Hey there Supreme Court, whatcha doing today? Not sucking? Sure, because the sun rose in the east this…wait, what? We’re so used to the Roberts Courts inventing new ways to prove that a bare majority of them are such fucking assholes they would sell out their own mothers for an invite to a Federalist Society dinner that we’re absolutely gobsmacked to find six – SIX – of the judges issuing a ruling we like. Not that SCOTUS needs the approval of this humble little mommyblog, but we’re still grateful for them
<blockquote>At issue here was a rule adopted in <b>2011</b> as part of the Obama Administration&rsquo;s <b>second-term</b> push to meet some environmental goals through the issuing of regulations from agencies under the aegis of the executive branch...</blockquote> Just one more example of the messin&#039; with history that our time-traveling Preznit is so notorious for.
<i>Specifically, the case turned on something called the &ldquo;good neighbor policy,&rdquo; a Congressional mandate from 1977 that ordered &ldquo;upwind states&rdquo; to find ways to keep their polluters from sending so much polluted air to &ldquo;downwind states&rdquo; that the downwinders could not themselves comply with federal clean air standards. </i>
Still waiting for our second-hand smoke from Colorado and Washington...
&quot;IMHO, there are far more people whose problem with the federal government stems from the fact that so many elected representatives and Supreme Court Justices are self-obsessed crooks, liars, racists, misogynists, plain fucking incompetent, or some combination thereof.&quot; FIFY
WTF is actually wrong with Scalia? Bunions? Hemorrhoids? Erectile dysfunction? Alzheimer&#039;s? Surely nobody is just this dickish, all the fucking time.
Stack &#039;em up, down by the river. <a href="http:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2013\/05\/18\/business\/energy-environment\/mountain-of-petroleum-coke-from-oil-sands-rises-in-detroit.html" target="_blank">Works for the Kochroaches</a> at any rate.
<blockquote>At issue here was a rule adopted in <b>2011</b> as part of the Obama Administration&rsquo;s <b>second-term</b> push to meet some environmental goals through the issuing of regulations from agencies under the aegis of the executive branch...</blockquote> Just one more example of the messin&#039; with history that our time-traveling Preznit is so notorious for.
&quot;Justice&quot; Antonym Scalia?
Hey, Antonin, how&#039;s about you buy a little place somewhere downwind from a polluter... and breathe in... deep.
<i>Specifically, the case turned on something called the &ldquo;good neighbor policy,&rdquo; a Congressional mandate from 1977 that ordered &ldquo;upwind states&rdquo; to find ways to keep their polluters from sending so much polluted air to &ldquo;downwind states&rdquo; that the downwinders could not themselves comply with federal clean air standards. </i>
Still waiting for our second-hand smoke from Colorado and Washington...
Regulating pollution is Marxism. Well, at least he didn&#039;t go full Godwin on us.
That&#039;s not really fair. Thomas can be a whole lot crazier than Scalia when he takes the time to write his own opinions.
&quot;IMHO, there are far more people whose problem with the federal government stems from the fact that so many elected representatives and Supreme Court Justices are self-obsessed crooks, liars, racists, misogynists, plain fucking incompetent, or some combination thereof.&quot; FIFY
WTF is actually wrong with Scalia? Bunions? Hemorrhoids? Erectile dysfunction? Alzheimer&#039;s? Surely nobody is just this dickish, all the fucking time.
Stack &#039;em up, down by the river. <a href="http:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2013\/05\/18\/business\/energy-environment\/mountain-of-petroleum-coke-from-oil-sands-rises-in-detroit.html" target="_blank">Works for the Kochroaches</a> at any rate.
scalia&#039;s concerned with how citizens feel about their government?