryant, While I appreciate your thinking, their removal requires conviction by two-thirds of the Senate, a development I only would expect to see if I live for a very long time. As for imposing a code of ethics, if we can hold our 49 Senate seats, flip 1 Republican seat, and hold the White House, presuming we would need the VP’s tie-breaking vote, I believe our Democratic Senators finally are receptive to filibuster reform and/or cut-outs that would allow the legislation to move to the floor for debate and an up or down majority vote.
I believe you're right that this Senate would never convict Thomas or Alito, not when so many Republicans have already shown a willingness to support a presidential candidate who supported the Jan. 6 insurrection and is also a convicted felon. These are dark times.
Bryant, While you’re right about these being dark times, were we to retake the House, hold our 49 Senate seats, flip 1 Republican-held seat, and hold the White House, we would be on the cusp of immeasurable change. My assertion is based on my understanding that Democrats overall are far more receptive 1) to expanding the Court and 2) to reforming the Senate filibuster rule. This understanding is what keeps me in the fight.
I believe the Democrats, maybe early in Obama’s first term, had the numbers in both chambers to reform the filibuster rule and chose not to do it. Harry Reid seemed to think if the Democrats didn't abuse the rule while in charge the GOP would not repeat its abuse of it when it regained the majority. Seems the Dems never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity.
Bryant, I believe the Democrats honestly thought the republicans would not abuse the filibuster rule and they did. I hope Democrats eyes are open now that you can never trust the republicans to do the right and decent thing. Next time we have the majority, I hope the Democrats will use it to put guardrails back in place that republicans tore down back in Reagan's time.
Let us hope they get the majority and don't blow it then. There remains so much damage from Reagan's presidency.
I am a lifelong Democrat and have no plans to change. That said, those Dems who are currently in office and who have been for the past two decades remind me of Charlie Brown to the Republican’s Lucy, certain every time that the football won’t get yanked away at the last minute, going in for the kick, and landing on their collective posteriors. It’s my hope that they will figure it out the next time (we have the majority), if there is one.
Peggy, You might recall, Harry Reid, in 2013, due to Republicans filibustering nearly every one of Obama’s federal judge nominees, eliminated the filibuster for federal judge appointments. Regrettably, in 2014, Dems lost the Senate to Republicans and, once Trump won the presidency in 2016, McConnell retaliated by eliminating the filibuster for Supreme Court Justice appointments.
Bryant, Democrats, again, controlled both chambers in Biden’s first two years. Ultimately, when neither Sinema nor Manchin would agree to resuscitate the talking filibuster which eventually would have moved the Freedom to Vote: John R. Lewis Act to the floor for debate and an up or down majority vote, Democrats grew increasingly united around the need for filibuster reform. I’m quite confident we won’t blow it if we get another shot in November.
Barbara, It’s just my opinion, but I think Manchin was a Democrat in name only. I don’t know what his overall voting record was, but he seemed to thrive on sticking his finger in the eye of the Democrats as often as he could - especially if it meant more free TV time for him. And Sinema? Well, she seemed to have no beliefs or priorities at all. She was totally driven by money. When that green paper was waved in her face, she followed it like a sheep right off the cliff. Many people no longer subject themselves to a moral value system. Just witness the many Republicans in Congress who still support trump - a treasonous shell of a man. I guess my point is, the Democrats really never had control of the House - not with Manchin and Sinema in the mix.
Barbara Jo Krieger: Manchin was a wolf in sheep's clothing. He was a democrat in name only. I hope he and his coal mine rot; hopefully some place where they can do no damage.
Apologies, but that was never the case:
“On January 20th, 2009, 57 Senate seats were held by Democrats with 2 Independents (Bernie Sanders and Joe Lieberman) caucusing with the Democrats...which gave Democrats 59 mostly-reliable Democratic votes in the Senate, one shy of filibuster-proof “total control.” Republicans held 41 seats.
The 59 number in January, 2009 included Ted Kennedy and Al Franken. Kennedy had a seizure during an Obama inaugural luncheon and never returned to vote in the Senate.....and Al Franken was not officially seated until July 7th, 2009 (hotly contested recount demanded by Norm Coleman.)
The real Democratic Senate seat number in January, 2009 was 55 Democrats plus 2 Independents equaling 57 Senate seats.” See:
https://www.beaconjournal.com/story/news/2012/09/09/when-obama-had-total-control/985146007/
So the claim that the Dems had the votes but chose not to is a very popular myth, but a myth nonetheless. The Dems did not have total control.
And Franken was purged at the instigation of Kirsten Gillibrand. I'd trade him for her in a heartbeat.
The Dems did not have the control that the myth says they did.
It's true that the Dems could have should have done more with the power that they did have during the Obama years, esp. with hindsight, but they were often just shy of the votes they needed. As for Biden's 1st term, Manchin and Sinema really screwed the pooch.
Harry Reid could have and should have exercised the "nuclear option"
What raises hackles is that the filibuster requires a senator to stand at the podium and talk, till the clock runs out. Harry Reid and Chuck Schumer allow the Republicans to say "filibuster" and that is it.
Think about this. We are suppose to be governed by the constitution and laws, but we are really being governed by in house rules, made up by the Senate and the House. and in Marbury v Madison, Chief Justice Marshall placed himself (the Court) above the Constitution as the arbiter of laws, by establishing the doctrine of Judicial review., in which SCOTUS can declare a law illegal.
The Court found that Madison’s refusal to deliver the commission was illegal, but did not order Madison to hand over Marbury’s commission via writ of mandamus. Instead, the Court held that the provision of the Judiciary Act of 1789 enabling Marbury to bring his claim to the Supreme Court was itself unconstitutional, since it purported to extend the Court’s original jurisdiction beyond that which Article III, Section 2, established.
https://www.oyez.org/cases/1789-1850/5us137
In so doing Justice Marshall essentially made SCOTUS dictator.
But as Andrew Jackson said "Justice Marshall has ruled, now let him enforce his ruling".
‘ ever muss an opportunity to miss
an opportunity ‘
Spot-On
or put another way, Democrats are experts at seizing defeat from the jaws of victory.
Sadly they continue to think people will do the right thing. What is right for the majority of citizens. Nope they only do what what helps themselves!
they (DEMs) trust too much.
Barbara Jo - Trust me. Even should Dems retake hold and flip, they'll blow it. That's their M.O. 🥺
@dnkarr, Given the slate of increasingly younger and more progressive Democrats winning their primaries, many of whom are poised to win in the General, respectfully, I disagree. I would add these past 8 years of Trump are having an impact on much of our party, both its leaders and its constituents, that isn’t immediately visible.
I am with you Barbara, but the old establishment Dems, like Nancy and Chuck hate progressives with the passion of Rahm Emanuel who called us "fucking retards".
Nancy, in charge of the DCCC backed a homophobe against a gay, and backed Conservadem Joe Kennedy Jr, against progressive Sen <Markey of MA.
And she hates the Progressive caucus, especially the Squad.
There is a reason for this. Congress critters spend more time on the phone dialing for dollars, than they do,in their jobs, and where do they get the dollars? Millionaires, billionaires, corporations, Bernie showed that a progressive populist, a genuine one,could out raise those dependent on plutocrat money, but the DNC put their thumb on the scale in the primaries for Hillary.
The problem is the two party system, which not only enables, but requires, like water to a mammal, money in politics.
Barbara Jo: Here's hoping you're right. Have a coffee on me - and a donut - if your prediction is correct!☕🍩
Hard to say. Hope springs eternal.
I keep hearing about this so-called “insurrection “. This is a leftist propaganda narrative. If it truly was an insurrection, why hasn’t anyone been charged with that crime?
Dnkarr- cut it with the negativity and cynicism. We tired of that.
