The only way you can say this with a straight face is if you are (a) willfully lying or (b) sufficiently arrogant to think that your opinions are truth handed down on tablets and those who disagree just lack your wisdom.
-
As a final comment on this, if you ever take a tour of the Supreme Court, ask the docent these questions. Because they will tell you that the building is designed to look like a temple, figuratively symbolizing that the law, morality and ethics are eternal truths, revealed in this great chamber.
Ask them how much that message screws with your ability to remain humble and thoughtful when it's repeated to you every day. Ask how happy Dred Scott felt after the truth of his inequality was revealed to him.
-
Ask them how much that message screws with your ability to remain humble and thoughtful when it's repeated to you every day. Ask how happy Dred Scott felt after the truth of his inequality was revealed to him.
Don't ask those questions out of malice. Ask them out of love. Because if these justices are ever going to be as perfect as they clearly want to / claim to be, they're going to need someone like you to prod them into some self-reflection and personal growth. /fin
-
And frankly, this goes back much beyond the Roberts court. One could argue that the Warren court also overturned historic precedents consistent with their politics. Or that Roger Taney did racist sh*t under the guise of law. And I would agree! Judges are fallible, opinionated humans too.
@SeanCasten “fallible, opinionated, assholes” Fixed it for you. Autocorrect misspelled the last word.
-
So I guess I made a mistake at the start of this thread. (See? You can admit it!). I said that Roberts is either lying or arrogant. But I suppose there is a third possibility. Perhaps he is, in fact, infallible. And it is our privilege to say that we walked the earth in His time.
@SeanCasten A fourth possibility is that he’s delusional enough to actually believe he is apolitical.
-
The only way you can say this with a straight face is if you are (a) willfully lying or (b) sufficiently arrogant to think that your opinions are truth handed down on tablets and those who disagree just lack your wisdom. https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-chief-justice-8933cfe269c90746e200f2588801dfae
@SeanCasten In other news, "Water is not wet"!
-
Don't ask those questions out of malice. Ask them out of love. Because if these justices are ever going to be as perfect as they clearly want to / claim to be, they're going to need someone like you to prod them into some self-reflection and personal growth. /fin
@SeanCasten Can we lovingly use a cattle prod?
#USPol -
So I guess I made a mistake at the start of this thread. (See? You can admit it!). I said that Roberts is either lying or arrogant. But I suppose there is a third possibility. Perhaps he is, in fact, infallible. And it is our privilege to say that we walked the earth in His time.
@SeanCasten Huh. There's a fourth possibility: he's the Pope.
Sadly for Roberts, we only have one American Pope at a time and he's not it.
-
The only way you can say this with a straight face is if you are (a) willfully lying or (b) sufficiently arrogant to think that your opinions are truth handed down on tablets and those who disagree just lack your wisdom. https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-chief-justice-8933cfe269c90746e200f2588801dfae
@SeanCasten Someone give dear John "Bumke" Roberts and his Reichsgericht leonard leo Villainous Six a revolver and put them in a fucking bunker.
-
If SCOTUS isn't political, why are the reconstruction amendments viewed so differently by Republican appointed judges (who seem confused as to what race was being protected by the framers of those parts of the Constitution)?
@SeanCasten The entire Republican Party has learned they can just lie, gaslight, and play the victim. SC justices aren’t immune to that.
-
Don't ask those questions out of malice. Ask them out of love. Because if these justices are ever going to be as perfect as they clearly want to / claim to be, they're going to need someone like you to prod them into some self-reflection and personal growth. /fin
@SeanCasten in the meantime, we really need to prod Congress:
-
@SeanCasten A fourth possibility is that he’s delusional enough to actually believe he is apolitical.
-
The only way you can say this with a straight face is if you are (a) willfully lying or (b) sufficiently arrogant to think that your opinions are truth handed down on tablets and those who disagree just lack your wisdom. https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-chief-justice-8933cfe269c90746e200f2588801dfae
@SeanCasten I concur except I think you are excluding the middle.
