[Unthinking Majority]

The SCOTUS has become something of a joke as an institution over the years, which is frightening.

[Steve_American]

The SCOTUS has become something of a joke as an institution over the years, which is frightening.

IMHO, the USSC has earned the status of joke all by itself. This recent case is just one of many.

It is high time the American voters rose up and threw all the bums out of Congress and cleaned house in the USSC too by packing it with 6 Progressive justices. 9+6=15. Now, the progressives need just 1 vote to make rulings. Then we need some additional amendments.
1] A 2/3 vote to confirm a justice to the USSC. But, a majority vote to convict and remove a justice for impeachable offensives, such as appearing to have lied under oath to get confirmed.
2] No filibuster in the Senate.
3] The Gov. has the power and obligation to do these things.
. . a] Fund Soc. Sec. with deficit spending if necessary.
. . b] Fund health care for every citizen and visitor.
. . c] Equal rights for women and give them control of their bodies until last trimester of pregnancy.
. . d] Enforce the labor laws to give the 2 sides [workers & corps] equal power.
. . f] Enforce laws to save the planet from AGW, aka ACC.
. . g] Enforce the anti-trust laws.
. . h] A way to amend the constitution by majority vote by the people in 2 elections that are 2 years apart.
. . j] Etc.

[BlutoSays]

Perfect example of Steve_American's idiotic ehoutght process. Wants iron-fisted rule because he's sure HIS views are correct. At least he's completely transparent about it.

What would Harambe do?

[pugsville]

Perfect example of Steve_American's idiotic ehoutght process. Wants iron-fisted rule because he's sure HIS views are correct. At least he's completely transparent about it.

What would Harambe do?

You object to the rule of law and the enforcement of laws in an Equitable way (applies to everyone equally)

I example of your thought process is any democratic law making prices and equitable enforcement is just unacceptable when it clashes with your views.

Why do you have such a problem with democracy and teh rule of law?

[BlutoSays]

You object to the rule of law and the enforcement of laws in an Equitable way (applies to everyone equally)

I example of your thought process is any democratic law making prices and equitable enforcement is just unacceptable when it clashes with your views.

Why do you have such a problem with democracy and teh rule of law?

[pugsville]

Ahh you can't make you mind up and donlt have a coherent position?

[BlutoSays]

Ahh you can't make you mind up and donlt have a coherent position?

Right you are!

[pugsville]

Right you are!

One is with the law and constitution the other is not.

[QatzelOk]

I like this meme because it summarizes my view of what "Canada" is.

As a government, "Canada" mainly exists to destroy local communities and cultures so that businessmen can make money off of any scam they cook up.

Your nation state may vary somewhat. But I can't see any other consistent pattern to the Canadian government. It destroyed Western metis and First Nations cultures to "build a railroad" (for private businesses), and has killed millions of foreigners in wars (with the UK or USA) in order to open up gold mines, or favorable trade relations.

Is that all governments do? Destroy local people in order to empower multinational oligarchs?

And if this is all they do, do their institutions deserve any respect whatsoever?

[Patrickov]

@BlutoSays

Governments doing most of the robbing and killing is not a problem by itself.

The real problem is some societies allow whoever (governments, thugs and maniacs alike) to do the robbing and killing arbitrarily without consequences.

For the United States' case, neither side is able to persuade the other that the situation would not go to the extreme as feared by their counterparts. (Repuds don't want to be controlled, all others think Repuds and their supporters are the real abusers)

I admit my stand is nearer to Repuds, but to be specific, my take is that arbitrary robbing and killing by individual maniacs is lesser evil than having it done by governments.

Still, there must be a middle ground that most can agree on.

[QatzelOk]

...arbitrary robbing and killing by individual maniacs is lesser evil than having it done by governments...

And since most Western voters choose "lesser evils," we will see more mass shootings which are "less evil" than firing squads.

Let's hear it for the land of lesser evil and all its school shootings! Hip hip... disrespect!

[BlutoSays]

[SpecialOlympian]

18 USC 1507

I super, super want to hear how you interpret this. My opinion of you is so low that it's like saying this is no different to me than pretending to throw a tennis ball just to fuck with a dog.

Whoever, with the intent of interfering with, obstructing, or impeding the administration of justice, or with the intent of influencing any judge, juror, witness, or court officer, in the discharge of his duty, pickets or parades in or near a building housing a court of the United States, or in or near a building or residence occupied or used by such judge, juror, witness, or court officer, or with such intent uses any sound-truck or similar device or resorts to any other demonstration in or near any such building or residence, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

Nothing in this section shall interfere with or prevent the exercise by any court of the United States of its power to punish for contempt

C'mon. C'mon boy. I got a congressional ruling for you, it's right here *Farrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrt*

[pugsville]

Right so we should abolish government the armed forces, money, the rule of law, law itself. Democracy.

Really you think that would work?


What do you believe in?

