Wingnutties out of control!

[O Really]

Senate Republicans have doubled down and ruled out any action on Obama's high court pick. Will this hurt them with voters? I'd hope so, but maybe too many put party before country.

When he nominates a moderate judge that almost every Republican voted for to go on the appeals court, I think they'll look pretty stupid(er). Good chance it will bite them. And then when they turn the moderate down and lose the Presidential election and Hillary nominates Angela Davis, they'll really be nutz.

[rstrong]

When he nominates a moderate judge that almost every Republican voted for to go on the appeals court, I think they'll look pretty stupid(er).

Obama and Hillary co-sponsored the senate resolution declaring John McCain a natural-born citizen. Trump is questioning Cruz's eligibility and he has a good point; the isn't settled.

So first, Democrats should sponsor a senate resolution declaring Cruz eligible, and make it clear that Obama and Hillary are behind it. Republicans will compete to be the loudest to declare otherwise.

Second, Obama should sponsor Rubio for the Supreme court. Republicans will compete to be the loudest to declare him a commie Marxist socialist.

[Seth Milner]

Yeah, I think most hotels that have "no locals" do so because they have (or believe they might have) a problem with the ho's or with the hotel being a hot bed for affairs that the hotel doesn't want to be involved with.

One of the posted complaints I read stated that one motel told a local that was refused service that local people tend to trash their rooms more frequently than non-locals... (hogwash ) I've yet to read anywhere that the possibility of one-night flings was the reasoning. Anyway, I've seen signs in various businesses that state: "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone"; however, recent court cases, especially those involving homosexuals, have been struck down and the owners fined. I don't understand why hotels/motels can't have their asses busted for the same reasons. I guess it's like already stated: no one has taken anyone to court. I need to talk to my neighbors.

Even with the offer of cash, the hotels/motels require identification, so my neighbors couldn't lie about their residence. (I think that's now a Homeland Security requirement, don't know for sure)

Anyway, thanks again.

[O Really]

They can "reserve" the right to refuse service to anyone, but that doesn't make it legal. They can refuse service to anyone for any reason except reasons that are prohibited by law. So sure, they refuse the black guy and point to their sign (as they used to do back in the day), but race is protected so the sign doesn't mean squat. If they say the black guy was drunk and rowdy, then they can toss him as long as they toss the white guys who are drunk and rowdy too.

I doubt this local thing is a problem in Marriotts, etc. What kind of Bates Motel place are they trying to stay in?

[Vrede too]

Zip codophobia would also be illegal if it was shown to have racial intent or possibly even just shown to have racial effect.

I would have considered offering the desk clerk a bribe.

[Vrede too]

Majority of Public Wants Senate to Act on Obama’s Court Nominee
Most opponents reject hearings no matter whom Obama nominates

[neoplacebo]

A couple of days ago the Washington County TN commissioners voted on a resolution that would affirm the definition of marriage as it is defined in the TN state Constitution (marriage is between a man and a woman) and thusly ignore the recent Supreme Court ruling on the subject. The resolution was defeated by a vote of 12-11 with 2 commissioners not casting a vote.The bad part of this is that wingnuttery is prevalent and almost running things up here. The potentially good part is that the same news story reports that there is a move to reduce the number of county commissioners by about half. I only pronounce this as potentially good, since there is a good possibility that the reduction in the number of commissioners may result in only the wingnut faction surviving. We'll wait......

[Vrede too]

Welcome back!

25 commissioners for a county with only 122,979 people? Wow, most of my life has been in similar sized counties with 3 or 5 commissioners.

[neoplacebo]

Welcome back!

25 commissioners for a county with only 122,979 people? Wow, most of my life has been in similar sized counties with 3 or 5 commissioners.

Thanks; as Admiral of the Fleet, I feel derelict in being away this long......
Yeah, I guess they all decided there are maybe too many of them, thus the effort to downsize. I'm in Sullivan County; not sure how many commissars we have, and until they commence blatant wingnuttery I will probably give them a wide berth.
As a side note, the Washington County anti gay rights resolution drew an SRO turnout and I would estimate about 70% of the folks in the local tv news clip at the meeting were wearing red shirts to signify their opposition.

[O Really]

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/ ... &ocid=iehp

Lindsay Graham, who up until very recently ago was one of the right-wing loons of the Republican Party, more recently the "reasonable" Presidential candidate (in comparison), now says the Republican Party has gone "bat shit crazy."

