tagged w/ SCOTUS
Here is the third article in our Republicans on Parade series, featuring individuals who personify what the Republican Party has become. Today’s honoree is Injustice Antonin Scalia, because he prefers his own racist view, in support of the Republican War on Minorities, to the law, as set by the US Constitution.Here is the third article in our Republicans on Parade series, featuring individuals... more
BIDEN PUTS WHITE HOUSE ON LOCKDOWN TO FIND CAR KEYS-Obama administration considering ways to overturn marijuana legalization-Tiffany Hartford and Father George Sayers Jr. have Baby, Arrested for Sex Crimes-Multiple media use linked to depression-Antonin Scalia is a disgusting human being. A tumorous boil on the ass of America.BIDEN PUTS WHITE HOUSE ON LOCKDOWN TO FIND CAR KEYS-Obama administration considering... more
The fascist five activist Republican Injustices on the Supreme Court are the willing Pawns of plutocratic billionaires like the Koch Brothers, as evidenced by the worst decision since Dred Scott, Citizens United. Here we have an opportunity to see just how twisted their rationale for misinterpreting the Constitution has become.The fascist five activist Republican Injustices on the Supreme Court are the willing... more
I trust that most of you are aware that, in spite of the Republican lie that winning the House gives them a mandate from the voters, over 500,000 more Americans voted for House Democrats than they did for House Republicans. Lets look at how Republicans Gerrymandered the districts to subvert the people’s will and at who is preventing reform.I trust that most of you are aware that, in spite of the Republican lie that winning... more
When the fascist five trashed the Constitution in an attempt to hand our electoral process to the 1%, they said that there were rules that would prevent Citizens United from corrupting the system. I strongly suspect that, even when they said it, they knew it was not true, because the Republican Party cares nothing whatsoever for rules. To understand this, let’s examine what is happening to a state with a history of clean elections.When the fascist five trashed the Constitution in an attempt to hand our electoral... more
When the fascist five ignored the Constitution to unleash unlimited Corporate election spending, part of their logic was both that it is speech, and that candidates will not be corrupted, because the Super PACS are forbidden to cooperate with campaigns. Now, having seen over and over again, that the Republican Party views rules as restrictions that OTHER people have to follow, I never had the slightest doubt that Republicans are scamming the system. However, I had no idea how they were doing it… until now.When the fascist five ignored the Constitution to unleash unlimited Corporate election... more
Considering that SCOTUS ignored the Constitution and decided Citizens United giving corporations free reign to spend $millions to fund disingenuous advertising for Republicans, do you think Republicans will be satisfied with their gift from the fascist five? If your answer is yes, you’re mistaken, because Republicans have filed suit for even more.Considering that SCOTUS ignored the Constitution and decided Citizens United giving... more
I’ve been paying attention to Politics since Kennedy beat Nixon, and never before have I seen so much money from the 1% filling the airwaves with ads, even here in a solidly blue state. Citizens United, as improperly decided by the Fascist Five, has unleashed a floodgate, and unless we close it, before the powers of Corporate Plutocracy and their party learn to take full advantage, elections will become nothing but auctions.I’ve been paying attention to Politics since Kennedy beat Nixon, and never... more
When I was young (~So Much Younger Than Today~) I use to refer to OLD as cobwebby (especially hinting at cerebral activity). I believe this was because whenever I encountered something really ‘decrepit’ or older than dirt, it had certain characteristics; like a funny unique (older than dirt) odor and was accompanied by a gazillion shuddersome cobwebs. So as I merrily journeyed toward senility, I would refer to some old people (especially old men who would flirt with me) as full of cobwebs, not so much because of their physical features; it was their thinking that seemed to drip with creepy spider webs, to me.
So it was, full-of-cobwebs meant to me that these oldsters could only view the world in terms of rules and laws from a by-gone era. You know those days when superstitions dominated the consciousness of the times i.e.
“If a candle lighted as part of a ceremony blows out, it is a sign that evil spirits are nearby.”
“A dog howling at night when someone in the house is sick is a bad omen.”
“It is bad luck to walk under a ladder.”
“To break a mirror means 7 years bad luck.”
“A white moth inside the house or trying to enter the house means death.”
