MigL

As you yourself alluded to, and TheVat explained, the Constitution is a 'fluid' document, that changes with changing societal norms ( except for that pesky 2nd Amendment, which resists change ). SCJ interpret these 'changes' in society and whether laws reflect and comply with those changes. This is, of course, strictly subjective, and the reason why it matters if a SCJ is a Conservative or a Liberal.After all, there was no such thing as abortions when the Constitution was written, so how can they be legal according to the Constitution ( as written ).

V Putin does not want neighboring former Soviet states to be successful, as Ukraine was ( slowly ) on its way to become. It looks bad on his failed government, that the largest country in the world, with all of its natural resources, has an economy equivalent to Spain, and its people are suffering. He has destabilized Kazakhstan, Georgia and Belarus already, a successful, pro-Western Ukranian state on the Russian border might give the Russian people the idea that it is their Government's fault, and it's time for a change.

You guys are full of crap. If SCJ don't interpret/make law, then why all the hand-wringing over whether they are Conservative or Liberal. or, pro-life or pro-choice ? It shouldn't matter if all they do is confirm the constitutionality of laws passed by the Legislative branch of Government.

23 minutes ago INow said "They did it, so we'll do it too." In a little while he'll deny he said it, or it was taken out of context, or it's a real stretch to get there from what he said. Give me a fucking break is right ! Nice come back. When your argument can't be backed up, you argue with rep points ? After having claimed you did not say that, you go and post the exact thing I pointed out you were doing. You seem to act very much like your Republican fellow citizens you hate so much.

Very well. Anyone who thinks that Democrats should employ the same methods as Republicans to acheive their ends. If it wasn't good when they did it, why is it now acceptable ? And if you think that way, then feel free to include yourself in the group I'm talking about. I have previously explained that 'best' is not the word I would use ( in response to CharonY ), I would use 'most suitable'. And if that should also confuse you, there can only be one that is 'most suitable', while there can be numerous 'suitable', and numerous-1 that are 'more suitable'. Am I being condescending again ? Maybe I'm slightly pissed at the way Phi always mischaracterizes me, and I'm unjustly taking it out on you. I may be Canadian, but I'm still only human. I fully understand the difference between applying for a job, and being 'appointed' to a job. But if you eliminate specific groups of people from consideration, the difference matters less and less with every group you eliminate. If J Biden had said "I am taking applications for VP, and the qualifications are that you must be a black woman, former DA in San Fran, first name begins with K, last ends with S, and AMALA HARRI in between." You have made a job application into a job appointment. And I still don't think gender and color are criteria to be considered for an appointment or an application. If anyone does, even if trying to rectify an inequitable current situation, then they are using the same methods as the people who created the inequitable situation. Now go back up to the beginning of this post and check to see if that makes you part of the group I'm talking about ...

If I may ... "In theoretical general relativity, a geon is a nonsingular electromagnetic or gravitational wave which is held together in a confined region by the gravitational attraction of its own field energy. They were first investigated theoretically in 1955 by J. A. Wheeler, who coined the term as a contraction of "gravitational electromagnetic entity" From Geon (physics) - Wikipedia

Then you must not read many of my posts. Or maybe it's your 'George W Bush' mentality, that if I don't agree with everything you say, I must be 'on the other side'. Either with you or against you; If I don't agree with your definition of a liberal, I must be a 'closet' Republican. ( I believe you used the term 'Trumpet', once; very imaginative but wildly inaccurate ) You know what else is a very liberal thing to say ? Not everything is black and white, pay attention to the nuances of an argument, before resorting to 'labelling' and making 'them' the enemy. Maybe if you weren't so politicized yourself, you might realize you and your fellow citizens have more that brings you together, than separates you. But what do I know, I'm Canadian ... While I would mostly agree, I think you would also agree we are not looking for the 'best' of the whole American population, only applicants or those who accept the nomination; and then we pick, not the best ( actually ), but the most suitable. And I would have no problem if J Biden eventually picked a black woman for SCJ; he didn't do very badly with K Harris at all. But to announce who he would pick ahead of time ? I think you would agree, gender and color ( don't wanna say race ) should not be a criterion on any job application. ( isn't that what got you in the mess in the first place ? )

Not complaining about US liberals at all. Complaining about you guys on this Forum who seem to have come to the conclusion that the best course of action, going forward, for your country is 'an eye for an eye' policy, and to try and beat your opponent by being just like them. Maybe the US should be just as ruthless as V Putin in order to beat Russia, and bomb indiscriminately. Maybe we should kill criminals who commit murder. Maybe we should enslave all Southern Americans who are descendants of slave owners. Or maybe the 'higher road' is the better way. And Zap, by definition there can only be one 'best', no matter how you define it. I suggest you read up on set theory.

