Teenager Visits 35 Countries in Under 24 Hours. Yeah, he sued a loophole. (via Fark)
The 2022 World's Ugliest Dog. He may be ugly, but Mr. Happy Face is very much loved by his human. (via Boing Boing)
Are Joe Manchin and Susan Collins Stupid—or Do They Just Think We Are?
Owners of Jumbo Floating Restaurant backtrack on sinking claims as authorities investigate. Okay then, never mind. (via Digg)
When Cats Chew Catnip, It Works as a Bug Spray.
Separation of Church and State Is Crumbling Before Our Eyes.
How the Wedding Dress Story Ends.
Nice Ice: Valerie Hammond on the Genteel Charm of Vintage Canadian Costume Jewelry.
15 Neat Facts About Robin Williams.
8 comments:
With his mind for loopholes, that teenage international traveler is destined to become a lawyer.
Linda Skeens killed Chuck Norris in a bake-off, just to watch him die.
I do love watching the left meltdown whenever something doesn't go their way. The Daily Beast is surely having a terrible time right now. Just to keep things in perspective:
We'll start with RBG because she set the standard every Supreme Court nominee has since followed:
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg (1993): “It would be wrong for me to say or preview in this legislative chamber how I would cast my vote on questions the Supreme Court may be called upon to decide. A judge sworn to decide impartially can offer no forecasts, no hints, for that would show not only disregard for the specifics of the particular case, it would display disdain for the entire judicial process.”
Justice Gorsuch: “Roe v. Wade, decided in 1973, is a precedent of the U.S. Supreme Court. It has been reaffirmed. . . . So a good judge will consider it as precedent of the U.S. Supreme Court worthy as treatment of precedent like any other. If I were to start telling you which are my favorite precedents or which are my least favorite precedents, or if I viewed precedent in that fashion, I would be tipping my hand and suggesting to litigants that I have already made up my mind about their cases.”
Justice Kavanaugh: “Roe v. Wade is an important precedent of the Supreme Court. It has been reaffirmed many times. It was reaffirmed in Planned Parenthood v. Casey in 1992. . . . So that precedent on precedent is quite important as you think about stare decisis in this context.”
Justice Amy Coney Barrett on "super-precedents": “Okay, well people use super-precedent differently. The way that it’s used in the scholarship and the way that I was using it in the article that you’re reading from was to define cases that are so well settled that no political actors and no people seriously push for their overruling. And I’m answering a lot of questions about Roe, which I think indicates that Roe doesn’t fall in that category. And scholars across the spectrum say that doesn’t mean that Roe should be overruled but descriptively it does mean that it’s a case - not a case that everyone has accepted and doesn’t call for its overruling."
"I do love watching the left meltdown whenever something doesn't go their way." Seriously? Are you saying that because they are you opposite? You don't feel the extreme ends of left and right do the gnashing of teeth and rending of cloth?
The extremists are always vocal with their position, but I've a feeling the moderates, the left and right centerists, are pretty disgusted with the black robed clowns running the country because congress is too busy playing politics and serving their(Citizens United) owners, to bother with governing the nation.
It seems everyone seeking elected office from dogcatcher to President has no interest in serving the people. Every one of them seems to have an agenda, an axe to grind, a goal to force on the system. People walk around with an "I voted" sticker on them, proud as punch. Ask who they voted for and they'll tell you the top spot on the ballot being President or Governor for that election. But can't tell you who else they voted for because that would require thinking and voting for each position rather than voting party.
The country is not what it was and I fear it's going to get worse.
America doesn't even have a left. The Democratic Party would be considered center-right anywhere else in the world.
Your point on the extremists is correct. Your point on the moderates is not. Your reasoning is skewed because you're missing something important. The Supreme Court's abortion decision is unpopular but legally correct. All the arguments prior to the decision were based on policy and political implications - not legality. For years the Left has used the judiciary to implement its policy goals because it failed to or couldn't legislate them. This is why the country is so screwed up. Imposing the will of California or New York on Mississippi or Texas (or vice-versa) is wrong and will never work. Abortion is not a Constitutional Right, it's a policy; and policy decisions belong to the legislative branches of the federal and state government.
I'm a RINO. Neither political party wants anything to do with me. I personally oppose abortion, agree with the Court's decision, and also respect and accept that it's legal in Maine. On various policy issues outside the purview of the Constitution, one has to acknowledge the regional differences in the country. If you can't do that, then your fear of what might happen next is justified.
The Democratic Party is controlled by progressive socialists. The Republican Party is controlled by populist conservatives. Moderate democrats are finding themselves to be center right while moderate republicans are all of sudden center left. Neither are welcome by the current leadership.
"Separation of Church and State" this is not in the US constitution (reread the 1st Amendment as needed).
The decision today was that some coach could pray by himself and whomever voluntarily joins after football games. More generally, this will allow a religious (Christian, Jew, Muslim, etc.) person to pray by themselves in public.
Post a Comment