Jump to content

Americans Unhappy With SCOTUS Voting Rights Decision


Recommended Posts

And the stupid cons still think they're on top of the world ! lol

 

Americans have mixed feelings about the Supreme Court's latest rulings, with a majority disapproving of its opinion on the Voting Rights Act, but in favor of two pro-gay marriage opinions, according to an ABC/Washington Post poll released Wednesday.

Just a third said they agree with the court's decision to strike down part of the Voting Rights Act, while 51 percent disagreed.

Knowledge about, and disapproval of, the VRA decision was especially high among African Americans, 71 percent of whom expressed disagreement with the ruling. Just 3 percent were undecided, while 16 percent of all adults had no opinion.

Other racial groups, however, also disapproved: Hispanic Americans disagreed by 50 percent while 40 percent agreed, and whites disagreed by 48 to 33 percent.

 

 

Americans Unhappy With SCOTUS Voting Rights Decision

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The dumb hick ignores everything working against him and his party.

 

You can't overturn RvW.

You got no traction out of all of the nonscandals.

Americans still favor democrat ideas over republicans....as I proved in another thread.

You lost on Doma.

And now the country sees how the extreme right wing conservative Justices think and vote.

 

If it were a high school baseball game the mercy rule would go into effect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Searching hard for a panty wad moment aren't you pink panty. It was before the SCOTUS and they ruled. Opinion does not enter into it.

 

Just another one of your miserable defeats for you personally.

 

Were you one of the outraged righties when John Roberts tie-broke the vote upholding the ACA? Righties started calling him "Toilet" Roberts, what a juvenile response. In any event, they were mad as h*ll at him. Did you think "It was before the SCOTUS and they ruled. Opinion does not enter into it?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not to mention, they didn't really "strike it down". It was kicked to Congress which is, I'll admit, the same thing. What's important to note against the typical con white hoodie is that the court said VRA should be adjusted to today's new reality, not abolished. If you bring back all of the paperwork they did the last time the VRA was continued in 2007 (?) and add to evidence from the 2012 election and add a sensible Congress...... you would actually have an even more widespread array of states under precondition. Problem is, this Congress won't get anything done. What a stupid decision!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And the stupid cons still think they're on top of the world ! lol

 

Americans have mixed feelings about the Supreme Court's latest rulings, with a majority disapproving of its opinion on the Voting Rights Act, but in favor of two pro-gay marriage opinions, according to an ABC/Washington Post poll released Wednesday.

Just a third said they agree with the court's decision to strike down part of the Voting Rights Act, while 51 percent disagreed.

Knowledge about, and disapproval of, the VRA decision was especially high among African Americans, 71 percent of whom expressed disagreement with the ruling. Just 3 percent were undecided, while 16 percent of all adults had no opinion.

Other racial groups, however, also disapproved: Hispanic Americans disagreed by 50 percent while 40 percent agreed, and whites disagreed by 48 to 33 percent.

 

 

Americans Unhappy With SCOTUS Voting Rights Decision

 

votes dont matter...prop 8 proved that

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that dead people voting, and those voting many times over in the election are a problem. Why is it that liberals get their pants in a wad when the right to vote, one person, one vote, and only Americans can vote in an American election is enforced?

 

Simply despicable what the left does to promote the bastardization of the voting process.

 

The stereotype the liberals persist on having in regards to the south is alarming. Their is more racism in your backyards than in the south. It is about time that the SCOTUS looked at a 40 year old law, you know, enacted back when the Democrats were still the anti-minority party. The Democrats truly have a very, very racist past.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And the stupid cons still think they're on top of the world ! lol

 

Americans have mixed feelings about the Supreme Court's latest rulings, with a majority disapproving of its opinion on the Voting Rights Act, but in favor of two pro-gay marriage opinions, according to an ABC/Washington Post poll released Wednesday.

Just a third said they agree with the court's decision to strike down part of the Voting Rights Act, while 51 percent disagreed.