The 'best' is one of a set, regardless of selection criterea. If you choose to limit selection to a subset of that set, then you may not be getting the 'best' selection. You don't have to be an outsider'' to realize that, combatting the inequality of SC Justice selection, by making color and gender a selection criteria is equivalent to continuing to dig when in the bottom of a hole. Even though Phi seems to forget about all the complaints most people here had about the last Presidency and his 'useful idiots' party, there have been plenty of complaints about 'tits' ( I'm a leg and bum man, myself ) and increasingly about 'tats', as Democrats try to beat Republicans at their own game. Is that what you guys really want for your country ? A descent into a 'cold' civil war ?

The pressure treated wood of my back fence looks like crap after 30 years. And this wooden walkway is over 5800 years old ?

Not impressed by the compass, but that is one sexy sextant.

What if one of the Mods said "Everyone's opinion counts, as long as their name begins with the 1st 25 letters of the alphabet" ??? If you limit the group under consideration, you are by definition, not getting the best overall, just the best of that limited group. I would suggest, as INow has, that J Biden is also playing to his base; and I'd probably be more accurate. ( K Harris turned out to be a solid choice as VP )

Someone should start a thread to try and figure out what Dimreepr considers worth fighting for. Or even worth making an effort. ( certainly not lengthy responses on this forum 😄 )

And here I thought we were all nice, respectable people in Canada ...

OK, I read the link ( although I do know the difference ) The line you quoted is from a posed question. A given answer provides the quote "Now you really shouldn't think of entanglement as exchange of information, because it happens instantaneously and it is impossible to transmit information instantaneously. Again, it is also impossible to transmit information instantaneously by collapsing the superposition."

I know what you are trying to say, but that sentence is misleading to the average person. There is no exchange of information.

That's why they were not especially good jokes, TheVat. A joke shouldn't need that depth of analysis.

Even though Canada is over 80% ( 83 % for 1st dose ), apparently a lot of people still think vaccination is too much of an imposition on their rights and freedoms. At the current time, several thousand heavy trucks are converging on Parliament hill, in Ottawa, to protest vaccination mandates. The truck connection is the requirement for truckers crossing the border to make deliveries to be vaccinated, whether entering Canada, or the US. Apparently J Trudeau, our Prime Minister, didn't think it was enough to claim he had been exposed to someone who tested positive, and would be in isolation; he actually left the Capital for an unknown location, fearing a US style, Jan 6, insurrection. Police presence is heavy, but this is Canada, I don't think there will be any serious trouble. Still, the ignorance of these protesters baffles me. Maybe, instead of doing it one group at a time, the Government should have passed laws making vaccination mandatory for all ( exceptions for age and medical reasons ). That way, specific groups would not feel as being specifically targeted. Not that I see any sense in any of this, but what do Confederate flags have to do with Canadian protests ????

Someone, who is now a 1/4 inch 'shorter', must be overly sensitive to circumcision jokes. They were not relly good jokes, but I don't think Mistermack deserved a downvote for them.

Absolutely right. I've never seen Genady get 'crabby'.

I agree, we in the West havemade the same mistakes when dealing with 'terrorists'. Implementing a 'thought police' is never a good idea. Then again, Uyghurs are not sent for 're-education' because they are thinking of terrorist acts, but, simply for thinking 'differently'.

If things worked as you assume, Edgar, you would not need 'vents' on the high pressure side to reduce pressure and restore position. As the one side gets forced farther away by your imaginary high pressure, the opposite side would move closer, and as a result, experience higher pressure which would restore position. But, of course, it doesn't happen that way in reality.

That doesn't change the fact that 'thoughts', appropriate or not, are NOT a crime; only inapproriate actions are.

Yes. Just ask Donald Trump ...

On the one hand you have states like Wisconsin, who send all underage teens to adult jail for almost all crimes, and on the other, you have the current situation in California. Hanna Tubbs, a 26 year old biological male ( who after being arrested identifies as female ), walked into a rest room and sexually assaulted a 10 year old girl, 8 years ago, when Tubbs was 17 years old. The LA county DA, has decided in his wisdom, that since Tubbs was a juvenile when he/she committed the crime, he/she will now serve his/her sentence in a juvenile correctional facility, with underage females, even though he/she is now 26 years old. Hannah Tubbs: Woman convicted of sexually assaulting 10-year-old will serve sentence in L.A. County juvenile facility - ABC7 Los Angeles Am I the only one who sees something wrong with this ? Is it time for America to have a federally controlled Justice/Penal system, somewhere in the middle of these radical right wing, and left wing, extremes ?