(OK, I’m getting way to Halloweenie, you can read more at: http://www.corsinet.com/trivia/scary1.html)
Anyway, back to Full-of-Cobwebs, some of those who identify with the Right-Wing Tea Party Movement… have so many cobwebs living within their brains cells, it’s a wonder they can live in this day of hi-tech and science. Actually they do have problems living in, The Today (which must seem very frightening to them). That is why they resort to antiquated superstitions to cope. What’s really chilling about this is the fact that some of these cobwebby folks are leaders in high places who with tons of webs in their belfries, have the power to make us all live by their archaic way of thinking.
Anthony Scalia is one such loony, TALK ABOUT POWER, he can send us all back to the dark ages with one full swipe of a pen. I came across this article this morning telling how this Supreme Court justice thinks (or thinks through an entanglement of cobwebs). Another disturbing factor, the man is proud of it! SAY WHAT? Please read the article below. Thinkingblue
PS: Here are a few quotes from another cobweb-loon who has the power to turn (OUR) life into a “Dracula” movie:
“If it's a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole ...” VICTIMS OF LEGITIMATE RAPE DON'T GET PREGNANT! Todd Akin
“Terrorist Doctors are giving abortions to women who aren't actually pregnant…” Todd Akin
This is benign but still noteworthy: Todd Akin Says McCaskill Is Not 'Ladylike' ... (COBWEBBY epitomized!)
Scalia says abortion, gay rights are easy cases
By MARK SHERMAN –Associated Press –
WASHINGTON (AP) — Justice Antonin Scalia says his method of interpreting the Constitution makes some of the most hotly disputed issues that come before the Supreme Court among the easiest to resolve.
Scalia calls himself a "textualist" and, as he related to a few hundred people who came to buy his new book and hear him speak in Washington the other day, that means he applies the words in the Constitution as they were understood by the people who wrote and adopted them.
So Scalia parts company with former colleagues who have come to believe capital punishment is unconstitutional. The framers of the Constitution didn't think so and neither does he.
"The death penalty? Give me a break. It's easy. Abortion? Absolutely easy. Nobody ever thought the Constitution prevented restrictions on abortion. Homosexual sodomy? Come on. For 200 years, it was criminal in every state," Scalia said at the American Enterprise Institute.
He contrasted his style of interpretation with that of a colleague who tries to be true to the values of the Constitution as he applies them to a changing world. This imaginary justice goes home for dinner and tells his wife what a wonderful day he had, Scalia said.
This imaginary justice, Scalia continued, announces that it turns out "'the Constitution means exactly what I think it ought to mean.' No kidding."
As he has said many times before, the justice said the people should turn to their elected lawmakers, not judges, to advocate for abortion rights or an end to the death penalty. Or they should try to change the Constitution, although Scalia said the Constitution makes changing it too hard by requiring 38 states to ratify an amendment for it to take effect.
"It is very difficult to adopt a constitutional amendment," Scalia said. He once calculated that less than 2 percent of the U.S. population, residing in the 13 least populous states, could stop an amendment, he said.
In a lengthy question-and-answer session, Scalia once again emphatically denied there's a rift among the court's conservative justices following Chief Justice John Roberts' vote to uphold President Barack Obama's health care law. Scalia dissented from Roberts' opinion.
"Look it, do not believe anything you read about the internal workings of the Supreme Court," he said. "It is either a lie because the press knows we won't respond — they can say whatever they like and we won't respond — or else it's based on information from someone who has violated his oath of confidentiality, that is to say, a non-reliable source. So one way or another it is not worthy of belief."
"We can disagree with one another on the law without taking it personally," he said.
More Here: http://news.yahoo.com/scalia-says-abortion-gay-rights-easy-cases-073501926.html___When I was young (~So Much Younger Than Today~) I use to refer to OLD as cobwebby... more
The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) begins a new term, and with it the possibility of further undermining the Constitution of the United States, as they did in Citizens United, the worst Supreme Court decision since Dred Scott. As the Justices (and the inJustices) ponder important cases, we should be pondering just how important the coming election looms.The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) begins a new term, and with it the... more
Editor's Note: This is an opinion-based contributor piece. The views expressed by the author do not necessarily reflect Benzinga.
If America ever descends to hell in a handbasket, it will be Wal-Mart (NYSE: WMT) that imports the carefully crafted, four-cents-an-hour basket straight from a Chinese labor camp.