Knowledge about, and disapproval of, the VRA decision was especially high among African Americans, 71 percent of whom expressed disagreement with the ruling. Just 3 percent were undecided, while 16 percent of all adults had no opinion.

Other racial groups, however, also disapproved: Hispanic Americans disagreed by 50 percent while 40 percent agreed, and whites disagreed by 48 to 33 percent.

 

 

Americans Unhappy With SCOTUS Voting Rights Decision

 

About 100.% of the African Americans have no clue what the ruling says. They are knowledgable only of the propaganda they've been told about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The SCOTUS is officially a liberal arm of the democrat party. They are not ruling according according to the constitution, rather, they are ruling according to their touchy-feely personal opinions. They work harder at finding loop holes than interpreting the law!! The democrats now have the Senate, the presidency and the SCOTUS! Disgusting!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

About 100.% of the African Americans have no clue what the ruling says. They are knowledgable only of the propaganda they've been told about it.

 

Your putdowns and condesensions of blacks are the reason you're in the mess with them today.

There are tens of thousands of blacks more highly educated than you....and obviously much smarter.

 

 

 

 

Pot, meet kettle. ;)

 

 

 

weak response and doesn't apply. Who won in 2008, and 2012?

 

 

 

 

 

 

I think that dead people voting, and those voting many times over in the election are a problem

 

 

the evidence doesn't back you up on this turd pulled directly from your ass.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Comprehensive Database of US Voter Fraud Uncovers No Evidence

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

LMAO. everyone knows THIS SC is right leaning. At least I thought everyone knew.

 

Supreme Court Leans Conservative - Washington Post

 

I just have to shake my head how little you cons really know.

 

With a right leaning SCOTUS, we would not have Obamacare. Prop 8 would still be law and DOMA would have been thrown

back to the states. What, are you on crack or something? Sheesh... I would think you would agree with me and be jumping for joy!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With a right leaning SCOTUS, we would not have Obamacare. Prop 8 would still be law and DOMA would have been thrown

back to the states. What, are you on crack or something? Sheesh... I would think you would agree with me and be jumping for joy!!!

 

Do you live in a parallel universe where up is down and black is white?

I just showed you documentation to back up the fact the SC is very right leaning.

Now do some homework and look at each individual justice and their background, voting record and WHICH president put them on the court.

 

You didn't read my link did you. You really don't like to learn do you.

 

Exclusive: The U.S. Supreme Court’s right-wing majority is a serial killer of American democracy – first Bush v. Gore, then Citizens United, now gutting the Voting Rights Act – but another part of this crime story is the Right’s grotesque last stand for white supremacy, writes Robert Parry.

 

By Robert Parry

Whatever legalistic wording or tortured logic is applied, the ugly truth is that the narrow right-wing majority of the U.S. Supreme Court is at war with American democracy. Or, put a bit differently, these justices don’t believe that a democratic judgment relying on black and brown people should be respected.

The five Republicans on the Court know full well that by striking down the preclearance requirement before electoral changes can be made in states and districts with a documented history of racial discrimination, they are inviting a wave of legal impediments to minority voting. The same five justices also knew that in 2010 their Citizens United ruling would open the floodgates for mostly right-wing billionaires to inundate political campaigns with misleading propaganda.

johnroberts-235x300.jpg

U.S. Chief Justice John Roberts.

And, the stage for this sustained judicial assault on democracy was set when the predecessor to the Roberts Court, the Rehnquist Court, intervened to stop the counting of votes in Florida and to effectively anoint Republican George W. Bush the President, though he lost the national popular vote and would have lost the swing state of Florida to Democrat Al Gore if all ballots legal under state law were counted. [see Neck Deep for details.]

The Bush v. Gore case was the first clear indicator that the modern Republican Right was determined to use the Supreme Court as a weapon to negate democracy and assure continued GOP control of the U.S. government. The Right was determined to assert and maintain its power by almost any means possible.

