My Photo

December 2022

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31

« Scattershots – 25sep20 (updated 26sep20) | Main | Sandbox – 28sep20 »

26 September 2020


Bill Tozer

Empaneling 2016/2020 SCOTUS Justices Explained

The Democrats of 2020 should listen to the Democrats of 2016. Highly recommended 2 minute montage video to put a smile on your face....unless you are of the Party of the Glum Lot.
Maybe of topic, but 45 seconds of more fun.
‘You ain’t done sh*t!’

Bill Tozer

'Democrats’ ‘Norm’ Is Brutalizing The Reputations Of Republican Court Nominees'

For the last 30 years, Republican nominations for the Supreme Court have faced personal, ugly, defamatory attacks from Democrats

George Rebane

BillT 131pm - Yes, that history of brutalizing is among many reprehensible attributes that seem to gather among the members of that party.

Paul Emery


Can you show me examples of Republicans specifically saying fourth year Supreme Court appointments are OK if at that time they are from the Party which controls the Senate? I didn't find any examples of that especially from Lindsey Graham of McConnell. Please correct me with examples if I'm wrong.

Don Bessee

@443 Please see the constitution for clear up your confusion/ignorance.



Emery has officially lost his mind.
TDS takes another one.

Now go do your own homework.

Bill Tozer

Empaneling 2016 SCOTUS Justices/Impaling 2020 SCOTUS Justices Explained.

Love it that Queen Nan of Quackery got snubbed 100% by the Constitution of the United States of America on this woman as SCOTUS thang. No can come into the clubhouse. You got cooties.

Paul Emery

Don, George

Definition of hypocrisy, as if it matters to you or the Republican Senate:

the false profession of desirable or publicly approved qualities, beliefs, or feelings, esp. a pretense of having virtues, moral principles, or religious beliefs that one does not really possess.


Bill Tozer


This afternoon President Trump announced his nomination of Judge Amy Barrett to the Supreme Court in a White House ceremony. Barrett spoke briefly and non-controversially. The confirmation battle is already underway; it has been since it became clear a few days ago that Barrett would be the nominee.

The Democrats can’t dispute Barrett’s qualifications, which are conceded by the liberal American Bar Association. Nor will they be able to attack her character, which has been attested to by everyone who knows her. But in truth, qualifications and character are irrelevant, as we saw with the Brett Kavanaugh nomination.

The Democrats object to Amy Barrett because she is not a left-winger dedicated to perpetuating the Court as a liberal super-legislature, which is the only sort of justice they want. That is why they object to her, but they hate her because she is a Christian. The extent of anti-Christian bigotry on the left is astonishing, given that until recent years the U.S. was widely described as a Christian country. No longer.

The confirmation process will be a fiasco, like Justice Kavanaugh’s. Everyone expects it, and the Democratic base demands it. I think at this point the public has pretty much caught on. Hard as Kavanaugh was to demonize with fraudulent allegations and testimony, Barrett will be even harder. But in the end, it doesn’t matter. President Trump either has the votes or he doesn’t, and as far as anyone can tell, he does. Everything that happens between now and the confirmation vote is entirely for show.”

————————- ———-
Any bets on how many young Handmaidens will be pouring fake menstrual blood over their heads in their white attire outside of the hearings when they start? Actually, Milo them to do it and it was pretty anti-climatic. Over hyped. Looked pretty watered down like it wasn’t even blood.

Don Bessee

Let me help you oh great pony tail of ignorance with your ongoing confusion @525 its called politics -

pol·​i·​tics | \ ˈpä-lə-ˌtiks \
Definition of politics
1a: the art or science of government
b: the art or science concerned with guiding or influencing governmental policy
c: the art or science concerned with winning and holding control over a government
2: political actions, practices, or policies
3a: political affairs or business
especially : competition between competing interest groups or individuals for power and leadership (as in a government)
b: political life especially as a principal activity or profession
c: political activities characterized by artful and often dishonest practices
4: the political opinions or sympathies of a person


paul emery

Let me help you hoseman Don. t's called lying. You know the thing you accuse Obamaa and Hillary of.