Oh so optimism these last 10 years has helped? It is what it is - a giant pile of poo
Tired of losing because of false hope and misplaced optimism.
Exactly
Guess I just couldn't my fake smile mask today. Will keep looking though! 🤡🤠
Ok it's been a couple of hours now. Been really searching for my fake smile mask. 🤡🤠 Dr. Fake Smile - please help me. Getting desperate. What medical insurance do you take?
I have read and reread Article III of the Constitution parts 1, 2 and 3. The only thing in it that mentions conduct is that they shall serve during good conduct.
Article III section 2,Constitution saysArticle II, Section 2, Clause 2:
He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.
There is nothing in the Constitution,other than impeachment, about the removal of cabinet members and judges. In Meyers v United States
The United States Supreme Court affirmed the lower court's ruling and held 6-3 that the that the power to remove appointed officials rests solely with the president.
It has been subsequently intepreted, by whom?, that the rulin doesn't include judges.
That falls in the same category, even less, than the headnote, not the ruling, in Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific, written in by a law clerk, himself a former president of a Rail Road company, that corporations are persons, and has been used by SCOTUS in other cases like First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti and Buckley v Veleo which led to Citzens United.
The house has no role in ratifying the appointment of judges and cabinet members
And in my opinion, there is nothing in the constitution or law that prohibits the president and the senate from removing a federal judge, including the Supreme Court, such a decision CANNOT reside in SCOTUS, it is a profound conflict of interest.
And there is nothing that requires impeachment or even a trial. A simple vote will do
He who giveth can also taketh away.
Hmmm... I'll have to think about this one a bit... there's a lot there to think about.
Just BTW... If we follow the supposed Conservative principles of textualism and Originalism, the SCOTUS doesn't have the right to judge if a law is Constitutional or not. CJ Marshall gave the Court that power.
We agree.
There is a lot of very questionable "common knowledge" going around. Makes me want to avoid the common.
The commons don't bother or threaten me, that's where the fun is.
At present the Supreme Court has 9 justices, a fact that would make the Alanta Braves jealous. Odds would figure a pretty even split between conservatives and liberals. This was how things sat pretty much until Donald Trump loaded the court with 3 new "conservative" members that so far have done as they've been told. SCOTUS is being controlled by a 3rd part's influence, one that holds no elected office but still wields leverage over the court. The past is over, and the new court will be rendering decisions based upon a fool's errand for some time to come. Thank you so very much Mr. Trump, stupid is as stupid does.
Donald Trump isn't stupid. Actually he is a self preservationist, he does not care one whit about anything other than himself, and every action he has taken has been to protect and advance himself.
He knows that we have the best government money can by, he knows that the political power resides in that money, and that the money uses and even exacerbates the anger and angst of what is now his cult
He gives the money, tax cuts and deregulation, they give him free publicity and money, to bullshit the cult, gives the cult what they demand, the necks and blood of their hated enemy. And his success is assured.
The indictments, the trials, all bumps in the road, Trump is pissed off and wants revenge, but is undeterred because he knows that in the end he will be victor and dictator, with the help of Muslims, Hispanics and black men. That's right the very groups that he has threatened, are the ones that will elect him, by either sitting out the election, voting third party or even, gasp, voting for him.
Barbara, and let us not forget that the repugnant senators voted against ethics for the supremes this past week.
Paul, Hence the reason we must hold our 49 seats and flip 1 Republican-held seat with the VP (presuming we hold the White House) casting the tie-breaking vote. Clearly, I’m also presuming some form of filibuster reform, for example resuscitating the talking filibuster, to ensure legislation eventually moves to the floor for debate and an up or down majority vote.
WHY can't we impose a Code of Ethics on the Socialist Demon Rats , to wit:
Want to stay in the Country ?
1- refrain from stealing electionS and then playing dumb by pretending not to see the evidence
2- Stop opening the borders to 15,000,000 unvetted illegals
3- Stop destroying the country by staying away from such HOAXES as the CONvid19 and the green new deal
4- Stop provoking Russia into invading Ukraine then use the "invasion" as a pretext to provoke a Nuclear WW3
That would be an excellent preliminary CODE OF ETHICS
LET'S DO IT
You are hallucinating after having drunk a LOT of psychedelic kool-aid: Particularly: 1) There was no steal, that is just a lie made up by Trump and promoted by believers like you because you don't want to admit Trump lost plain & simple. So far he has never been the choice of the plurality of voters. Never. You just wish he was and just keep lying about it thinking if you repeat it enough it will somehow become true. No such luck for you.
2) Those unvetted immigrants are unvetted like our ancestors were unvetted when they walked off the boat. Times have changed, but you're still trying to change the rules on them. Going by the stats of crime rates, we'd be better off with them than with the crowd you hang out with.
3) Because of our low overall birthrates, and the fact that many native born true-blood types seem to be retarded, we're going to need all those immigrants to pay for OUR retirements and to keep America competitive.
Turns out Liberal Democrats are the only truly decent people left in the country. No wonder you call us all those nasty names, you've got nothing else. Just a lot of ugly negative feelings and a bunch of fictional stories Rightwing media has fed you. And you think you and your kind should run the country...?!?!?! You must be drunker than a skunk. You can't even run a section of the country the right way... let alone the whole country. You do not qualify and never will.
Put that as a mean tweet!!!
What planet do you live on? Certainly not THIS plant earth. So I’ll ask. What’s your code of ethics? Do you actually have any? Fortunately for you, you survived Covid. Ask yourself, why did more right wingers percentage wise die of Covid than those on the left? Because they were told not to believe their own eyes and ears. I’d call that natural selection. Survival of the smartest. Did Trump refuse treatment when he fell ill or forgo his Covid shot? Nope to either. But he told you not to do so. Why is that? As to Ukraine. Who invaded who? It’s pretty clear. As my very conservative father would say, if you think it’s so great in Russia, move there. And I’d concur with his statement, especially in your case. I do agree with you though that the border is a mess. So why did republicans stall when they had a chance to do something about it? And last I looked, Steve Bannon is going to trial for stealing money from guys like you who gave to support the wall. Oh, wait, it takes WORK to actually govern. Something republicans have not done since the early 2000’s. Instead, grift makes them more money.
The Old Left splintered when Stalin’s crimes became understood, and those who hoped for something better in Russia saw the truth. I thought the bitter and closed-minded Russia worshippers went extinct. Not so! Their grandchildren worship Putin now.
Yep! I think back to when I was old enough to think about politics and that was when Goldwater was running. That far right came around once again. And here we are. But even more stupid than before.
Goldwater was a decent American. His political views differed from mine now. But remember, Hillary Rodham was once a “Goldwater Girl” back in the day. I think he would have been on the forefront of cleaning up the wreckage of his party. He and Bill Buckley threw out the rabid Birchers, so that nobody would confuse Republicans with utter lunatics and scum. It’s been sixty years of watching the sewers back up. Remember when Nixon was the low-water-mark for the Party?
No one provoked Russia, you anti-American russofascist Putin apologist! That disinformational propaganda is the real hoax.
Yo Jaime , go over to the consulate . They’ll translate the videos for you.
Gracious. If you said to WWII veterans that you were going to the Russian embassy to discover the truth, you probably wouldn’t get an escort.
Yo Stevie, has the Russian bullcrap been working for you ?
I agree with your #1. Trump & Graham, who were actually caught on tapes pressuring election officials to change votes to favor Republicans, & no doubt they & other Republicans did the same successfully in many other races that gave Republicans the win in all 10 tossup Senate races & all 27 House races (the odds of this happening by random chance is 1 in 75 trillion), & Trump in a number of states by much larger margins than predicted, mainly in states whose electoral apparatus was (& still is) controlled by Republicans & which use the problematic ES&S voting machines that are owned & managed by Trumpsters & manipulable remotely, as well as those members of the Trump administration & Republicans in Congress involved in the attempt to illegally overturn the legitimate election results &/or planning, organizing & inciting the Capitol Insurrection & attempt to assassinate the VP & SOTH, should all be expelled from this country as traitors. Get rid of these liars, cheaters, demagogues & traitors!
