Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 66

Thread: Shocking, the infotainment cable networks actually did something credible today,

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    42,254
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked 22,245 Times in 13,970 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 3,056 Times in 2,851 Posts

    Default Shocking, the infotainment cable networks actually did something credible today,

    they aired uninterrupted the questions and responses from the Supreme Court regarding the Mississippi abortion law. Of course they all added their framed views as soon as the recordings ended, but for close to two hours they were actually news channels

    Couple of takeaways, based on the questions, first, probability exists they will uphold the Mississippi law leaving abortion up to the individual State, but the question remains if they will continue onward and just scrap Roe vs Wade

    Second, Kagan bought out an interesting point, if all the same circumstances exist today that existed prior to the last three appointees to the Court taking their seats, when the same Roberts Court upheld Roe vs Wade, why now then did Mississippi pass that law? The thought was given consideration given that in the Mississippi legislature it was echoed often that they could do it now cause of the Trump Justices.

    What she was pointing out was that the Court’s own integrity is at stake, and could be considered as nothing more than just another political entity

    And lastly, there is a reason Thomas never asks questions, he is a dimwit. Asked one question totally unrelated to discussions and was embarrassed when the lawyer easily point out his inanity

  2. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to archives For This Post:

    evince (12-01-2021), martin (12-01-2021), Phantasmal (12-04-2021), ThatOwlWoman (12-01-2021)

  3. #2 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2021
    Posts
    5,460
    Thanks
    1,909
    Thanked 1,917 Times in 1,477 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 77 Times in 75 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    .
    Second, Kagan bought out an interesting point, if all the same circumstances exist today that existed prior to the last three appointees to the Court taking their seats, when the same Roberts Court upheld Roe vs Wade, why now then did Mississippi pass that law? The thought was given consideration given that in the Mississippi legislature it was echoed often that they could do it now cause of the Trump Justices.

    Hmmm ... an obastard appointee complaining about partisanship on the SCOTUS .... whoda thunk ???

  4. #3 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    42,254
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked 22,245 Times in 13,970 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 3,056 Times in 2,851 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Grumpy View Post
    .
    Second, Kagan bought out an interesting point, if all the same circumstances exist today that existed prior to the last three appointees to the Court taking their seats, when the same Roberts Court upheld Roe vs Wade, why now then did Mississippi pass that law? The thought was given consideration given that in the Mississippi legislature it was echoed often that they could do it now cause of the Trump Justices.

    Hmmm ... an obastard appointee complaining about partisanship on the SCOTUS .... whoda thunk ???
    Little history for you there pal, 63 Senators voted for her appointment to the SCOTUS, only 37 opposed, doesn’t quite fit your characterization of partisanship

  5. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to archives For This Post:

    evince (12-01-2021), Phantasmal (12-04-2021)

  6. #4 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2021
    Posts
    5,460
    Thanks
    1,909
    Thanked 1,917 Times in 1,477 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 77 Times in 75 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by archives View Post
    Little history for you there pal, 63 Senators voted for her appointment to the SCOTUS, only 37 opposed, doesn’t quite fit your characterization of partisanship
    REALLY ... WHY DO THE DIMS ALWAYS VOTE AS A BLOCK ???

    BTW ... GUESS YOU FORGOT SHE HAD ZERO JUDICIAL EXPERIENCE ...

  7. The Following User Says Thank You to Grumpy For This Post:

    Earl (12-02-2021)

  8. #5 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    20,920
    Thanks
    1,067
    Thanked 5,761 Times in 4,510 Posts
    Groans
    297
    Groaned 185 Times in 181 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Grumpy View Post
    REALLY ... WHY DO THE DIMS ALWAYS VOTE AS A BLOCK ???

    BTW ... GUESS YOU FORGOT SHE HAD ZERO JUDICIAL EXPERIENCE ...
    In the last session 67% of the decisions were unanimous or with only one dissent. That "block" consists of almost all justices.

  9. #6 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    42,254
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked 22,245 Times in 13,970 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 3,056 Times in 2,851 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Grumpy View Post
    REALLY ... WHY DO THE DIMS ALWAYS VOTE AS A BLOCK ???

    BTW ... GUESS YOU FORGOT SHE HAD ZERO JUDICIAL EXPERIENCE ...
    Again, educating the ill informed, there were only 51 Democrats in the Senate and she got 63 votes, hope I don’t have to do the math for you also

  10. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to archives For This Post:

    evince (12-01-2021), Hoosier Daddy (12-02-2021)

  11. #7 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    53,923
    Thanks
    254
    Thanked 24,835 Times in 17,266 Posts
    Groans
    5,349
    Groaned 4,601 Times in 4,278 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Grumpy View Post
    REALLY ... WHY DO THE DIMS ALWAYS VOTE AS A BLOCK ???

    BTW ... GUESS YOU FORGOT SHE HAD ZERO JUDICIAL EXPERIENCE ...
    The Dems don't. Do you pay any attention to the judges votes? The Reds come very close to a complete party vote.

