Supreme Court History Replay: The same folks who made Bush President now tip the scales for Trump. This infographic shows how John Roberts, Brett Kavanaugh, Amy Coney Barrett, Ted Cruz, Joel Kaplan, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alioto helped stop the vote recount in Florida to get Bush Jr. elected. Surprised by their decision to tilt the scales for Trump?
I haven't read this essay yet -- I know it's going to be another home run. I was distracted by the LARGER EGO anagram -- too much fun -- and so I asked CHAT GPT to come up with some for my name, along with definitions. Highly recommend that everyone try this wonderfully entertaining exercise!!! "Realistic Beehag:" Perhaps a "beehag" could be a mythical creature, part bee and part old crone, dwelling deep in enchanted forests. This fantastical being might be known for her wisdom in matters of nature and magic, as well as her ability to communicate with bees and harness their powers for healing or mischief. She could be a guardian of the natural world, ensuring the harmony of the ecosystems she inhabits.
OR "Ethical Grease" -- a substance or concept that facilitates ethical behavior or smooths the path toward ethical decision-making. It might symbolize a lubricant for moral dilemmas or a means of navigating complex ethical situations with clarity and integrity. In a metaphorical sense, "ethical grease" could represent virtues such as honesty, transparency, and fairness that help to grease the wheels of ethical conduct in various contexts, whether it's in business, politics, or personal relationships. It suggests a commitment to ethical principles and practices that ensure smooth functioning and positive outcomes while upholding moral standards.
But enough about me and my response to LARGER EGO ;) -- hope my experience playing "What's in a name?" sparks joy -- TGIF!!
Ethical Grease is chef's kiss. Maybe you should invert it, European style, and make it Grease Ethical? That feels more mysterious to me. I'm glad you had fun with it!
As anagrams go, LARGER EGO is almost untoppable, though.
As for Thomas, isn't it interesting that they are not going after interracial couples?
"Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967), was a landmark civil rights decision of the U.S. Supreme Court which ruled that laws banning interracial marriage violate the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution." Aha, they do know about the Fourteenth Amendment!
I have worked most of my 83 years among, alongside and with and for minorities. There are a number of those who had names for individuals like Thomas. And it wasnt, Brother!
The Court’s the way it is because several of the dudes got their feelings hurt?! I guess that makes some sense, but didn’t people have feelings 100 years ago? Didn’t Congress have bullies 100 years ago? I smell a rat, and his initials are Leonard Leo!
Yes, but people weren't publicly humiliated in this sort of way until mass media. Roger B. Taney wasn't memed to death. That's, I think, the difference. And that Leo recruits horrible, thin-skinned creeps.
"Time was, justices would move to the left the longer they served on the court. Why has that stopped?"
My first answer to this question in the subheading was, "because the money and vacations they now crave are not being offered by the Left," but getting their FEELINGS hurt and then lashing out forever, 1) makes more sense with the current crew, and 2) is not mutually exclusive to what I thought.
JFC! You have a Coke can, or a beer keg too many, or some sexual assault in your background? IT WILL COME OUT! So, maybe, don't put yourself forward to be a SC nominee, and keep your nasty secrets private. But NO, the big, fat egos of conservatives, EXPECT people to respect them just because of who they think they are. And then their feelings get hurt when it doesn't happen? Yeah, fuck their feelings, and fuck them. My current approval rating for the SCOTUS is 0%, only because negative percentages don't make much sense.
Once again, a comedian, in this case Stephen Colbert, has said in the past week that the SC doesn't make laws, they don't have an army, or any way to enforce their "rulings," why do we listen to them? We do because for the same reasons pieces of paper in our wallets marked 1, 5, 10, 20 can be used to buy things and services, we BELIEVE it. I think it's time we considered the idea of ignoring SC "rulings." They have consistently been on cultural issues of late, not the Constitution, and people are being told how to live their lives by them. Why do we continue to allow that in a country that's supposed to be free?
Thanks for this, Steve. Kavanaugh in particular had no business putting himself forward. They knew very well about his ugly past (and his present). The fact that he put himself and his wife and daughters through that at all, or didn't withdraw when he could have before the Dr. Ford stuff came out, makes me wonder if he had a choice in the matter. Look at how Habba brazenly called him out.