A lie is an assertion that is believed to be false, typically used with the purpose of deceiving someone. The practice of communicating lies is called lying. A person who communicates a lie may be termed a liar. Lies may serve a variety of instrumental, interpersonal, or psychological functions for the individuals who use them. Generally, the term "lie" carries a negative connotation, and depending on the context a person who communicates a lie may be subject to social, legal, religious, or criminal sanctions.

Don Bessee

See 3c above oh great pony tail of ignorance, its as old as time even though you seem to like pretending to be shocked and surprised. That TDS is an awful way to suffer. LOL


Don Bessee

Lets get jiggy with it! -

Ibram X. Kendi, director of Boston University’s Center for Antiracist Research, wrote on Saturday that white people who adopt black children may be “racist,” joining a growing group of Democrats and leftists commenting on Judge Amy Coney Barrett’s Haitian son and daughter.


Well that will move things along!

Hirono, Blumenthal say they won’t meet with Amy Coney Barrett


paul emery

Don writes about Republican politics:

" political activities characterized by artful and often dishonest practices"

thanks for confirming my observations about the Republican Party and Trump Don. I appreciate it.

Bill Tozer

Buck Sexton

ACB: brilliant, attractive, successful, mother of 7, devout Roman Catholic, two adopted children from Haiti, carpool mom, patriot, Constitutionalist, humble.

Yup. The Left absolutely hates her

Bill Tozer

Yo Don @ 6:47 pm

Remeber when the stage was packed when the Dems had their first primary debates and Larry Elder asked, "How come the only person on the stage with a black kid is a white guy?"

Those Dems must not like black children. Even though black folk have the cutest babies, we all know how the white liberals think about them.

Don Bessee

What a lying sack of shit @731. Not even a decent retort, no thought just another kvmr game from the decrepit pony tail of ignorance struggling under the weight of facts. AS IF it didnt apply to all politics. #sadderthanever


George Rebane

The above sequence of comments re party platforms confirms once more that we are way beyond any ability to communicate reasonably. Not only is middle ground not known to either party, but neither has the ability to cooperate in a search for any such middle ground. So why are we continuing to circle barns like this and not figure out how a Great Divide may be peacefully implemented.

Scott O

re George 9:24 - yep.
The hilarious part is Paul trying to act like the Dems are as clean as the driven snow.
He knows damn well if the situation was reversed the Dems would do exactly the same as the Rs are doing now.
It's just more of the same old - I do it, it's good - you do it - it's bad.
So childish and boring.
We have rules as to how to run the govt spelled out in the Constitution.
Trump and the Rs are following the rules.
Lies and hypocrisy?
Gee, Paul - as you yourself have stated - "when was there a finding of guilt by a court of law?"
We're going to have a new SCOTUS justice sworn in pretty soon.
Totally legal and proper.
Deal with it.

Don Bessee

Lets get ready to ruuummmmmmmbbbbbbllllle! -



"but neither has the ability to cooperate in a search for any such middle ground."

I'd say there used to be *the appearance* of opportunities for that. Health systems are complex and subject to compromise, both abortion and gun law have a lot of nuance, but what has broken out under the pressure of COVID is quite another beast entirely.

We could put up literally thousands of links showing the beast that has broken out in universities, on the streets, in metropolitan newsrooms, and starting to feed on government, but the local elderly hippies think it's either bullshit or unimportant. Of course, when all you've got is a hammer, everybody else is a Nazi.

My take is that once the statues started coming down, prison-style race politics became the fashion, and the culture and history of the West intended to go up in flames, all bets are off. We're not at a shooting war, but compromise has left the building and the only thing the Blue Mob will recognize is power.

so..."figure out how a Great Divide may be peacefully implemented."

Given the urban v. rural angle to this (as opposed to the quasi-borders you find in separatist movements), I'd say that physical split could only happen if it were given quite a long time to percolate and combined with a withdrawal of most federal power.

Other possibilities.
. A major war breaks out and people redirect their anger. With the huge decrease in patriotism, it's hard to see a successful mobilization.
. Federal power vastly expands and a largely hereditary ruling caste moves in. Pressure is increasingly applied to keep the lid on and uses modern surveillance tech. Most likely result I'd say. Fairly peaceful but not pretty.
. Increased ethnic/cultural diversity leads to fission into multi-power dogfight. US breaks into smaller subnations with toothless central government. Not peaceful. Social trust continues downward spiral.

It's a novel situation. Post WWI political turmoil combined with open borders. It's funny how a small group of motivated individuals can bring down an established order.

Scott O

Here's a great lefty article:
They're OLD!!!!
Gosh - the left used to go on and on about how we shouldn't descrimanate against the elderly.
Ah, but that was like, a while ago.
Things are different, now.
And how old is Biden?
Money quote:
"“I just don’t think it’s in the public interest to have people certainly over 80—and I think 75 should be the cutoff for most everything—exercising serious power, whether it’s the Court, whether it’s in Congress,” the legal historian David Garrow told me."
He may as well have substituted women or blacks instead of 'old' people.
The funny thing is the only person you could point to as having a diminished capacity is Biden, not anyone on the court.
And who will David Garrow vote for?
My money says Biden.

scenes a side note, I don't think it takes a great deal of imagination to predict disaster, it always (always) happens eventually.

The tricky part is building a sense of a timeline. For all I know, the current outburst by the Left will be followed by a quiet period before the real one hits.

My general working theory though is that states that are not nations need either strong centralized control or they break apart eventually. Lacking strong underlying social cohesion (think 'Japan' as a strong case), you end up travelling down one road or the other.

George Rebane

Scenes 1038pm - what national scenarios would qualify as ‘disaster’?



In the sentence, I'm referring to a serious state change in the makeup of the country and it's ruling, not some sort of external cause. Disaster = breakdown *or* disaster = redesign.

Another way to say it is that it's easy to guarantee the collapse of the US as we knew it since it always happens eventually, the trick is predicting when. It's not dissimilar to predicting stock market collapses if you run a goldbug financial column.

There's no arguing that the system is under a lot of pressure right now and existing civic institutions have been largely suborned by the coalition called the 'Blue Mob'. If they seize all levers of power, the fission begins. Warlords or a dominant subgroup? The Russians answered that in their own way. As I mentioned, it all seems natural given the social trust breakdown engendered by diversity, lack of central guiding principles (religion, national philosophies), and/or lacking a truly dangerous external enemy.

George Rebane

scenes 820am - Well enough, but let's continue this examination of 'national disaster' of governance that would lead to a rapid (instead of an evolving) fundamental transformation of our country. Specifically, I'd like to be able to identify at least one reliable causal harbinger, the occurrence of which would signal that the disaster is starting or is already underway.

Some years back on the county's large scale emergency committee I suggested that such a harbinger was dialing 911 and not getting an answer. The committee agreed. Can we formulate a functional equivalent for the disaster we're discussing?


"Well enough, but let's continue this examination of 'national disaster' of governance that would lead to a rapid (instead of an evolving) fundamental transformation of our country."

There's rapid and there's rapid, and things usually look faster the further back they occurred. It took almost 20 years for a regime change in Russia for example. You can argue that WWI was their rapid transformation even though there's nothing particularly Communist-flavored about it.

So...perhaps we tend to often see two things paired together. A build-up of potential energy paired with a sudden release (is there a name for that in physics?). The potential energy is a build up of fear/greed/anger of a political or religious nature. A fairly speedy breakdown from COVID made a pretty good fuse as without it the most likely result would have been business as usually with TDS grumbling (and more potential energy), but I don't know if COVID has high enough disaster potential. Eventually people just ignore it.

I would say that generally the flare goes up when there's an economic breakdown. I believe that the French Revolution and all of it's special magic for The People was prefaced by a collapse in the Royal Treasury. People go broke slowly and then all at once and when the bond market collapses the iron rice bowls go empty.