  12. #8 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2020
    Location
    NYC & CO
    Posts
    13,967
    Thanks
    4,137
    Thanked 4,827 Times in 3,623 Posts
    Groans
    2,288
    Groaned 368 Times in 352 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Grumpy View Post
    REALLY ... WHY DO THE DIMS ALWAYS VOTE AS A BLOCK ???

    BTW ... GUESS YOU FORGOT SHE HAD ZERO JUDICIAL EXPERIENCE ...
    You're as stupid as Clarence Thomas is.

    https://www.biography.com/law-figure/elena-kagan

  13. #9 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    135,319
    Thanks
    13,309
    Thanked 40,977 Times in 32,292 Posts
    Groans
    3,664
    Groaned 2,869 Times in 2,756 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by archives View Post
    Little history for you there pal, 63 Senators voted for her appointment to the SCOTUS, only 37 opposed, doesn’t quite fit your characterization of partisanship
    why do you think that changes the observation that the political makeup of the SC hasn been an issue for the last eighty years.........remember the stack the court controversy that occurred during Roosevelt's administration?......
    Isaiah 6:5
    “Woe to me!” I cried. “I am ruined! For I am a man of unclean lips, and I live among a people of unclean lips, and my eyes have seen the King, the Lord Almighty.”

  14. #10 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    42,254
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked 22,245 Times in 13,970 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 3,056 Times in 2,851 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PostmodernProphet View Post
    why do you think that changes the observation that the political makeup of the SC hasn been an issue for the last eighty years.........remember the stack the court controversy that occurred during Roosevelt's administration?......
    Never went beyond a FDR temper tantrum

  15. #11 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Federal Way, WA
    Posts
    68,354
    Thanks
    18,375
    Thanked 18,676 Times in 14,049 Posts
    Groans
    628
    Groaned 1,136 Times in 1,080 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by archives View Post
    they aired uninterrupted the questions and responses from the Supreme Court regarding the Mississippi abortion law. Of course they all added their framed views as soon as the recordings ended, but for close to two hours they were actually news channels

    Couple of takeaways, based on the questions, first, probability exists they will uphold the Mississippi law leaving abortion up to the individual State, but the question remains if they will continue onward and just scrap Roe vs Wade

    Second, Kagan bought out an interesting point, if all the same circumstances exist today that existed prior to the last three appointees to the Court taking their seats, when the same Roberts Court upheld Roe vs Wade, why now then did Mississippi pass that law? The thought was given consideration given that in the Mississippi legislature it was echoed often that they could do it now cause of the Trump Justices.

    What she was pointing out was that the Court’s own integrity is at stake, and could be considered as nothing more than just another political entity

    And lastly, there is a reason Thomas never asks questions, he is a dimwit. Asked one question totally unrelated to discussions and was embarrassed when the lawyer easily point out his inanity
    Emanations and penumbras. That's the vaunted credibility that has existed since Douglas was shitting all over the Constitution.

  16. #12 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    184,527
    Thanks
    72,464
    Thanked 35,773 Times in 27,247 Posts
    Groans
    54
    Groaned 19,590 Times in 18,179 Posts
    Blog Entries
    16

  17. #13 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    184,527
    Thanks
    72,464
    Thanked 35,773 Times in 27,247 Posts
    Groans
    54
    Groaned 19,590 Times in 18,179 Posts
    Blog Entries
    16

  18. The Following User Says Thank You to evince For This Post:

    Hoosier Daddy (12-02-2021)

  19. #14 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    42,254
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked 22,245 Times in 13,970 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 3,056 Times in 2,851 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gin Saké View Post
    Emanations and penumbras. That's the vaunted credibility that has existed since Douglas was shitting all over the Constitution.
    Did you think a strict constructionist interpretation of the Constitution is ever possible? Even Jefferson abandoned that notion when he purchased Louisiana in 1800

  20. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to archives For This Post:

    Diesel (12-01-2021), evince (12-02-2021)

  21. #15 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2020
    Location
    NYC & CO
    Posts
    13,967
    Thanks
    4,137
    Thanked 4,827 Times in 3,623 Posts
    Groans
    2,288
    Groaned 368 Times in 352 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by archives View Post
    Did you think a strict constructionist interpretation of the Constitution is ever possible? Even Jefferson abandoned that notion when he purchased Louisiana in 1800
    Ask him how we regulate television and computers.

Similar Threads

  1. Three top cable news networks cut away from Trump speech
    By Bourbon in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-30-2018, 06:45 AM
  2. "Three top cable news networks cut away from Trump speech"
    By archives in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 03-29-2018, 04:39 PM
  3. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 09-06-2016, 02:55 PM
  4. Obama the non-credible filth
    By transwarpdrive in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-10-2016, 10:14 AM
  5. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 06-01-2010, 06:33 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •