Liberal Forum
Archive
‹
Political Chat Rooms
‹
No Holds Barred Political Forum
‹
The Conservative Supreme Court
The Conservative Supreme Court
By B.See
9 Dec 2021 2:36 am in No Holds Barred Political Forum
9 Dec 2021 2:36 am
As some may recall, several months ago, certain conservative members of the Supreme Court suddenly became "concerned" about the public's perception of their (quite apparent) right winged partiality, as if the EVIDENCE of the fact might've somehow escaped the attention of anyone half paying attention.
After all, they only undermined landmark legislation like Affirmative Action and the Voting Rights Act. "Nothing to see here" eh?
And the GOP only bitched and moaned when, shortly after later conservative shenanigans on the part of Trump's SCOTUS, a few Democrats WHISPERED about adding more justices to the bench... JUST a whisper, mind you, because Democrats are mostly best at bringing knives to gunfights.
Never mind that McConnell and company blocked Obama's pick (Merrick Garland), though given Garlands rather milksop approach to prosecuting Trump, prolly just as well, and they fairly CHORTLED at the notion of NEVER affirming a ninth justice if Hillary had won the presidency.
Because unlike Democrats, they make up ways to do whatever **** they WANT to do... on the fly.
SO, given the above, it didn't exactly take a rocket scientist to figure out WHY their sudden compulsion to go public about the public's perception of their obvious political BIAS. Obviously SOMETHING was in the wind or down that old proverbial "pike." Nor did it take long for things to become a little CLEARER (for those who hadn't yet figured it OUT) exactly WHAT:
There is no doubt any more: the US supreme court is run by partisan hacks | Robert Reich | The Guardian
SCOTUS will gaslight us until the end.
After all, they only undermined landmark legislation like Affirmative Action and the Voting Rights Act. "Nothing to see here" eh?
And the GOP only bitched and moaned when, shortly after later conservative shenanigans on the part of Trump's SCOTUS, a few Democrats WHISPERED about adding more justices to the bench... JUST a whisper, mind you, because Democrats are mostly best at bringing knives to gunfights.
Never mind that McConnell and company blocked Obama's pick (Merrick Garland), though given Garlands rather milksop approach to prosecuting Trump, prolly just as well, and they fairly CHORTLED at the notion of NEVER affirming a ninth justice if Hillary had won the presidency.
Because unlike Democrats, they make up ways to do whatever **** they WANT to do... on the fly.
SO, given the above, it didn't exactly take a rocket scientist to figure out WHY their sudden compulsion to go public about the public's perception of their obvious political BIAS. Obviously SOMETHING was in the wind or down that old proverbial "pike." Nor did it take long for things to become a little CLEARER (for those who hadn't yet figured it OUT) exactly WHAT:
There is no doubt any more: the US supreme court is run by partisan hacks | Robert Reich | The Guardian
SCOTUS will gaslight us until the end.
9 Dec 2021 3:02 am
They will do what they figure they can get away with doing. And they APPARENTLY figure they can get away with just about ANYTHING.Pengwin » 09 Dec 2021, 3:48 am » wrote: ↑ The "Court" is done if they ****-up Roe.
End of debate (and the Founders would have no objections). It's not what they envisioned in the first place....
We Always Knew Conservative Justices Would Tear Roe Down. The Latest SCOTUS Fight Proves It. – Mother Jones
Roe v. Wade In Serious Peril After Dramatic Supreme Court Arguments | HuffPost Latest News
Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization: Kavanaugh and Barrett showed their cards.
Justice Sotomayor Expertly Exposed the **** of Mississippi’s Attack on Abortion Rights – Mother Jones
Justice Sotomayor makes the case for expanding the Supreme Court
14 Jan 2022 4:53 am
Trump's reich-winged supreme court struck again today, this time compounding the criminally negligent actions of der "chosen one" by striking some of President Biden's vaccine mandates:
The Supreme Court Just Spit in the Face of Joe Biden and the American Public
The Supreme Court Had No Legal Reason to Block Biden’s Workplace Vaccine RulesSo it made one up.
