I take your point half-way – but it seems you take it all the way to fatalism, which I don’t do.
2 Likes
With six Catholics it’s not a court. It’s a Star Chamber.
1 Like
No not fatalism…not as I understand it. That’s a philosophy that teaches there’s no point to anything as everything is fated so you need only sit by the window and watch it go down. I agree with you that voter, not fate, is how we got here. But if voters just by virtue of being voters alone are a justification for what they vote in then Barrett is OK as is Trump. Voters put them there. No fate. We can do as we please and take ourselves where we want. In 2016 America wanted what it has now. I think they’ve changed. Just too late.
1 Like
I’ll try to be polite. I’m an atheist so I see it as a bunch of clowns playing dress up in their robes guided by something less real that what Alice reported was in Wonderland.
1 Like
Well, there are politicians right now arguing explicitly that voters in the coming elections should take the composition of the court into account.
Here’s one example:
“Remember that Republicans have lost 6 of the last 7 popular votes, but have appointed 6 of the last 9 justices,” Omar tweeted.
2 Likes
She’s right. But that’s the voters again. Who put the clown on SCOTUS that put Bush in office? Folks that got the power to do so by voters. Who buys into the exceptionalism shtick and end up with our exceptional disasters in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan? Voters and they still “love the military” even after it has robbed them blind and produced nothing but a shitty product for 75 years. Voters want “choices” so they vote for a scad of shitty ones. Voters. None of this had to be. It wasn’t fated. It was voted for.
The point is, she’s urging voters to do something about the problem.
2 Likes
And I thank her for it but I think we’re in the same bed as a guy dying of lung cancer after smoking 2 packs a day for 40 years. The time to “do something about it” was 40 years ago. There is nothing we can to today to fix a world class fuck up in the past. We can learn and not repeat but Barrett stays on the Court while we do so.
When you’re the daddy to two girls, you get plenty of practice in wearing all kinds of things that you may never have expected.
3 Likes
At least that what you tell the neighbors.
2 Likes
Disagree. They’re not asking voters to unseat Barrett.
Not only practice in but also joy out of.
I imagine.
3 Likes
Correctly.
Who said voters of today are being asked to unseat Barrett? What I said was the time to deal with Barrett was years ago when Bernie bros were protest voting and the MSM was “but her emails” its ass off. When folks thought 3rd party idiots were the cure and when Comey was sealing not only his fate but all of America’s. 2016. Then. Not now.
If you read the comment you refer to and the one you’re referring from you’ll see they are perfectly parallel. In BOTH I say the time to act is prior. Had the USA been properly educated in 2016 the shitstorm of 2020 does not happen. No one is belly aching about 2016. I made a historical reference only. Do you disagree with it? Do you think we’d have a Barrett or a Kav on SCOTUS had Americas been free of FaceBook’s Russian agitprop? Of Uraniumgate, Benghazigate and emailgate ( all of which vanished after Nov. 2016 as there was never anything but electoral utility in them )? Addressing that is not bellyaching. It’s dealing with the facts. Confronting the truth. Just as the recognition that Barrett is on that Court and the time to have kept her off it is past.
Be careful Cerv. Just digging at someone for diggings’s sake is not becoming. If you have to reframe someone words or point to attack them it’s best to put down your pen.
Which you also say is not fatalistic, and so on. Not much of it makes sense to me – but I concede this is my problem, not yours.
Luckily, I have my own reasons to quit!
Cheers.
The near-term answer to “6-3, woe is me” is “3.2,2, that’s what we’ll do.” Pass laws walling off personal privacy rights (basis of Roe), campaign finance restrictions, review of ACA, etc. etc. etc. from appellate review. Nullify SCOTUS with the lawmaking power. SCOTUS is an inferior, dependent child of the other branches anyway, as any reading of the Constitution makes clear; remind it of that fact.
1 Like
Yet they didn’t blink at Scalia manufacturing a right to self protection that isn’t even remotely mentioned or implied anywhere.
1 Like