Though Bush’s presidency turned out to be a disaster for the United States and the world, it was a godsend to the Court’s right-wing majority. Bush was able to replace two Republican justices who participated in appointing him – William Rehnquist and Sandra Day O’Connor – with right-wingers, John Roberts and Samuel Alito.

Those two Bush appointments moved the Court even further to the Right and gave the Republicans hope that even amid the nation’s demographic changes, which were reflected in the election of Barack Obama in 2008 as the nation’s first African-American president, there was still a way for right-wing and white power to be sustained.

The Citizens United case of 2010 was the next blow, delivered by the Roberts Court, making possible unlimited spending from “dark pools” of cash to propagandize the American electorate. That surge of right-wing money – combined with progressive disappointment with the first two years of Obama’s presidency – helped elect rabidly right-wing Republican majorities in the House and in state capitals around the country.

Given that 2010 was a census year, Republicans were empowered to gerrymander congressional seats to concentrate liberal voters in a few isolated districts and arrange for solid conservative majorities in most others. (The redistricting effectively guaranteed a continued Republican majority in the House even though Democratic candidates received about one million more votes nationwide in 2012.)

Voter Suppression

The outcome of Election 2010 also enabled Republican-controlled statehouses to begin a coordinated strategy to suppress the votes of blacks, Hispanics, the poor and the young – seen as predominantly Democratic voters – by requiring photo IDs, tightening eligibility and reducing voting hours.

That plan, however, ran afoul of the Voting Rights Act, especially in Old Confederacy states like Texas which were covered by the preclearance requirement of the law. Using the Act, the Justice Department was able to beat back most of the attempts to infringe on suffrage – and minorities provided key votes to reelect President Obama in 2012.

So, the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (which had been reauthorized overwhelmingly by Congress in 2006) became the next target of the Roberts Court. In a historic ruling on Tuesday, the five right-wing justices – Roberts, Alito, Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy and Clarence Thomas – gutted the law by ripping out the preclearance procedure.

The five justices barely bothered with any logical or constitutional argument. Their central point was to publish charts that showed that black voting in areas under special protection of the Voting Rights Act was generally equal to or even higher than the percentages of white voters.

But all that did was show that the law was working, not that those areas would not again resort to trickery once preclearance was removed. As Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg argued in a dissent, there was no justification for the Court to overrule the judgment of Congress, reaffirmed only seven years ago.

“Throwing out preclearance when it has worked and is continuing to work to stop discriminatory changes is like throwing away your umbrella in a rainstorm because you are not getting wet,” Ginsburg wrote.

There also is no doubt that the Constitution grants Congress the explicit power to enact legislation to protect the voting rights of people of color. The Fifteenth Amendment states that “The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.” It adds: “The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.”

The amendment was ratified in 1870 during Reconstruction, meaning that many whites from Southern states and other racist jurisdictions never accepted its legitimacy. Once Reconstruction ended in 1877, the whites of the Old Confederacy reasserted political control and deployed a wide array of tactics to deter many blacks from voting.

It was not until the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s that the federal government reasserted its determination to guarantee justice for African-Americans, including the right to vote through the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Because the national Democratic Party took the lead in pushing these changes, many Southern whites switched their allegiance to the Republican Party.

This white backlash gave impetus to the elections of Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, all of whom appealed to white voters with coded racially tinged language. The Republican strategy also included putting like-minded justices on the Supreme Court with an eye toward rolling back the civil rights gains of the 1960s.

To make its appeals to racism less offensive, the Right also began cloaking itself in the nation’s founding mythology, dressing up renewed appeals for “states’ rights” in a fabricated historical narrative that the key Framers of the Constitution – the likes of George Washington and James Madison – despised the idea of a strong central government when nearly the opposite was true. [see Consortiumnews.com’s “The Right’s Dubious Claim to Madison.”]

