However, I do have to congratulate Bush on such a clever appointment.

I don’t care about what people do with respect to drugs, so long as it doesn’t affect me (don’t make me a burger with animal semen or run in to me when you’re high as a kite). Further, I don’t care what religion, if any, you practice. And again, don’t force it on me; I have my own beliefs and I won’t force them on you.

But the fact of the matter is that, in this case, _Congress_ has enacted no laws establishing one state church. The president and SCOTUS are walking a fine line, however, since the constitution’s _intent_, clearly, is to prevent _government_ endorsement of religion. Executive orders are that, not laws in the traditional sense and certainly outside of provisions regarding _Congress_. What do you do when the courts aren’t trustworthy?

As I’m sure you’re all aware, congress represents but one branch or our {broken} government; the courts (who are also at fault, as well as the executive (over which our court jester of a president presides) the remainder. What kills me, and always has, is that two of the branches are (directly) beholden to the people, yet in most cases the courts are appointees of politicos with, in the case of SCOTUS, lifetime terms and no reasonable way to unseat them.

Bush is perhaps the luckiest of presidents to run this country (into the ground). I have told my father time and time again how I can’t wait for his generation to die off and leave their governmental posts, so that my generation might have a chance to right so many wrongs. Yet Dubya has run us so far backward, and stacked the SCOTUS deck so greatly that we’ll likely never recover; the selection of the far-right-wing and young Roberts for chief justice will have ramifications so far into the future I have lost all hope.

Interesting…

Also, I thought I would let you know that I clerk for a judge on the U.S. District Court of Eastern Wisconsin, my next clerkship will be for a judge on the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals.

And wow, I am seriously loving the Supreme Court today. This part of the year is always filled with interesting decisions…Kudos to the United States Supreme Court!

Also, Law-school…haha…I’m allready working on a REAL education, that actually get society somewhere.

Seriously get a grip, go to law school if you can get in, and maybe you can understand just why decisions like this are made.

Idiots.

You know, anonymity brings out the worst in some people. Apparently, we are ‘idiots’ simply because we disagree with Andrei Varney and the majority opinion of the Supreme Court.

Since Andrei Varney read the “full decision”, undoubtedly, the minority opinion was read as well:

The Court rejects outright these twin foundations of Tinker because, in its view, the unusual importance of protecting children from the scourge of drugs supports a ban on all speech in the school environment that promotes drug use. Whether or not such a rule is sensible as a matter of policy, carving out pro-drug speech for uniquely harsh treatment finds no support in our case law and is inimical to the values protected by the First Amendment.

Apparently, Justices Stevens, Souter, and Ginsberg are all ‘idiots’ who need to ‘get a grip’ in Andrei Varney’s view.

These three ‘idiots’ go on to point out what many of us made, that the statement isn’t even a pro-drug one, it is a nonsensical one intended for humorous effect:

To the extent the Court independently finds that “BONG HiTS 4 JESUS” objectively amounts to the advocacy of illegal drug use — in other words, that it can most reasonably be interpreted as such — that conclusion practically refutes itself. This is a nonsense message, not advocacy.

Andrei Varney is correct on one point though, some are seriously undermining the judicial system. I just happen to think that it’s Justices Roberts, Thomas, and Alito.

Perhaps if you read in detail the full decision you would realize the effect of the cases.

Second as to the home schooled comment, that’s far out-reached and just plain rediculous. Making remarks like that makes you like a joke.

Seriously get a grip, go to law school if you can get in, and maybe you can understand just why decisions like this are made.

Idiots.

Wow. So since my wife and I are going to home school our son, this means I can curtail alot of his speech.

If I construe “i’m thirsty” as meaning that he wants to try acid I got the gub’nent behind me!
woo hooo!
Stuff ‘em in a berrel and feed them through the bunghole!