Time For Term Limits Or Mandatory Retirement For Court

 

Most Disapprove Of Job The Supreme Court Is Doing

 

The chart above is from the Gallup Poll -- done between July 1st and 21st of a nationwide sample of 1,010 adults, with a 4 point margin of error.

Blind To The Truth

 Political Cartoon is by Clay Jones at claytoonz.com.

When Trump Said That He Meant Something Else (Satire)

 In this great satire, Alexandra Petri (in The Washington Post) has fun with Trump's statement that christians won't have to vote again after this election:

Probably, as usual, this is meaningless. You know how some people are. You cannot take anything they say literally. The speeches of Donald Trump are supposed to be surreal and unsettling. Like a Salvador Dalí painting, but with words.

So I’m sure that when the former president said, “Get out and vote just this time. You won’t have to do it anymore. Four more years it will be fixed. It’ll be fine. You won’t have to vote anymore, my beautiful Christians,” and, “We’ll have it fixed so good you’re not going to have to vote,” he meant something different than what it sounded like.

It sounded pretty scary and autocratic, I agree! But look, when you’re a nail, everything Donald Trump says sounds like a hammer. That doesn’t mean it is or isn’t a hammer. That just means you need to calm down.

Why, off the top of my head, I can think of plenty of reasons you would say something like this and not mean that you were intending to stop elections:

• Trump knows that something will happen in the lives of all his listeners — nothing bad, just something that will keep them busy in 2028, when other voters will take their place.
• He has the gift of prophecy and foresees a horrifying cataclysm that will make voting obsolete. Not his doing! Something to do with magma. He can’t elaborate because he doesn’t want to worry you.
• Trump will simply not be running in four years because he knows the Constitution doesn’t permit it, so he’s indifferent to what you do then and happy to see Democrats win!
• This quote was simply broken up wrong during transcription. The actual sentences were, “We’ll have it fixed so good. You’re not going to have to. Vote!”
• He means you won’t need to vote because the country will be so free and so far from autocracy that you won’t even have to worry.
• He didn’t mean everyone; he just meant “my beautiful Christians”! He thinks their influence in politics is too great and wants to discourage their turnout.
• Hyperbole — he only meant you will have to stop voting for president. State and local elections will still take place normally.
• In four years, the country will be overrun with bears and it will be too dangerous to go out and vote, and Donald Trump knows about this. Voting will pick back up in 2032 once the bears have had their fun.
• He means nothing. No further questions!
• Currently this does mean exactly what it sounds like, but he is going to say “... not!” in a few weeks. He loves his jokes.
• He just means the totally unworrisome thing his defenders are saying he meant: that by 2028 everything will be so perfectly arranged according to conservative Christian voters’ desires that no unanswered wish could possibly compel them to the polls. By then, we will have Bibles and the Ten Commandments in every classroom, abortions and no-fault divorce nowhere, and the married, heterosexual couple as the only valid family structure. See, isn’t that so much better?
• Or the magma!

Call Him Mini-MAGA

Political Cartoon is by Bill Bramhall in the New York Daily News.
 

Immigrants Pay A Big Part Of Social Security And Medicare

 

The Last Vote?

 

Public Opinion Starting To Favor Harris Over Trump

 

These charts reflect the results of the ABC News / Ipsos Poll -- done on July 26th and 27th of a nationwide sample of 1,200 adults, with a 3 point margin of error.

The Air-Conditioning Olympics

Political Cartoon is by Joe Heller at hellertoon.com.
 

President Biden Calls For Supreme Court Reform

The following post in The Washington Post was written by President Biden:

This nation was founded on a simple yet profound principle: No one is above the law. Not the president of the United States. Not a justice on the Supreme Court of the United States. No one.

But the Supreme Court’s 6-3 decision on July 1 to grant presidents broad immunity from prosecution for crimes they commit in office means there are virtually no limits on what a president can do. The only limits will be those that are self-imposed by the person occupying the Oval Office.

If a future president incites a violent mob to storm the Capitol and stop the peaceful transfer of power — like we saw on Jan. 6, 2021 — there may be no legal consequences.

And that’s only the beginning.

On top of dangerous and extreme decisions that overturn settled legal precedents — including Roe v. Wade — the court is mired in a crisis of ethics. Scandals involving several justices have caused the public to question the court’s fairness and independence, which are essential to faithfully carrying out its mission of equal justice under the law. For example, undisclosed gifts to justices from individuals with interests in cases before the court, as well as conflicts of interest connected with Jan. 6 insurrectionists, raise legitimate questions about the court’s impartiality.

I served as a U.S. senator for 36 years, including as chairman and ranking member of the Judiciary Committee. I have overseen more Supreme Court nominations as senator, vice president and president than anyone living today. I have great respect for our institutions and the separation of powers.

What is happening now is not normal, and it undermines the public’s confidence in the court’s decisions, including those impacting personal freedoms. We now stand in a breach.