As to the Colbert comment, that's what makes this such a hard needle to thread. We have to excise the tumors without killing the host body. We don't want a public that ignores how the court rules. (Interesting word: rules.) That's why expanding the court, and not to 11 or 13 but to like 27, would end this problem. The more there are, the harder they are to corrupt, and the more normal the rulings will be. Also, why does that fuckstick Roberts get to be CJ forever? I'd like a law to change that structure. Make it a troika, or give THAT a term limit. Too much power, totally arbitrary.
Greg, SCOTUS is now shaped by DEI, deviousness, envy and intolerance. Kavanagh and other recent appointees all clearly affirmed settled law, a devious response at best, outright lie most likely. Envy epitomizes Thomas. He and Alito are the poster boys for intolerance, Roberts a closeted intolerant. M These qualities more than anything keeps them from evolving, keeping an open mind rather than entrenched views shaped by secret society manifestos.
Intolerance, yes, absolutely. I'll add: intolerant to anyone who doesn't agree with their warped worldview. Alito gets SO upset when we don't laugh at his bad jokes or recognize his "genius."
I think it’s just the undoing of all that’s productive, logical, righteous, fair and good, as mankind slowly and inevitably marches towards self destruction. Perhaps it was always written in the wind.
You're probably right, but I have to believe otherwise, for the sake of my sanity. Maybe it's more cyclical. That's what Yeats thought: the widening gyre.
Greg, I don't know what AI platform you're using, but the scope of this one blew my mind. 😁 Thanks (and FU) for bringing all this history back in technicolor. Excellent interview, too. May we prevail.
Fascinating. Our country may fail as a democracy because some men's FEELINGS were hurt?
I found the last comment particularly telling:
"Look at Justice Alito—who, by the way, in the last couple of weeks made this insane, gratuitous statement about how he’s coming after Obergefell, [after] marriage equality because it hurts the feelings of people who want to be able to discriminate against LGBTQ Americans."
That's right up there with laws that say you can't teach any history that might make a student "feel bad about themselves."
I thought us women were the emotional ones.
I had an interesting go-round once with an attorney in our office. I was disagreeing with him about a point of interpretation of a case and he suddenly said "Stop being so emotional." There wasn't anything emotional about my analysis and I said so. At that point he went into total breakdown--screaming, ranting about women and emotions. The secretaries and clerks outside the office could barely keep from laughing--eyes were definitely rolling as I left.
He not too much later left to join a county prosecutors office, where he was in charge of 5 women attorneys. Our secretary and I agreed--how long will THAT last?? Not very--within a year he was gone from that job for harassment of the women--not sexual, particularly--just screaming and ranting away.
Thanks for sharing that anecdote. I've seen this in the workplace, too...men who are accustomed to being in power and acing like assholes suddenly find that assumption being pushed back on, and they react like spoiled toddlers having their toy taken away.
To be fair, it IS tricky to navigate the world these days for older straight white men who aren't as sensitive to what they say and do. For years it was not only acceptable but expected that that attorney guy you mention would behave that way. He was probably trained to be that way, on some level. And now he has to adapt or find another line of work. Some of the anger on the right is them being lurched out of their -- to use a term they hate -- safe spaces. But we are the snowflakes...
my and his generation had the "boys don't cry" training. Looking back, I expect he had something going on in his life and it just boiled over. But he really couldn't deal with women lawyers.
I listened with interest to your interview with Dahlia Lithwick, Greg. I found it hard to follow at times; so, I appreciated when you interpreted some of her thoughts for us. I think it is important for each of us to play a part in crawling back our democracy. Some of us are prolific orators like you and Ms. Lithwick. Some are handy with writing, texting or phone banking. Still, others create graphics to show how effective the Democrats have been in our government, or like Chunk displaying the absurdity of what the Republican party has become. There's the likes of Stephen Colbert who I just heard take down SCOTUS in his 11-minute monologue the other night. And many more who are "fighting the good fight" to wake America up to the dangers of authoritarianism and theocracy.
I do not possess any of these skills. I do not know what Ms. Lithwick was going to say about postcarding. But I will tell you how gratified I was when I discovered it as something I could do to help "save" my country. To be sure, there are lots of postcarding "venues" who provide addresses that span the country. There's postcards4va, Activate Amerca, Center for Common Ground, Postcards to Swing States, just to name a few. I've written to my fellow citizens who live in Arizona, New York, Georgia, Ohio, and of course Virginia where I live. I've read where recipients have taken their postcards and taped them to their refrigerators to remind them to go vote. In short, I "feel" I've joined a truly grassroots movement that will have a favorable impact on the future of this country. If I am wrong about this, at least I know that I did something; that I tried.
