Supreme Court expansion is a bad idea. President Franklin Roosevelt, or FDR, tried it in 1937. Some of Roosevelt's more unconstitutional policies to help Americans during the Depression were struck down by the Supreme Court, or SCOTUS. So FDR decided to pass a law that made every SCOTUS Justice over a certain age, too old, and would have to be replaced by him. He could then appoint jurists who agreed with his policies. The SCOTUS nomination process needs an update to come into the 21st Century. But expansion is not the solution. A better solution is a time limit as a SCOTUS Jurist. 20 years, then the jurist retires, and whoever is President in office gets to choose. Rotate the retirements to make sure every administration gets at least 1 SCOTUS choice, per administration. That is more fair and equitable for the people, and for justice.
So Jim Irsay owner of the Indianapolis Colts gets a 6 game suspension and a $500,00 fine for several counts of misdemeanor drunk driving. It appears that he violated the personal conduct rules. The NFL say's that the owners have to be held to a higher standards than players. Where do I begin with this tripe the NFL calls a punishment. Here goes anyway. First of all, players should be held to a higher standard because they are the public face of the team and the league. I see Andrew Luck jersey's not Irsay jersey. Second and more important is I guess it is less egregious to slap your wife around in a hotel elevator than it is for a known drunk to drink and drive. While both are bad choices, wife beating is bad ands shows a lack of character. Rice gets a two game suspension for an act that is so morally and socially unacceptable as to border on evil. The punishment fits in one but not the other when both are equally bad. The NFL punishment system is a joke, and old Rog is a piss...
So they built the wall to be cut through, and then didn't leave money (it is all spent on the barrier) to hire agents to monitor the wall. Really? "We have a very powerful wall. But no matter how powerful, you can cut through anything, in all fairness. But we have a lot of people watching. You know cutting, cutting is one thing, but it's easily fixed. One of the reasons we did it the way we did it, it's very easily fixed. You put the chunk back in,” Trump said. This is my fav orite part of the BS right here; “The bollards are not the most evolved design; they are the most evolved that we could pay for,” Ronald Vitiello, former acting director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, told the Post. “We never said they would be an end-all, be-all.” They said that the wall was what was needed, because it was 97% effective. The inference, and the spending of money nowhere else, say's they thought it would be the end all. Which it is not. Here we are, sp...
Comments
Post a Comment