That’s why — in the face of increasing threats to America’s democratic institutions — I am calling for three bold reforms to restore trust and accountability to the court and our democracy.

First, I am calling for a constitutional amendment called the No One Is Above the Law Amendment. It would make clear that there is noimmunity for crimes a former president committed while in office. I share our Founders’ belief that the president’s power is limited, not absolute. We are a nation of laws — not of kings or dictators.

Second, we have had term limits for presidents for nearly 75 years. We should have the same for Supreme Court justices. The United States is the only major constitutional democracy that gives lifetime seats to its high court. Term limits would help ensure that the court’s membership changes with some regularity. That would make timing for court nominations more predictable and less arbitrary. It would reduce the chance that any single presidency radically alters the makeup of the court for generations to come. I support a system in which the president would appoint a justice every two years to spend 18 years in active service on the Supreme Court.

Third, I’m calling for a binding code of conduct for the Supreme Court. This is common sense. The court’s current voluntary ethics code is weak and self-enforced. Justices should be required to disclose gifts, refrain from public political activity and recuse themselves from cases in which they or their spouses have financial or other conflicts of interest. Every other federal judge is bound by an enforceable code of conduct, and there is no reason for the Supreme Court to be exempt.

All three of these reforms are supported by a majority of Americans — as well as conservative and liberal constitutional scholars. And I want to thank the bipartisan Presidential Commission on the Supreme Court of the United States for its insightful analysis, which informed some of these proposals.

We can and must prevent the abuse of presidential power. We can and must restore the public’s faith in the Supreme Court. We can and must strengthen the guardrails of democracy.

In America, no one is above the law. In America, the people rule.

Dems Run Harris - GOP Runs Scared

Political Cartoon is by Clay Bennett in the Chattanooga Times Free Press.
 

A Republican Laments What His Party Has Become

 

The following is part of an op-ed by Peter Wehner (who served in the administrations of Reagan and both Bush's) in The New York Times:

Populism has its place. It can be an understandable response to enormous and rapid economic and social changes. It can alert elites to problems they may be out of touch with, including vast inequality, an indifference to beleaguered lives and shattered communities, and widespread institutional failure. . . .

The Republican Party, rather than embracing the best aspects of populism, has taken on its vices: anti-intellectualism, anti-institutionalism and anti-elitism; feeding off negative emotions like anger, grievances and vengeance; and a propensity to believe and to spread conspiracy theories. Populism often looks for scapegoats, frequently blaming immigrants and those who are ethnically and culturally different. Populists are also historically attracted to demagogues and authoritarian personalities.

But the most worrisome feature that has defined the Republican Party during the Trump era is a relentless assault on reality, fused with lawlessness and the embrace of illiberalism.

The Republican Party once preached about the importance of standing for moral truths and standing against moral relativism; today it is, in important respects, nihilistic. The Republican Party once described itself as the party of “law and order”; it now worships a man who is a felon, who was found liable for sexual assault and defamation, and who portrays the violent mob that attacked the Capitol as a band of patriotic “J6 martyrs.” Republicans once proudly proclaimed their reverence for the Constitution; in Milwaukee, they crowned as their leader a man who attempted to subvert it.

It’s hard and haunting to know that the political party to which I devoted a significant part of my life has become the greatest political threat to the country I love.

The Wannabe Potentate

Political Cartoon is by Clay Jones at claytoonz.com.
 

Biden Passes The Torch To America's Future

 

Not A Good Thing!

 

Optimism Among Democrats Has Risen Sharply

The chart above is from a YouGov Poll done between July 22nd and 25th of a nationwide sample of 1,107 adults, with a 4 point margin of error.

The Laughter Is Over In The GOP

Political Cartoon is by Randall Enos at Cagle.com.
 

Homelessness Rises In A Good (But Unfair) Economy

From The Washington Post:

They are plumbers and casino supervisors, pizzeria managers and factory workers. They deliver groceries, sell eyeglasses and unload trucks at Amazon.

And they’re the new, unlikely face of homelessness: Working Americans with decent-paying jobs who simply can’t afford a place to live.

Homelessness, already at a record high last year, appears to be worsening among people with jobs, as housing becomes further out of reach for low-wage earners, according to shelter interviews and upticks in evictions and homelessness tallies around the country. The latest round of point-in-time counts — a tally of people without homes on one given night — show a discernible uptick in homelessness in many parts of the United States, including Southeast Texas (up 61 percent from a year ago), Rhode Island (up 35 percent) and northeast Tennessee (up 20 percent).

While there is no federal data on unhoused workers, shelter administrators and local groups report a spike in first-timers with jobs. In Tulsa, for example, where homelessness rose 26 percent this year, lack of affordable housing ranked as the top reason people said they were homeless, beating out mental health struggles or job loss. . . .

Years of fast-rising rents and a shortage of affordable housing have created a situation where even a strong labor market and rising wages haven’t been enough to offset the financial strains of inflation.