He's both. Plato's Republic even justifies it and as a lawyer and Republican he's almost certainly a huge fan.
For those who've not read it, along with the Forms thing he also suggested that:
a) people have certain skills at birth and the state needs to establish what those are and put people in those positions.
b) only the leader class is smart and reasonable enough to know the truth without exploding.
-
The only way you can say this with a straight face is if you are (a) willfully lying or (b) sufficiently arrogant to think that your opinions are truth handed down on tablets and those who disagree just lack your wisdom. https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-chief-justice-8933cfe269c90746e200f2588801dfae
he's a white supremacist, bald-faced lies are just what he does
-
R relay@relay.infosec.exchange shared this topicR relay@relay.publicsquare.global shared this topic
-
The only way you can say this with a straight face is if you are (a) willfully lying or (b) sufficiently arrogant to think that your opinions are truth handed down on tablets and those who disagree just lack your wisdom. https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-chief-justice-8933cfe269c90746e200f2588801dfae
@SeanCasten The Supreme Court isn't political, and I'm a super-buff music superstar in my mid-20s.
-
The only way you can say this with a straight face is if you are (a) willfully lying or (b) sufficiently arrogant to think that your opinions are truth handed down on tablets and those who disagree just lack your wisdom. https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-chief-justice-8933cfe269c90746e200f2588801dfae
@SeanCasten I’ll do you one better: the only way you can say this with a straight face is (a) you’re willfully lying
-
And frankly, this goes back much beyond the Roberts court. One could argue that the Warren court also overturned historic precedents consistent with their politics. Or that Roger Taney did racist sh*t under the guise of law. And I would agree! Judges are fallible, opinionated humans too.
@SeanCasten
some serious ignorance on display comparing the Warren court with anything in the Taney and now the Roberts court, just gobsmackingly foolish to make an offhand claim like that. you can always delete it, if, after a brief moment, you reflect that indeed you cannot find a single decision from the Warren court that even comes close to Dred Scott (Taney) or Citizens United (Roberts) or Dobbs (Roberts); reflection time is over, time to delete this foolish toot -
The only way you can say this with a straight face is if you are (a) willfully lying or (b) sufficiently arrogant to think that your opinions are truth handed down on tablets and those who disagree just lack your wisdom. https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-chief-justice-8933cfe269c90746e200f2588801dfae
@SeanCasten Or, maybe he means that they are purely pay for play?
No politics, just cash and carry.
-
The only way you can say this with a straight face is if you are (a) willfully lying or (b) sufficiently arrogant to think that your opinions are truth handed down on tablets and those who disagree just lack your wisdom. https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-chief-justice-8933cfe269c90746e200f2588801dfae
@SeanCasten Johnny is like Biden, mentally living in a nostalgic version of DC that no longer exists.
-
The only way you can say this with a straight face is if you are (a) willfully lying or (b) sufficiently arrogant to think that your opinions are truth handed down on tablets and those who disagree just lack your wisdom. https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-chief-justice-8933cfe269c90746e200f2588801dfae
@SeanCasten i like it when right-wing dildos are in their 70s. They will die sooner.
-
The only way you can say this with a straight face is if you are (a) willfully lying or (b) sufficiently arrogant to think that your opinions are truth handed down on tablets and those who disagree just lack your wisdom. https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-chief-justice-8933cfe269c90746e200f2588801dfae
The Constitution's design makes each of the three branches of govt "political." Otherwise, how could each act as a check or balance on or for the other two?
"Interpreting" the law at the highest level, means recognizing facts, taking positions on their meaning and on the intent behind the actions of the other two branches. Those are inherently political acts.
Roberts's argument is really, "It's not political when I do it. It is heinously political when the minority does it."
-
R relay@relay.mycrowd.ca shared this topic