[Politics_Observer]

@pugsville

I think @BlutoSays made clear what he believes in. He believes that the only role government should serve is to assure his supreme status over all others as a white male. That means, there can be no real rule of law, only a system of control over others that are not him or other white males like him. That's because if we really had a REAL rule of law, everybody, including Trump, would be held to the same standard. But we have seen that just simply isn't the case given the overwhelming evidence that Trump has broken the law many times, publicly, openly, and there is no accountability. This isn't just limited to Trump's mind, you, this applies to many privileged, wealthy white males.

When Bluto says "little to no government" what he really means, is no government that will hold him to the legitimate rule of law or threatens his status of superiority and supremacy over others that are not white males in American society. He is OK with socialism though, but only with socialism for rich white males. Just not socialism for others. See how that works? Remember, the American system of government was built to ensure white supremacy. The founding fathers who wrote the U.S. Constitution were slaveholders. So, relegating others to second-class citizens is embedded in the U.S. Constitution since it was written.

The second amendment was all about ensuring that Southern slave owners had the means to forcibly put down slave revolts and that the militia in their states was under state control rather than federal control. That way, southern slave owners can count on the militia to be there for them in the event of a slave revolt. Logically, that would be the reason why we lack gun control today. Whites see a lack of gun control as a means to protect their privileged status in society, especially in the South. It's also worth noting how this loose interpretation of the second amendment doesn't seem to apply equallyh to black folks when they carry a gun in the same way legally as whites do. One only has to look to American history, starting with the writing of it's constitution to understand why.

[Rancid]

Is all @BlutoSays knows how to do is post memes?

Is he capable of original thought?

[Politics_Observer]

@Rancid

I think he is capable of original thought. He is just selfishly looking to preserve his privileged status as a white male in America at the cost and expense of others. Of course, nobody likes being the bad guy, so they have to lie to themselves about the reasons they do this.

[MistyTiger]

Why should we respect an institution that wants to control a woman's right to abort/not abort her baby? Some mothers should not give birth at all. I have known some women who had children but are lousy human beings. And I think they are contaminating the minds of their children and those others who are under their influence. Toxicity is a serious matter. There are not enough prison cells for these kinds of toxic women.

And some of the Justices on the SCOTUS should not be on that bench. I can name at least one scumbag on the bench. Blehhh. *coughs*rapist*coughs

[BlutoSays]

Right so we should abolish government the armed forces, money, the rule of law, law itself. Democracy.

Really you think that would work?


What do you believe in?

Stop ascribing your views to me.

The Department of Energy produces no energy. The Department of Agriculture produces no food. The Department of Commerce just gets in the way of everything and everyone, causing our competitors like China to run circles around us and lower our standards of living. Most federal departments just churn out mindless rules and regulations all day, because that's the only thing they know how to do. When they've created the final package of regulations to kill any and every enterprise, do you know what they'll do? Start on the next package of regulation, because that's the only thing they know how to do.

The federal bureaucracies, cabinet level departments and welfare bureaus should be cut by 75%. No one would miss HUD and its idiocy. Return important functions to the states. Those that aren't important, kill them off altogether. The federal register is a compendium of 80,000 pages of mind fuckery that is used as a weapon to drive opponents out of business. Where a large company can hire a staff to deal with regulations, a small company cannot. So, they are driven out of business, consolidation takes place and you end up left with Amazon, Cargill and Walmart. That's not by accident. Less choice for the consumer, higher prices and less quality because of less competition thanks to legislation being used as a weapon to drive competitors out of business. All that happens because of Washington DC and its behemoth federal bureaucracies. It's time to take .gov apart and defang it.

Rule of law? WTF? Have you seen our cities lately?

Fuck you and your "democracy". You wouldn't know what democracy is if it bit you. You're simply a DNC parrot.

[BlutoSays]

@pugsville

I think @BlutoSays made clear what he believes in. He believes that the only role government should serve is to assure his supreme status over all others as a white male. That means, there can be no real rule of law, only a system of control over others that are not him or other white males like him. That's because if we really had a REAL rule of law, everybody, including Trump, would be held to the same standard. But we have seen that just simply isn't the case given the overwhelming evidence that Trump has broken the law many times, publicly, openly, and there is no accountability. This isn't just limited to Trump's mind, you, this applies to many privileged, wealthy white males.

When Bluto says "little to no government" what he really means, is no government that will hold him to the legitimate rule of law or threatens his status of superiority and supremacy over others that are not white males in American society. He is OK with socialism though, but only with socialism for rich white males. Just not socialism for others. See how that works? Remember, the American system of government was built to ensure white supremacy. The founding fathers who wrote the U.S. Constitution were slaveholders. So, relegating others to second-class citizens is embedded in the U.S. Constitution since it was written.

The second amendment was all about ensuring that Southern slave owners had the means to forcibly put down slave revolts and that the militia in their states was under state control rather than federal control. That way, southern slave owners can count on the militia to be there for them in the event of a slave revolt. Logically, that would be the reason why we lack gun control today. Whites see a lack of gun control as a means to protect their privileged status in society, especially in the South. It's also worth noting how this loose interpretation of the second amendment doesn't seem to apply equallyh to black folks when they carry a gun in the same way legally as whites do. One only has to look to American history, starting with the writing of it's constitution to understand why.

Stop ascribing your views to me.