So, a code of conduct to you is simply an extra-judicial means of retaliation? You must love the Enabling Act of 1933. It did everything you would want, and more. Frustratingly, the supporters were some of the first to hear the knock at the door. NO FAIR!
HUH? WTF?
And you "concluded" that I would support the Enabling Act of 1933 HOW?
I’m reassured you’re not “playing dumb by pretending not to see the evidence.” I think you’re the real deal, through and through. You don’t like people who “believe in COVID?” That’s a code of ethics? Expelling people who don’t love the New Soviets as much as you do?
Say whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat?
I love people who beliece in CONvid.
After 8 boosters the SOCIALIST DEMON RATS will say BUH BYE , for good
Is 65% 2/3rds? Registered Trumplican Traitors make up only 35% of the electorate! (I was, bafflingly, a year ahead in math in high school, so I took none in college. I forgot AAAAAAALLLLL of it!)
Close. It is 66.666666666..., rounded up to 67%.
Democrats aren’t even committed to imposing a code of ethics/conduct on SCOTUS. We need new leadership that is committed to DOING not just ranting and fundraising. Why aren’t they in favor of term limits for Congress and SCOTUS? POTUS has term limits since 1951!
We need to change this too!
Agreed, Bryant, but nothing will happen this year, BUT the Democrats can draw up the Articles of Impeachment and publicize it.
We need them to have and follow a Code of Ethics.
WHY can't we detain and deport the Socialist Demon Rats who are trying to hijack the Democratic Party?
Let me guess: you are posting on behalf of China.
Russian bot?
For sure, Russia. Could be China, too
HUH? WTF?
WE THE PEOPLE HAVE SWORN TO UPPORT AND DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION AGAINST *******A L L ***** ENEMIES.
Be careful! You have already revealed yourself as an enemy of the American people.
No, just of the SOCIALIST DEMON RATS , but I don't care
Ridiculous comment!
Wow. I bet your father is so proud of you today.
I would bet he is truly embarrassed to have a family member on the wrong side of the U.S.A.
The Dem “leadership” has no plan to fix SCOTUS. They rant, rile up the base, and then fundraise. They never actually DO ANYTHING. Not even a plan.
Just how are they to be removed? Wouldn't they have something to say about it? ..
The bias is neutral, neither right nor left. Think about it! Perhaps your thoughts are away from normal. Sample American History.
Not tomorrow …. Now! Quit making the rest of us feel like pawns in a losing game of chess.
>>>>>How did the Supreme Court get this far out of control? <<<<<<
I totally forgot that the Constitution requires that SCOTUS be under the Control of the Socialist Demon Rats 24/7 - ain't that some Shih-Tsu?
Very very bloody civil war coming up.
Thanks to traitors like you, Trump & the subversive terrorist organization called the Republican Party.
HUH?
The Demented POS has no idea how much harm and destruction he has caused to our wonderful country .
He is also a pendejo to boot.
Huh?
WHEN/HOW did the Socialist Demon Rats acquire the authority to determine when
" the Supreme Court is out of control? "
Unfortunately, only death will enable the first. As to code of ethics, it takes congress to enact that. Good luck, that’s wishful thunking..
Like any employer, dismiss them for lying on their job applications.
The Supreme Court Has Already Given Us The American Civil War Fought Over Slavery (Later called States Rights ). These Clowns 🤡 wear Robes to present and pretend to be Impartial But it’s Just Window Dressing toMake The Confidence Game seem to Be More Than Just a Plain Confidence Game of Crooks and Deception of The RUBES with costumes…
I DREAD Another DRED Scott Decision!!!
Citizen, What role did the Supreme Court play in the civil war.
From what I know, it came about because Congress refused to legalize slavery throughout all the states, especially the new states in the west that were joining the union.
The cotton kings of South Carolina perceived that as a threat to their economic well being, power and wealth, and seceded from the union, citing slavery as the cause, followed quickly by Arkansas and other states.
I know of no involvement by SCOTUS, but I am open to new info.
DRED Scott
Thanks
The refusal of the SC to Actualize the the Constitution all men are created equal and to allow The States to decide What’s the constitution means to them. The decision to allow slavery without justification and deny the humans to be just property…
The result was to let the mostly Southern
Slave owner to exploit humans as they were animals . Slaves were actively Used to breed more new baby slaves for the long term benefit of the owner of the humans treated as property.
Yep, all you say is true, However the constitution did not say All men are created equal, point of order that was the Declaration of Independence, and it said men, not persons or people,
The Constitution was drawn up by a different group of men, Thomas Jefferson is created with writing the Declaration of Independence
In that era only men had rights, property owning men at that British common law prevailed, and was carried over into the newly formed country.
Property owning black men did have the right to vote, in states that did not preclude them from voting, which of course were the slave states. The only state that I could find where property owning black men voted was New Jersey and until until 1804, when the state passed a law.
The problem is from the beginning, that all powers not delegated to the Federal Government, are relegated to the states, and that includes voting, civil affairs, taxes and even military affairs (National Guards aka state militias)
Joseph, The logic of your call, notwithstanding, the Constitution provides conviction by two-thirds of the Senate as the sole recourse for removal of a Supreme Court Justice.
Perjury is a crime. So is bribery. Hard to hear cases from jail.
Daniel, While you make good points, because our framers made it difficult to edit them, I’m not convinced a criminal conviction and detention invariably would result in their removal from the bench. Case in point: were Donald Trump sentenced to jail time, he still could become President.
If those crimes - perjury and accepting bribes were adjudicated as felonies, and they were found guilty, those Justices would be disbarred. You cannot be a lawyer with felony convictions - at least, that is my understanding. So, if you are disbarred, can you still remain a Supreme Court Justice? I don’t think so!
I don't think you have to be a lawyer to be a Supreme Court Justice. It's a tradition but not a Constitutional requirement.
However from a practical standpoint, post conviction, justices would have to recuse from virtually every case.
Eileen, Gloria, who is part of this thread, is correct. I would add a Justice only can be removed by impeachment, and obviously, resignation or death.
Barbara, I have read Article III of the Constitution and it does not say any of that, it only says that a justice will serve during good behavior, it has no remedy for removal of judges.
Article II says that the President will appoint and the Senate confirm.
Therefore he who appoints can also remove,it doesn't even provide a requirement for a trial or other procedure.
That's true and downright depressing!
Peggy, I agree and, frankly, stay in the fight convinced, that if Democrats succeed, this November, to control both U.S. Chambers and hold the White House, we will have a shot at enacting reforms that would be truly transformative.
Yes Mam! That would be a joy beyond my wildest imaginings! Our country could once again start moving forward. I hope it happens! Vote Blue, America!!
Specially when the process is perverted by LAWFARE - disguising ELECTION INTERFERENCE - power grabs - as criminal indictments !!!!!!
And yet again our resident Trump troll rears i's head.
.-- . .-.. .-.. ..--..
I want to hear Biden say he will expand the Supreme Court if the American people will give him the House of Representatives and the Senate in enough numbers to eliminate the filibuster and to end this criminal and corrupt court’s reign of terror. This is war people and the Republican terrorists in our own country are winning.
Nancy, I understand increasingly more Democrats in both U.S. Chambers plus the President have become increasingly more receptive to expanding the Court. However, were they to announce their intent before the election, they would be subject to the potentially fatal criticism of wanting to pack the Court, despite the fact that in 1869 the number of justices was set at 9, each assigned to one of the 9 U.S. federal courts of appeal; today there are 13.
