This just in: shit comes from ass
Who is this man so wise in the ways of science.
Is anyone still denying it at this point?
Exactly. Who are they talking to?
The past, I suspect
The past, I suspect
And I’d love to know when that was, given we have stuff like Santa Clara County v Southern Pacific Rail Road, and that was in 1886. I’d love to see someone defend the “corporations have the same rights as humans” thing as being apolitical, LOL.
Its “judges” (snort) are literally appointed by the president. Of course it’s political.
Chief Justice John Roberts wants us to believe that neither the court nor the judiciary as a whole has “Obama judges or Trump judges, Bush judges or Clinton judges.” Justice Neil Gorsuch insists that the court is not populated by “politicians in robes.”
Justice Amy Coney Barrett went on Fox News to say that justices “don’t wear red and blue, we all wear black because judges are nonpartisan. And the idea is that we are all listening to the law. We’re all trying to get it right. We’re not playing for a team.”
One notes that the judges most invested in the appearance of “not playing for a team” are, in fact and by every discernible measure, all playing for the same team.
It’s funny that they are trying this bullshit. Just like the dickheads that pretend to be “independents” and then proceed to do all kinds of concern trolling and Murc’s Law bullshit about liberals and Democrats.
#1 - both sides are bad. #2 I didn’t vote for this #3 I’m not MAGA #4 I’m a centrist. I’m in the middle #5 I don’t like to talk about politics #6 You cut some off because of politics? #7 Why can’t we all just get along?
https://www.instagram.com/original_pringles/reel/DZ8zh0NR01T/
Everything is political. Even things that claim not to be are.
Everything is political. Especially things that claim not to be.
My favorite thing is when someone chastises someone in a mixed group type of setting and says “we shouldn’t talk politics”. I mean, what the actual fuck, how do we do that?
Cannot even stick to the weather, since the cons have poisoned that entirely. If it’s hot as fuck out, they are on pins and needles and just waiting for someone to indicate it is record setting heat and start raging out with some talking points related to it. Same when it’s cold out or snow on the ground. Same with things like fires raging in the country. Or the drought. Or the price of gas and the price of just about everything else being sky-high…
I mean, seriously, it is nearly impossible for families/neighbors to not talk “politics”. And even when you are talking about things that are for sure “politics”, you have to all pretend you are not talking about things affected by politics…about the only safe topics might be music or sports, and even that is filled with landmines, given the culture war the cons have been conducting…
Is this some kind of revelation? At least as far back as Roe v Wade, the cons have been agitating for activist judges (yes, more projection on their part, imagine that) that will overturn women’s rights.
Not to mention deliver all kinds of other conservative activist fuckery from the court…
For that website? Yeah it’s a bigger deal for them to be saying this than idk, Washington Post or Huffington Post or Emily Post. maybe not Emily Post I take that back. I used to read the hill when I was more in politics. It was a fairly reliably [in the lens of the US Overton window, moderate/conservative/semicentrist] perspective.
Even State Supreme Courts are political. The positions in our ballot pamphlet says “Nonpartisan” but candidates for every open position this year are very clearly political.
We get a side that wants to rewrite the state constitution without a vote of the people and another side that wants to bend the constitution to fit the needs of fascists.
Wonderful times we live in.
The saying, ‘politics has an interest in you even when you don’t have an interest in politics’ rings true.
These people don’t care for facts or otherwise. Only what impedes their powerstruggle.
I used to think we needed to expand SCOTUS by 4 seats, but I no longer believe that. Now I think we need to expand SCOTUS by 20 seats, with rolling term limits, so each president gets to appoint a few.
No bad faith president should be able to negatively impact American policy for the next 50-75 years.
I prefer the idea that there is no set number of justices, every president gets to appoint one judge per term. Obviously they should still be approved by the Senate. After the Senate approves the judge, that’s it, someone dies, to bad wait a few years for the next term or president. Sure we might end up with 20 justices if a bunch of young people are appointed but that just opens up the term limit conversation, and that would be great since lifetime appointments shouldn’t be a thing for any position.
The best idea I saw had 18 year terms and each president may nominate 3 during their term, leading to a 27 member court. My math says 24 members so I must be misremembering something
27 will work, 31 will work, whatever. It just has to be large enough that one treasonous president can’t significantly alter the composition of the court.
It’s important that SCOTUS remain protected from the wild fluctuations in political direction that is common to the presidency. We need stability in the SCOTUS.
Never not been and impossible for it not to be.
always has been, always will be.
deleted by creator
It’s not just political. It’s rotten to the core.
astronautwithpistol.jpg
🌎👨🚀🔫👨🚀
pikachu face
Uhhh yeah duh