My best guess is a collapse in some financial markets, perhaps in the dollar. This is a cowardly easy response. The Chinese could likely fire off such a thing either accidentally or as a strategy.

In the interest of efficiency and wealth, the world appears to be quite a lot more fragile. Combine a crazy quasi-religious belief system, racial politics, and hunger or bankruptcy in the same package, and things could get exciting in a hurry.

..that's at a national level. Locally, I would keep an eye on Blue Mob activities. I doubt that the local politicians are much for Law 'n Order when it collides with their political sensitivities and we live in a flammable landscape with plenty of sketchy people who would love to be in a bonafide movement. Take note the first time that one of the 'Peace Marches' is attended by more than teen age girls and elderly hippies. Your neighbors with the Audrey Denney signs all over their yard don't much care when all the windows downtown are smashed, it's for a good cause after all.


Yes, everything the Reps have done regarding the obstructing of hearings for Garland to the now rush to install "The Handmaid" are allowed under the Constitution.
But so is impeaching Trump yet again.
By impeaching him now, the Senate will have to drop everything and get busy working on the impeachment proceedings.
It is just politics.

George Rebane

scenes 11218pm - Good thoughts Mr scenes, thank you. I would have just a nit with you characterization that the destruction of the dollar is a "cowardly easy response" as a reliable harbinger of the fundamental transformation disaster. Perhaps this is a self-serving observation, because I have for years identified that fate of the dollar as the end of Pax Americana, and believe it today more than ever.

Don Bessee

Looks like @1233 didn't get the latest talking points for lefties, botox nancy already said NO to impeachment. LOL


File under getting under their skin so easily -

Critics Go Ballistic As GOP Peddles 'Notorious ACB' T-shirts


Don Bessee

Just to a different crowd -

Amy Coney Barrett: A New Feminist Icon
Feminism is changing, and Barrett’s replacement of Ruth Bader Ginsburg will show how.

Barrett could be Ginsburg’s polar opposite on Supreme Court



"Looks like @1233 didn't get the latest talking points for lefties"

She did get the 'Handmaid' part right though. That's the official DNC talking point for any kind of tradition Catholic woman...except for 'wise Latinas' of course. (or is that Latinxas?).

I figure they should just run the vote and be done. Any hearings will simply be softball questions from one side and character assassination from the other.

Maybe Gad Saad will be brought in to testify like that crazy Christine Blasey Ford woman.

Don Bessee

Good line - Sell crazy somewhere else we are all stocked up here. LOL -

“Sen. Stabenow is my colleague, and I consider Debbie a friend, so I say this gently: Sell crazy somewhere else; we’re all stocked up here," Kennedy said. "Unless Debbie’s clairvoyant, I don’t think she knows how the nominee’s going to vote or any other member of the United States Supreme Court."

Kennedy said Stabenow's claim illustrates how Democrats and Republicans view the high court differently.

"My Democratic friends think that the Supreme Court ought to be a mini-Congress," he said. "They don’t even need to hear cases; they already know how they’re going to vote. And that’s part of the problem. That’s not how I view the appropriate role of the Supreme Court. And I don’t think that’s how it operates.”



Anyone thinking the Supreme Court is in a hurry to reconsider Roe hasn't been paying much attention to the court for the last 30 years.

Even if it were to be overturned, it would only push the question back to the individual states to decide. That, btw, is where it belongs given that the Constitution is completely silent on abortion. It took the creative invention of a 'right to privacy' (also not mentioned in our founding documents) to construct the present travesty. If the Court wanted that fight over again, it would already have happened.

Don Bessee

They wont listen -


The Estonian Fox

Scenes @ 12:18PM:

"A build-up of potential energy paired with a sudden release (is there a name for that in physics?)."

Yes, there is. A sealed vessel, being filled with a gas, increases in potential energy. When it exceeds the burst pressure, there is an explosion. That's the word. But I'm sure you knew that.

