273 Comments
User's avatar
Androgynous AF's avatar

There's always a first time... None previously married 3 times. Or... Divorced 2 times. Problematic every which way... Whispers of rape, groping, affairs, busting into women's dressing rooms, on tape bragging about taking advantage of women. And yet NOT vetted. He said 'No'... Big ass RED FLAG...

Expand full comment
Goin Green's avatar

I got my popcorn ready.

Expand full comment
You Should Ice That Burn's avatar

"would resolve these cases in a way that would not require the Federal Judiciary to decide the correct racial apportionment of Alabama’s congressional seats," sounds noble and shit until you remember that his patrons have very deliberately been deciding the racial apportionment through maps brought to his attention in cases like this.

Expand full comment
Goin Green's avatar

Our conversation is now moot.

Expand full comment
Robyn Ryan's avatar

Those are icing. Dobbs legalizes a separate set of constitutional protections dependent on gender. Separate but equal.Dobbs is precedent to repeal Brown, which is the real goal

Expand full comment
Parakeetist's avatar

Yeah. I have to try to be kind to him, because he has dementia, and sometimes he doesn't understand.

I'll give him a hug tomorrow. Thank ye!

Expand full comment
glenglish's avatar

Clarence is more'n likely pissed off cuz that Ketanji woman is not only representing women but she's one athem "coloreds" that it is "his duty" to represent. "The arrogance of that woman... And Biden n'them socialist senators."

Expand full comment
Jo Marie's avatar

"...maybe some far worse decision is on the way..."Indigenous communities are fully bracing themselves for the IWCA to be overturned tomorrow, clearing the way for more good old fashioned cultural genociding, and leading the way for the dismantling of tribal sovereignty.

Expand full comment
Cat's Paw's avatar

Clarence must go.He doesn't represent US All.He represents himself.

Expand full comment
Cat's Paw's avatar

The number of representatives has been limited by a couple of laws.I know one is "The Method of Equal Proportion" from 1941.

The reasons for the law were technological at the time.and we can overcome those by using the internet.(The size of the chamber for the lower house, just can't seat any more people!)

The point being, that the electorate is under-represented.More representatives would mean more encounters with more people in more lower income brackets.

Expand full comment
Cat's Paw's avatar

I hope he gets a big fat epiphany.!

Expand full comment
Cat's Paw's avatar

He could resign.

Expand full comment
Cat's Paw's avatar

Increase the house, but why ditch The Senate? No one has said that!

Expand full comment
Cat's Paw's avatar

The Senate represents the state. Not cows.

Expand full comment
Cat's Paw's avatar

no.to be represented! - by their white owners.

Expand full comment
House0fTheBlueLights's avatar

Fair point

Expand full comment