Along similar lines, this has happened re abortion:
Amy Coney Barrett Suggests Forced Pregnancy Is Fine Because of Adoption
Brett Kavanaugh brought up LGBTQ rights in abortion case and it was even worse than you think / Queerty
Poll: just 24% of Americans want Roe v. Wade overturned
The Most Blistering Lines From Sotomayor’s Extraordinary Dissent in Today’s Abortion Ruling – Mother Jones
and this regarding their sabotage of voting rights:
Roberts court's 'stench' began when it undermined Voting Rights Act and America's democracy diplomacy | TheHill
opinions:
Justice Breyer's rejection of reality proves why the Supreme Court needs to be expanded - Alternet.org
Joy Reid: Court Justices Should Have 'Right-Wing' Talk Shows
The Supreme Court Just Spit in the Face of Joe Biden and the American Public
The Supreme Court Had No Legal Reason to Block Biden’s Workplace Vaccine RulesSo it made one up.
Along similar lines, this has happened re abortion:
Amy Coney Barrett Suggests Forced Pregnancy Is Fine Because of Adoption
Brett Kavanaugh brought up LGBTQ rights in abortion case and it was even worse than you think / Queerty
Poll: just 24% of Americans want Roe v. Wade overturned
The Most Blistering Lines From Sotomayor’s Extraordinary Dissent in Today’s Abortion Ruling – Mother Jones
and this regarding their sabotage of voting rights:
Roberts court's 'stench' began when it undermined Voting Rights Act and America's democracy diplomacy | TheHill
opinions:
Justice Breyer's rejection of reality proves why the Supreme Court needs to be expanded - Alternet.org
Joy Reid: Court Justices Should Have 'Right-Wing' Talk Shows
14 Jan 2022 6:30 am
The Court has lived beyond its usefulness.
Time to drop it back to the very minor, almost nonexistent function, of the Founders.
Time to drop it back to the very minor, almost nonexistent function, of the Founders.
21 Jan 2022 6:32 pm
'This is absurd': A legal expert unpacks the hidden agenda behind the Supreme Court's 'pernicious' decision - Alternet.org
Justice Sonia Sotomayor blasts Supreme Court's handling of Texas abortion case as a 'disaster for the rule of law and a grave disservice to women'
Sotomayor Denounces Supreme Court For Looking ‘The Other Way’ On Texas Abortion Law | HuffPost Latest News
Justice Sonia Sotomayor blasts Supreme Court's handling of Texas abortion case as a 'disaster for the rule of law and a grave disservice to women'
Sotomayor Denounces Supreme Court For Looking ‘The Other Way’ On Texas Abortion Law | HuffPost Latest News
21 Jan 2022 6:35 pm
No, I don't recall that.B.See » 09 Dec 2021, 3:36 am » wrote: ↑ As some may recall, several months ago, certain conservative members of the Supreme Court suddenly became "concerned" about the public's perception of their (quite apparent) right winged partiality,
21 Jan 2022 7:12 pm
That's only one justice.
21 Jan 2022 7:52 pm
It was liberal leaning for a LONG time. Never heard a **** word...B.See » 09 Dec 2021, 3:36 am » wrote: ↑ As some may recall, several months ago, certain conservative members of the Supreme Court suddenly became "concerned" about the public's perception of their (quite apparent) right winged partiality, as if the EVIDENCE of the fact might've somehow escaped the attention of anyone half paying attention.
After all, they only undermined landmark legislation like Affirmative Action and the Voting Rights Act. "Nothing to see here" eh?
And the GOP only bitched and moaned when, shortly after later conservative shenanigans on the part of Trump's SCOTUS, a few Democrats WHISPERED about adding more justices to the bench... JUST a whisper, mind you, because Democrats are mostly best at bringing knives to gunfights.
Never mind that McConnell and company blocked Obama's pick (Merrick Garland), though given Garlands rather milksop approach to prosecuting Trump, prolly just as well, and they fairly CHORTLED at the notion of NEVER affirming a ninth justice if Hillary had won the presidency.
