[Johny Joe Hold]

So far as I know, Clarence has never missed a day of work. That is what we need in the Supreme Court, people who show up and pass rulings for Jesus. Liberals should leave Clarence alone.

[Dr. Anthony J. Toole]

Originally Posted by Johny Joe Hold

So far as I know, Clarence has never missed a day of work. That is what we need in the Supreme Court, people who show up and pass rulings for Jesus. Liberals should leave Clarence alone.

Yes, Mr. Mayor. As I believe Justice Kennedy said when leaving early for the day, "if you don't like it go find 67 Senators". The Founding Fathers really considered everything.

[Johny Joe Hold]

Originally Posted by Dr. Anthony J. Toole

Yes, Mr. Mayor. As I believe Justice Kennedy said when leaving early for the day, "if you don't like it go find 67 Senators". The Founding Fathers really considered everything.

Today, I scrolled briefly past MSNBC, the "C" stands for communism. The talking heads were discussing money spent by Republicans on lining up their own nominees and setting up backdoor ways to get money to spouses like Mrs. Thomas.

I wanted to interrupt their blather and shout, "What is wrong with Supreme Court Judges having a side hustle?" Side deals that pay for college of Justices children, vacations and anything else is merely gifts for jobs well done.

[MitzaLizalor]

Originally Posted by Johny Joe Hold

"C" stands for communism

A bankrupt doctrine for so many reasons. First must be the concept of ideology before knowledge. Appoint your creatures, sound on Marx but woeful on how to do any job assigned to them, shoot all the billionaires and instant magic! Now everyone is equally poor and nobody in charge could run a liquid celebration at the bottom of the Mariana Trench – exactly where the economy is headed. Let's take a simple example: transport.

Capitalist design	Communist design
We're all familiar with these so a single example suffices here. If you thought I'd picked a foul commie chariot on purpose –> Larger sizes linked

Clearly, if no business runs at a profit, there will be no wealth and no billionaires to shoot. Eventually the economy runs down, supporting less and less people, introducing instant magic #2 — shoot ordinary people! Industrial processes are another example, large scale electricity generation, say. We could all use candles or have hand-wound springs driving dynamos but that's not going to make many nukes. And commies love nukes. Expect to see doctrinaire Marxists running power stations who don't know how the things work, “Why not put the engineers designing them in charge?” you may be wondering. And that's an excellent example of the sort of question getting you shot. There are many such questions.

When a business offers products that increase efficiency in the home, people will buy them. A factory saves time compared to everyone making one for themselves and that saving translates into quality of life. For the homeowner, more opportunities for praise and worship. For the millionaire, opportunities to further increase efficiencies and become a billionaire.

Am I not allowed to have friends who are billionaires? Should there be no billionaires at all? Only a communist would say, “Yes! You're not and there shouldn't be!” But do we really want our elite arbiters running around with communists? If so, I have a vehicle they might like to buy.

[Dr Laurence Niles]

Originally Posted by Dr. Anthony J. Toole

The liberal hit piece machine keep on coming - today it's conservative justice Clarence Thomas in the firing line (again). According to muck-racking idlers at ProPublica, Thomas has been taking lavish holidays for decades at the expense of a close personal Republican megadonor.

Fortunately the Code of Conduct voluntarily subscribed to by Supreme Court justices does not include the tiresome stipulation holding back other federal officials to avoid the appearance of impropriety. Therefore Mr. Thomas does not need to trouble with this trivial story. Nevertheless, he has generously responded that he was merely following "guidance early in his tenure about the gifts" and that he “always sought to comply with the disclosure guidelines.”

Thomas noted that the disclosure guidelines are being changed... [to include] a requirement to disclose some free trips and air travel. He added that he intends to follow that guidance in the future.


In other words, rules don't apply to him. Even if they do, they're just guidelines suggested somewhere sometime maybe. And if he breaks them, he tried his best. Perhaps someone should update the guidelines, no harm done right? Just as the founding fathers intended. I can particularly imagine Thomas Jefferson - the one who mused about watering the tree of liberty with the blood of tyrants - having nothing to say about this.

This really stopped me thinking and started to read my Bible (KJV-1611). As soon as I stopped thinking for myself it became clear.

James 4:11 “Speak not evil one of another, brethren. He that speaketh evil of his brother, and judgeth his brother, speaketh evil of the law, and judgeth the law: but if thou judge the law, thou art not a doer of the law, but a judge.”

Who are we to say anything about Jude Clancy? I have no doubt she has left the nigra lifestyle far behind. If we judge her we are literally saying the systems and structured set up by Jesus is WRONG!

Romans 13:1 “Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.”

Judge Clementine was appointed by Jesus. And last time I read my Bible KJV (1611) several times at once that meant what Jesus says goes.

Acts 5:29 “Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men.”

Are the woke rabble saying they know the law more that the very person Jesus signed off on to be the first Black Woman on the bench? Or that the Bible (KJV- 1611) is nothing more than a suggestion and not a deadly serious admonishment not to question?

1 Corinthians 2:16 “For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ.”

Judge Cleary could be as corrupt as all to get out but she’s not based on my reading of the Bible KJV (1611). I’ve not actually looked into the matter but the Bible is clear. Read the Bible (KJV1611) NOT the usernets or the AOL search alogrithmics.

Trust in Jesus!

And don’t be gay

Yours in Christ’s muscular embrace.

[Prayer Warrior]

https://www.levernews.com/clarence-t...mily-payments/

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas changed his position on one of America’s most significant regulatory doctrines after his wife reportedly accepted secret payments from a shadowy conservative network pushing for the change. Thomas’ shift also came while he was receiving lavish gifts from a billionaire linked to other groups criticizing the same doctrine — which is now headed back to the high court.


The so-called “Chevron deference” doctrine stipulates that the executive branch — not the federal courts — has the power to interpret laws passed by Congress in certain circumstances. Conservatives for years have fought to overturn the doctrine, a move that would empower legal challenges to federal agency regulations on everything from climate policy to workplace safety to overtime pay.


Thomas wrote a landmark Supreme Court opinion upholding the doctrine in 2005, but began questioning it a decade later, before eventually renouncing his past opinion in 2020 and claiming that the doctrine itself might be unconstitutional. Now, Thomas could help overturn the doctrine in a new case the high court just agreed to hear next term...


Thomas wrote the majority opinion, arguing that the lower court should have applied the Chevron doctrine to the case and deferring to the agency’s interpretation of the law.





But within the ensuing decade, Thomas changed course to crusade against Chevron deference, eventually arguing that his own opinion in the 2005 case had been ill-advised.

People are allowed to change their minds. Thomas after having his educational experience provided by these people is older, wiser, and is making more informed decisions. He just said his old opinion was ill-advised, that's all.


Just because Justice Clarence Thomas wrote the majority opinion on and upheld the Chevron defense in 2005, then received money from a group opposing that position, then changed his position, doesn't necessarily mean that the money influenced his decision.

[Johny Joe Hold]

Originally Posted by Prayer Warrior

People are allowed to change their minds. Thomas after having his educational experience provided by these people is older, wiser, and is making more informed decisions. He just said his old opinion was ill-advised, that's all.
Just because Justice Clarence Thomas wrote the majority opinion on and upheld the Chevron defense in 2005, then received money from a group opposing that position, then changed his position, doesn't necessarily mean that the money influenced his decision.

You are so right, Brother Warrior. If ever there was a judge that based opinions on facts and not on his own personal gain it is Judge Thomas. All this stuff about free trips and whatever--all was necessary for the Judge's personal growth. And the money that made his wife rich, well that's his wife's business and we have no right to be suspicious.

[MitzaLizalor]

Originally Posted by Prayer Warrior

educational experience

Isn't it funny how humanistic bolsheviks tell us, “Education never ends: it's an ongoing, lifelong process!” although they themselves seem to have stopped reading as soon as they hit upon Jacques Derrida or José Gomes Ferreira. Earlier I posted a motor vehicle coming apart at the seams as soon as it left the factory. “Is this the best they could do?” I thought momentarily but of course it was only for the little people such abominations were intended and if you questioned the products in any way, it was off to Siberia for you because you were trying to learn.

One characteristic of learning is a change in how one thinks or acts. But when an example of just that is presented, the class of commie poets reverts to form and replaces (tries to) learning with believing what they tell you instead. I am praying for Thomas.

MASOCHISTS' CORNER

José Gomes Ferreira reading from the following selection https://www.escritas.org/pt/ jose-gomes-ferreira

Jacques Derrida commenting on Freud's wax tablet model of time and memory, which I'd have thought the less expounded upon the better

Why is this absurd dream? what they call reality don't obey me like the others What do I have in my head? Here's the great anger! Mix it with roses and call it life. https://www.escritas.org/pt/t/1607/ porque-e-que-este-sonho-absurdo HERE'S ANOTHER ONE https://www.escritas.org/pt/t/1613/ quero-voar

The machine does not run by itself. It is less a machine than a tool. And it is not held with only one hand. This is the mark of its temporality. Its maintenance is not simple. The ideal virginity of the present … is constituted by the work of memory. At least two hands are needed to make the apparatus function, as well as a system of gestures, a coordination of independent initiatives, an organized multiplicity of origins. https://archive.org/details/ 20200118_20200118_1707/ PAGE 284

Now let's face it, if those two knocked at your door you'd pretend to be the house sitter and say you'd gone to the moon for the foreseeable future. Even worse than the Jehovah's Witnesses for whom I've only ever claimed to be in The Azores. Nevertheless, biting the bullet as it were, I've posted some of their material to illustrate the difference between education and learning. Thomas is willing to learn, as defined above, whereas progressive deconstructivists are more interested in Besetzungsinnervationen.

