Republican Hypocrisy category archive
Tales of the Graham Cracker 0
(Warning: Short commercial at the end.)
If One Standard Is Good, Two Must Be Better 0
At the Portland Press-Herald, Victoria Hugo-Vidal takes a look at the Supreme Supremacist Court’s recent abrogation of Roe v. Wade. It is a thoughtful and well-reasoned article, but one bit leapt out at me as highlighting the misogyny and arrogance underlying that decision:
You’ll notice nobody ever proposes punishing men who get their jollies.
Follow the link for the rest.
Immunity Impunity
0
The Graham cracker refuses to crumble.
The Realization 0
Joe Patrice explains at Above the Law.
“An Armed Society Is a Polite Society,” Originalist Sin Dept. 0
Michael Paul Williams has some qualms about “original intent” as interpreted by the current majority of Supreme Court:
Follow the link for context.
“A Republic, If You Can Keep It” 0
William Rivers Pitt fears that we cannot.
Courting Disaster 0
At the Des Moines Register, John and Terri Hale explain why they disagree with four recent, major Supreme Supremacist Court decisions. Their article is notable for its clarity and simplicity and I commend it to your attention.
Here’s their take on one of them (emphasis in the original):
Our view: Public dollars are for public schools that take on the challenge and the opportunity of educating everyone, regardless of skin color, abilities, beliefs, primary language, gender identity, or sexual orientation. They should not be used to support the teachings of any particular faith nor any institution that discriminates in admissions or hiring.
“Ban Ladders” 0
David discusses the ridiculous pretzel logic that gun nuts use to pretend that the proliferation of firearms is in no way related to the proliferation of persons using firearms to randomly rub out large numbers of persons (warning: short commercial at the end).
Courting Disaster, Conflict of Amendments Dept. 0
At the Hartford Courant, Samuel Teixeira suggests that there is a logical flaw in Samuel Alito’s reasoning in his decision to overturn Roe v. Wade. (Of course, the moral flaw is obvious, but the law and morality are only occasionally related.)
Here’s a bit from hit article:
The Ninth Amendment effectively makes unconstitutional just one method of construing — interpreting –– the Constitution: an interpretation that denies or disparages a right because other rights are explicitly enumerated –– listed.
Teixeira’s reasoning is interesting, perhaps even correct, but irrelevant.
Alito’s opinion was not based on logic or reasoning and certainly not on precedent. It was based on dogma, and the arguments he made in it are nothing more than Sunday-go-to-meeting clothes for “because we can.”
(Broken link fixed.)
Courting Disaster, Creeping Theocracy Dept. 0
Sam and his crew dissect the slow-moving theocratic coup.
Soiler Alert, Reprise 0
PolticalProf parses the perfidy.
Stray Thought, Originalist Sin Dept.* 0
I just checked the Constitution of the United States of America.
It does not mention airplanes.
Does that mean that the FAA is unconstitutional?
___________________
*Also known as the “Words Mean What I Want Them To Mean Dept.”
