Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   Justice Ginsburg gives an "I told you so" interview on all the new restrictive voting measures being pushed through state legislatures after the Supreme Court struck down a key provision of the Voting Rights Act   (news.yahoo.com) divider line 12
    More: Obvious, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Voting Rights Act, Ginsberg, supreme courts, state legislative, voter ID, Urban League, Chief Justice John Roberts  
•       •       •

2534 clicks; posted to Politics » on 26 Jul 2013 at 1:26 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Funniest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

2013-07-26 05:23:23 PM  
2 votes:

Neighborhood Watch: Deucednuisance: Well, you got that hang of the "shiat-and-run" technique down pretty quickly, I'll give you that.


I'm still here.


I thought you were traveling. . .
 creepy ass-cracka     
        2013-07-19 08:47:45 PM

skozlaw: Neighborhood Watch: I'm not a 'troll'...
Ha. Ha. You're trolling Fark on a Friday night with a custom account. Nobody loves you, not even your mom.
Fine, believe what you want, but I'm definitely not a troll.

 http://www.fark.com/comments/7850857/Well-that-didnt-take-long-Fox- New s-host-calls-Obama-Race-Baiter-In-Chief?viewmode=1&togglehtml=1&is_usi ng_js=1&unignore=1&startid=85481281&tt=

/At least you remembered to use the same log-in name this time...
2013-07-26 02:24:44 PM  
2 votes:
"I stopped wearing condoms when I screw prostitutes because I never got any STIs."
~~Chief Justice John Roberts, United States Supreme Court.

No sh*t. That's a real quote.
2013-07-26 11:56:36 AM  
2 votes:
i.imgur.com
2013-07-26 03:32:32 PM  
1 votes:

Rann Xerox: mediablitz: "Scalia, who really takes after the court for taking over legislative turf in same-sex marriage, doesn't make a whimper in voting rights, which passed 98 to nothing in the Senate and 330 to something in the House. I didn't put that to him, but surely he's going to be asked the question, 'How do you distinguish the two?'" she said.


He doesn't give a shiat, Ruth. He knows he is being a hypocrite. He's made it perfectly clear he doesn't care.

Scalia is a troll in black robes.  He had better hope that his grave will have a state-of-the-art drainage system, otherwise things will get rather messy around it.


If I don't outlast him. somebody please take one for me.
2013-07-26 02:29:10 PM  
1 votes:

mediablitz: "Scalia, who really takes after the court for taking over legislative turf in same-sex marriage, doesn't make a whimper in voting rights, which passed 98 to nothing in the Senate and 330 to something in the House. I didn't put that to him, but surely he's going to be asked the question, 'How do you distinguish the two?'" she said.


He doesn't give a shiat, Ruth. He knows he is being a hypocrite. He's made it perfectly clear he doesn't care.


Scalia is a troll in black robes.  He had better hope that his grave will have a state-of-the-art drainage system, otherwise things will get rather messy around it.
2013-07-26 02:28:09 PM  
1 votes:

Neighborhood Watch: If you have to prove who you are to get a welfare check, is that 'restrictive' too?


You're a big thinker. I'm recommending you for a position at the Institute for Advanced Study, where you'll supervise Ed Witten.
2013-07-26 01:44:31 PM  
1 votes:

Saiga410: Mike Chewbacca: BMFPitt: meat0918: As a layman, I'm still not sure of the constitutional grounds they used to stomp on the Voting Rights Act, besides, "We don't like this law".

It treated different states/cities differently based on what was going on there 50 years ago.

Except those same states turned around that same day and disenfranchised voters previously protected by the Voting Rights Act.

The VRA protected people without IDs and vote early?


Yes.
2013-07-26 01:38:37 PM  
1 votes:

Jackson Herring: weird, apparently I forgot to put you on ignore yesterday


Yeah, I somehow managed to not ignore him on day 1, too, even though I distinctly remember hitting the little images-mediawiki-sites.thefullwiki.org .
2013-07-26 01:38:27 PM  
1 votes:

BMFPitt: meat0918: As a layman, I'm still not sure of the constitutional grounds they used to stomp on the Voting Rights Act, besides, "We don't like this law".

It treated different states/cities differently based on what was going on there 50 years ago.


All they had to do was behave for 10 years in a row.

As in, they've had 50 years to stop behaving like bigots, and couldn't farking do it.
2013-07-26 01:29:07 PM  
1 votes:
weird, apparently I forgot to put you on ignore yesterday
2013-07-26 12:10:13 PM  
1 votes:

the_sidewinder: Nadie_AZ: Really? No one? Not a single farker could have predicted any of this?

Uh, Ginsberg was saying the exact opposite

 "And one really could have predicted what was going to happen."

Basically says "This outcome was obvious, idiots"


Holy crap. I read that backwards ... thank you for catching that.
2013-07-26 12:02:00 PM  
1 votes:
Thank you John Roberts, for being a colossal asshat.
I'd argue for impeachment, but we all know that will never happen.
 
Displayed 12 of 12 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report