Should We Be Polite as the GOP Stomps on Our Democratic Rights? - Jim Hightower

[justaprogressive]

When a fox attacks a hen house, is it uncivil for the hens to raise a ruckus?

Two Supreme Court justices say it is. Elevating collegiality above social justice, right-wing extremist Amy Coney Barrett and progressive jurist Sonia Sotomayor have jointly been hailing America's top court as a model of genteel political discourse, claiming that the six Republicans and three Democrats disagree agreeably. "We do not interrupt one another, and we never raise our voices," Barrett primly lectured to a recent conference of civics teachers. Sotomayor chimed in that court decorum frowns on any internal comments that "could be viewed (by other justices) as hurtful."

How sweet that the Supremes are so judiciously cordial inside their marble sanctuary. But how bitter that the court's lockstep Republican ideologues are so crudely slapping down women's rights, running roughshod over our environmental protections, stomping on voting rights, enthroning plutocracy, imposing theocracy ... and so awful much more. Yet, when any of the three progressive justices do publicly assail these blatantly partisan, anti-democratic edicts, Barrett decorously decries their "stridency," demurely chiding that "the court should turn the national temperature down, not up."

Yoo-hoo, Madame Supreme, can you even hear yourself? Your very elevation to the High Court was a strident affront to our democracy and to the very idea of justice, rammed through in a flagrantly partisan power play by a lame-duck president and a corrupt Republican senator. Please, spare us your phony lectures on judicial propriety!

[link:https://www.creators.com/read/jim-hightower|

[republianmushroom]

1. We have ben being polite for many years.

It is time to fight fire with fire and not turn the other cheek. It is time to fight.

[CrispyQ]

2. I love Jim Hightower!

Long ago I got his newsletter via mail, back when Wuerker did the cartoons. I still have them in the basement somewhere.

[TwilightZone]

3. The answer is...creating a hostile work environment? Sure.

They have to work together, and I'm not sure what yelling at each other or being overtly hostile would accomplish. Do people routinely yell at their coworkers when they disagree with them at their own jobs? How does that work out for ya?

There are clearly strong disagreements amongst the justices, as is noted in the dissents every time there's a major decision and occasionally in oral arguments. Just because they don't yell at each other routinely doesn't mean that opinions aren't being voiced.

[ck4829]

5. Losing democratic rights with smiles is not the way we should go though

[Caliman73]

4. I just said this on another thread, the Geraldo / MSNBC thread.

Right wingers love to use Liberal notions against Liberals. The idea of "fair play" and good faith arguments are NOT Conservative ideas. Conservatives believe in power and hierarchy. They believe that certain people should be bound by the law and NOT protected and other should be protected by the law but not bound by it. It is an intrinsically undemocratic and unjust system of thought, no matter how they try to focus on their bullshit planks.

When people have had enough of their overreach, which they inevitably engage in because it is built into their worldview; when people are at the point of say...guillotines or other less drastic but still fiery forms of reaction, the right will say, "Wait, what about tolerance? What about civility?" EVERY SINGLE TIME. Sadly, a lot of Liberals fall for it too. "Yeah, I guess we should be fair" and they give Flat Earth people a chance to plead their case. They put up people who are anti vaccine or who are still "skeptical" about climate change.

As I said in the other thread, Not Every Viewpoint Is Valid. We don't have to be civil. We shouldn't be cruel and crooked, and destructive like right wingers, but we shouldn't indulge their "Kings, Queens, and Nobility" fantasies either.

Conservatism, as a political ideology, doesn't work for the VAST VAST majority of people. It is a system of thought built by people who were DEFENDING MONARCHY and ARISTOCRACY as a viable and preferred form of government. The founders of Conservatism knew that hereditary monarchy was not going to last at the point they were writing in its defense but they wanted to maintain the STRUCTURE and were creating a new ideology around the concept of hierarchy, a defense of inequality and concentration of wealth and power. That is STILL Conservatism today not matter what the leaders say about "small government", "fiscal responsibility", "family values", and all their other bullshit. They are simply trying to maintain the unequal distribution of the benefits of society.

When it comes to democracy versus Capitalism, Conservatives will choose Capitalism every time.

[Hugin]

6. If this is is the system in place, it's no wonder loudmouths such as Ginni...

And Alito have so much influence. The rest are all cowed in fear of a so-called scene.

Just so we’re clear, I don’t want a Supreme Court that’s genteel and courteous to each other, I want a Supreme Court that provides Justice and protects my rights.