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.

(Five Thirty-Eight)   Conservatives, you might just be disappointed, new Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch could disappoint you with his stance on immigration. You will be disappoint   ( fivethirtyeight.com) divider line
    More: Interesting, Supreme Court of the United States, Supreme Court, bail hearing, Gorsuch, immigrants, cases, immigration, Supreme Court term  
•       •       •

1782 clicks; posted to Politics » on 03 Oct 2017 at 5:33 AM (9 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



41 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2017-10-03 03:22:19 AM  
Which conservatives? The ones who love cheap labor or the ones who hate brown people?
 
2017-10-03 04:46:27 AM  

fusillade762: Which conservatives? The ones who love cheap labor or the ones who hate brown people?


The ones who hate abortion.
 
2017-10-03 05:34:52 AM  

kevlar51: fusillade762: Which conservatives? The ones who love cheap labor or the ones who hate brown people?

The ones who hate abortion.


The ones who hate.  In other words, conservatives.
 
2017-10-03 05:39:11 AM  
Even if Gorsuch makes the odd decision against core conservative values, the fact he shouldn't even be on the court in the first place will always make it a conservative victory in  the end.
 
2017-10-03 05:54:05 AM  
I'll believe it when i see it.
 
2017-10-03 06:07:22 AM  

Summoner101: Even if Gorsuch makes the odd decision against core conservative values, the fact he shouldn't even be on the court in the first place will always make it a conservative victory in  the end.


Russian victory.
 
2017-10-03 06:20:52 AM  
It's so common for SCOTUS justices to frustrate and thwart the powers who appointed them that it is almost an historical cliche. This applies to liberals and conservatives alike.
 
2017-10-03 06:25:47 AM  
Not sure if this headline is a trainwreck or a joke I don't get.

I'm going with trainwreck.
 
2017-10-03 06:38:11 AM  
Gorsuch is a disappointment because the Senate refused to do its duty in a timely manner.  That abdication of their Constitutional Duty (and the fact that they also failed to approve so many open court appointments) means that they should all have been removed from office for dereliction of duty.  But I've pretty much given up on Congressional ability to govern beyond stigginit.
 
2017-10-03 06:41:32 AM  

Summoner101: Even if Gorsuch makes the odd decision against core conservative values, the fact he shouldn't even be on the court in the first place will always make it a conservative victory in  the end.


Yeah - but in terms of precedent and political capital expended, it was an expensive one.
And what did it get them? A court whose balance is no different than it was when Scalia was sitting on it.
There is no reason to believe that this court will rule any differently than it did before Scalia's death triggered all this nonsense.
Not much of a victory, when you calculate the ROI. They have loosed a dog that will come back to bite them - and gained very little from it.
TL/DR - they made another stupid, short sighted decision.
 
2017-10-03 07:13:00 AM  
He is literally on McConnels payroll, giving speechs for McConnel at fundraisers in exchange for hundreds of thousands of dollars. He will do exactly what the Republican Party tells him to do
 
2017-10-03 07:14:36 AM  

jso2897: Summoner101: Even if Gorsuch makes the odd decision against core conservative values, the fact he shouldn't even be on the court in the first place will always make it a conservative victory in  the end.

Yeah - but in terms of precedent and political capital expended, it was an expensive one.
And what did it get them? A court whose balance is no different than it was when Scalia was sitting on it.
There is no reason to believe that this court will rule any differently than it did before Scalia's death triggered all this nonsense.
Not much of a victory, when you calculate the ROI. They have loosed a dog that will come back to bite them - and gained very little from it.
TL/DR - they made another stupid, short sighted decision.


The lost no political capital over it. Hell, the won the election. Next time a justice dies they will do the exact same thing. There are no consequences for their actions
 
2017-10-03 07:14:58 AM  

Alphax: kevlar51: fusillade762: Which conservatives? The ones who love cheap labor or the ones who hate brown people? The ones who hate abortion.

The ones who hate.  In other words, conservatives.


Do you judge people by A) Their station of birth, or B) What they do with their station?

If you answer A, then you are a conservative. Now add some hate for the sizzle.
 
2017-10-03 07:15:46 AM  
Where's my world's smallest violin when I need it???
 