I think that we should all do what we can. Not everyone has to do everything, or should try.
I think that when she said that about postcarding, it wasn't to poohpooh it, but just to emphasize that this election is the one where we have to throw everything and the kitchen sink at it. It's good that you do that! And I do think it helps.
The current Supreme Court is a travesty. For me the problem is they are not, and can't be, held accountable. Two ways to fix this (1) Have an equal number of right and left leaning members (would force more cross isle pollination) "I'll give up this of you give up that" and we both get something AND it works for a majority of America, (2) Term limit these egotistical shits. Ok make it 10 years not every two (too tactical) and not every 18 years (which has been bandied about). The Constitution does not require life time appointments, so they'd have to be reconfirmed and if at initial confirmation they lied about what they really believed, they COULD be held accountable. The only reason I can find as to why Supreme Court appointees are unaccountable (lifetime appointments, no external checks and balances etc.) is because it's always been DONE that way - PRECEDENCE! How ironic for a court that has, and will continue to, blow off precedence.
TGIF🎉🎉🎉
We need Citizens committed to stand up for justice and working towards a judicial system that upholds the principles of fairness and justice. ⚖️
Nothing says "fairness and justice" like Clarence in his $250k RV.
Supreme Court History Replay: The same folks who made Bush President now tip the scales for Trump. This infographic shows how John Roberts, Brett Kavanaugh, Amy Coney Barrett, Ted Cruz, Joel Kaplan, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alioto helped stop the vote recount in Florida to get Bush Jr. elected. Surprised by their decision to tilt the scales for Trump?
https://thedemlabs.org/2024/02/28/maga-supreme-court-justices-tip-the-scales-for-trump/
Thanks for this work, Deepak!
I haven't read this essay yet -- I know it's going to be another home run. I was distracted by the LARGER EGO anagram -- too much fun -- and so I asked CHAT GPT to come up with some for my name, along with definitions. Highly recommend that everyone try this wonderfully entertaining exercise!!! "Realistic Beehag:" Perhaps a "beehag" could be a mythical creature, part bee and part old crone, dwelling deep in enchanted forests. This fantastical being might be known for her wisdom in matters of nature and magic, as well as her ability to communicate with bees and harness their powers for healing or mischief. She could be a guardian of the natural world, ensuring the harmony of the ecosystems she inhabits.
OR "Ethical Grease" -- a substance or concept that facilitates ethical behavior or smooths the path toward ethical decision-making. It might symbolize a lubricant for moral dilemmas or a means of navigating complex ethical situations with clarity and integrity. In a metaphorical sense, "ethical grease" could represent virtues such as honesty, transparency, and fairness that help to grease the wheels of ethical conduct in various contexts, whether it's in business, politics, or personal relationships. It suggests a commitment to ethical principles and practices that ensure smooth functioning and positive outcomes while upholding moral standards.
But enough about me and my response to LARGER EGO ;) -- hope my experience playing "What's in a name?" sparks joy -- TGIF!!
I really like Ethical Grease. It’s descriptive and sounds like a product we are sorely in need of right now.
Perhaps it can be used on SCOTUS to prevent corrupt viscosity and thermal breakdown.
[That's loosely the words of an STP commercial from like 1985]
Ethical Grease is chef's kiss. Maybe you should invert it, European style, and make it Grease Ethical? That feels more mysterious to me. I'm glad you had fun with it!
As anagrams go, LARGER EGO is almost untoppable, though.
Gerg. Your work always amazes me. Lilb Elres. Billserle.com
Thanks, Bill!
Kavanaugh will live to be the coward he is, as he knows he lied and lied to get where he sits.
Thomas keeps trying to become white and got caught using polish. And he acts on the commands of the Treacherous Queen of Diamonds.
As for Thomas, isn't it interesting that they are not going after interracial couples?
"Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967), was a landmark civil rights decision of the U.S. Supreme Court which ruled that laws banning interracial marriage violate the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution." Aha, they do know about the Fourteenth Amendment!