How can I be so sure? Because this corporate giant manages to be on the receiving end of both angles of the Food Stamp program – it is the largest reason why we need a Food Stamp program and yet it reaps the ultimate benefit of the program. Like Homer Simpson once said of alcohol, Wal-Mart is the cause of, and its own solution to, all life's problems. How can it be that it is both? Simple.
First, the benefits. Wal-Mart receives between 25 and 40 percent of all Food Stamp spending. Yes, you read that correctly. Up to 2 in 5 dollars spent by all Food Stamp recipients is spent at Wal-Mart.
Considering that the federal government spent approximately $72 billion on Food Stamps last fiscal year , Wal-Mart would have earned up to $28.8 billion in sales from the program alone. The company brought in $448 billion in sales last year, so this government program is clearly a big winner for them. Unfortunately, their win is our loss, at least as far as taxpayers go. You see, Wal-Mart is the reason why many of these people are on Food Stamps to begin with. Wal-Mart's low wages and purposeful underemployment keep their workers just rich enough to occasionally make rent and just poor enough to be eligible for public assistance like Food Stamps.
•Wal-Mart's intentionally low wages force employees to need approximately $420,000 per year, per store, totalling $2.66 BILLION annually in Food Stamps and other taxpayer assistance...to survive.
•Wal-Mart's intentionally low wages cost the country HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of dollars in payroll tax deductions for Federal, State, and Local taxes.
•Wal-Mart's intentionally low wages cost our communities the ability to hire and retain important public service workers like firefighters, police officers, maintenance workers, and teachers.
•Wal-Mart's intentionally low wages cost our communities with their increased need for those same public services they are underfunding.
•Wal-Mart's intentionally low wages and lack of covered benefits cost taxpayers over $1.02 BILLION a year in healthcare costs.
•Wal-Mart's intentionally low wages cost taxpayers as much as $225 MILLION in free and reduced price lunches for school-age children.
•Wal-Mart's intentionally low wages cost taxpayers over $780 MILLION in tax deductions for low-income families.
Read more: http://www.benzinga.com/news/12/07/2738503/wal-mart-americas-true-welfare-queen#ixzz22HLQYtTw
Read more: http://www.benzinga.com/news/12/07/2738503/wal-mart-americas-true-welfare-queen#ixzz22HLC2HiREditor's Note: This is an opinion-based contributor piece. The views expressed by... more
LOS ANGELES -- Opponents of same-sex marriage asked the U.S. Supreme Court Tuesday to overturn a federal appeals court decision that struck down Proposition 8, the 2008 California ballot initiative that limited marriage to a man and a woman.
Protect Marriage, the sponsors of Prop 8, called Februarys 2-1 decision by the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals misguided.
Our Constitution does not mandate the traditional definition of marriage, but neither does our Constitution condemn it, the groups petition to the high court said. Rather, it leaves the definition of marriage in the hands of the people, to be resolved through the democratic process in each state.
More at link...LOS ANGELES -- Opponents of same-sex marriage asked the U.S. Supreme Court Tuesday to... more
Scalia appeared on "FOX News Sunday - with Chris Wallace" this week. He's promoting his new book. Most of the commentary on his appearance centered on his comments on gun control and the Affordable Care Act. However, I found a quote included in the Reuters story to be perhaps the most interesting thing Scalia said.
"Of course, I would not like to be replaced by someone who immediately sets about undoing everything that I've tried to do for 25 years, 26 years, sure. I mean, I shouldn't have to tell you that. Unless you think I'm a fool."
It's the active voice in the reference "everything I've been trying to do" that I find troubling. It seems to me that this is the statement of an Activist Justice with an agenda for the Court. Aren't Justices simply supposed to be ruling objectively and independently on the cases that come before them. Are they really supposed to be trying to advance an individual agenda? It sounds like Scalia sees the Court almost as a policy making institution.
Maybe I am hearing more than is there. I've always been deeply skeptical of Scalia's judicial temperament. I'm very curious how this sounds to others, so comment away! You have my take.
The full video of the interview is available on the FOX News site. The comment I reference is toward the end if I recall.
http://s1.reutersmedia.net/resources/r/?m=02&d=20120729&t=2&i=635815833&w=320&fh=&fw=&ll=&pl=&r=CBRE86S1K4Q00Scalia appeared on "FOX News Sunday - with Chris Wallace" this week.... more
We want to take a moment and thank the Supreme Court for upholding legislation that has already had a tremendous impact on the quality of life for millions of Americans.
