I wonder if Penn State ever considers revoking his JD - he’s constantly showing he has no understanding of how the law and judicial systems work, much less the legislative systems authoring them.
5 Likes
I love the part where former Senator Frothy Mixture strongly implies that conversion therapy works.
The man is a complete fraud and a monumental moron.
11 Likes
Man, that’s the truth. For a national audience he’d have answered questions while she had a grip whip pies at his head. It’s a challenge to imagine a personality that would spend so much time on such a humiliatingly futile quest. (We have someone right in this thread who could help with that, but best not to encourage him.)
5 Likes
I doubt it. I love Rachel She is a model of what journalism should be
4 Likes
Yes Puppies and Darcy
4 Likes
“Waste time and the taxpayer’s money” is the central plank in the GOP platform.
The Court has occasionally changed its mind and overturned past decisions, but that is only after a considerable time and when the general opinion of society changes, as was the case with Brown reversing Plessy v. Ferguson. But, the likelihood of the social climate changing against same-sex marriage seems extremely low. If anything, it will become more accepted.
4 Likes
Do you like anyone?
1 Like
And Darcy is right there with Puppies. Sick minds think alike
2 Likes
Those were not ThunderclapNewman’s words — he was quoting Darcy.
1 Like
I was quoting Darcy.
You need to read more carefully before you embarrass yourself again.
Chief Justice Roberts at one point in effect compared the marriage ruling (same sex marriage) to Dred Scott v. Sandford. Abraham Lincoln’s opinion on the case was that it was wrong and eventually the Supreme Court would discover the errors of their ways.
He also noted one ruling should not bind the country right away. If the opinion is seen by enough people as wrong, it could be challenged and only becomes firmly binding from such challenge when it in place for a long time, firmly accepted by multiple court action. So, for example, during the Civil War, Congress did protect rights of blacks though Dred Scott said they were not constitutional “persons.”
http://www.virginia.edu/woodson/courses/aas-hius366a/lincoln.html
Congress tried that when the Supreme Court struck down a punishment for burning the flag in protest. The Supreme Court then reaffirmed they previous opinion. An individual litigant might be barred from re-litigating something. Congress doesn’t have the problem. It might be a waste of time, but in that respect Santorum is correct.
Oh, snap!
1 Like
You know you’re the only one I like chammy.
1 Like
Absolutely correct. The best one hour news hour n TV
4 Likes
You shouldn’t insult chammy that way.
1 Like
“There are people who are alive today who identify themselves as gay and lesbian and who no longer are,” he added after Maddow continued to press him on the issue.
There are are also people alive today who identify themselves as straight and who no longer are. What’s your point, Rick?
5 Likes
Yeah I know.
His point is on top of his head, but he hopes it won’t show if he combs his thinning hair the right way.
2 Likes
“I was quoting Darcy.”
No, your words Thunder. I knew you were on my side.
1 Like