I looked at 2 polls and roughly only 1/3 of people want to pack the court, whereas term limits are quite popular- about 2/3 like that.
Ending the filibuster is not popular.
Thanks for causing me to look this up.
https://www.monmouth.edu/polling-institute/reports/monmouthpoll_us_093022/
Steve, To be clear, the Dems opposed to ending the filibuster are receptive to resuscitating the talking filibuster and/ or filibuster cut-outs. Either way, the point is the increasing receptivity to ensuring legislation eventually moves to the floor for debate and an up or down majority vote.
As for the Court, the point that still is in question is whether term limits can be imposed without having to amend the Constitution requiring a two-thirds majority in both U.S. Chambers ratified by three-fourths of the States. To the contrary, expanding the Court, presuming some reform to the filibuster, would require simple majority votes in each Chamber signed into law by the President.
I was talking about the the public generally does not want to end the filibuster.
Also, the Brennan Center thinks term limits can be passed by Congress if done in a certain way.
https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/its-time-supreme-court-term-limits
So suppose it's passed. It's contested and goes before the Supreme Court. SCOTUS could say it's unconstitutional and a constitional amendment is required.
It seems the bottom line is this:
a rogue SCOTUS can't be stopped if if has the backing of over a third of Senators.
Maybe the framers of the Constitution got it wrong on this.
Steve, I would note, while I’ve heard Brennan Center President and CEO Michael Waldman assert that term limits could be imposed without having to amend the Constitution, I’m not thoroughly convinced. On the matter of the filibuster, I imagine the public would welcome the resuscitation of the talking filibuster and occasional carve-outs on matters relative to fundamental rights like voting. Such a reform would return the Senate to its original purpose—to be a truly deliberative body.
I think Steve's point is that the Democrats will be subject to intense political pressure to back off from increasing the number of justices on the SCOTUS. Many will see it as "packing the court" regardless of any other argument. Some of the weak knee Democrats may decide not to support. Ditto the filibuster. These important changes will not be a "walk in the park" for the Democrats and may cost them Congressional seats in later elections.
It appears to me that SCOTUS is already packed and justice is not blind nor nonpartisan.
Tim, My view is if we’re in a position to expand the Court, it will be incumbent upon us to make the case so the project isn’t viewed by reasonable people as court-packing.
I guess you mean make the case after the election since you said previously an intent signalled before the election would subject it to the fatal criticism of packing the court. I agree with that.
After the election pack the hell out of the court making the case to the public, as far as I'm concerned.
reasonable people see
1- Lawfare as election interference
2- voting machines, mail in ballots , ballot harvesting as ELECTION HEIST
3- the attempt to exand the court as court packing
Polls: Garbage in, garbage out. If polls decided the election, Trump would have been re elected and there would have been a blue wave, and Hillary would have been President.
Polling companies are profit and ideologically driven,.and questions are constructed to push, not determine, opinions.
My under graduate Statistics professor had us study How to Lie with Statistics, and he used that book to create the exams.
But it’s OK if insane, trump worshipping idiots pack the court. Note I used the word expand, not pack.
Yeah man
fool the people again AFTER the election On November 6th,
1- pardon Hunter
2- ban fossil fuels, coal and LPG
3- Declare that Conservatives and Republicans are the new Palestinians
4- abolish SCOTUS
etc etc etc
Another ridiculous comment!
There is no way you’re a physician and lawyer.
That is correct - you unmasked me
I'm a cotton picker and a pimp
I don't know what you are, but the things you have posted here do not give a positive impression.
I understand .
If you are a Biden Junta devotee and a gullible LaLaLander you probably hate my guts.
Eric, your daddy needs a diaper change.
Nancy, that's the kind of messaging President Biden needs to send out on the campaign trail. Speak the truth about the supreme court, the monopolistic corporations and their greed being the reason the cost of living is so high, the republicans voting no about IVF, and the cancer that is trump taking down their party. It is war and we have to put up a better defense. Once we've put up a defense, we need to go on the offense! We cannot wring our hands and cry 'What can we do'? There is plenty we can do. Talk to people, get people to register and vote, send post cards, sign petitions. Speak the truth constantly to the MAGA followers and those sitting on the fence. It is possible to win some of them over. We cannot afford to be complacent! Vote Blue, America!!
I agree. One concept I read yesterday by a man who has started a web for people leaving MAGA is not to call them names but to be kind and respectful. Like Mrs. Obama said, “When they go low, we go high.” The man was a rabid MAGA until he started hearing the other side. That’s his advice, which makes sense. It isn’t easy, but I am working on that. I am always surprised at what MAGA people think. There is hope.
Elizabeth, it surprises me, too, when someone who was all in on MAGA suddenly realizes he/she had blinders on! When you talk to them it is important to remember how fervently they believe the lies trump has fed them. When they actually look at both sides, it is heartening to see that awakening! You are right, we must be respectful and it is important NOT to say it's about time you came to your senses. More often than not, the MAGAs that open their eyes are embarrassed at what they had supported.
But it’s oh so hard to remain civil!
It’s like trying to be kind to rattlesnakes.
Oh please..."reign of terror"? Corrupt? Boy, you progressives get very dramatic when things don't go your way. Our SCOTUS swings like a pendulum do. At the moment, it's autocorrecting from too many years on the left.
You Walter are the problem.
Unless something horrific happens to you and yours you don’t give a fuck.
Imagine your beloved grandchild is at school and suddenly a gunmen with a machine gun mows down your kid and her classmates.
Imagine your granddaughter raped and pregnant by her rapist.
Imagine your daughter being forced to carry a dead child to term in her body.
Imagine.
That is autocorrected for you.
That is reality, Walter. It is the life many Americans have now after the Las Vegas massacre, Marjory Stoneman Douglas killings, & hundreds more; young children raped & impregnated, women forced to carry a dead fetus to “term” because she can’t have it removed medically — which would prevent her becoming infected & threatening her life. People are your family, Walter. Women & children & men deserve to be free of authoritarian oppression that reduces our humanity to less than an animal’s. Compassion is not a sin.
Correct, all those situations are horrific. Just as the drug cartels that control our border and extort money and human trafficking to people trying to get to America. I'm sure you've heard of Rape trees. We've lost about 100,000 souls to fentanyl every year for the past 5 years. Twice the number of soldiers we lost in Vietnam. I am unaware of anyone being forced to carry a dead child. Maybe you can provide a link or reference to investigate. Compassion certainly is not a sin. However, killing developing children, let alone viable, doesn't sound like compassion to me.
All of those evils Walter, originated and facilitated by "conservative" Presidents and Politicians.
🙄
Pat, nothing bad happens to people like Walter (he thinks). Bad things happen only to people he doesn’t know (but hates anyway, and they must have deserved it). People like Walter are incapable of imagining empathy.
This is Donald’s gig. He understands Divide And Rule. Bring everyone together to do his will, then peel them off one at a time and call them enemies. The Gulag made it to 20 million, just one at a time. And the suckers never wise up.
Oh please. You know nothing about me. You're just spewing hate because I don't disagree with you. Stop virtue signaling.
The use of the phrase Virtue Signaling tells us all we need to know about you. The phrase is a trade mark of the right wing.
Correct. People who use the phrase “virtue signaling” honestly think decency is always an act, because that’s how they operate — they are always pretending they aren’t terrible, but anybody who supports Trump is obviously quite awful.
You can always tell when a phrase cuts too close to the truth. Progressives hate that term, and others like (try Woke) because it's true. Progressives take what they believe to be the high, moral and correct perspective. Anyone who chooses to disagree, MUST be attacked, cancelled and ridiculed. Disagree with any element of the LBGT+ community? You're a homophobe. Question the wisdom or lack of research on chemical or surgical transitioning of children or adolescents? Your transphobic. If you're black, and "don't vote for me", you're NOT BLACK. "Put ya'll back in chains"
You know the drill. Saul Alinsky wrote the book. Hillary did her thesis on him. Obama worked in one of his "activist organizations.
