According to wiki, they "represent evil, darkness, chaos, and conflict... Their presence communicates treason and impending doom... They are not only political traitors, but spiritual traitors as well... They defy logic, not being subject to the rules of the real world." And that was the wiki page describing these present-day female judges (I think).
In fact, what I am about to show you MAY JUST CONVINCE YOU that TIME TRAVEL IS REAL!
The top image is of course our weird women on the SCOTUS. You might assume the bottom image is simply an artist's exact replication of this scene. You would be wrong. The bottom painting was actually completed in 1782 by Henry Fuseli and titled, "The Three Witches." 1782??? HOW IS THIS POSSIBLE?!
But I digress. What I really wanted to blog about was President Trump's upcoming nomination for the SCOTUS. It will either be leaked Sunday or announced on Monday, so we won't have long to wait.
And my selection for the 2018 Supreme Court draft is... [mumbles incoherently]. What was that? I said, my selection for the 2018 Supreme Court draft is... Darko Milicic.
This pick is more important than the Gorsuch selection (or even the 2003 Detroit Piston's draft pick). Trump wasn't going to do better than Scalia, and thankfully he picked an acceptable replacement. This time we need to gain ground in replacing the unreliable, namby pamby Justice Kennedy with a constitutionalist. There should be no more 'reaching across the aisle'. Rather, there should only be stepping on their throats and grinding in our heels.
Mike Lee should be at the top of all right-minded folks, but for some reason is not expected to be picked. Some speculate a deal was already struck with Kennedy. I hope not. Amy Coney Barrett would be my second choice after Mike Lee. Ultimately, Roe v Wade needs to be overturned. I refuse to join the crowd that suggests that's not possible. Well, maybe not tomorrow, but why not next week?
AND THAT'S THE MEMO...
FULL DISCLOSURE: I studied Billy Shakespeare in college, so this is why you felt intellectually inadequate as I demonstrated my grasp of his little puppet show Macbeth. It was 1985 and I was in my second year at UM-Flint pursuing a BBA. I had to fill an elective humanities requirement, and a class on Shakespeare happened to be slotted on MWF and fit around my Statistics and Operations Mgt courses but still allowed me a lengthy lunch hour to shoot pool with my friends at the UCEN. How hard could thouist be or not to be?, thunkist I. I remember the book (which I barely cracked) was a thunderous tome and cost over $20! (a lot back then) The thing filled up my back pack and I could barely fit in the smallish CliffsNotes version (which I almost read in it's entirety). Either I didn't understand the deeper meanings or my professor was a communist (likely both), for I scored a D-. It was my only blemish and a lesson learned (never take a class requiring such a large book). The takeaway that you need to remember is that I studied Shakespeare in college.
As I was remembering this Shakespeare class, I noticed my eyelids beginning to droop. "Have I been hit with a tranquilizer dart again?," I mused... as I started going numb. I feeel... sooo... sleeeepy... Zzzzz.
~ ~ DREAM SEQUENCE ~ ~
EXTRA EXTRA! Researchers Have Found Two New Pages of Macbeth Exhumed From Under the Ancient Foundation of Shakespeare's Two-car Garage!
“By the pricking of my thumbs / Something wicked this way comes,” says one of the Weird Sisters as Trumpbeth approaches their coven
All hail, Trumpbeth, hail to thee, Thane of business. [past]
All hail, Trumpbeth, hail to thee, President of the United States. [present]
All hail,Trumpbeth, the destroyer of Roe V Wade! *gasp* [future].
"Fair is foul, and foul is fair / Hover through the fog and filthy air" (sounds like Mad Auntie Maxine is approaching - and I awake with a start!!!)
I envision them passing their one eye around, while they conspire to destroy the United States.ReplyDelete
Well, I'm at a disadvantage here as I barely gradeated 8th grade. What I will say is Ruth Buzzard Ginsflap and the HildehagBeast will never die. Ever. But we could damn well get to a 6-3 Supreme Court that even the dastardly J Roberts couldn't even thwart.ReplyDelete
I swear the beast will run again in 2020.... Here's my dream sequence.. voter fraud must be shut down... voter fraud must be shut down...
I remember everybody saying wonderful things about conservative Sandra Day O'Connor.ReplyDelete
We have not done well with women on the SCOTUS.
I'll take Kethledge please. Scalia 2.0.
Jess, I wish they'd point that eye at the Constitution once in a great while.ReplyDelete
Kid, I swear that Ruth Buzzi G must have made a pact with the devil. Maybe she could be convinced to retire if offered a spot on the next Stones tour? And PLEASE run the beast again!
Ed, It was not just Sandra Day O'Connor, as I blogged 2 years ago, since 1969 (to 2016) the high court was packed with 75% Republican nominees. That was the main reason I did not vote for Trump. If even Reagan could screw up that badly, why would we give a New York liberal like Trump a shot? (that was my reasoning then) However, Trump has won me over since then and he has a chance to be the greatest president in my lifetime if he can "PACK" the court with real jurists who will someday actually interpret the Constitution and overturn Roe v Wade.
Amy Coney Barrett is a Catholic mother of 7. I'd roll the dice that she would be on the right side of history on this one. As for Kethledge, I like that he is a Michigan man, but am a little concerned about his loyalty to stare decisis regarding Roe v Wade. “obviously, first and foremost I would follow Supreme Court precedent.” First and foremost? Hmmmm...
I had not heard that quote concerning him.ReplyDelete
I also read a report recently that said that Scalia was not that convinced that fetii were "persons".
I should add that I found that disappointing.ReplyDelete
The article went on to say that each of the states that ratified the 14th amendment also outlawed abortion because their understanding of personhood included fetuses.
I just read this about Barrett:ReplyDelete
"But while she has said that some cases like Roe v. Wade need not stand as precedents if a future court deems it to be wrongly decided, she has generally suggested that Roe v. Wade is in fact settled law."
well that was anti-climaticReplyDelete