Rebranding the Racists

What the Right actually was doing with its bogus history was enabling today’s neo-Confederates to rebrand themselves, from the overt appeals to racism symbolized by the Stars and Bars by substituting the Revolutionary War banner of a coiled snake and “Don’t Tread on Me” motto. Yet, despite the more popular imagery of 1776 over 1860, the philosophy remained the same.

This cosmetic transformation of the Right – from its crude allusions to the Old Confederacy to its more palatable references to the Revolutionary War – surfaced most clearly after the election of Barack Obama in 2008. The Right recognized that the demographic shifts that made his election possible were also dooming the future of white supremacy.

So, the Tea Party – invoking the Right’s carefully constructed founding myth – rallied to “take our country back,” aided immensely by massive funding from the Koch Brothers and other right-wing billionaires.

The Right’s current message remains wrapped in the word “liberty” – much as that word was used by some of American slaveholders in the nation’s early years and by the Confederates during the Civil War. But the Right’s message is really all about the “liberty” of white Americans to reign over — and rein in — non-white Americans.

It is not even clear that many right-wing white Americans believe that blacks and other non-whites deserve citizenship, a position that many in the Tea Party appear to share with their forebears – some of the slaveholding Founders, the “nullificationists” of the pre-Civil War South, the Confederates, and the Ku Klux Klan.

That sentiment remained at the heart of the Jim Crow laws during Southern segregation denying citizenship rights to blacks despite the Fourteenth and Fifteenth amendments; it can be seen in the Right’s longstanding refusal to grant congressional voting rights to District of Columbia residents, many of whom are black and who face “taxation without representation”; it is reflected in the Right’s obsession with the conspiracy theory about Obama being born in Kenya; and it fires up Republican opposition to immigration reform since it would permit some 11 million undocumented immigrants — mostly Hispanic — to eventually gain citizenship.

It is this fear of real democracy – with its genuine promise of one person, one vote – that has now motivated the Supreme Court’s right-wing majority to give America’s neo-Confederates one more shot at reversing the nation’s acceptance of racial equality at the ballot box.

If the civil rights era starting in the 1960s was a kind of Second Reconstruction – forcing fairness and decency down the throats of resentful Southern whites – then what Roberts, Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas and Alito have done could be viewed as the start of a Second Jim Crow era.

After the Voting Rights Act was gutted on Tuesday, some officials from the Old Confederacy immediately rubbed their hands with glee, anticipating how they could minimize the number of black and brown voters in future elections and maximize the number of white Republican members of Congress.

“With today’s decision,” said Greg Abbott, the attorney general of Texas, “the state’s voter ID law will take effect immediately. Redistricting maps passed by the Legislature may also take effect without approval from the federal government.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Do you live in a parallel universe where up is down and black is white?

I just showed you documentation to back up the fact the SC is very right leaning.

Now do some homework and look at each individual justice and their background, voting record and WHICH president put them on the court.

 

You didn't read my link did you. You really don't like to learn do you.

Exclusive: The U.S. Supreme Court’s right-wing majority is a serial killer of American democracy – first Bush v. Gore, then Citizens United, now gutting the Voting Rights Act – but another part of this crime story is the Right’s grotesque last stand for white supremacy, writes Robert Parry.

 

By Robert Parry

Whatever legalistic wording or tortured logic is applied, the ugly truth is that the narrow right-wing majority of the U.S. Supreme Court is at war with American democracy. Or, put a bit differently, these justices don’t believe that a democratic judgment relying on black and brown people should be respected.

The five Republicans on the Court know full well that by striking down the preclearance requirement before electoral changes can be made in states and districts with a documented history of racial discrimination, they are inviting a wave of legal impediments to minority voting. The same five justices also knew that in 2010 their Citizens United ruling would open the floodgates for mostly right-wing billionaires to inundate political campaigns with misleading propaganda.

johnroberts-235x300.jpg

U.S. Chief Justice John Roberts.