Don Bessee

Apparently not! -

Trump slams media’s treatment of Barrett’s Catholicism: ‘I thought we settled this’ with JFK



"Yes, there is. A sealed vessel, being filled with a gas, increases in potential energy. When it exceeds the burst pressure, there is an explosion. That's the word. But I'm sure you knew that."

I was thinking more along the lines of a sudden vs. a slow release of energy. It wouldn't have to be an explosion. Fast heating, pushing something off of a table, release of a bow string.

Scott O

Duh 12:33 - "Yes, everything the Reps have done regarding the obstructing of hearings for Garland..."
Duh lives up to his reputation. How could the Rs 'obstruct' hearings they had said they weren't going to hold?
Do try to keep up, old chap.
Sorry to hear you're frightened by a strong woman on the court.
It'll be OK - you'll still be allowed to exist in your little bubble of ignorance.

George Rebane

scenes 1218pm - A more precise explanation is that all real systems have a maximum capacity to store energy. When that capacity is exceeded the system breaks - technically it goes 'unstable' and sheds the excess energy through various modes depending on the kind of unstable state it has achieved. An overarching principle for all systems is that they naturally want to reside in the lowest energy state possible, and constantly seek that state when left unattended. One of the signs of intelligent intervention is a system that maintains a high energy state with no evident natural means to do so.

And for the real aficionados, a system absorbs energy at maximal rates when it is excited in one or more of its eigenmodes (characteristic modes, usually of movement or temperature increase). For example, the wind blowing crosswise to the Tacoma Narrows bridge excited it in one of it eigenfrequencies, which then started the bridge to absorb that wind energy in the only way it could, by starting to oscillate (going up and down) at an ever greater amplitude until it structurally failed.



Try "event". Something happens.

An all purpose word that might anything from a minor leak to a thermonuclear explosion.

The Estonian Fox

Catholicism is old hat for the Court. Five members are already Catholic, one is Episcopalian, and two are Jewish. Brett Kavanaugh was Catholic at the time of his Inquisition, yet I don't remember that his religion was ever mentioned. The Democrats evidently thought rape was the better hole card.

For Ms Barrett, it looks like religion is the only hole card left. It will prove to be a very weak one, if it is even used during her hearing. Dems have been known to bluster a lot. As have Republicans as well. And remember, the Repubs didn't even draw a card to nail my favorite unconvicted felon, Hillary, back in 2017-18. And they had a 30,000 card email deck to draw from.


From a piece in cnn:
"And now, with the near-certain confirmation of fully one third of the court over the last four years, McConnell's legacy is complete. He will go down as one of the most consequential Senate leaders in modern history, overseeing a massive ideological overhaul of the judiciary branch from the bottom all the way to the top. And there's not a damn thing Democrats can do about it."

I recall moaning from folks here about how McConnell didn't deliver anything... when Obama was President, and trying to tell folks that he really couldn't deliver Jack Squat when there was a President who wouldn't sign GOP legislation. If the Gorgeous ACB gets confirmed, the Supremes will have been transformed under the Turtle's tutelage, from an expected 4-5 (with Garland) to a 6-3, with 2nd Amendment rights all but guaranteed.


Sorry, the link to the piece by Sillyzilla is here
courtesy of RealClearPolitics

Bill Tozer

@ 12:34 pm

“I recall moaning from folks here about how McConnell didn't deliver anything... when Obama was President, and trying to tell folks that he really couldn't deliver Jack Squat when there was a President who wouldn't sign GOP legislation.”

That be me. Guilty as charged, your Honorable Discharge. My beef with The Grim Reaper was that when Obama was POTOS and promoting things that I clearly viewed as unconstitutional, Mitch didn’t say a thing. No raised objections. Soured me on the man.
Yes, I know it is wise to pick your battles and he was playing with a losing hand (especially with Paul Ryan in the House and all the RINOs in the Senate), but at least he could have mustered together a protest vote or even a speech of condemnation on the matter. The issue wasn’t about Obamacare, it was some spending provisions put forth and passed that Mitch choose to go along to get along. Sure, it was at the end of Obama’s term and all, but Mitch did remained mum...twice. To tell you the truth, I can’t remember which bill he offered no resistance to which raised my ire and broke my weary heart.

