Tag Archives: supreme court

The Confederate flag was where???

3 Replies

Virginia’s McAuliffe plans to phase out Confederate flag license plate – The Washington Post.

Easily the most depressing thing about the move to remove the Confederate flag is learning all of the places that — 150 years after we defeated these racist traitors — continued to display or sell this racist, traitorous symbol.  WTF, Virginia?  You had this on your license plates?  Even Texas went to the Supreme Court to resist putting the flag on their plates FFS.  Wal-Mart?  Amazon?  Sears?  Etsy??  WTF?

WTF eBay:

We have decided to prohibit Confederate flags and many items containing this image because we believe it has become a contemporary symbol of divisiveness and racism,” eBay said in a statement.

Contemporary?  CONTEMPORARY?  It’s been a symbol of divisiveness, racism, and TREASON for over 150 years.  You had to wait for nine people to be slaughtered in a place of worship AND for popular opinion to tip the economic scales AND THEN you remove the flag?

*head explodes*

Finally – Supreme Court oral arguments are televised!

1 Reply

This is brilliant!

 

 

(h/t The Mahablog and my mom.)

However, I do have to point out that we were there first!

Image: photo of irresistably cute golden retriever puppy with the words "Title III of the ADA governs businesses like stores, restaurants, and theaters.

(Cross-posted at CREECblog.)

Dog Bites Man*

1 Reply

Justice Scalia Makes Epic Blunder In Supreme Court Opinion.

“This is not the first time EPA has sought to convert the Clean Air Act into a mandate for cost-effective regulation. Whitman v. American Trucking Assns., Inc., 531 U. S. 457 (2001), confronted EPA’s contention that it could consider costs in setting [National Ambient Air Quality Standards],” Scalia wrote in his dissent, which was joined by Justice Clarence Thomas.

The problem: the EPA’s position in the 2001 case was exactly the opposite.

More or less epic than basing an entire judicial career on the fallacy that he can accurately interpret the intent of the drafters 100% of the time and that, coincidentally, it favors the desired conservative legal outcome 100% of the time?

************

* No dogs were harmed in the drafting of this post, though a number of them may have been insulted by the unfortunate comparison to Justice Scalia.