And, the stage for this sustained judicial assault on democracy was set when the predecessor to the Roberts Court, the Rehnquist Court, intervened to stop the counting of votes in Florida and to effectively anoint Republican George W. Bush the President, though he lost the national popular vote and would have lost the swing state of Florida to Democrat Al Gore if all ballots legal under state law were counted. [see Neck Deep for details.]

The Bush v. Gore case was the first clear indicator that the modern Republican Right was determined to use the Supreme Court as a weapon to negate democracy and assure continued GOP control of the U.S. government. The Right was determined to assert and maintain its power by almost any means possible.

Though Bush’s presidency turned out to be a disaster for the United States and the world, it was a godsend to the Court’s right-wing majority. Bush was able to replace two Republican justices who participated in appointing him – William Rehnquist and Sandra Day O’Connor – with right-wingers, John Roberts and Samuel Alito.

Those two Bush appointments moved the Court even further to the Right and gave the Republicans hope that even amid the nation’s demographic changes, which were reflected in the election of Barack Obama in 2008 as the nation’s first African-American president, there was still a way for right-wing and white power to be sustained.

The Citizens United case of 2010 was the next blow, delivered by the Roberts Court, making possible unlimited spending from “dark pools” of cash to propagandize the American electorate. That surge of right-wing money – combined with progressive disappointment with the first two years of Obama’s presidency – helped elect rabidly right-wing Republican majorities in the House and in state capitals around the country.

Given that 2010 was a census year, Republicans were empowered to gerrymander congressional seats to concentrate liberal voters in a few isolated districts and arrange for solid conservative majorities in most others. (The redistricting effectively guaranteed a continued Republican majority in the House even though Democratic candidates received about one million more votes nationwide in 2012.)

Voter Suppression

The outcome of Election 2010 also enabled Republican-controlled statehouses to begin a coordinated strategy to suppress the votes of blacks, Hispanics, the poor and the young – seen as predominantly Democratic voters – by requiring photo IDs, tightening eligibility and reducing voting hours.

That plan, however, ran afoul of the Voting Rights Act, especially in Old Confederacy states like Texas which were covered by the preclearance requirement of the law. Using the Act, the Justice Department was able to beat back most of the attempts to infringe on suffrage – and minorities provided key votes to reelect President Obama in 2012.

So, the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (which had been reauthorized overwhelmingly by Congress in 2006) became the next target of the Roberts Court. In a historic ruling on Tuesday, the five right-wing justices – Roberts, Alito, Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy and Clarence Thomas – gutted the law by ripping out the preclearance procedure.

The five justices barely bothered with any logical or constitutional argument. Their central point was to publish charts that showed that black voting in areas under special protection of the Voting Rights Act was generally equal to or even higher than the percentages of white voters.

But all that did was show that the law was working, not that those areas would not again resort to trickery once preclearance was removed. As Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg argued in a dissent, there was no justification for the Court to overrule the judgment of Congress, reaffirmed only seven years ago.

“Throwing out preclearance when it has worked and is continuing to work to stop discriminatory changes is like throwing away your umbrella in a rainstorm because you are not getting wet,” Ginsburg wrote.

There also is no doubt that the Constitution grants Congress the explicit power to enact legislation to protect the voting rights of people of color. The Fifteenth Amendment states that “The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.” It adds: “The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.”

The amendment was ratified in 1870 during Reconstruction, meaning that many whites from Southern states and other racist jurisdictions never accepted its legitimacy. Once Reconstruction ended in 1877, the whites of the Old Confederacy reasserted political control and deployed a wide array of tactics to deter many blacks from voting.

It was not until the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s that the federal government reasserted its determination to guarantee justice for African-Americans, including the right to vote through the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Because the national Democratic Party took the lead in pushing these changes, many Southern whites switched their allegiance to the Republican Party.

