A New Height in Who Cares
From an article by one Joe Kovacs, over at our fave website, Renew America:
"For the first time, a U.S. Supreme Court justice is offering some legal insight about the so-called Fairness Doctrine, suggesting the off-the-books policy could be declared unconstitutional if it's revived and brought before the bench.
In written discussion on yesterday's ruling cracking down on indecent language on television, Justice Clarence Thomas called the policy "problematic" and a "deep intrusion into the First Amendment rights of broadcasters."
You know, Joe, no one in the world gives a flying fuck what this ignorant, dishonest cretin has to say about anything.
Not even you wingnuts do. You'd much prefer that he serve his appointed task of giving Antonin Scalia two votes on the court, and then just keep his mouth shut.
"For the first time, a U.S. Supreme Court justice is offering some legal insight about the so-called Fairness Doctrine, suggesting the off-the-books policy could be declared unconstitutional if it's revived and brought before the bench.
In written discussion on yesterday's ruling cracking down on indecent language on television, Justice Clarence Thomas called the policy "problematic" and a "deep intrusion into the First Amendment rights of broadcasters."
You know, Joe, no one in the world gives a flying fuck what this ignorant, dishonest cretin has to say about anything.
Not even you wingnuts do. You'd much prefer that he serve his appointed task of giving Antonin Scalia two votes on the court, and then just keep his mouth shut.
Comments
I'd like to hear your take on the "mortgage cramdown" bill and vote in the Senate today.