Rule #5 and 13 seems to fit. So, your reaction to the phrase "Virtue Signaling", tells us all we need to know about you as well. Truth is truth.
Huh? “Don’t disagree” seems to be an error. Actually, the reply that would have impressed me is along the lines of “Pat, thanks for pointing out those examples. I will think about what you say. “
I think you may need virtue signaling in light of your comments, apparently you have none of those attributes!
I’m not familiar with those terms. And I’m not outraged. However, it sure sounds like you’re wound way too tight.
Could you be more dramatic? Why can't you formulate a position without attacking the character of the person you disagree with? There are almost 400,000,000 guns in the USA. More guns than people. Our problem isn't guns, it's mentally disturbed people. Machine guns have been strictly controlled and illegal for citizens since 1934. We've had semi-automatic pistols and rifles since the 1880's. When I was in HS, it wasn't unusual for someone to have a gun hanging in a rack in their pickup. Schools had shooting teams. If you want to end homicides, most of which happen in drug related conflicts, do something about the drugs flowing across our borders. By far handguns are involved in about 80% (approx. 8,000/year) of murders. Long guns very rarely by comparison.
So weird that the U.S. has so many more crazy people than the rest of the world! What makes Americans so murderously insane, do you think?
Great question. Let's think about this. Other than China (totalitarian) and India, we have the third most people in the world. India has strictly limited who can own a gun, and what kind since 1959. Combine that with their deep poverty until fairly recently. Of course, India has a long record of internal conflicts between religions where taking a life was usually done with a club or knife.
The US has always had the second amendment. So, ownership here has been a right. Our history has been expanding into an often-hostile wilderness where guns were a necessity. Lastly, since 1965 when we redefined our immigration policies to encourage more people from South America, Africa, Asia etc., we've had introduced cultural differences. A simple look at the statistics of our homicides and other crimes of violence shows the non-European segments of our population are heavily overrepresented. Prior to 1965, the US was 90% European. Today that figure is about 60%. So, the lack of gun violence we have seen in the EU up until recently I think may be due to their culture being homogeneous with shared values. Of course, the last ten years of massive immigration from North Africa and the ME is changing their situation as well. Different cultural values, religious values, attitudes to the concepts of human rights. etc.
But back to your question. We've always had some degree of nuttiness here. Let's face it, people who had it made in Europe and around the world didn't need to give up everything and take a gamble on coming to the new world. It could be argued our national DNA is more attuned to risk taking. Our founding documents provide lots more freedoms than other nations. But our craziness in wanting to kill strangers isn't as widespread as we might think. Again, dig into the crime statistics. Facts will show certain communities and cultures foment most of the violence you read about in the news.
The most frightening group now is white males. They’re the ones who walk into schools, theaters, churches etc and start murdering. What are we going to do to control these violent, outlaw Europeans?
The problem is that 90% of gun owners are harmless, and 10% need their weapons taken away. The big problem is that gun owners take offense at taking guns from people who pose a danger. If gun owners didn’t shill for the manufacturers, and contributed decent solutions, we might make progress. Switzerland has firearms in nearly every home, and have a very strict no-bullshit gun CULTURE. Contrary to many opinion, many countries have private ownership. What they don’t have is propaganda.
I agree to a point. I'd say 99% of legal gun owners are harmless. It's that 1% that shouldn't have a gun. But that like trying to pick the fly crap out of the pepper. Here in Cleveland, almost all violence with guns is centered on drug disputes in a very small segment of our population. Statistics don't lie
Well then, why the f*, Walter, aren’t the 90-something percent UP IN ARMS, so to speak, defending their reputations? They shill for the “NRA,” an Astroturf grass-roots phoney-baloney puppet of big manufacturers? The 2nd Amendment zombies howl on command when ANYONE is prevented from combat weapons ownership. We need the 90% to grow the hell up and be responsible Americans.
Talk to your buddy kyle rittenhouse,
Dummy, fentanyl is fairly easy to cook, and a kilo gets you well over a million doses. Why do people see it as some mysterious foreign substance? I’m sure home-cooked fentanyl is taking off in the US.
I'm sure the drug cartels are working to move their operations into the US as well. Afterall, if they can get the raw ingredients here in the US, they can avoid the expense of the border. Besides, they're making too much money trafficking human beings. But let's not kid ourselves. For the past 20+ years our Opioid crisis has been related to drugs being brought into the country. Besides, just because someone can make a batch here in the US doesn't mean the problem should be ignored. 2023 110,000 people died from the stuff. And many of them unaware what they were taking was laced with that stuff.
Walter, the problem is US. The market in AMERICA for whores, especially underage whores, is the problem. Shady brown foreigners aren’t the ones paying to f* little boys and girls.
“Law authorities have led sting operations in connection with Super Bowl games. During the Super Bowl XLVIII, authorities arrested 45 pimps and rescued 25 child victims of human trafficking. During Super Bowl XLIX, authorities led a sting operation called National Day of Johns and arrested almost 600 people and rescued 68 victims. Publicity surrounding the Super Bowl provides opportunities for public awareness of sex trafficking.”
I don’t know about you, but I don’t go to many Super Bowls. People who like living large, who can drop $100 large every year on the Big Show, those are the ones buying baby prostitutes. Don’t point to some pimply Venezuelan whoremonger.
And fentanyl? Here’s a chill 4 U. It’s the WEAKEST synthetic opiate in its class. Some ones like sufentanyl go for a million doses in just 10 grams, a Chap-Stick container. Just one batch, and retire. Walter White was an under-achiever.
The opioid crisis was largely caused and fed by corporate assholes in Big Pharma.
Walter you forgot the "feminazis's, "nigrahs" and "queers in your rant., aren't they responsible for the "social ills" that have you so outraged?
What the hell are you talking about? There has not been a liberal Supreme Court since 1969 and the maggots cheated and lied to get the Supreme Court the way it is right now
So then, what's your problem? If the court hasn't been liberal since 1969, we've lived these past 55 years with a court no different than how our court is structured today. So, why is this court suddenly so terrible?
You're the one who said they were autocorrecting. They're doing the opposite. The reason you didn't know that our court hasn't been liberal since 1969 is cuz you couldn't tell because Supreme Court Justices aren't supposed to have opinions. They're supposed to follow the Constitution. This court is helping the Nazi takeover
Who are you defining as a Nazi? Do you even know who the Nazi's were? I think you're misapplying a term. Are these so-called Nazi's building concentration camps for their enemies? Please stop with the easy buzz words that don't apply.
When your lord and savior Trump wins, he will be building and using concentration camps to hold the 11 million people he wants to deport, and the tens of millions more "liberals, Queers,and POC" that he has declared his enemy and upon whom he seeks revenge.
I'm defining those quoting Hitler like Trump for instance. And you must be deaf dumb and blind if you haven't heard about the concentration camps. They might not be building them right at this very second but they do have abandoned military bases they can use. Maybe they're working on those. Project 2025 is like all Nazi. Maggots just called a religious move. Taking away women's rights to their own autonomy is Nazi. I'm guessing you don't know what Nazi means. In fact I go as far as to say that you're one of those people who thinks the Holocaust never happened. Did your family come to America after World War II?
But they do apply
That’s part of project 2025 I think.
Funny you should mention concentration camps because that's what the fascists that have devised Project 2025 have in mind for people they want to deport.
Walter the problem is three specific jurists are pushing their views onto American society. Do you think Alito and Thomas would have dared to go against what Americans wanted if they knew it was a free unbiased court?