“We are pushing working people into homelessness because they just can’t afford the rent,” said Margot Kushel, director of the Benioff Homelessness and Housing Initiative at the University of California at San Francisco. “The general public doesn’t see these folks as homeless — they’re not as visible as the people who occupy public spaces, who have substance abuse issues or mental health problems. But it’s a catastrophe, and it’s happening just under our eyes.”

Out Of Business

 Political Cartoon is by Clay Jones at claytoonz.com.

Joy For Democrats - Wake-Up Call For Republicans

 

GOP Just Starting Its Racists Attacks On Kamala Harris

 

The GOP Has Trouble Avoiding Racist/Sexist Speech (SATIRE)

Alexandra Petri (pictured) pokes fun at the House Republican caucus in this satirical post in The Washington Post:

At a closed-door meeting of House Republicans on Tuesday, National Republican Congressional Committee chairman Richard Hudson (R-N.C.) urged lawmakers to stick to criticizing Vice President Harris for her role in Biden administration policies.

“This election will be about policies and not personalities,” House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) told reporters after the meeting.

“This is not personal with regard to Kamala Harris,” he added, “and her ethnicity or her gender have nothing to do with this whatsoever.” — Associated Press, July 24

Chairman: Hi, members! Thanks for joining this impromptu session! Totally unnecessary, of course. Just an abundance of caution. Just, remember, BRATS! Bag Racism, Avoid The Sexism! If you could turn your attention to the whiteboard please.

[Chairman painstakingly writes “RACIST, SEXIST ATTACKS ON VP KAMALA HARRIS.” Audience murmurs knowingly.]

[Chairman draws a large X through “RACIST, SEXIST ATTACKS ON VP KAMALA HARRIS.” Members gasp.]

Member: I have a question. I saw that you wrote “racist, sexist attacks on VP Kamala Harris” on the board, and I was with you. But then you drew an X through it. Does that mean, make racist, sexist attacks on Vice President Harris on X?

Several members: Ohhhh.

Chairman: No. It means, don’t make racist, sexist attacks on Kamala Harris. Attack her policies instead.

Member: Okay. Interesting.

[Beat.]

Member: Okay, I see that it says “Don’t make racist, sexist attacks on VP Harris.” But suppose I am tired and somebody is asking me a lot of questions. Then can I do one?

Chairman: Still no.

Member: Just a little one?

Chairman: No.

Member: Well, can I make a racially tinged remark that some listeners decry as sexist?

Chairman: As far as I can tell, that is the same thing, so, ideally, no?

Member: Huh. How can I know if what I’m saying is okay or if people will see it as some kind of racist, sexist attack?

Chairman: If you’re not sure, before you make an attack on Harris, ask yourself, “Would I say this about Mitt Romney?” And if you wouldn’t, don’t.

Member: So I can say, “Although I know how to pronounce that first name, I dislike having to do so. I don’t think we should have a president with that first name.”

Other member: “I think the number of kids that this candidate has is wrong.”

Chairman: I guess you found some loopholes. No. Please don’t say that. Don’t say anything you wouldn’t say about any other male, White vice president: say, Mike Pence —

[Members lean forward and start murmuring excitedly.]

Chairman: I take that back! Another bad example. Please, please don’t say any of the things you said about Mike Pence about her. Maybe let’s brainstorm things that would be okay to say. Like, try making “I” statements and focusing them on policies, such as, “I think Kamala Harris’s wild, outrageous health-care policies are too far left for this country.”

Member: Point of order — would I say that about Mitt Romney?

Chairman: Wouldn’t you?

Member: I think she is a childless cat lady.

[Chairman sighs.]

Member: JD Vance said it, not me!

Chairman: Yes, I know, we’re having a separate meeting with him.

Member: Can I call her ungrateful?

Chairman: No.

Member: But JD Vance —

Chairman: We are aware of the JD Vance situation. Please, forget personal attacks, and say things about her politics.

Member: I dislike her laugh. I consider the laughter of women sinister. I am threatened when women laugh. I want to outlaw all abortions.

Chairman: No! No! No! Just, please stop saying the quiet parts out loud. They are supposed to be a dog whistle, plausibly deniable, audible only to those who know to listen, not, as they have been in all these cases, a deafening foghorn. Try again.

Member: “When I think about the prospect of a Kamala Harris presidency, I feel economically anxious.”

Chairman: [Sighs.] Better?

Republicans Against "Childless Cat Ladies"

Political Cartoon is by Clay Jones at claytoonz.com.
 

A Bad Pick - Trump Shouldn't Be Allowed To Make More

 

Michelle And Barack Endorse Kamala For President!

 

New Poll Shows Harris Has Evened The Presidential Election

 

The chart above reflects the results of the New York Times / Sienna College Poll -- done between July 22nd and 24th of a nationwide sample of 1,142 voters, with a 3.4 point margin of error.

The chart below shows the results between June 28th and July 2nd.