Because unlike Democrats, they make up ways to do whatever **** they WANT to do... on the fly.
SO, given the above, it didn't exactly take a rocket scientist to figure out WHY their sudden compulsion to go public about the public's perception of their obvious political BIAS. Obviously SOMETHING was in the wind or down that old proverbial "pike." Nor did it take long for things to become a little CLEARER (for those who hadn't yet figured it OUT) exactly WHAT:
There is no doubt any more: the US supreme court is run by partisan hacks | Robert Reich | The Guardian
SCOTUS will gaslight us until the end.
First time they went slightly the other way, a little honesty popped out.
You are surprised? I'm not.
Please seat yourself.
I like the very things you hate.
I like the very things you hate.
21 Jan 2022 8:01 pm
What are the odds that Yahoo administrations would nominate SIX CONSECUTIVE anti abortion jurists?
21 Jan 2022 8:02 pm
Don't know if I'd call it "honesty." More like concern that the public is catching wind of what they're UP TO. Long before this "honesty" the court (shadow docket) has reportedly been catering to Trump & Co's beck and call. Now the cat's out of the bag, as it were so... c.y.a. time.DeezerShoove » 21 Jan 2022, 8:52 pm » wrote: ↑ It was liberal leaning for a LONG time. Never heard a **** word...
First time they went slightly the other way, a little honesty popped out.
You are surprised? I'm not.
21 Jan 2022 8:02 pm
According to whom was SCOTUS "liberal" and when?DeezerShoove » 21 Jan 2022, 8:52 pm » wrote: ↑ It was liberal leaning for a LONG time. Never heard a **** word...
First time they went slightly the other way, a little honesty popped out.
You are surprised? I'm not.
Not all if us are hip to The Gospel of Slizzy, Slizzy..
21 Jan 2022 8:06 pm
OP said justices. That's plural. He showed evidence from one justice.Blackvegetable » 21 Jan 2022, 9:01 pm » wrote: ↑ What are the odds that Yahoo administrations would nominate SIX CONSECUTIVE anti abortion jurists?
21 Jan 2022 8:08 pm
"Affirmative Action" takes jobs [and seats in training programs] away from more qualified people every day.
It is time to abolish this program that has lowered our standards.
It is time to abolish this program that has lowered our standards.
21 Jan 2022 8:15 pm
Focus.StrictlyCashNCarry » 21 Jan 2022, 9:06 pm » wrote: ↑ OP said justices. That's plural. He showed evidence from one justice.
Answer the question
21 Jan 2022 8:16 pm
Present one.
21 Jan 2022 8:21 pm
What are the odds that Yahoo administrations would nominate SIX CONSECUTIVE anti abortion jurists?
Again.
21 Jan 2022 8:24 pm
Blackvegetable » 21 Jan 2022, 9:21 pm » wrote: ↑ What are the odds that Yahoo administrations would nominate SIX CONSECUTIVE anti abortion jurists?
Again.
Explain.
21 Jan 2022 8:24 pm
https://youtu.be/iMIKzUAY8n4GHETTOBLASTER » 21 Jan 2022, 9:08 pm » wrote: ↑ "Affirmative Action" takes jobs [and seats in training programs] away from more qualified people every day.
It is time to abolish this program that has lowered our standards.
21 Jan 2022 8:26 pm
If I now assert that you're a moron, it's my bad, right?
Who is online
In total there are 4293 users online :: 15 registered, 17 bots, and 4261 guests
Registered users: Johnny You, *Roshambo, Blackvegetable, Zeets2, Buck Naked, Squatchman, ROG62, RebelGator, Beekeeper, jerra b, PhiloBeddo, Cannonpointer, nefarious101, sole, Huey
Bots: Firefox/7.0, NING, MicroMessenger, ADmantX, Mediatoolkitbot, facebookexternalhit, Pinterest, CriteoBot, proximic, Mediapartners-Google, curl/7, YandexBot, Applebot, Googlebot, GPTBot, Baiduspider, bingbot