You'd have to be more specific, but as Obama said several times, "Elections have consequences". He also said he was going to "Fundamentally Change America", which certainly sounded ominous to me. No one or nation is perfect. but looking back over our history, certainly the "arc of justice" has been the defining principle since our Founding. All this court has done is apply the original intent of the Constitution to their decisions. They haven't created rights. But that's the beauty of our constitution and brilliance of our Founders. We have a congress empowered to create laws and fund directions.
Because SCOTUS is in reality the High Holy Catholic Inferior Court.
What? Is there really a big difference between the Catholics and protestants (or Jews for that matter) when it comes to values? Christian values are largely formed from the Old Testament, Greek philosophy and Roman law. AKA and Western Civilization born from the Enlightenment. Would you rather live under Sharia law?
Yes there is a big difference between the Abrahamic religions. Protestants range from liberal to extremist, Catholics are ruled by papal edicts, or at least the ones that modern Catholics like, Jews don't actually bother anyone. The Jewish religion ranges from reformed to ultra orthodox, but they don't try to shove their religion down anyone's throat, nor make it the law of the land like Protestants and Catholics do.
Christian values are whatever the person who claims to be a Christian says they are, they use their god and their Jesus as a sock puppet.
They couldn't live under the values of the Old Testament, the values are encapsulated in the 613 Laws in the book of laws, Leviticus.
And even your Jesus is blood thirsty, Luke 22:36, Sell your cloak and by a sword
Luke 19:27 Moreover, bring my enemies here who do not wish to have me reign over them and kill them before me!'”
And then there is the misogyny and gender apartheid of Paul
I am glad you mentioned Sharia, I have incurred much wrath from HAMAS loving and ignorant "liberals", because I am an Islamophobe.
I have studied the Quran, hadiths and biography of Mo by ibn Ishaq, and am more familiar with Islam and Islamic law than most Muslims, to the extent that Muslims call me an apostate because in their ideology if you know as much as I you have to be a Muslim.
Islam is like the other Abrahamic religions a death cult, intolerant, demanding, triumphalist, just like the Christian religions.
Christianity in the west is what it is today because of the enlightenment and democracy, because it schismed, but there are powerful forces that want it to return to it's roots, the Mosaic Law: Dominionism, aka Christian Reconstruction, aka Christian NAZIs and the New Apostolic Reformation, these people make the Taliban and Sharia law look liberal.
There is no chance that America will come under Sharia law, the fear and claim is frankly bullshit propaganda, but there is real threat that it will come under Mosaic law, even worse than Sharia, and it's proponents are not only politiicians like Mike Johnson and Mike Pence or Mike Flynn, but billionaires like Harlan Crowe and the two oil billionaires that actually run Texas. Tim Dunn and Farris Wilks
Dominionism, founded by R J Rushdoony and the father of Ted Cruz, Rafael Cruz. https://www.sullivan-county.com/nf0/fundienazis/royal_race.htm
Death by stoning for less than faithful Christians, adulterers, rebellious teens, etc
Makes Sharia seem liberal.
Dominionism and New Apostolic Reformation (NAR) are transdenominational, not a church but an ideology and it is the ideology driving MAGA and Trump.
Worse than Sharia.
It's more extreme than ever. It's been reliably corporatist & anti-environmental for over 40 years, & now has become antidemocratic & anticonstitutional since the addition of the 3 illegitimate Trump picks & corrupt & flagrantly biased under the fascist extremism of Thomas & Alito.
I live in a city where the river caught fire back in the '70's. People are trout fishing there now. Please. I'm old enough to remember driving thru cities like Akron and Pittsburgh where the pollution was horrific. Now the skies are clear as is the water. Perfect? Of course not. Work to do? Of course. But you're throwing around some pretty heavy words there Jaime. Corrupt, fascist, extremist, illegitimate etc.
Just imagine, 1969? That means everything you've been blaming on liberals is due to what conservatives have been doing. Everything, since 1969. I was 14. When I went into high school that's when we started discussing how America would fall from within and it is unless we stop it but you won't. When I was 14 I could care less about politics. I'm guessing you're not 14. Very unfortunate, just like it's unfortunate that Trump isn't 14. Responsibility comes with being an adult and Trump isn't responsible or an adult
I was 18 in 1969. I even voted for Carter. Why are you bringing up Trump? I thought we were discussion the SCOTUS?
Trump made this scotus with the help of Mitch McConnell. He's the one who stopped Obama from appointing a scotus. This was planned before Trump became president. Just like they needed Bush Jr to be president so they could continue their plans. Who do YOU think took down the World Trade Center? Seems to me it's the same Nazis trying to take down the country right now. This plan hasn't stopped planning since 1945. Even before that. After all Hitler had plenty of time to plan while he was sitting in jail. Trump doesn't mock Hitler, he mimics Hitler. He mocks our servicemen, for instance. You know the people who gave their lives to stop Hitler. He speaks that way so people will give up and give in
We know who took down the World Trade Center. Islamic terrorists funded by Osama bin Laden. Who do YOU think brought down the towers? As for Obama's choice, who is now our Attorney General, based upon what I've seen of him so far, thanks god he didn't get on the court. And Biden's pick is so wise, she can't even define what a woman is because she's not a biologist. Yet she IS a woman. The Woke crap has got to stop.
Yeah Osama Bin Laden who played in The Playpen with George Jr cuz their fathers were business partners. See you don't even know what woke means. It means you got educated and just cuz you don't like the answer doesn't mean it ain't true. If Garland was on the court they wouldn't be sitting on these cases waiting for after the election. That's downright cheating. It's called helping a candidate which is totally against the ethics of the Court. It's all a game. People are getting laid off by people who want Trump to lower their taxes. It's their way of trying to get you to vote for him cuz they're going to blame it all on Biden who has nothing to do with whether or not you have a job or prices or anything else these corporations rule over
Fact check on Merrick Garland. Unlike those reactionaries who will defend him because he is attacked from the right., I castigate Biden for appointing him.
Obama was weak, A black executive of a country ruled by white, mostly racist men. He was opposed at every turn. His only achievement was the ACA and then only after he got the insurance companies on board by dangling profits in front of them, and indeed they wrote the ACA.
When a seat came open on the Supreme Court, the right wing telegraphed that they would thwart his nomination, so he asked the most Righit Wing Senator at that time Orrin Hatch R-UT for the name of someone that the right wing in the senate would approve and Orrin Hatch gave him the name of Merrick Garland.
Garland worked for the Federalist Society as a moderator, even then McConnell didn't want to give the darkie a win, so he refused to bring him up for a vote.
Garland has proven his right wing bonafides, time and again.
He never appointed a special counsel to investigate much less indict the seditionist coup plotters in congress, not even Lauren Boebert who kicked off the assault on the Capitol by tweeting 1776.
Only the pawns have been prosecuted, and even then 99 % have been given slaps on the wrist, and only the ring leaders prosecuted for felonies and given real prison time in years.
He jumped to appoint a Trump humping lawyer, David Weiss, to prosecute Hunter Biden. Weiss jumped in front of Garland and wanted the Job, badly.
Garland then used a phony excuse to move the documents trial to Florida claiming that is where the crime occurred. It occurred in D.C. when Waltine Nauta moved the documents from the White House to a truck and then to an Airplane.
Moving it to Florida enabled him to appoint a newly minted inexperienced Trump loyalist as the judge over the case.
He has used the excuse of the "wheel" named for the wheel of fortune, in which it is chance that determines the judge, but the wheel hasn't been used in decades.
Merrick Garland has proven to be a bonafide and loyal Federalist Society member.
And now the left is expected to defend him because he is attacked from the right.
That is a fools game, reverse psychology.
Trump also called the media, the enemy of the people, and he is absolutely correct. the media has given him millions of dollars in free air time (and there is no such thing as bad publicity), and thanks to the media he won the presidency, and they are at it again.
