In my history, I rightly (pun intended) called out that this court is 2 trump appointees and 1 george hw bush appointee. Both are -4'ed and 1 flagged, with name calling of 'ad hominem'.
Judges are inherently human, but they should strive for impartiality. But with continual 6-3 judgements out of SCOTUS, which lie directly with what party appointed who, along with federal-court shopping shows that this criticism is well stated.
And it probably is an ad-hominem, as in 'to the (hu)man'. But that is no excuse or hand-wavey reason to not look closely at corruption, which is what I think all of this is. And yes, it is a trade commission justification to make sure companies are using fair practices, of which 'call 10 times and threaten, and eventually send a snail mail to cancel' is demonstrably NOT fair. Doubly so, since the same companies that do this make it easy to sign up. And they know if they make cancellng hard, theY get more money.
But yeah, 3.5 more years of this presidency at minimum, and upper bound is 50+ years for having these judges retire/die of natural death? We can't even get Clearance Thomas (misspelling intended) impeached due to, I dunno, bribery?
> Democrats, while apparently not as entertaining, just want to make life a little more fair for everyday people who don't want to be cheated, shot or robbed.
It's hard to say they want to do anything as a party based purely on their actions over the last forty years or so. Some of them—sure, but as a party they seemed determined to do nothing that might endear them to voters.
Sadly, "at least we're not republicans" seems to be a very effective route to staying in power.
I think there's a meta-ness in their point. They're currently the top comment, and their point was that many people vote for Trump/Republicans because of the "bombastic language" since Dems are seen as boring.
> A company that uses scam tactics to grab money from people has basically admitted that they don’t believe they can succeed in an open marketplace of goods and services.
It's exactly the opposite of that. The fact that scare/scam tactics work is why we add rules to reduce the "openness" of the market. As we find things that companies do that are detrimental to people/society as whole, we add laws and regulations to prevent them from doing that. That is moving _away_ from an open market... to the benefit of society.
mystraline|7 months ago
Judges are inherently human, but they should strive for impartiality. But with continual 6-3 judgements out of SCOTUS, which lie directly with what party appointed who, along with federal-court shopping shows that this criticism is well stated.
And it probably is an ad-hominem, as in 'to the (hu)man'. But that is no excuse or hand-wavey reason to not look closely at corruption, which is what I think all of this is. And yes, it is a trade commission justification to make sure companies are using fair practices, of which 'call 10 times and threaten, and eventually send a snail mail to cancel' is demonstrably NOT fair. Doubly so, since the same companies that do this make it easy to sign up. And they know if they make cancellng hard, theY get more money.
But yeah, 3.5 more years of this presidency at minimum, and upper bound is 50+ years for having these judges retire/die of natural death? We can't even get Clearance Thomas (misspelling intended) impeached due to, I dunno, bribery?
MangoToupe|7 months ago
It's hard to say they want to do anything as a party based purely on their actions over the last forty years or so. Some of them—sure, but as a party they seemed determined to do nothing that might endear them to voters.
Sadly, "at least we're not republicans" seems to be a very effective route to staying in power.
onlyrealcuzzo|7 months ago
Anyone?
unknown|7 months ago
[deleted]
froggertoaster|7 months ago
gkoberger|7 months ago
fyurule|7 months ago
[deleted]
chasing|7 months ago
[deleted]
RHSeeger|7 months ago
It's exactly the opposite of that. The fact that scare/scam tactics work is why we add rules to reduce the "openness" of the market. As we find things that companies do that are detrimental to people/society as whole, we add laws and regulations to prevent them from doing that. That is moving _away_ from an open market... to the benefit of society.