I am cool with Moscow Mitch now, aka, the Enemy of the State, the author of Terrorism against all things good, the home grown terrorist, and Cocaine Mitch. We be cool. When he got that twinkle in his eye after his spine implant during Kavanaugh, I began to see a better side of the hillbilly from Kentucky.
To this date, Lyndsey Graham has talked a great talk, but has utterly failed to deliver. Talk talk talk, we are going to hold hearings, we are going to hold people responsible for the former administration’s spy gate scandal on Trump and cover up as well as the Russian Collusion Hoax that never happened.

All in all, I like Lyndsey and Mitch the Evil mich better now that they have discovered they are vertebrates. Winning, like losing, becomes a habit. What have you done for me lately??

Nancy to Mitch: “You MUST delay the ACB hearings. It’s a threat to our democracy and constitution.”

Mitch to Nancy: “You should read the Constitution. Show me one reference to the House of Representatives concerning the nomination and confirmation process of those to be seated on the Supreme Court of these here United States. Our Constitution says ‘President’, it says ‘Senate’, it does not say Speaker or House. So, Crazy Nancy, go pound sand.”

Condoms? Really? Really Dems, you goof it’s. Is this the hill you Biden voters have chosen to plant their flag on, defend to the death, and make an big election issue? Condoms? Purple prophylactics? Trojans?

Well, looking at the Biden Voters like Schifflips and Mad Max and Stolen Valor Blumenthal, it does sort of makes sense. Big uge honking rubbers are needed to cover the noggins of those dickheads.

Resistant! Wear condoms on your head! Or, wear condoms over your pink pussy hats. Sure is extremely important to Left for some reason only Providence knows.

The Estonian Fox

I figure that the Court needs a 7-2 'conservative' political edge to ensure a 5-4 decision on conservative or Constitutional issues. The conservative judges seem to veer to the side on a number of issues before the Court. The liberals seem to be locked into their decision - sometimes before the arguments begin.

With Ms Barrett aboard, it's only 6-3 on political labels.

Bill Tozer

Speaking of Stolen Valor Blumenthal, he is amped up and rearing to go. Ah, the "unwritten rules" card.

'CNN asks Democratic senator to explain how nomination of Amy Coney Barrett is 'illegal or illegitimate.' He can't.'

"Blumenthal was forced to admit that nothing the Republicans were doing was "illegal" or "illegitimate" under the Constitution.

But never mind that — the Republicans, he claimed, were violating the "unwritten rules."

Illegal it may be not under the Constitution," the Connecticut senator stated. "Under the norms and traditions and unwritten rules of the Senate, it is illegitimate."

Blitzer eventually forced Blumenthal to concede that, indeed, there's nothing illegal or actually illegitimate about the Barrett nomination.

"What I hear you saying, Sen. Blumenthal, it may be inappropriate, it may be wrong —..."

"It may not violate the letter of the Constitution," Blumenthal admitted. "It violates the spirit of the Constitution."

George Rebane

Since the Republicans are prone interpret letter of the textual Constitution, I guess that leaves the whole field of interpreting the "spirit of Constitution" to the Democrats, which comes with the added bonus of their being able to tell what all is then "illegal and illegitimate" - such a deal. And our local leftwing lackeys cannot genuflect enough for such an approach to national political discourse.


Blumenthal must have a different Quija board than I.

Bill Tozer

‘The Left Hates Amy Coney Barrett Because She Disproves All Their Lies About Women’

“Her very existence repudiates the left's binary thinking about womanhood, that women have to deny what makes women different from men to achieve professionally. And that's why they hate her”

George Rebane

re BillT 912am - And here's something for those wanting a deeper look at human differences - 'Human Diversity' by Charles Murray. This tome is sure to upset anyone from the anti-science Left.

This is another hunk of real science that is sure to invite responses from the Collectivist Cricket Chorus

The comments to this entry are closed.