This white backlash gave impetus to the elections of Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, all of whom appealed to white voters with coded racially tinged language. The Republican strategy also included putting like-minded justices on the Supreme Court with an eye toward rolling back the civil rights gains of the 1960s.

To make its appeals to racism less offensive, the Right also began cloaking itself in the nation’s founding mythology, dressing up renewed appeals for “states’ rights” in a fabricated historical narrative that the key Framers of the Constitution – the likes of George Washington and James Madison – despised the idea of a strong central government when nearly the opposite was true. [see Consortiumnews.com’s “The Right’s Dubious Claim to Madison.”]

Rebranding the Racists

What the Right actually was doing with its bogus history was enabling today’s neo-Confederates to rebrand themselves, from the overt appeals to racism symbolized by the Stars and Bars by substituting the Revolutionary War banner of a coiled snake and “Don’t Tread on Me” motto. Yet, despite the more popular imagery of 1776 over 1860, the philosophy remained the same.

This cosmetic transformation of the Right – from its crude allusions to the Old Confederacy to its more palatable references to the Revolutionary War – surfaced most clearly after the election of Barack Obama in 2008. The Right recognized that the demographic shifts that made his election possible were also dooming the future of white supremacy.

So, the Tea Party – invoking the Right’s carefully constructed founding myth – rallied to “take our country back,” aided immensely by massive funding from the Koch Brothers and other right-wing billionaires.

The Right’s current message remains wrapped in the word “liberty” – much as that word was used by some of American slaveholders in the nation’s early years and by the Confederates during the Civil War. But the Right’s message is really all about the “liberty” of white Americans to reign over — and rein in — non-white Americans.

It is not even clear that many right-wing white Americans believe that blacks and other non-whites deserve citizenship, a position that many in the Tea Party appear to share with their forebears – some of the slaveholding Founders, the “nullificationists” of the pre-Civil War South, the Confederates, and the Ku Klux Klan.

That sentiment remained at the heart of the Jim Crow laws during Southern segregation denying citizenship rights to blacks despite the Fourteenth and Fifteenth amendments; it can be seen in the Right’s longstanding refusal to grant congressional voting rights to District of Columbia residents, many of whom are black and who face “taxation without representation”; it is reflected in the Right’s obsession with the conspiracy theory about Obama being born in Kenya; and it fires up Republican opposition to immigration reform since it would permit some 11 million undocumented immigrants — mostly Hispanic — to eventually gain citizenship.

It is this fear of real democracy – with its genuine promise of one person, one vote – that has now motivated the Supreme Court’s right-wing majority to give America’s neo-Confederates one more shot at reversing the nation’s acceptance of racial equality at the ballot box.

If the civil rights era starting in the 1960s was a kind of Second Reconstruction – forcing fairness and decency down the throats of resentful Southern whites – then what Roberts, Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas and Alito have done could be viewed as the start of a Second Jim Crow era.

After the Voting Rights Act was gutted on Tuesday, some officials from the Old Confederacy immediately rubbed their hands with glee, anticipating how they could minimize the number of black and brown voters in future elections and maximize the number of white Republican members of Congress.

“With today’s decision,” said Greg Abbott, the attorney general of Texas, “the state’s voter ID law will take effect immediately. Redistricting maps passed by the Legislature may also take effect without approval from the federal government.”

One simple example is Roberts ruling on Obamacare. He went out of his way to determine that the fines are actually a tax,

rather then throwing the damn thing out!

 

Post all you want, but if you view them from behind, the "right leaning SCOTUS" is actually leaning left.

 

One simple example is Roberts ruling on Obamacare. He went out of his way to determine that the fines are actually a tax,

rather then throwing the damn thing out!

 

Post all you want, but if you view them from behind, the "right leaning SCOTUS" is actually leaning left. You can rejoice now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Boy, the two party paradigm stupidity is getting really thick in here. "Its Left leaning", "It's right leaning"........ do you know how dumb you guys sound ?

 

There is only stupidity on one side. The court is decidedly right leaning.

The examples Ravi gave are just sour grapes with Obamacare.

 

I documented the facts I know to be true.

 

Need more proof?

 

From a decidedly conservative publication: Forbes.

 

Obama Victory Could Spell End Of Conservative Supreme Court ...

 

So if a justice dies or quits and Obama can turn the court back to being liberal....how could it NOW be "left leaning".

 

I know wingnuts aren't known for their logic, but this is simple logical deduction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

There is only stupidity on one side. The court is decidedly right leaning.

r v w was not a right leaning ruling

 

dumbazz

 

the scotus has moved left ever since

 

stop lying

 

you creepy ass cracker

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

r v w was not a right leaning ruling

 

dumbazz

 

the scotus has moved left ever since

 

stop lying

 

you creepy ass cracker

 

 

You just get dumber by the minute....and the fact you have nothing to do with your pathetic life than follow me around and rate me, is hilarious and speaks volumes of your miserable life.

 

 

 

 

From a decidedly conservative publication: Forbes.

 

Obama Victory Could Spell End Of Conservative Supreme Court ...

 

So if a justice dies or quits and Obama can turn the court back to being liberal....how could it NOW be "left leaning".

 

I know wingnuts aren't known for their logic, but this is simple logical deduction.

 

 

 

 

 

 

r v w was not a right leaning ruling

 

 

 

 

 

It was common sense.

 

 

 

the scotus has moved left ever since

 

stop lying

 

 

 

Thanks for the endorphin rush. I'm still laughing at your stupidity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

You just get dumber by the minute....and the fact you have nothing to do with your pathetic life than follow me around and rate me, is hilarious and speaks volumes of your miserable life.

 

 

 

 

From a decidedly conservative publication: Forbes.

 

Obama Victory Could Spell End Of Conservative Supreme Court ...

 

So if a justice dies or quits and Obama can turn the court back to being liberal....how could it NOW be "left leaning".

 

I know wingnuts aren't known for their logic, but this is simple logical deduction.

 

 

 

 

 

 

It was common sense.

 

 

 

Thanks for the endorphin rush. I'm still laughing at your stupidity.

you agree with r v w

 

anything you agree with is left leaning

 

dumbazz...

 

you creepy ass cracker

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you agree with r v w

 

anything you agree with is left leaning

 

dumbazz...

 

you creepy ass cracker

 

 

Obama Victory Could Spell End Of Conservative Supreme Court ...

 

You're a game player, a fool and a know nothing. And those are your good points.

Funny you didn't have the balls to admit the game you and your butt buddy Bedwetter are playing with the ratings.

LMAO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Obama Victory Could Spell End Of Conservative Supreme Court ...

 

You're a game player, a fool and a know nothing. And those are your good points.

Funny you didn't have the balls to admit the game you and your butt buddy Bedwetter are playing with the ratings.

LMAO

posting other peoples words makes you so smart

 

 

did you take the "learn to copy and paste can raise your IQ" course ?

 

you pathetic dumbazz...

 

you creepy ass cracker

 

why were you at my profile ? did I really get to you ? lol

 

you are the one playing ratings loser

 

go ahead ES, didnt you gave me a neg rating ...

 

like I care

 

lol

 

you creepy ass cracker

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

posting other peoples words makes you so smart

 

 

did you take the "learn to copy and paste can raise your IQ" course ?

 

 

 

Well...you can pull lying shi-t straight from your ass...or you can go to valid sources to back up an opinion like I did.

I FIRST gave my answer and then backed it up with documentation.

That's what an educated person does.

we see how you've been noneducated with your assertion the Sc is left leaning. LMAO.

 

why were you at my profile ? did I really get to you ? lol

 

 

You paranoid? I left you a message that first has to be approved.

Funny you cant/won't comment on your lunacy of abusing the rating system.

You are an immoral fu-ck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...