No apology is required (and I'm not offering one) for that but perhaps for this next sentence which describes the term:

[POSTED FOR INFORMATION] (with apologies) - Besetzungsinnervationen • a discontinuous distribution—through rapid periodic impulses—of “cathectic innervations” from within toward the outside, toward the permeability of the system.

If such creatures have anything to do with education, this stuff will be pumped into young minds from preschool (it's why they want mothers "to be free to work" while they operate daycare from birth) to university and beyond. A single idea with no questioning and no ability to change. No ability to learn.

Justice Thomas has shown a preparedness to learn. Who would you rather have deciding educational priorities? Clarence? Or the postpostmodern deconstructivist progressives? I'm starting to feel unwell.

[Dr. Anthony J. Toole]

Those concerned about conflicts of interest and bias in the highest court in the land will be relieved today to hear that they're wrong.

Chief justice says US supreme court keeps ‘highest standards’ of conduct

The chief justice of the US Supreme Court, John Roberts, said he and the other justices hold themselves to the “highest standards” of ethical conduct.

However, that does not mean everything is perfect. There are still some areas of concern.

“There is much in the legal world that [is] abhorrent. Judges heckled and shouted down at law schools. Protesters outside the homes of justices, with marshal protection needed 24/7.”

Roberts also said the hardest decision he had made as chief justice was not in any case. It was, he said, “whether to erect fences and barricades around the supreme court” when the Dobbs decision was due, knowing protests would follow.

“I had no choice but to go ahead and do it,” he said.

If the disobedience continues there will be no choice but to put the final pieces in the puzzle to enact the long-awaited Christofascist police state. Don't make him do it, liberals.

[Dennis Lukes]

Liberal blacks hate Uncle Clarence because he's the least racist black person in America. Doesn't only work for the benefit of his fellow blacks but for all Americans. Unlike other blacks, he judges people for the content of their character. Presumably this is why he doesn't care much for other Negroes. (If liberals started judging them by the content of their characters instead of the color of their skin... hoo boy, it'd be back to Africa). He even married a white woman. The Negro community calls her a "snowbunny" and they call him a sellout.

In fact, he's so enlightened that he befriended some persecuted minorities - billionaires - and hangs out with them sometimes. An inspiration to us all.

[Johny Joe Hold]

Originally Posted by Dennis Lukes

Liberal blacks hate Uncle Clarence because he's the least racist black person in America.
In fact, he's so enlightened that he befriended some persecuted minorities - billionaires - and hangs out with them sometimes. An inspiration to us all.

Clarence is just the kind of intellectual we need on the Court. As you say, Brother Lukes, he hangs out with people others ignore. Billionaires are people who need a kind word now and they like the rest of us.

I also like it that Clarence dislikes liberals. His opinions on cases liberals on the Court win almost snarl with sarcasm. He is a Judge for America.

[Dennis Lukes]

Originally Posted by Johny Joe Hold

Clarence is just the kind of intellectual we need on the Court. As you say, Brother Lukes, he hangs out with people others ignore. Billionaires are people who need a kind word now and they like the rest of us.

I also like it that Clarence dislikes liberals. His opinions on cases liberals on the Court win almost snarl with sarcasm. He is a Judge for America.

Amen, he's no activist judge. Just sits there quietly twiddling his thumbs and occasionally glancing at the clock, then always takes the right-wing position. Love that guy.

[MitzaLizalor]

Originally Posted by Dr. Anthony J. Toole

Those concerned about conflicts of interest and bias in the highest court in the land will be relieved today to hear that they're wrong.

Thank you for that reassurance. It's not the first time minority interests have tried to get the upper hand with creeping diminution of established laws and ways of doing things. And without wanting to come across as the commie latitudinarian here, maybe some of them occasionally did have a good idea. (They also might not have.) What's important though is to get the pursestrings away from crazed extremists and into the hands of those with sound ideas concerning how a society should be structured.

Where do those ideas come from? To answer that I've checked out a range of social norms in different places (by going there) and wow. Just WOW! You wouldn't believe some of the decrepitude passing itself off as "interesting" to half baked trippers, rubbernecking at "quaint" elements of cultures they'd never actually want to live in. Those ideas (and objects, in the case of goblin idols) need to be identified and removed, just as God has explained. While Clarence is addressing that, it would be so lovely if Mrs Thomas were available to look around, experience the reality of where we are—taking in some Indonesian volcanos perhaps—and appreciate exactly why God was so explicit on this. She'd be a great companion.

[Dr. Anthony J. Toole]

Originally Posted by MitzaLizalor

Thank you for that reassurance.

You're very welcome Sister, any time.

Speaking of which, we may be in need of further reassurance from the Chief Justice again today.

The US Supreme Court justice Samuel Alito accepted a seat on a private plane owned by the conservative billionaire Paul Singer, flying to Alaska for a luxury fishing trip hosted by another rightwing businessman, then did not declare such gifts or recuse himself when Singer had business before the court.

Justice Alito offered reassurance: “It was and is my judgment that these facts would not cause a reasonable and unbiased person to doubt my ability to decide the matters in question impartially”. So there you have it - anyone who doubts his impartiality is unreasonable and biased. He further supported his position with a recollected account.

• Had he not gone, "The seat on Singer’s plane would have otherwise been vacant”.
• Alito said the fishing lodge in Alaska was “comfortable but rustic”, serving “homestyle fare”.
• “I cannot recall whether the group at the lodge … was served wine, but if there was wine it was certainly not wine that costs $1,000.”

Fortunately one of the lodge's fishing guides could recall: "chefs served multi-course meals of Alaskan king crab legs or Kobe filet [steak]. On the last evening, a member of Alito’s group bragged that the wine they were drinking cost $1,000 a bottle".

[Johny Joe Hold]

Originally Posted by Dr. Anthony J. Toole

The US Supreme Court justice Samuel Alito accepted a seat on a private plane owned by the conservative billionaire Paul Singer, flying to Alaska for a luxury fishing trip hosted by another rightwing businessman, then did not declare such gifts or recuse himself when Singer had business before the court.
Justice Alito offered reassurance: “It was and is my judgment that these facts would not cause a reasonable and unbiased person to doubt my ability to decide the matters in question impartially”. So there you have it - anyone who doubts his impartiality is unreasonable and biased. He further supported his position with a recollected account.Had he not gone, "The seat on Singer’s plane would have otherwise been vacant”.

There you have it, charges against Clerance Thomas are racist. That a white Judge, Alito, was given a weekend of luxury when the donor had a case before him and he said it did not influence a decision proves the Supreme Court is on the up and up. We need to stand up and defend Thomas.

[Dr. Anthony J. Toole]

Originally Posted by Johny Joe Hold

That a white Judge, Alito, was given a weekend of luxury when the donor had a case before him and he said it did not influence a decision proves the Supreme Court is on the up and up.

Mr. Mayor, I think I've heard it said that the ability to lie to someone's face when both sides know you're lying is the very definition of power. Not that anyone is lying, of course.

The faintest of fig leaves - a personal account contradicted by witnesses and the evidence - is more than adequate to cover Alito's shortcomings in this area. Something more substantial might be needed for Thomas, if the rumors are true.

[Dr. Anthony J. Toole]

If anything this latest hit-piece shows when others lose their minds, the cool heads at the Supreme Court maintain their integrity. Especially when it involves themselves. Lowly plebians cannot be trusted to be impartial in such cases, confusing lavish undeclared gifts with bribes and unexplained breaks in precedent as evidence of bias. That's why these issues are passed behind closed doors without comment. John Roberts rightly points out such matters can only be handled by the superior (some may say regal) impartiality of the Judicial Branch, rather than subjecting themselves to the riffraff.

[Johny Joe Hold]

Originally Posted by Dr. Anthony J. Toole

If anything this latest hit-piece shows when others lose their minds, the cool heads at the Supreme Court maintain their integrity. Especially when it involves themselves. Lowly plebians cannot be trusted to be impartial in such cases, confusing lavish undeclared gifts with bribes and unexplained breaks in precedent as evidence of bias. That's why these issues are passed behind closed doors without comment. John Roberts rightly points out such matters can only be handled by the superior (some may say regal) impartiality of the Judicial Branch, rather than subjecting themselves to the riffraff.

So correct, Dr. Toole. Conservatives on the Supreme Court are there to prevent Satan from dancing on the grave of this country. Christian rules against abortion, gay rights, secular education and all the other garbage Satan wants the public to follow have to be stopped somewhere. Poking into the private lives and conversations of conservative Judges while they are "making arrangements" to stop Satan is off limits.

[MitzaLizalor]

There are even those who say the laws themselves are subject to the will of the people. (And therefore, I suppose, the judiciary.) Just visit anywhere with "The People's" in its name!

[Johny Joe Hold]

One thing we do not need in this country is Republican politicians criticizing Republican Supreme Court Justices. I was appalled to read of a Republican Senator remarking that Republicans have been silent on Justice Thomases' rides on billionaire jets. "How many billionaire friends does each Justice need?" he asked. Talk about snarky.

Republican politicians should spend their time going over the expense accounts of Democrat judges.

U.S. Senator Slams "Deafening Republican Silence" After New SCOTUS Revelations (msn.com)