[rstrong]

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Scalia dead: San Antonio Express-News

I'll not be hypocritical. He's dead. I'm glad. Ding Dong.

...so sad there's people like you that would cheer at someone's dying.

It's hard to disagree with this statement.

But it wouldn't be out of line to note that the reasons to do so just keep rolling in.

Bloomberg Law: Scalia’s Death Prompts Dow to Settle Suits for $835 Million

Scalia’s death is likely to make it harder for companies to get the five votes they need to overturn awards or get new restrictions on class actions. He had been a key voice for companies in challenging group suits at the Supreme Court. Scalia wrote the 5-4 ruling in 2011 that said Wal-Mart Stores Inc. couldn’t be sued by potentially a million female workers. Two years later, Scalia was the author of a 5-4 ruling that freed Comcast Corp. from having to defend against an $875 million antitrust lawsuit on behalf of Philadelphia-area customers.

[O Really]

It may be rude to "cheer at someone's dying" but at least that's an honest reaction - as compared to those who bashed him in life, opposed his every opinion, etc., and then came to praise him after death. Personally, I wouldn't publicly "cheer" out of respect for his family, but really, since Supreme Court justices are on the bench for life, it's a good thing his pull date has passed.

[Vrede too]

I would have been just as fine with it if Scalia resigned in disgrace after being busted illegally hunting quail or getting caught with that male hooker before the exertion killed him.

[Vrede too]

Texas v. Johnson

Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397 (1989), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States that invalidated prohibitions on desecrating the American flag enforced in 48 of the 50 states. Justice William Brennan wrote for a five-justice majority in holding that the defendant Gregory Lee Johnson's act of flag burning was protected speech under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution....

The opinion of the Court came down as a controversial 5-4 decision, with the majority opinion delivered by William J. Brennan, Jr. and Justices Marshall, Blackmun, Scalia, and Kennedy joining Brennan, with Kennedy also writing a concurrence....

Scalia

No, I've never burned a flag, I think it's immature and counter-productive. However, I considered it while these laws were popular and before the SCOTUS decision - as a pro-free speech statement, not an anti-American one.

One year my Halloween costume was a US flag cape, a giant fake match and a sign reading, "1st Amendment Beginner's Kit". Liberal town - lots of smiles and appreciation, a little grief, one near fight.

[JTA]

Texas v. Johnson

Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397 (1989), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States that invalidated prohibitions on desecrating the American flag enforced in 48 of the 50 states. Justice William Brennan wrote for a five-justice majority in holding that the defendant Gregory Lee Johnson's act of flag burning was protected speech under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution....

The opinion of the Court came down as a controversial 5-4 decision, with the majority opinion delivered by William J. Brennan, Jr. and Justices Marshall, Blackmun, Scalia, and Kennedy joining Brennan, with Kennedy also writing a concurrence....

Scalia

No, I've never burned a flag, I think it's immature and counter-productive. However, I considered it while these laws were popular and before the SCOTUS decision - as a pro-free speech statement, not an anti-American one.

One year my Halloween costume was a US flag cape, a giant fake match and a sign reading, "1st Amendment Beginner's Kit". Liberal town - lots of smiles and appreciation, a little grief, one near fight.

Yeah I agree. Never done it myself nor would I, but you should be able to torch an American flag if you want to. Maybe it's just because I'm not a religious guy and don't fanatically venerate symbols, but end of the day it's just a rectangular cloth.

[Vrede too]

. . . made in China.

[JTA]

. . . made in China.

Like the tea party of the past, by burning an American flag you're actually showing solidarity with America.

[rstrong]

Like the tea party of the past, by burning an American flag you're actually showing solidarity with America.

John Hancock and friends were smugglers, importing tea and undercutting the British price. But then Benjamin Franklin proposed to the British government the idea of eliminating the British duties on tea as a way to help the failing East India Company.

With British duties gone, John Hancock and his fellow smugglers couldn't make money. Which is why they destroyed the British tea rather than distributing it to their fellow Americans.

Solidary with America, Trump style.

[rstrong]

But it wouldn't be out of line to note that the reasons to do so just keep rolling in.

Bloomberg Law: Scalia’s Death Prompts Dow to Settle Suits for $835 Million

And again:

Washington Post: For first time in 10 years, Justice Clarence Thomas asks questions during an argument

A 1970s TV cliché was the kid who wouldn't speak until - good news! - a crisis forced him to.

[Vrede too]

The content of the Thomas inquiry was of less interest than it having happened at all.

Oooh burn.