Trump also called for defunding the FBI, but the FBI is ultra conservative, and full of right wingers. It was investigating BLM and antifa up to the moment of Jan 6th, and I suspect stilll are. On their radar progressives, the left,liberals are the enemy and the Proud Boys, Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association and militias are heroes and patriots.
And again reverse psychology, Trump attacks and the left defends.
I successfully used reverse psychology to manipulate a recalcitrant, and defiant step son. He is still an asshole, and I didn't want to finance his college education ( I have three children of my own, who didn't have ODD), so I pressed him to study and get good grades, he did the opposite, and at 17 he dropped out of school and joined the Marines. I used reverse psychology to get him to do what he would resist as well.
Even a broken clock is right twice a day.
And I voted for Goldwater in 1964, and now you and I are at the opposite ends of the pole, again Walter. There was no culture war in 1964 and 1968, but the MAGA culture war has apparently grabbed you by the gonads, and as Nixon said your heart and mind followed.
There was no culture war in 1968! Chicago Democratic National Convention? Anti-war movement. I was in college '69-'73. My home was less than 5 miles from the May 4th Kent State shootings. I remember a lot of culture war. You don't understand MAGA IMHO. I don't like Trump. But I believe his policies were directionally correct. Not being a politician, but being a narcissist, means he says things in a way that does put people off. Me included. He has turned half the nation crazy with TDS because he does all the things the rest of our pols hide. I mean, congress has paid out $18,000,000 in hush money from their private slush fund to cover up their behavior. Isn't that "election interference?". Yet Trump enters a non-disclosure agreement (legal) with someone and suddenly he is a criminal? Please. Trump has been attacked by the DNC and Rino's since the day he came down the escalator in 2015. While the Clintons, and Biden's skate with the aid of our MSM. Or a better name would be Pravda.
Harlan Crow is the cofounder of The Club for Growth, a group that advocates for conservative reforms. Crow “befriended” Justice Thomas when he threatened to quit the court to make more money. Justice Thomas did not declare the millions of dollars he received from his billionaire donor until it was exposed. And he didn’t recuse himself from cases that benefited Crow and The Club for Growth.
If Justice Sotomayor received millions from a progressive mega donor and didn’t claim it, would that be corrupt?
Another right winger joins the chorus. I was correct, as we get closer to November they will be legion. The word must be out on the right wing social media. There is one way to cure this problem Robert and that is to make this pay to post, which is most substack.
Common Bill. You want to life only in a bubble where people agree with you? We need dialogue. People need to hear the other side. Politely, yes. But I'm not calling you or anyone else here a danger to our society. To quote an old rock song, "it's only you and me, and we just disagree". (Dave Mason)
First of all don't call me Bill, we are not friends and no one calls me Bill
My situation is that I don't live in a bubble. I was a right wing extremist in 1964 and voted for Goldwater. I've seen life from both sides now, as the song by Zach Sobiech, Clouds, says.
I have not only heard your side but live it and then some, I was even visited by a recruiter for Aryan Nations.
A situational change in 1989 saved me from myself. But I knew too much to become a leftist as well, so here I sit forming my own opinions Neither left, right or center.
The world of ideas and politics is, to me, a buffet, a charcuterie, a crudité, I have sampled and take what makes sense, and leave that which leaves a foul taste in my mouth.
How about you. Looks to me like you swallow the whole hog, like an anaconda.
You are sure full of disgust, even hatred and fear of people of color, gays and trans. and yet none of them are a threat to you., well maybe to your perception of male superiority.
LOL, OK William. I see your mind is made up. I am neither afraid of, or hate POC, the gay community, etc. My family is a blended race family. I've hired and worked with numerous members of the gay community. And as a husband and father to a daughter and granddaughters, I fully embrace the fact females are the superior gender.
The pendulum has been on the right for 44 years, moving into fascist territory for much of the last decade, at risk of swinging into Nazi territory permanently should Trump & the republonazis get back in power.
I agree with the idea, but I think that kind of honesty would scare independents and cost Biden the election.
I believe we need to educate everyone to vote against this Supreme Court. The only way to reign in this court is if Dems win the Presidency, House & Senate. Biden is part of it, but if he loses, Trump could replace another justice.
Biden should take back the Supreme Court that McConnell gave away
Biden is a criminal. He is violating US law in continuing to send arms to the mass-murderers in Israel. WE DO have laws on how the nations who send arms to USE them.
Biden is a CRIMINAL. A nice guy, but a criminal. And probably too stupid or mentally gone to realize it.
And the lead criminal of the Na-Zi-onist regime is coming to town.
I agree Biden hasn't done his job as POTUS and am concerned he is a criminal. But not because of his support for the only democracy in the MENA. However, I feel about Hamas and all the other Iranian supported terror groups. They need to be treated like we treated Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan. Destroyed. As a US taxpayer, I'm perfectly find seeing our munitions used to end those monsters.
BTW, recent polls in Gaza show 70+% of Gazan's support Hamas and think Oct. 7 was right to do. They are the Nazi's.
Recent polls in Gaza? ... Are you effing kidding me? Israel kills native journalists and won't allow those from the outside to enter, lying nazi-boy.
The THOUSANDS of children under five years old who are killed and wounded never took part in your "Poll" -- lying nazi-boy.
Zionist Israel is self-destructing -- and the world will be much better off for it.
https://www.google.com/search?q=i+see+dead+people&oq=i+see+dead+people&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyBggAEEUYOTIKCAEQLhixAxiABDIHCAIQABiABDIHCAMQABiABDIHCAQQABiABDIHCAUQABiABDIHCAYQABiABDIHCAcQLhiABDIHCAgQABiABDIHCAkQABiABNIBCDc4MzFqMGo3qAIIsAIB&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:909ca3ee,vid:ZSNyiSetZ8Y,st:0
Remember when the right-wing complained about "activist judges"?
The best descent against the bump stock was, if it walks like a duck, talks like a duck, and looks like a duck, then it’s a duck. The bump stock turns an automatic rifle into a machine gun PERIOD Have these Republicans lost their way or are they that stupid?
Both.
Not "stupid" - but have a different Agenda from normal people, i.e. corrupted by the sellers of rifles, and careless of deaths of unarmed Americans.
And perhaps worse than that. Perhaps looking forward to the fascist country they are creating, where only the brownshirts are carrying machine guns and the rest of us are ratting on our neighbors to save our own skins.
I’m going with deliberately stupid.
No, not stupid. Craven cowards, prostitutes, victims of a system the voters have allowed to develop, but not really stupid.
Under the Administrative Procedure Act, the agency is supposed to do fact finding. If they failed to do it, the remedy would have been to remand for a hearing. It's like NONE of the justices went to law school.
Agreed. Not stupid. Evil.
Lost their way following the money trail by rich “friends” and others.
The trouble is, if you want it to be a chicken, you can always change your search terms. If it walks on 2 legs, has a beak, and is a bird, must be a chicken. That’s how our Formerly Supreme Court deals with the knotty issues of jurisprudence.
It's not about losing their way or stupidity. It's all about how stupid Americans are cuz it's all about lying. They depend on other people's stupidity. It's the same stupidity Germans had when their lives got taken over
Keith, it seems like they are afraid of physical harm, like a witness against a gang or Mafia member.
Reubicans in Congress either chose not to run again or became subservient like there is a physical threat. It has to be more than merely monetary reward or reelection.
Your understanding is inaccurate. A bump stock does allow a SEMI-AUTOMATIC to be fired more rapidly. But certainly not as fast as an actual "machine gun". Fully automatic rifles and pistols are not legal for private citizens in the USA.
First things first. If Biden is not reelected all else fails.
Re-electing President Biden has to be our primary goal. Everything else pales in comparison.
