What's new
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

The Power of the SCOTUS II: "Release the Kagan!"

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS II: "Release the Kagan!"

It was an obvious joke. He's just PMS'ing because the Twins are struggling in Tampa Bay, and Favre is having his usual will-he-or-won't-he drama. :p
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS II: "Release the Kagan!"

It was a bad joke, not funny and tacky. That it was obvious was the best part about it.
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS II: "Release the Kagan!"

It wasn't THAT bad of a joke. :p
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS II: "Release the Kagan!"

It was an obvious joke. He's just PMS'ing because the Twins are struggling in Tampa Bay, and Favre is having his usual will-he-or-won't-he drama. :p

I am not even watching the Twins I am watching Psych which is hilarious unlike you and Tonka Boy. ;)

Plus the Favre stuff is hilarious why would that tick me off? Watching all the fans and media run like ants whenever he goes outside is the cure for the summertime blues my friend :D
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS II: "Release the Kagan!"

Bloomberg is reporting she's confirmed. No breakdown of the votes yet.
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS II: "Release the Kagan!"

Never mind, found the thread. Apparently the search function on the new board is still funky.

Anywho, while not SCOTUS related, the Iowa judicial retention votes are getting major airtime this year. Some 3-time failed gubernatorial candidate is leading the charge to oust the 3 state supreme court justices facing retention this year, in retaliation solely for their ruling allowing same-sex marriage. Sadly, he and his out-of-state money from some Mississippi group seem to be carrying the day, as the latest poll shows a dead-heat on the issue.

I will say, the wingnuts coming out in support of ouster would make you laugh if it weren't so sad. Their sole reason is that one ruling - who cares if they got every other one right (which the law of averages say they probably did not) or that they've maintained their professionalism and propriety (which they have). It's a perfect storm really, especially when you've got whatever percentage of the people who vote no every year just out of spite or envy or whatever causes them to hate all judges.

Apparently some new wingnut is campaigning to not just get rid of the 3 supreme court justices, but every judge in the state up for retention. That'll lern 'em, or something.
 
Last edited:
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS II: "Release the Kagan!"

Never mind, found the thread. Apparently the search function on the new board is still funky.

Anywho, while not SCOTUS related, the Iowa judicial retention votes are getting major airtime this year. Some 3-time failed gubernatorial candidate is leading the charge to oust the 3 state supreme court justices facing retention this year, in retaliation solely for their ruling allowing same-sex marriage. Sadly, he and his out-of-state money from some Mississippi group seem to be carrying the day, as the latest poll shows a dead-heat on the issue.

I will say, the wingnuts coming out in support of ouster would make you laugh if it weren't so sad. Their sole reason is that one ruling - who cares if they got every other one right (which the law of averages say they probably did not) or that they've maintained their professionalism and propriety (which they have). It's a perfect storm really, especially when you've got whatever percentage of the people who vote no every year just out of spite or envy or whatever causes them to hate all judges.

Apparently some new wingnut is campaigning to not just get rid of the 3 supreme court justices, but every judge in the state up for retention. That'll lern 'em, or something.

There's a guy half a mile from my house who has signs plastered all over his yard saying "Total recall: constitutional provision to recall all sitting justices," followed by the mandatory Bible quotes and anti-UN fulminations (it's a Jewish plot, if you didn't know). His house looks exactly like the lair from "Jeepers Creepers," and it's covered in the homemade bird feeders he sells ("at reasonable prices!"). In my county, this guy is considered slightly right of center.
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS II: "Release the Kagan!"

This story is crazy.

“Good morning, Anita Hill, it's Ginny Thomas,” said the voice. “I just wanted to reach across the airwaves and the years and ask you to consider something. I would love you to consider an apology sometime and some full explanation of why you did what you did with my husband. So give it some thought and certainly pray about this and come to understand why you did what you did. OK, have a good day.”
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS II: "Release the Kagan!"

:D

Drunk dialing is never a good idea.

I know Thomas's wife is from Omaha and a Creighton grad (which is a big reason why Justice Thomas comes to Creighton's Law School every other year), but honestly, the more words I hear out of her mouth...cookoo doesn't even come close.
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS II: "Release the Kagan!"

I know Thomas's wife is from Omaha and a Creighton grad (which is a big reason why Justice Thomas comes to Creighton's Law School every other year), but honestly, the more words I hear out of her mouth...cookoo doesn't even come close.

To be fair, Maureen Scalia wrote it for her and she just read it.
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS II: "Release the Kagan!"


Nothing crazy there. Unrealistic, probably. Crazy no. Those are rationale, reasoned words, but just not recognizing that if anyone was going to come clean on things from the famous he-said/she-said of 20 years ago, it would likely have already happened. But I don't see why people are going nuts over this, other than that the media hate Thomas and go after him at the slightest provocation.
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS II: "Release the Kagan!"

Nothing crazy there. Unrealistic, probably. Crazy no. Those are rationale, reasoned words, but just not recognizing that if anyone was going to come clean on things from the famous he-said/she-said of 20 years ago, it would likely have already happened. But I don't see why people are going nuts over this, other than that the media hate Thomas and go after him at the slightest provocation.

Hey, I like Clarence Thomas, I think he's excellent. Maybe "crazy" was the wrong word to use. However, even if you think Anita Hill was lying, it's still pretty odd for Ginny Thomas to think that Hill is going to apologize- and thus renounce her meal ticket for the past 20 years.

Plus, if you like a good conspiracy theory, there's a lot of stuff to work with here. Is she asking for an apology because Thomas is ready to step down, and wants vindication? Or maybe Ginny Thomas has some evidence proving Hill was lying, and wanted to give her a chance to apologize before she went public?
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS II: "Release the Kagan!"

Hey, I like Clarence Thomas, I think he's excellent. Maybe "crazy" was the wrong word to use. However, even if you think Anita Hill was lying, it's still pretty odd for Ginny Thomas to think that Hill is going to apologize- and thus renounce her meal ticket for the past 20 years.

Plus, if you like a good conspiracy theory, there's a lot of stuff to work with here. Is she asking for an apology because Thomas is ready to step down, and wants vindication? Or maybe Ginny Thomas has some evidence proving Hill was lying, and wanted to give her a chance to apologize before she went public?

I doubt there's any "evidence" of Hill lying or what have you. If so, I'd bet it would have surfaced years ago. Justice Thomas and Prof. Hill seem to have gone their own ways and established themselves accordingly. Why Mrs. Thomas thought it was a good idea to open that can of Coke is beyond me.

Conspiracy? Perhaps Prof. Hill and Justice Thomas are more than just enemies. :eek::D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top