We want to take a moment and thank the Supreme Court for upholding legislation that... more
I have always pictured the Supreme Court of the United States as a very formal setting, where collegiality and propriety prevail at all times. In addition, Justices regularly claim that the atmosphere was non-political. A rare glimpse inside SCOTUS puts both those myths to rest.I have always pictured the Supreme Court of the United States as a very formal... more
If Obama manages to lose to Romney, a blatant unabashed liar and a flagrant SCREWBALL, the Supreme Court will become a dictatorship and not an impartial, objective observer who can make decisions according to the constitution and what is good for this nation and its people; A tyranny court of far right-wing, goofy and dangerous decisions.
When this court, in 2000, picked our next president against the will of the people, my one thought was, OH NO MORE RIGHT-WING JUSTICES WILL BE APPOINTED. Of course this SCOTUS decision to appoint Bush, also wrecked havoc on our country and society which left us quite bruised and damaged, still the USA, with time, was permitted to heal somewhat, with the election of an intelligent brain. Yet Dubya’s conservative picks for the court has continued to EASE ON DOWN THE ROAD and vote along an ideological line, so that, in a sense means that old George W Bush is still sort of, YIKES, at the helm. More conservative appointees (from Romney) will clinch the deal and we won’t need those 9 justices anymore, just sign on the dotted line and enact laws that will favor the rich and make the poor even poorer until they won’t be called poor any longer but slaves. So be it. thinkingblue
Court's Recent Rulings Shake Up Partisan Narrative
June 29, 2012
It's a bit less likely now than a week ago that you'll hear people accuse the Supreme Court of being politicized.
That's because this week, the court ended its session with two controversial decisions — neither one of which was decided on the usual and predictable split between the five justices appointed by Republican presidents and the four appointed by Democrats.
But that doesn't make the court any less of a political animal.
Complaints about "activist courts" are common — and that phrase is easy to define, says Jeffrey Segal, a Stony Brook University professor. "Activism is a decision that people don't like."
A partisan court is a little different.
"Political polarization means that, by and large, the center is disappearing," Segal says.
There was a time when justices appointed by Democrats and Republicans intermingled in their judicial decisions. Ideological lines were murkier, and it was harder to predict who would fall where in a split decision. The last two justices who retired, David Souter and John Paul Stevens, were both Republican appointees who usually voted with the court's liberals.
Since they left, the court has settled into a partisan pattern of 5 to 4. MORE HERE http://www.npr.org/2012/06/29/155985744/courts-recent-rulings-shake-up-partisan-narrativeIf Obama manages to lose to Romney, a blatant unabashed liar and a flagrant SCREWBALL,... more
A day has passed, and I got to spend most of it studying. This is my best understanding of what happened and why, followed by three excellent video clips. Please note that my thoughts on the motivations of Chief Justice Roberts are my own opinions only, and I do not present them as facts.A day has passed, and I got to spend most of it studying. This is my best... more
Congrats to Jacki Schechner and Current TV for beating CNN, GOP-TV and MSNBC with the Correct story on SCOTUS ACA Ruling.Is it me or is Wolf Blitzer just a sadder version of Ron Burgundy? When everyone else was reporting facts, CNN & FOX decided to be edgy and just make stuff up. I really wish I could watch their FAIL in a CNN 3D hologram, that would make it even better.
This to me, epitomizes everything wrong with the news media today. http://www.upworthy.com/breaking-cnn-is-still-a-really-awful-news-organization?c=bl3
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=331487796932280&set=a.111384848942577.19584.100002131866339&type=1&ref=nfIs it me or is Wolf Blitzer just a sadder version of Ron Burgundy? When everyone else... more
Police already had the power to check the immigration status of someone they arrest or detain. The key provision of the bill, that was struck down, would have given the state the ability to require papers from anyone, even if police had no reason to detain them. The only difference is that police no longer have the discretion to look the other way, if for example, they suspected that someone is undocumented, but needed information from that person about a violent crime. Therefore undocumented people will be even more reluctant to talk to police, making Arizona less safe for citizens.Police already had the power to check the immigration status of someone they arrest or... more