2017-10-03 07:16:31 AM  

jso2897: Summoner101: Even if Gorsuch makes the odd decision against core conservative values, the fact he shouldn't even be on the court in the first place will always make it a conservative victory in  the end.

Yeah - but in terms of precedent and political capital expended, it was an expensive one.
And what did it get them? A court whose balance is no different than it was when Scalia was sitting on it.
There is no reason to believe that this court will rule any differently than it did before Scalia's death triggered all this nonsense.
Not much of a victory, when you calculate the ROI. They have loosed a dog that will come back to bite them - and gained very little from it.
TL/DR - they made another stupid, short sighted decision.


People keep saying the GOP will pay for their shortsighted, selfish actions for years.  When does it catch up with them?
 
2017-10-03 07:20:06 AM  

jso2897: Summoner101: Even if Gorsuch makes the odd decision against core conservative values, the fact he shouldn't even be on the court in the first place will always make it a conservative victory in  the end.

Yeah - but in terms of precedent and political capital expended, it was an expensive one.
And what did it get them? A court whose balance is no different than it was when Scalia was sitting on it.
There is no reason to believe that this court will rule any differently than it did before Scalia's death triggered all this nonsense.
Not much of a victory, when you calculate the ROI. They have loosed a dog that will come back to bite them - and gained very little from it.
TL/DR - they made another stupid, short sighted decision.


It was all about STIGGINIT. that's never stupid and short-sighted in their minds.
 
2017-10-03 07:21:56 AM  

Summoner101: jso2897: Summoner101: Even if Gorsuch makes the odd decision against core conservative values, the fact he shouldn't even be on the court in the first place will always make it a conservative victory in  the end.

Yeah - but in terms of precedent and political capital expended, it was an expensive one.
And what did it get them? A court whose balance is no different than it was when Scalia was sitting on it.
There is no reason to believe that this court will rule any differently than it did before Scalia's death triggered all this nonsense.
Not much of a victory, when you calculate the ROI. They have loosed a dog that will come back to bite them - and gained very little from it.
TL/DR - they made another stupid, short sighted decision.

People keep saying the GOP will pay for their shortsighted, selfish actions for years.  When does it catch up with them?


The next time a Republican president faces a hostile legislature. If you believe history has ended forever, and that that will never happen again - I can't help you. Despair trolls are beyond the reach of any reason or logic that lies at my disposal. At any rate - the court we have now is no different than the one we had before. I fail to see the big "victory". All I see is a sleazy, dick move that won't be forgotten, and that netted them very, very little.
But, if you want to go on thinking of the GOP as invincible supervillains or some shiat - be my guest. I don't have the energy or inclination to argue with you.
 
2017-10-03 07:26:44 AM  

serfdood: It was all about STIGGINIT. that's never stupid and short-sighted in their minds.


Indeed. Enough small, short stigs, delivered rapidly and with unrelenting fury, will take down even the greatest land creature on earth: the donkey.
 
2017-10-03 07:29:33 AM  
A tainted justice in a tainted seat appointed by president taint...er, trump.
 
2017-10-03 07:42:10 AM  

jso2897: Summoner101: jso2897: Summoner101: Even if Gorsuch makes the odd decision against core conservative values, the fact he shouldn't even be on the court in the first place will always make it a conservative victory in  the end.

Yeah - but in terms of precedent and political capital expended, it was an expensive one.
And what did it get them? A court whose balance is no different than it was when Scalia was sitting on it.
There is no reason to believe that this court will rule any differently than it did before Scalia's death triggered all this nonsense.
Not much of a victory, when you calculate the ROI. They have loosed a dog that will come back to bite them - and gained very little from it.
TL/DR - they made another stupid, short sighted decision.

People keep saying the GOP will pay for their shortsighted, selfish actions for years.  When does it catch up with them?

The next time a Republican president faces a hostile legislature. If you believe history has ended forever, and that that will never happen again - I can't help you. Despair trolls are beyond the reach of any reason or logic that lies at my disposal. At any rate - the court we have now is no different than the one we had before. I fail to see the big "victory". All I see is a sleazy, dick move that won't be forgotten, and that netted them very, very little.
But, if you want to go on thinking of the GOP as invincible supervillains or some shiat - be my guest. I don't have the energy or inclination to argue with you.


I don't think that that's despair 'trolling' as much as it's just plain despair. This current timeline is kind of shiat.
 
2017-10-03 07:49:36 AM  

mdemon81: I don't think that that's despair 'trolling' as much as it's just plain despair. This current timeline is kind of shiat.


Attempting intelligent conversation with people who have surrendered to despair is futile, and I don't attempt it. It's like talking to a zoned-out drunk, or junkie. Any logic or reason is wasted on them.
Despair is a mindset - and as such, a delusion.
 
2017-10-03 08:03:19 AM  

SpaceyCat: Gorsuch is a disappointment because the Senate refused to do its duty in a timely manner.  That abdication of their Constitutional Duty (and the fact that they also failed to approve so many open court appointments) means that they should all have been removed from office for dereliction of duty.  But I've pretty much given up on Congressional ability to govern beyond stigginit.


They refused action on numerous Clinton's lower court appointments as well.  I don't recall any consequences.
 
2017-10-03 08:26:37 AM  
Gorsuch? Nope. They picked him for a reason- to beat down the Constitution, not enforce it.

Gorsuch... sounds Russian.
 
2017-10-03 08:33:43 AM  

jso2897: It's so common for SCOTUS justices to frustrate and thwart the powers who appointed them that it is almost an historical cliche. This applies to liberals and conservatives alike.


True, but I don't expect it from Gorsuch, given the circumstances of his appointment.  There's no way they picked anyone but a known ideologue.  Then again, this current bunch of conservatives haven't impressed me much with their general competence, so anything may still be possible.
 
2017-10-03 08:35:36 AM  
GORSUCH
I AM DISSAPOINT
 
2017-10-03 08:39:29 AM  
I'm weary of over active those who cannot comprehend obvious political sarcasm.
 
2017-10-03 08:43:55 AM  

jso2897: mdemon81: I don't think that that's despair 'trolling' as much as it's just plain despair. This current timeline is kind of shiat.

Attempting intelligent conversation with people who have surrendered to despair is futile, and I don't attempt it. It's like talking to a zoned-out drunk, or junkie. Any logic or reason is wasted on them.
Despair is a mindset - and as such, a delusion.


"Time is an illusion. Lunchtime, doubly so" came to mind when I read that... So, what you're saying is:
img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2017-10-03 08:44:19 AM  
Unless there is a company-owned eighteen-wheeler involved. Those are more important than human life, after all.
 
2017-10-03 08:47:10 AM  
Sure. And monkeys could fly out of my ass.
 
2017-10-03 08:49:59 AM  
i.imgur.comView Full Size
 
2017-10-03 08:57:30 AM  
Bullshiat. Gorsuch will continue being a right-wing lunatic until the day he dies.
 
2017-10-03 08:59:25 AM  

jso2897: if you want to go on thinking of the GOP as invincible supervillains


Because they somehow keep winning.  Almost like most of the nation supports their evil at just about every level (local, state, national).  They keep winning because they are what people actually want.  They want abusive, exploitative policies.  They want second-class citizens.
 
2017-10-03 09:13:36 AM  
FTFA:

"The case that will be argued before the Supreme Court today, Sessions v. Dimaya, hinges on whether "crime of violence" is clear enough for ordinary people to understand - and whether noncitizens, like criminal defendants, have the right to challenge laws for vagueness in civil court."

Depends on what your definition of, "ordinary people" is. Is someone who is illiterate in English, "ordinary?"
 
2017-10-03 09:23:44 AM  

fernt: FTFA:

"The case that will be argued before the Supreme Court today, Sessions v. Dimaya, hinges on whether "crime of violence" is clear enough for ordinary people to understand - and whether noncitizens, like criminal defendants, have the right to challenge laws for vagueness in civil court."

Depends on what your definition of, "ordinary people" is. Is someone who is illiterate in English, "ordinary?"


Does literacy include proper use of commas and other punctuation marks?
 
2017-10-03 09:27:29 AM  

fernt: illiterate in English


That's not a thing. You're either illiterate or you're not. It describes education, not language skills.

As they say on 4chan, Drewgs can't into English.
 
2017-10-03 09:39:45 AM  

cranked: fernt: FTFA:

"The case that will be argued before the Supreme Court today, Sessions v. Dimaya, hinges on whether "crime of violence" is clear enough for ordinary people to understand - and whether noncitizens, like criminal defendants, have the right to challenge laws for vagueness in civil court."

Depends on what your definition of, "ordinary people" is. Is someone who is illiterate in English, "ordinary?"

Does literacy include proper use of commas and other punctuation marks?


Depends on the grade level you are looking for;)
 
2017-10-03 09:41:52 AM  
As long as he votes right on abortion, he could retroactively appoint Obama to a third term and all would be right with their world.
 
2017-10-03 10:38:47 AM  
The man thinks it's your duty to die for your employer.  No matter how he rules, he will always be an asshole.
 
2017-10-03 12:09:28 PM  

jso2897: Summoner101: jso2897: Summoner101: Even if Gorsuch makes the odd decision against core conservative values, the fact he shouldn't even be on the court in the first place will always make it a conservative victory in  the end.

Yeah - but in terms of precedent and political capital expended, it was an expensive one.
And what did it get them? A court whose balance is no different than it was when Scalia was sitting on it.
There is no reason to believe that this court will rule any differently than it did before Scalia's death triggered all this nonsense.
Not much of a victory, when you calculate the ROI. They have loosed a dog that will come back to bite them - and gained very little from it.
TL/DR - they made another stupid, short sighted decision.

People keep saying the GOP will pay for their shortsighted, selfish actions for years.  When does it catch up with them?

The next time a Republican president faces a hostile legislature. If you believe history has ended forever, and that that will never happen again - I can't help you. Despair trolls are beyond the reach of any reason or logic that lies at my disposal. At any rate - the court we have now is no different than the one we had before. I fail to see the big "victory". All I see is a sleazy, dick move that won't be forgotten, and that netted them very, very little.
But, if you want to go on thinking of the GOP as invincible supervillains or some shiat - be my guest. I don't have the energy or inclination to argue with you.


The big victory is that the GOP is going to hold the court for the rest of my working lifetime. I required two things with a Hillary victory: Holding the Gerrymandered congress in check, and putting the Supreme Court in the hands of the democrats. When do you see the supreme court getting turned around?
 
2017-10-03 02:36:17 PM  

Devo: jso2897: Summoner101: jso2897: Summoner101: Even if Gorsuch makes the odd decision against core conservative values, the fact he shouldn't even be on the court in the first place will always make it a conservative victory in  the end.

Yeah - but in terms of precedent and political capital expended, it was an expensive one.
And what did it get them? A court whose balance is no different than it was when Scalia was sitting on it.
There is no reason to believe that this court will rule any differently than it did before Scalia's death triggered all this nonsense.
Not much of a victory, when you calculate the ROI. They have loosed a dog that will come back to bite them - and gained very little from it.
TL/DR - they made another stupid, short sighted decision.

People keep saying the GOP will pay for their shortsighted, selfish actions for years.  When does it catch up with them?

The next time a Republican president faces a hostile legislature. If you believe history has ended forever, and that that will never happen again - I can't help you. Despair trolls are beyond the reach of any reason or logic that lies at my disposal. At any rate - the court we have now is no different than the one we had before. I fail to see the big "victory". All I see is a sleazy, dick move that won't be forgotten, and that netted them very, very little.
But, if you want to go on thinking of the GOP as invincible supervillains or some shiat - be my guest. I don't have the energy or inclination to argue with you.

The big victory is that the GOP is going to hold the court for the rest of my working lifetime. I required two things with a Hillary victory: Holding the Gerrymandered congress in check, and putting the Supreme Court in the hands of the democrats. When do you see the supreme court getting turned around?


Kagan is 57 and Gorsuch is 50, but the rest of SCOTUS are roughly twice my age(or more). A lot depends on what happens in the next few years, sure, but if Democrats can retake the White House in 2020 I can can easily see a more liberal court by 2025-2030. Yes, that's still a ways off, but one of the shortcomings of liberals is they tend to forget politics is a long game.
 
2017-10-03 03:25:54 PM  
Yeah, right. Totally not a stooge in his stolen seat will be impartial and independent. Then I'll win the lottery.
 
Displayed 41 of 41 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  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