Wasn’t it in Arizona that when votes were recounted, at the insistence of republicans, they had to correct the tally because a few more votes for Biden had been discovered? Hardly anything to change the outcome, but the opposite of what they thought they’d discover. Look that up, it’s real.
Oh it's real. I don't remember if it was Arizona, they did so many recounts, but that did happen
It happened multiple times, in Arizona, including the audit, in Georgia, & I think some other states, all after recounts or audits insisted by Republicans, all with a few more votes found for Biden. Just think what might've been found if some of the states whose elections were run by Republicans, whose voting machines were the corruptible ES&S machines, where Republican Senate & House candidates all won tossup races & Trump did significantly better than expected were investigated!
I think we all questioned the down ballot. At least everyone who wasn't a magnet at the time. Of course no one was going to do anything about that. There were too many people who got back in the office who should not have
I believe so.
Absolutely!!!
Good luck with that....unless you cheat again.
Trump is the only criminal who cheated. He tried to steal an election that he lost. Try reality for a change.
DEMOCRATS DID NOT AND DO NOT CHEAT. Present the evidence, ANY EVIDENCE, or drop these bleeping lies. Comprende'?
Keith, I agree with your sentiment; however, Paul is a troll and he's trying to push your buttons. Scroll past and save yourself from raising your blood pressure! There will be an awful lot more in the next few months. We need you in the fight! Vote Blue, America!
Oh, I know. I'm just sick of hearing it.
Me, too! Sometimes I get so angry, I want to hurl my laptop into the nearest body of water!! When I start feeling that stinkin thinkin coming on, I get away from it for a while. I take a walk, play with my dog, do some gardening, just anything that keeps me from thinking about it for a while. That is what they want us to do. Have a meltdown, say to hell with it and don't do anything about it especially vote. If they can get enough people to throw up their hands and give up, they will achieve victory. We simply cannot let them have that. Vote Blue, America!!
Obviously a troll. 60+ judges would disagree.
I don’t converse with delusional people.
That is an indictment on America ! I am sure there are always a better American than some old hack !
America should open the opportunity for better candidates to enter the politics !
Serious political finance reform, total ban on lobbyists, specially foreign agents and foreign money under any disguise !
Right now, both major political parties are very deeply rotten or corrupted by big money and Supreme Court’s partisan decisions !
Reforming our Supreme Court may never happen and the nomination and confirmation process can be improved if America can put an end to all sorts of corruption in public life ! Congressional candidates should meet much higher standards in order to be a candidate ! Even our most Corrupt senior Senator complained during the recent election that the quality of the candidates was a serious problem for his party and I will add it is a problem for both major parties !
Finance reform for our elections is desperately needed.
Vote Blue 2024
And change can happen.
I won't say the Dems are rotten or corrupted, but certainly influenced, otherwise I agree.
If a guy can let the murder of children, babies, mothers and grandparents go on for eight months and still send weapons, really WMDs …. I don’t know what to think of him ?
Unfortunately there are a few (Conservative) Supreme Court decisions like Citizen's United in the way. The Conservative Justices have equated wealthy special interest group money in politics as "speech" and protected by the First Amendment. Yes, I know, idiotic, but once again reforming our system requires a better Supreme Court. And even if we get a Court that will overturn decision like Citizen's United, all incumbents, Democrat and Republican alike benefit from wealthy special interest money so I am not sure very many Democrats in office really want to do away with it. But I agree with your sentiments that the influence of special interest groups is causing our government to govern in the interests of the wealthy, not the people, causing people to lose faith in democracy, and curiously causing people to somehow believe Trump is their savior.
But I also agree with your sentiments that the influence of special interest groups is causing our government to govern in the interests of the wealthy which is abundantly clear, not for the people, causing people to lose faith in democracy, and curiously causing some mostly republican people to somehow believe Trump is their savior.
??
This latest ruling of the Supreme Court is the height of pedantic idiocy. The next time someone uses a bump stock to commit mass slaughter they should be indicted as accessories to murder.
All of the above.
Given the make up of Congress, it is not practicle to focus on impeachment and removal. It just won't happen unless the Dems get the majority in the House and 2/3rds in the Senate. That is not happening unfortunately. And even if it did, the Dems are not noted for their ability to have the backbone to act at this level. So the only means forward is to create an enforceable code of ethics in the House should the Dems win the majority. Then expand the court to bring balance. And finally impose strict term limits. 10 years tops. Some have suggested 18 years. That is way to long. Almost an entire generation.
I would submit that the sole strategic choice in today’s poll is to reelect Biden, without whom we neither can impose term limits or expand the size of the court. As for impeaching Alito and Thomas, the two-thirds Senate majority required for conviction pretty much, certainly in the foreseeable future, nullifies that option. I make this point to redirect our focus to the challenge at-hand—hold the White House, retake the House, hold our 49 Senate seats, and flip 1 Republican-held seat. Were we to succeed, the transformative possibilities over the next 2 years would be immeasurable.
Register millions who trend Democratic. .
https://www.fieldteam6.org/
Agreed!
If one of those Justices had lost a family member to a random or planned shooting, would they have voted for bump stocks? Probably. They do not have hearts, just pockets.
The Supreme Court has lost a ton of respect over the last decade thanks to their ruling that go against the majority of Americans!
NO-ONE should be guaranteed a 'job-for-life' - least of all justices, law-makers or presidents! Here in the UK we are implementing a maximum age of 80 for members of the House of Lords (Equivalent to US Senate). I would have preferred 75. Just think - if the US had an upper age limit of 75, neither of the current (unsuitable) presidential candidates would qualify for consideration, and you could also get rid of some of those ghastly justices. BTW I am a fit and healthy 80, and I don't see why anyone of my generation should still have responsible jobs. Give the youngsters a chance!
Retire at 75? I don't understand why anyone would want to work at all, much less up to the age of 75. Even 75 is too old to be working. 65 maybe 55 better 45 best
Whoa! Age can bring wisdom. 45 is too young.
45 isn't too young to retire. People retire from the U.S. military younger than age 45. I don't see age bringing any wisdom from several of the current Supreme Court justices. In fact, just the opposite - stupidity.
Corruption, rather than stupidity, has nothing to do with age. Witness Matt Gaetz. US military members have physically demanding jobs requiring top physical fitness. These Supreme Court justices aren’t incompetent, they’re evil.
One first has to be stupid to be corrupt (not either/or). Yes, at least two of these Supreme Court justices are competent *and* do evil things.
Term limits won’t work. They’ll just crime faster. Appoint a new Chief Justice. Impeach those cheats and expand the court.
Term limits would help though in limiting the amount of time any single Justice can wreck havoc. Limits also should permit each president to appoint a Justice.
Yes, Re term limits, some opinion piece said, when Tucker Carlson got talked-at by Putin, with info about a 900 year history that supports road he has chosen and forever.
Opinion was—good thing about democratic routine of renewal, by way of elections—means old wood, individuals that imagine God and history, tribe, and “friends” favor them—it doesn’t matter, “Time’s-up,” or a mechanism like vote to dissolve, non-confidence based on a proposed budget, or impeachment (less subtle), works, for peaceful renewal.
Refreshing new ideas and vision from alternate new minds. If “your” ideas were good ones, others will champion them. Get out of the road, off the track, it is not Yours.
Monique, term limits would guarantee that court justices would be out after a certain period of time thus shortening the time they have to cause problems. Also, if the rules were made abundantly clear about impeachment, the justices would think twice about causing chaos.
All of the above
Idea: since 1977, the Australian High Court (US Supreme Court equivalent) has had a compulsory retirement age: 70. All Federal judges have to retire at 70. That rule was brought it at a referendum due to activities of several older judges (including the Chief Justice at the time) rewriting things to suit themselves. Works in Australia. Worth thinking about in the US?