Hypocrisy
Good point. It only further proves, as if more proof were needed, how nakedly corrupt he is.
Remember when all Thomas would do was sit like a bump on a log not asking questions or saying anything? Wonder what finally wound him up?
The Queen of Diamonds told him she was formicating with the King of Spades, LEO.
I have worked most of my 83 years among, alongside and with and for minorities. There are a number of those who had names for individuals like Thomas. And it wasnt, Brother!
I hear you. Uncle Tom came to mind for me.
Mild
Certainly it is in today’s terms. I remember, as do you I’m sure, when it was a pretty strong pejoritive.
The Court’s the way it is because several of the dudes got their feelings hurt?! I guess that makes some sense, but didn’t people have feelings 100 years ago? Didn’t Congress have bullies 100 years ago? I smell a rat, and his initials are Leonard Leo!
Yes, but people weren't publicly humiliated in this sort of way until mass media. Roger B. Taney wasn't memed to death. That's, I think, the difference. And that Leo recruits horrible, thin-skinned creeps.
"Time was, justices would move to the left the longer they served on the court. Why has that stopped?"
My first answer to this question in the subheading was, "because the money and vacations they now crave are not being offered by the Left," but getting their FEELINGS hurt and then lashing out forever, 1) makes more sense with the current crew, and 2) is not mutually exclusive to what I thought.
JFC! You have a Coke can, or a beer keg too many, or some sexual assault in your background? IT WILL COME OUT! So, maybe, don't put yourself forward to be a SC nominee, and keep your nasty secrets private. But NO, the big, fat egos of conservatives, EXPECT people to respect them just because of who they think they are. And then their feelings get hurt when it doesn't happen? Yeah, fuck their feelings, and fuck them. My current approval rating for the SCOTUS is 0%, only because negative percentages don't make much sense.
Once again, a comedian, in this case Stephen Colbert, has said in the past week that the SC doesn't make laws, they don't have an army, or any way to enforce their "rulings," why do we listen to them? We do because for the same reasons pieces of paper in our wallets marked 1, 5, 10, 20 can be used to buy things and services, we BELIEVE it. I think it's time we considered the idea of ignoring SC "rulings." They have consistently been on cultural issues of late, not the Constitution, and people are being told how to live their lives by them. Why do we continue to allow that in a country that's supposed to be free?
Thanks for this, Steve. Kavanaugh in particular had no business putting himself forward. They knew very well about his ugly past (and his present). The fact that he put himself and his wife and daughters through that at all, or didn't withdraw when he could have before the Dr. Ford stuff came out, makes me wonder if he had a choice in the matter. Look at how Habba brazenly called him out.
As to the Colbert comment, that's what makes this such a hard needle to thread. We have to excise the tumors without killing the host body. We don't want a public that ignores how the court rules. (Interesting word: rules.) That's why expanding the court, and not to 11 or 13 but to like 27, would end this problem. The more there are, the harder they are to corrupt, and the more normal the rulings will be. Also, why does that fuckstick Roberts get to be CJ forever? I'd like a law to change that structure. Make it a troika, or give THAT a term limit. Too much power, totally arbitrary.
Greg, SCOTUS is now shaped by DEI, deviousness, envy and intolerance. Kavanagh and other recent appointees all clearly affirmed settled law, a devious response at best, outright lie most likely. Envy epitomizes Thomas. He and Alito are the poster boys for intolerance, Roberts a closeted intolerant. M These qualities more than anything keeps them from evolving, keeping an open mind rather than entrenched views shaped by secret society manifestos.
Intolerance, yes, absolutely. I'll add: intolerant to anyone who doesn't agree with their warped worldview. Alito gets SO upset when we don't laugh at his bad jokes or recognize his "genius."
I think it’s just the undoing of all that’s productive, logical, righteous, fair and good, as mankind slowly and inevitably marches towards self destruction. Perhaps it was always written in the wind.
You're probably right, but I have to believe otherwise, for the sake of my sanity. Maybe it's more cyclical. That's what Yeats thought: the widening gyre.
Oh yes my very favorite poem of all time and I saved your post on that very poem. It’s what got me hooked on your newsletter.
Thanks! It's such a good one, and, alas, it feels so current and so ominous.
I do. Im 83
Greg, I don't know what AI platform you're using, but the scope of this one blew my mind. 😁 Thanks (and FU) for bringing all this history back in technicolor. Excellent interview, too. May we prevail.
Thanks so much, Joel!
The only AI that I used is the kind that generates transcripts and those are a god-send.
Fascinating. Our country may fail as a democracy because some men's FEELINGS were hurt?
I found the last comment particularly telling:
"Look at Justice Alito—who, by the way, in the last couple of weeks made this insane, gratuitous statement about how he’s coming after Obergefell, [after] marriage equality because it hurts the feelings of people who want to be able to discriminate against LGBTQ Americans."
That's right up there with laws that say you can't teach any history that might make a student "feel bad about themselves."
I thought us women were the emotional ones.
I had an interesting go-round once with an attorney in our office. I was disagreeing with him about a point of interpretation of a case and he suddenly said "Stop being so emotional." There wasn't anything emotional about my analysis and I said so. At that point he went into total breakdown--screaming, ranting about women and emotions. The secretaries and clerks outside the office could barely keep from laughing--eyes were definitely rolling as I left.
He not too much later left to join a county prosecutors office, where he was in charge of 5 women attorneys. Our secretary and I agreed--how long will THAT last?? Not very--within a year he was gone from that job for harassment of the women--not sexual, particularly--just screaming and ranting away.
Thanks for sharing that anecdote. I've seen this in the workplace, too...men who are accustomed to being in power and acing like assholes suddenly find that assumption being pushed back on, and they react like spoiled toddlers having their toy taken away.
To be fair, it IS tricky to navigate the world these days for older straight white men who aren't as sensitive to what they say and do. For years it was not only acceptable but expected that that attorney guy you mention would behave that way. He was probably trained to be that way, on some level. And now he has to adapt or find another line of work. Some of the anger on the right is them being lurched out of their -- to use a term they hate -- safe spaces. But we are the snowflakes...
my and his generation had the "boys don't cry" training. Looking back, I expect he had something going on in his life and it just boiled over. But he really couldn't deal with women lawyers.
Be real nice if we could add another six Justices...
I want 18 more.
I listened with interest to your interview with Dahlia Lithwick, Greg. I found it hard to follow at times; so, I appreciated when you interpreted some of her thoughts for us. I think it is important for each of us to play a part in crawling back our democracy. Some of us are prolific orators like you and Ms. Lithwick. Some are handy with writing, texting or phone banking. Still, others create graphics to show how effective the Democrats have been in our government, or like Chunk displaying the absurdity of what the Republican party has become. There's the likes of Stephen Colbert who I just heard take down SCOTUS in his 11-minute monologue the other night. And many more who are "fighting the good fight" to wake America up to the dangers of authoritarianism and theocracy.
I do not possess any of these skills. I do not know what Ms. Lithwick was going to say about postcarding. But I will tell you how gratified I was when I discovered it as something I could do to help "save" my country. To be sure, there are lots of postcarding "venues" who provide addresses that span the country. There's postcards4va, Activate Amerca, Center for Common Ground, Postcards to Swing States, just to name a few. I've written to my fellow citizens who live in Arizona, New York, Georgia, Ohio, and of course Virginia where I live. I've read where recipients have taken their postcards and taped them to their refrigerators to remind them to go vote. In short, I "feel" I've joined a truly grassroots movement that will have a favorable impact on the future of this country. If I am wrong about this, at least I know that I did something; that I tried.
I think that we should all do what we can. Not everyone has to do everything, or should try.
I think that when she said that about postcarding, it wasn't to poohpooh it, but just to emphasize that this election is the one where we have to throw everything and the kitchen sink at it. It's good that you do that! And I do think it helps.
The current Supreme Court is a travesty. For me the problem is they are not, and can't be, held accountable. Two ways to fix this (1) Have an equal number of right and left leaning members (would force more cross isle pollination) "I'll give up this of you give up that" and we both get something AND it works for a majority of America, (2) Term limit these egotistical shits. Ok make it 10 years not every two (too tactical) and not every 18 years (which has been bandied about). The Constitution does not require life time appointments, so they'd have to be reconfirmed and if at initial confirmation they lied about what they really believed, they COULD be held accountable. The only reason I can find as to why Supreme Court appointees are unaccountable (lifetime appointments, no external checks and balances etc.) is because it's always been DONE that way - PRECEDENCE! How ironic for a court that has, and will continue to, blow off precedence.