Posted On: Saturday - June 30th 2018 3:44PM MST
In Topics: Trump US Feral Government
the Constitutionality of sex with goats.
"SO LET IT BE WRITTEN, SO LET IT BAAAAA DONE!"
... anyone got ahold of that guy they call "the pillow" who the cntrl-left contracted with for Scal ...? OK, anyway, there' nothing in the US Constitution that says there must be any certain number of justices. There's nothing that says to be a justice one must be a lawyer either, BTW. I'll get to this, as this post is just some general thoughts on this SCOTAL*-development.
The Socialist Franklin Roosevelt threatened to pack the court if he did not get his way with his Raw Deal program to bring Socialism to America. Most people just seem to be under the impression that all this stuff - the 9 members, but more importantly, the power they have - is fixed, just because it's been for most of a century. President Trump has a lot more power than he knows, in my opinion. That is one, of very few, disadvantages he's got by not being guy who spent his life in the Feral Government. I doubt he knows a whole lot of history about American government.
Peak Stupidity's thoughts on the power of the Supreme Court, and their transition from a interpretive body to a legislative cabal, have been detailed before just under a year ago. At this juncture though, it is very nice that this president has a 2nd pick already for this supposedly august body of wise men, lesbos and latinas. This is a fairly big deal due to the power that Americans and the other 2 branches of the Feral Gov't have given to that court in undue deference.
I'm no court-watcher, as I'd almost rather watch golf, but many suggestions have already been set out there, and I've enjoyed reading iSteve commenters under this unz post (and I see he's got 2nd one with > 200 comments I've not read yet). I really like the idea of Ann Coulter! Having disagreed with possibly only one thing out of her writing in a decade, I think her Conservatism, Libertarianism, and knowledge of the Constitution should make her a shoo-in, am I right? Hahahaa, oh wait, that would be only if we were living in the Constitutional Republic of yesteryear, silly me! However, just the suggestion of the nomination of Miss Coulter by President Trump would send the cntrl-left to insane asylums "♩♩♩♫♫♬♭ all over this land ♩♩♩♫♫♬". It'd be a hoot-nanny for the rest of us. As a commenter on unz noted, the tactic of nominating her, and dealing with the shitstorm for a few weeks, then coming up with the other Constitutional guy you've got in your back pocket, would be pretty clever. Yeah, not 3-D chess, but not tic tac toe either. We can be proud of ourselves to be promoting another non-SCROTAL SCOTI* to the position, at that.
As to my point above about occupation of said nominee, having a logical legal mind (as Ann Coulter does, BTW) could be helpful, but I'd rather just know we have a nominee who is not lying about his understanding of the court's role - most do - is not a guy who will flip on us, and can read plain English. That's all it takes. The Founders did not write this document for it to take a scholar of any sort to understand, like a priest reading Latin for the illiterate congregation of old. The document is pretty damn clear. The problem we've been having is voters not standing on principle for the last century or so (that's kind of coincident with when women were allowed to vote ... weird that...)
Looking at a timeline of how long the current SCOTILE crowd have been members, it seems like more change is due:
Keep it up, big Purple. It looks like those blue and red lines are a bit too long for
Trump having 2 picks already in 2 years is a good deal for patriotic Americans, and just imagine if the Hildabeast were in the office... shudder, shudder. I hope we can take good advantage and have more choices to come soon.
* No, I really do hate these terms SCOTUS, POTUS, FLOTUS, etc, as they seem much too anatomical and just modern-era-stupid in general. We're just making fun here.
Comments: