357 Comments

Can someone explain to me how multi-ethnic society isn't doomed to fail when we have morons like this on SCOTUS because of skin color and the presence of a vajayjay? I don't pay taxes so this idiot can tell me what I can and cannot say. This is not sustainable. It does not end well.

Expand full comment

Remember when Sotomayor claimed over 100k children died from c19?

That's the true power of censorship.

Expand full comment

No kidding. Her incredible ignorance spilled out of her mouth for all to hear. Except, I'm sure this was never seen on MSDNC, CNN, CBS, NBC, ABC, etc. Most of the people who watch those channels would have just nodded in agreement. What incredible ignorance.

Expand full comment

Exactly. That was the real reason for the censorship

Expand full comment

Ah, yes another stunning and brave SCOTUS diversity hire. Who needs to know anything about an experimental transfection agent mandated by the government when you have feeeewings and beautiful brown skin?

Expand full comment

Yeah...we need to gOvERn hArDeR because we have a kidapocalypse on our hands.

Expand full comment

This week SCOTUS ruled that officials elected to government cannot block on social media dissenting opinions. How does that square with now, they can just censor them completely?

Expand full comment

Easy easy. Can't block them, so just make a call and have them deleted.

Expand full comment

Easy. According to FANI, without saying a word, BLACK WOMEN with real or fake political power, depending on the mood they are in, (and Grey Goose) can do anything they want to..... and deal with the "white resistance" later..... so, yes, Charlotte, TOTAL censorship is in the air SCOTUS is breathing...... sorry for any typos, I was falling off of my chair from laughing.

Expand full comment

I do remember. And am still appalled that Sotomeyer wasnt called out as a lying fool, by her other SCOTUS OR anyone in the larger public eye. Like K-Brown, Soto likes to roost on the wrong side of truth, knowing they will get away with abusing the first amendment when ever they deem it useful. REALLY ABHORRENT BEHAVIOR

Expand full comment

"Remember when Sotomayor"

They're not Numbers People, Ryan. They're more wordy and stuff.

Expand full comment

and they have removed the rule that says their words have to make sense.... so.... we are back to s

Expand full comment

It's to eliminate history.

For example how many people know that the definition of herd immunity and vaccine were changed in the still of the night?

They seek to eliminate history by eliminating reference

Expand full comment

Well said and I'm sure plenty of people never batted an eye at this. Everything that was grossly distorted before gets manipulated after the fact to appear fine. It's only the people actually paying attention to the details that notice the sh*t storm.

Expand full comment

All the more reason to have dictionaries from before the pandemic. And it makes you wonder...how many other definitions have been changed over the years.

Expand full comment

the Amish knew. and prevailed. simple common sense

Expand full comment

Conquest's 3rd Law of Politics:

"The behavior of any bureaucratic organization can best be understood by

assuming that it is controlled by a secret cabal of its enemies."

In other words, everything's going according to plan.

Expand full comment

I’m always shaking my head when I hear someone say “the government is broken.” No it’s not sweetie, it’s working exactly as planned.

Expand full comment

Kazackly

Expand full comment

They still claim that "millions of children are infected with Covid" and that their whole lives will be mired in chronic conditions.

Expand full comment

head-exploding level of ignorance and bias. those bitches have no business being on ANY bench, much less SCOTUS

Expand full comment

Sotomayor displaying a deep ignorance of facts germaine to a case has become a meme.

It's like she doesn't even read the brief or something?

Expand full comment

I don't think she has the capacity to read above 10th grade level. I'm serious

Expand full comment

I imagine her lounging on a coach, being fed grapes while lackeys give her the TL:DR, but they're too corrupt to give an honest briefing.

Expand full comment

Jaba the hutt

Expand full comment

We remember, and still wonder where that 'person' came from.... ????

Expand full comment

It's not ethnicity. If it were, then Thomas would fall into the crack you are describing. Remember, the dems wanted the moron Garland in that crack, too.

It's marxist progressivism.

Expand full comment

Yeah, but Thomas is qualified. He just happens to be black. They also used identity politics against him, accusing him of rape, IIRC.

Expand full comment

We agree. Marxist dems want you to hate black people and women because it destabilizes society. So when people ID and disparage someone like Jackson by her gender or color instead of her ideology, they are falling into the trap.

Expand full comment

I don't hate blacks, but I am learning to hate a large number of women. They seem particularly susceptible to things like wokeness and censorship... Not just credulously swallowing propaganda (without ever seeming to learn anything), but moralizing the shit out of every single issue all the time.

None of this would be happening if they were not so subject to groupthink and moral panics. Social media took women's worst attributes and put them on steroids.

I suspect you are a sane woman, so no offense, but I'm exhausted with pretending it's not a problem.

Expand full comment

Kari Lake? Winsome Sears? Carol Swain? Marsha Blackburn? Please attend a Republican Women's group in your area. Social media and MSM took every liberal's worst attributes and put them on steroids, and then censored and smeared conservatives. ALL conservatives.

Expand full comment

Yeah, but take a look at the FIRE poll about attitudes towards free speech men vs women. Women as a group are far more censorious, presumably because of how they exhibit aggression - gossip and slander.

Also, as a consequence of this, many women are incapable of understanding when verbal aggression crosses the line into violence. Men are more familiar with violence (generally) and are more supportive of working things out rationally before it escalates to that.

Additionally, as someone who has been an engineer for a long time, about 10 years ago I got really tired of hearing "we need more women in STEM". Somewhat recently, the concept of "validating feelings" was introduced to me and it clicked... There's no objective to a lot of what women do. When they say they want "more women", there's no success criteria. There's no stop condition. They literally have no goal when they bring identity politics into work.

I'm really, really sick of it. Yes, conservative women do exist, and I'm happy for that, but as a group, women create serious problems when they involve themselves in goal oriented affairs.

You're arguing that women be treated as individuals, and that I'm buying into the Marxist group idea, and I understand your point. But honestly, how are men supposed to deal with this, other than viewing women with skepticism? It only takes one of the "believe all women" crowd to wreck my (or any other man's) life. Why would I want to subject myself to that?

Expand full comment

I am convinced that WE will have to resort to more strenuous methods of 'communication' in order to reach the pea-sized brains of some of our members of SCOTUS. That is a long and tiresome project. KITMANGEY BROWN does not surprise me with her 'half-wit angry black woman crap' as I live in Georgia, Land of "gimme a reeson why I hafta obey da law eff I think its stoopid". When TRUMP is re-elected this fall, we can then work differently in "chanaging the minds of ignorants and morons" who wrongly believe that they own us...'jus becuzz'. I do not know how several SCOTUS members were allowed to join this once highly honored and astute group, but I remain hopeful that AGAIN, President Trump, will know how to easily and quickly adjust this situation, possibly to have 8 or 9 of them REMOVED to a new location, such as GITMO, where they can quietly discuss their errors in judgment to the end of time.

Thank you for your post; I especially LOVE your talented cat, as I have one who loves the internet also. Best entertainment around, everyone should have a CAT; they are so very intelligent, fun, and polite. Have a wonderful, happy day!

Expand full comment

Exercising 2A is a pretty effective way to communicate....just sayin'....;=]

Expand full comment

Ryan, I wish that were a thing. I am a gun owner and I think 2A essentially IS the constitution, but as Gato said, leftists think the Constitution is just a nuisance; something to pay lip service to while circumventing it at every turn. I am sure they consider it an artifact of the white patriarchy or something. They have made it a dead letter. While I am sure many gun owners would actively protect their families if directly threatened by bad guys, who are you gonna shoot as your liberties are slowly being eroded? Hell, in 2020 governors, the president, the CDC etc. shut our businesses down, forced masks on us, and ruined countless lives and livelihoods, and we all bent over and said "thank you sir may I have another?" Not one gun was lifted. I don't have the answer, but I get frustrated by fellow conservatives who make a lot of noise but continue to let the left walk all over them.

Expand full comment

No. If it is initiated by 2A advocates, it's a loss. It needs to be initiated by the ethnic minorities poisoned by the political left. Make woke and "diverse" environments too physically dangerous for white liberals, and show white liberals forceful but nonviolent hostility in more "homogenous" environments.

Expand full comment

Agree

Expand full comment

I thought here in Georgia we are in the "Land of the Walking Dead."

As far as the election goes, I have very little faith it will do anything.

Expand full comment

We need more Cats in the Supreme Court and investigative reporting. Hail Cats.

When 45 is re-elected then we can prune the idiots who assume their power is invincible as they wake up in a 3 am sweat.

Expand full comment

Trump won't be back . Thanks for handing Biden the election

Expand full comment

Lysenkoism was born of this.

Expand full comment

You can't tell me the same people who put crack in the inner cities, created the 2 tier racist prison industrial complex, coming out of J.Edgar Hoover's ideal of "No more black messiahs," now suddenly actually want black people to succeed and rule. Flannery O'Connor, in Wiseblood, had her protagonist say "Jesus is a trick on n-words," and we might replace "Jesus" with "DIE and CRT" (as well as updating the other vernacular) When Tucker interviewed the author of Mao's America, he asked her how the Cultural Revolution started and ended. Apparently, at an elite young women's school in Bejing, the girls beat the principal to death, and the violence and mayhem persisted for 3 or so more years, whereupon Mao sent the hysterical, boundariless, brainwashed, bloodlust-filled Red Guards to "re-education" where they died. The diverse brainwashed puppets smugly advocating global socialist utopia, Year Zero, blank slate brains and fluid biologies, parroting their handlers, may actually believe they are among the chosen, but my suspicion is that they'll be subject to the Mao option, or perhaps meet the fate of the Sonderkommando https://freespoke.com/search/web?q=Sonderkommando&utm_source=firefox_omnibar. I am actually cheered here in Detroit by the comments sections under any MSM propaganda that mentions diseases and vaccines, showing that Kendi and D'Angelo and their ilk are not penetrating all communities, hurray!

Expand full comment

When I saw veejayjay I immediately thought "She was a commentator on MTV?"

Expand full comment

Or as the great hero of our time "The Dude" stated "This aggression will not stand, standing peeing person who does not put down the toilet seat."

Expand full comment

WHACHA gonna do about it?

Expand full comment

Personally, I think the vax mandates should be personalized, racialized, and moralized. I think the white liberals that support people like Brown and Sotomayor should be made the target of the ethnic violence they love so much.

That, not putting up with woke shit in the workplace (even if it means getting fired), and preparing myself for when it all falls apart - which it will. That's about all I can do. Unless you have more suggestions.

Expand full comment

Your latent racism exposes your wilful-ignorance.

Might one remind you that the American 'Indians' didn't ask for an invasion of 'your country' by European land-thieves and the consequent dictatorial multi-ethnic societies forced upon them. I'm sure that the American-Indians would be more than happy for the Europeans to return from whence they came. Waddyareckon aye? So, from your-high horse, jaundiced perspective ... what exactly constitutes an acceptable version of a 'multi-ethnic' society?

An invariably, self-congratulatory, jaundiced view of historical truths, is prefaced with all manner of manure and fraught with self-serving p latitudinal hogwash, bathed in whitewashed text-book manure. Conditioning can present such a bugger of a hurdle to negotiate ...

Next thing is one might be encouraged to assume that this paid-troll of a 'judge' quite obviously serving the interests of the barbarians-in-suits, to be a protege of her ethnicity, which would or should be counter-intuitive. She is to all intents and purposes, a paid-servant of the bankster-class and bears NO resemblance, other than complexion, to the people she is supposed to represent. In my book, she is quite obviously a high-class pimp for the swamp-creatures.

Expand full comment

Well, I'm glad you hate her as much as I do, Kunta Kinte.

Expand full comment

KBJ doesn’t know what a woman is, or the first amendment. She is an intersectionality shield for the regime like Kamala and KJP. DIE uber alles, including free speech. I for one welcome our future Google Gemini Supreme Court. Lawfare is turning our judicial system into show trials and kangaroo courts: https://yuribezmenov.substack.com/p/lawfare-65-project-democracy-docket-marc-elias

Expand full comment

She’s not a biologist! How could she know what a woman is? Leave that to the experts.

Ultimately, she doesn’t need to know anything. She isn’t there for any reason other than her gender and race. This was stated explicitly by the administration that nominated her. “A woman of color” was the sole criteria given for their pick.

Expand full comment

And yet she got her position precisely because she is female and dark skinned. Her reasoning here demonstrates it was not for an intellectually acute judicial temperament.

Expand full comment

the doc I went to last year did not know what a woman is. And she is one herself too. Very difficult to trust that kind of people (she is of Indian origin)

Expand full comment

Maybe she also thinks a tumor can identify as a benign lump. I'd switch doctors if I were you.

Expand full comment

oh she won't ever see me again LOL. My old doc retired and I am now hearing around. This was the closest by, so I tried my luck. Not a very lucky choice, obviously!

Expand full comment

I am starting to believe there are only a handful of real doctors left. The majority are shills for big pharma/big brother.

Expand full comment

Thank You for the reminder of how this once honored agency turned into crap so easily. I believe that next year WE are going to have a lot of FUN! ...GITMO will be bursting at the seams with a new batch of prisoners, all lined up for their Military Tribunals and Last Day of Life on Earth. WE will have a PRESIDENT who Handles our Business According to our ORIGINAL LAWS AND CONSTITUTION.

Expand full comment

Spot on. I'm gonna like me any post that uses both miscegenation and defenestration.

Never forget 1A is just as important for the listener.

For every person they silence a thousand can not hear.

Draw a picture of that and it's worth a thousand words.

That's what they're after.

Expand full comment

Me eldest is OBSESSED with defenestration. She shouts it out every time it comes up. And when you start looking for it, it comes up A LOT.

Expand full comment

It's the only word in the English language without an antonym.

Here's another tidbit of language trivia:

What is the longest word in the English language with only one vowel?

Hint it's something we're all going to need in these times.

Expand full comment

seems like there are lots of words without antonyms.

what, for example, is the antonym of "carrot" or "nematode."

Expand full comment

What I want to know is how did nematode emerge in your brain as an example?!...lol...of all things

Expand full comment

Dang it I meant synonym

Expand full comment

Meh. Same thing.

Expand full comment

If they keep censoring long enough the meanings will be inverse...or worse no antonym or synonym.

To eliminate nuance gives the ruler the power of the word to make the rules on what can and can not be said; imprecision is precisely how the totalitarian uses words to name the enemy

Expand full comment

Well I guess unique too

Expand full comment

Take out the animal kingdom and food.

No fun!

Expand full comment

but also, why can't refenestration be a thing?

Expand full comment

After reading Ryan's "no opposite of defenestration" I've been scouring the intertubes for 20 minutes (I mean, what's government funding for, after all) for videos of, as you've nicely named it, refenestration.

It does not appear to be a thing.

Expand full comment

So why not "make it so"?

If the left can deliberately, with malice aforethought, redefine half of the bloody dictionary, why can't the (relatively) sane do the same?

Expand full comment

I shall make it so.

Expand full comment

I don't know. Maybe because if you throw something out a window you can't repair the glass by throwing them back through?

But if it were an odious bureaucrat I'd try to defy reality

Expand full comment

Is "odious bureaucrat" not a bit redundant?

And once the odious creature has successfully been defenestrated, why on earth would one ever want to toss it back? Even to fix the window?

Asking for a friend.

Expand full comment

The windows don't always have glass! European castles just had open spaces for a long time. I'm envisioning throwing the body back where it came from. Not that that would happen. But your claim was provocative.

Expand full comment

defenestration is a word because people used to throw a lot of stuff (including slop and excrement) out of windows. little was thrown in, so we did not develop a word.

there are lost of words that have a negative but no positive.

gormless.

i've never seen gorm or gormful as a positive.

Expand full comment

Alright I'm going to shut up now

..;(

Expand full comment

only on film I guess, when you turn it backwards

Expand full comment

ha ha ha

Expand full comment

This whole thread made me feel so much better. I was actually nauseous last night after reading the SCOTUS bull crap. I honestly had a hard time sleeping. Thanks you all! ❤️

Expand full comment

how about antidefenestration?

Expand full comment

That's anti-physics Kertch!

Expand full comment

It can either mean that you are against defenestration, or you are throwing the object back up through the window. In the case of a person thrown up to a window at a significant height during the Renaissance, it would require a catapult of sorts.

Expand full comment

strengths - one vowel.

Expand full comment

Bingo

Expand full comment

Do I win a prize?

I'll take door number three Monty.

You've won a jar of Turtle Wax.

But I don't own a car.

Expand full comment

I'm terrible at these but I am also very curious...

Expand full comment

STRENGTH

Expand full comment

here's a hard one:

what's the longest english word that is all vowels?

6 letters.

Expand full comment

Euouae. It also has the most consecutive vowels

Expand full comment

I'm not getting into this battle...you'll smoke me

Expand full comment

Pluralize it!

Expand full comment

Dang it I forgot the S

Expand full comment

"The Second Amendment is just in case the first one doesn't work out."

~ Dave Chappelle

Expand full comment

Well it might be time to "break glass"....;)

Expand full comment

Four years past time, says I.

Expand full comment

Well said, Ryan.

Expand full comment

Yep. "To suppress free speech is a double wrong. It violates the rights of the hearer as well as those of the speaker." Frederick Douglass

Expand full comment

Anyone who wants to take away your right to speak always has something to hide. If they didn't, they would welcome open debate. When open debate is censored/shut down, something is very, very wrong. Freedom of speech is the most basic right and the right which causes all others to fall if taken away. All across history, the censors were never the good guys.

Expand full comment

Justice DEI has no business being on SCOTUS.

Expand full comment

Great post, gato.

Why aren’t YOU arguing in front of the Supreme Court?!? Our odds might improve…

Expand full comment

i tried but no one could explain to ketanji brown "what a cat is."

sigh.

Expand full comment

Well, she's not a zoologist.

Expand full comment

LOL! WHAT is She, EXACTLY????

Expand full comment

"Qualified"

Expand full comment

a bag of meat, obviously.

Expand full comment

Isn't it whatever the federal government says it is? Like the Constitution, it's all fluid.

Expand full comment

The Constitution is supposed to be changeable, but only via Amendments.

The idea of the Constitution is pretty simple:

1. List all the powers of the federal government.

2. Make sure to say that ALL THE OTHER POWERS BELONG TO THE STATES AND THE PEOPLE.

That's it, really.

Expand full comment

For what, exactly?

Expand full comment

This Ketanji chick can't even define a woman. She is the new perfect democrat: A fcking useful MORON

Expand full comment

Nailed it! the PERFECT DEMOCRAT. MORONS ARE SO IGNORANT, YOU CANNOT GET A COHERENT RESPONSE ON ANY SUBJECT FROM ONE OF THEM, SO THEIR AIM IS TO BE USELESS.

Expand full comment

Thanks Gayle. The way I see it (and I’m right, by the way) KJB is the exact same DEI hire that has worked out so well for Boeing and United.

Expand full comment

All she will ever be is the first black woman appointed to the court for DEI reasons. That is not something I would be proud of TBH. Where is the achievement? It's sad for everyone.

Expand full comment

'ACHIEVEMENT' is part of the job? Stephenie, you have just sent most of SCOTUS directly to GITMO!!!! THANK YOU, BUT.... that may mean YOU are in charge now!

Expand full comment

see, sad for everyone.

Expand full comment

The only purpose SCOTUS serves is to decide whether or not a law or act is Constitutional.

It's one thing for a non-biologist to not be able to even colloquial define woman (especially seeing as being a woman one of her key qualifications for this sinecure https://youtu.be/0JNO0TBbpSc?si=Mfn6AZc4Y_Hgv7yF)

But it's entirely another thing for a trained legal scholar, one who's been appointed to the highest bench in the land, to not be able to properly understand "Congress shall make no law respecting... abridging the freedom of speech."

Hamstringing the Government is the entire f#@&ing point of 1A.

Expand full comment

"the entire f#@&ing point of 1A"

Preach it brother!

Expand full comment

THANK YOU!

Expand full comment

It would be nice if a Supreme Court Justice actually understood the First Amendment.

Expand full comment

It would be nice if a supreme court "justice" could read the amendments. 🙄

(Just being snotty. I'm sure it can read.)

Expand full comment

I am Certain they may be capable of reading; however, THEY DO NOT TAKE THE TIME TO ACTUALLY READ ANY OF THESE IMPORTANT AMENDMENTS. The crap that comes out now is evidence of that.

Expand full comment

Could also be lack of comprehension, too.

Expand full comment

Definitely! and isn't that a shock, and also sad and ridiculous! Where do these "people" come from?

Expand full comment

I suspect they are, like most other political appointees, selected from the somewhat shallow pool of party loyalists. Chosen, above all, for party loyalty. Competence, if it is considered at all, is very, very low on the list of criteria.

Expand full comment

You forgot race and sex, too.

Expand full comment

HI Andy in BC! You are correct! The "Competence pool is very shallow, but perfect for childish Temper Tatrums, Screaming and Loud Fussing and Fuming, when a normal "indoor voice" would work wonders... so, it has become the Baby Democrat Pool. Votes for our U.S, Constitution will make a very welcome change in November! Fingers are crossed and Prayers are being said, for a Return to Normal. Wea re hopeful and positive!

Expand full comment

Jupiter? 😉😊😋

Expand full comment

Sounds about right. Neptune is waaaaay out there... hmmmm... too costly to send 'them back.... GITMO will have to do.

Expand full comment

One has to consider the possibility that those representing "our side" don't actually believe what we believe about rights, and want to make sure the power exists when they wield the whip hand. Everyone says "oh Republicans so stupid, go speed limit, never accomplish anything," because they think the Rs are some kind of opposition. This is a mistake. They may be stupid, but they are just as venal and corrupt as the Ds. One big club, as the man said.

But now that Oregon and Washington have eliminated the bar exam, we can look forward to more "justice" from the likes of KJB.

Expand full comment

"One has to consider the possibility that those representing "our side" don't actually believe what we believe about rights"

So you're saying maybe there should be some sort of "In Name Only" tag for people like that. *rubs chin thoughtfully*

Expand full comment

The biggest issue is that it's not technically government induced censorship when the platforms doing the censoring are on the same team as the biden regime. They wanted to do all this, because they are the regime. They are indistinguishable from each other.

You'd almost be better off with the Supreme Court (all of whom still believe the covid hoax) by attempting to prove that facebook, Google, Amazon, and historical Twitter IS the federal government and not private companies and that any act in which they restrict free speech is government censorship.

Expand full comment

Did you notice not one other SCOTUS member corrected Sotomayor when she claimed 100k children died from c19?

I wonder why....perhaps fear?

Expand full comment

I think they all believed the lie...

They were all covidians.

Expand full comment

Bingo. Fear itself. The fear of being wrong. And the fear of social tyranny

Expand full comment

If I hate anything it's human weakness (in myself as much as anyone else). Succumbing to social pressure to act like a tyrant, no existential principles, just ideological self-righteousness, or sheepish compliance.

I've seen cockroaches with more honor.

Expand full comment

Perfectly stated

Expand full comment

Maybe the 9-0 verdict a week or so ago riled the libtard mob so much that the libtard justices feel the heat now

Expand full comment

Moreso, the weak "moderates" like Kavanaugh and coney Barrett. You'll likely see a 7-2 or 6-3 ruling against the 1st amendment in this case.

Terrifying times...

Expand full comment

Yeah...who wants to get epsteined?...:)

Expand full comment

"The first duty of man is to conquer fear." Thomas Carlyle

Expand full comment

Like I said elsewhere - they're truly just not number people.

Like when they suggested that bump stocks could enable the shooter to get off 800 rounds a minute without that number setting off the first hint of "Wait - that's, like *finger finger toe carry the 1* 13 rounds a second. Can that be for real?" which should be considered at least a minimal requirement if you're going to meaningfully pass judgment.

Expand full comment

I wonder if any of them got the covid shots. They weren't mandated.

Expand full comment

It's been reported they all did. I confirm for certain, but you can glean their views about the plandemic pretty clearly to assume they all did. Even Alito and Thomas.

Expand full comment

I had to stop listening 🙉

Expand full comment

♡♡♡ THIS 🤯♡♡♡

Expand full comment

chilling and disgrace scary heartbreaking to say the least. Katanji brown is a clueless moron. Clearly an idiotic half wit diversity hire

Expand full comment

KIMANGEY BROWN showed all of us exactly who she was from her first ridiculous idiotic sentence. It is definitely TIME OUT PERIOD for that one..... her??? him???? it???? apparently NOT a woman.

Expand full comment

it really beyond belief. She doesnt understand the very thing that literally defines the US and the core principle underpinning Western civ, the magna carta, etc... is the right of an individual to speak and think what they want without fear . She had no idea ... literally no concept of this. For her to say something like that... beggars belief. Its not surprising really. PPL still give the SCOTUS respect. But ALL of our public institutions are failures and scotus is the biggest failure of all.

Expand full comment

Justice Brown’s view is a direct result of 60+ years of the Marxist assault on the nuclear family. I don’t know what her personal background is, but the welfare state that destroyed the black American family has convinced three generations that the government is responsible for providing for you and keeping you safe, not your parents. In that world, when you weigh the right of the individual to speak freely against the “responsibility” of the government to keep you safe, it seems heartless to advocate for the individual. What about all those people who will be hurt, you bunch of selfish meanies who think your speech is more important than all the grandmas who will die if they don’t take this shot? Grandma can’t make up her own mind don’t you know? And that’s where we are.

Expand full comment

Nailed it

Expand full comment

We literally had someone on the "highest court in the land" showing that this Country is doomed.

5months, 5years, 50years, not a matter of if but when.

When she spewed out that the 1st Amendment was bad because it could hamstring the Government from censoring info it deemed "harmful", I almost shit my pants. THAT IS THE WHOLE POINT!!!

I can't think of a more perfect example of our downfall than that exchange from KBJ.

BUT, that's exactly why she was put there.

1/3 to 1/2 of this Country agrees with her, because they think they'll always be on the correct side of the Freedom Fence. Idiots, all of them. Little do they know, the Freedom Fence or Circle of Freedom only gets smaller, it only contracts. At some point, you are on the wrong side. It never fails, EVER.

Now what does "doomed" mean. Civil War? Divorce? States just ignoring Fed Law/Judiciary? Well that last one is already going on, Blue States have been doing that for years and years now.

The extremes in this Country have ZERO common ground anymore, and that's where our institutions stand at this point. It's FUBAR.

All Empires end, ours is no different or special.

The reality is, things could be so amazing around the World, BUT...

We have psychopaths and sociopaths running this Country, and the World for that matter.

They are drawn to Government, for obvious reasons. That is a HUGE problem.

That's why, even though elections are rigged, it doesn't matter. We aren't just an election or two away from fixing any of this. The rot is everywhere and unfixable. A full gut rehab is needed.

But hey, what's on Netflix???!!!

SMDH.

Expand full comment

A couple more notes here.

If your ideas are good, you don't need coercion or censorship or force to sell them, they just sell themselves. It's quite simple. You don't need to lie to people, you don't need to quash other viewpoints. When you tell someone to not run into traffic on a highway, they listen. The idea and suggestion is a clear winner. I don't need to silence some other clown telling you that cars crashing into you won't hurt you.

Lastly, I don't know how to comprehend any of this anymore. Maybe it's because so many have lost any type of religion or spiritual guidance. I look around and see so much chaos, it's mind-boggling. I just do not understand.

The whole "most people are good", I don't know about that. Prove it to me, because I don't see it. I see evil and selfishness everywhere.

I might be an asshole at times, but that isn't a reflection of my values. If anything, my asshole-ness comes because of all the evil I see. At times, I wish I was a NPC, ignorance is bliss must be an amazing stress-free way to live life. :/

Expand full comment

Right there with you Jerky Boy. Sometimes I long for the happier days of having my head up my ass. But alas, I can’t unsee what I’ve witnessed in the last five years and that youthful notion of “greatest country ever” is so far in my rear view mirror I can no longer see it.

Expand full comment

"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." - John Adams

Expand full comment

"States just ignoring Fed Law/Judiciary?"

The Hawaii Supreme Court recently said (paraphrased) "the US Constitution doesn't apply in Hawaii" in a 2A case. Instead, "the scriptwriters for 'The Wire' are our guiding light."

Expand full comment

what? I totally missed that.

Expand full comment

"HONOLULU — A ruling by Hawaii's high court saying that a man can be prosecuted for carrying a gun in public without a permit cites crime-drama TV series "The Wire" and invokes the "spirit of Aloha" in an apparent rebuke of a U.S. Supreme Court decision that expanded gun rights nationwide.

"The thing about the old days, they the old days," the unanimous Hawaii Supreme Court ruling issued Wednesday said, borrowing a quote from season four, episode three of the HBO series to express that the culture from the founding of the country shouldn't dictate contemporary life.

Authored by Justice Todd Eddins, the opinion goes on to say, "The spirit of Aloha clashes with a federally-mandated lifestyle that lets citizens walk around with deadly weapons during day-to-day activities.""

https://www.npr.org/2024/02/09/1230580485/hawaii-high-court-the-wire-gun-rights

Buy guns and ammunition.

Expand full comment

Thanks for that. oh my. Good thing we left my home state, it's not looking good these days. Not that the EU is much better, but....

Expand full comment

When Obama said the Constitution was a "document of negative liberties", I knew we were F#^ked. This asshat and his administration would just figure out "work-arounds" to the Bill of Rights, so they could do what they wanted. Screw the people and their freedom.

Expand full comment

Bush called it a GD piece of paper when he wanted to legalize torture. And spying.

Then congress voted to let him off and then Obama put the spying on steroids. And said that "we tortured some folks."

Expand full comment

Well said.

"We have psychopaths and sociopaths running this Country, and the World for that matter."

And unfortunately we can’t vote them out because we never voted them in. Congress doesn’t even write bills anymore. The lobbyists do and congress just votes on them without having time to read what’s in them. Massie explained that during the 1st year of Covid.

Expand full comment

I read a summary of yesterday's SCOTUS activity on this case that said SCOTUS was admonishing the plaintiffs because they hadn't shown the harm that was done to them by the government's efforts to suppress speech.

While I think this is off-track (as GM explained so well, they should be addressing the infringements of rights not worrying about proving harm), I think the plaintiffs need to attack the claim that the wrong information can harm people. Make the government prove that information is DIRECTLY harmful to people.

Information by itself can do no harm. Information is just words and images that are processed by people. People then decide what they will do with that information. Absorb it, ignore it, talk about it with friends, whatever. There can be no possible harm until the person takes action. Any harm is thus the responsibility of the person taking in the information, not on the purveyor of the information.

If we can blow up the claim that information is harmful to people, the justification for censorship falls apart.

Expand full comment

I listened to the whole thing live yesterday and was astonished by the very same thing. "Where's the harm?" was the gist of way too much questioning. This pertains to "standing" I gather, which seems to be legalese for "we don't want to touch this with a 10-foot pole."

Expand full comment

'which seems to be legalese for "we don't want to touch this with a 10-foot pole."'

Exactly, but what is driving their fear of addressing it? Are they in on the con or being blackmailed?

Expand full comment

Invitations to the best cocktail parties?

Expand full comment

If it's that shallow it's even worse than the other options.

Expand full comment

I am regretting my snarky question above; but we are tribal animals and I am concerned that the temptation to do too little will be too strong. We have come a long way since Snyder v. Phelps.

Expand full comment

Exactly. Well said! Gosh and we aren’t even lawyers, but understand how important the 1st amendment is. And why it’s the 1st.

Expand full comment