TomSlick
TomSlick's JournalDid I hear people booing when Gov. Beshear presented the Kentucky Derby trophy?
Is the racing crowd GQP?
My elderly parents got their first Covid-19 shots today!
My college professor wife is to get her second shot in a couple of weeks.
Now, if my in-laws could get theirs, I'd feel much better.
I'm not quite old enough to get my shot anytime soon - maybe in the summer.
Legislation Alert!
A Bill introduced in the Arkansas House (House Joint Resolution 1005) proposes an amendment to the Arkansas Constitution to require a super majority (60%) vote for any law to be adopted by initiative or referendum.
[link:https://www.arkleg.state.ar.us/Bills/FTPDocument?path=%2FBills%2F2021R%2FPublic%2FHJR1005.pdf|
If adopted by the General Assembly and approved by the vote of the people (interestingly by a simple majority), it will be very difficult for the people to pass laws by initiative or referendum. For the sake of consistency, the Bill should include changing the State Motto from "Regnat Populus" - The People Rule. I propose ""Pecunia Loquitur" - Money Talks.
If any of you have a state legislator who will talk to you (mine hates me), let them know this is a really bad idea.
To give the Devil his due.
Governor Asa Hutchinson was interviewed by CNN's Christiane Amanpour.
To give the Devil his due, Asa sounds remarkably reasonable for a Republiqan in this day and time. He allows that he would have voted to strip MTG of her committee assignments.
Skip ahead to 7:45 unless you want to hear him lie about how well vaccinations are going in Arkansas.
[link:https://www.cnn.com/videos/tv/2021/02/04/amanpour-asa-hutchinson.cnn|
I am concerned about CJ Roberts not presiding over the impeachment trial.
I have read several stories about CJ Roberts not presiding over the upcoming impeachment trial. I have seen references to CJ Roberts not wanting the job. What I cannot find is whether CJ Roberts affirmatively declined to preside. According to CNN, both CJ Roberts and Senate pro temp Leahy are declining to answer the question.
I understand the argument that since Trump is not the current president, the constitutional requirement that the CJ preside over impeachment trials does not apply. I am uncertain of that argument. Moreover, it undermines the argument in response to the Trumpster's argument that an impeachment of a former President is somehow improper that the Senate trial is a continuation of an impeachment process that began in the House while Trump was still President
I think that CJ Roberts should recuse from the impeachment trial because it seems likely that, at some point or other, Trump will challenge the constitutionality of the impeachment trial. However, I hope CJ Roberts was invited to preside and affirmatively declined.
I was finally able to watch Wednesday night's inaugural concert.
WOW!
Amazing performances. Fireworks like I've never seen.
Most moving of all - Brayden Harrington recited part of JFK's inaugural speech.
I put out my new U.S. flag.
I have never before felt the need to fly the U.S. flag at my home but a new flag went out today.
Our democratic Republic roused itself, rejected a would-be autocrat, and will survive - at least for now.
The insurrectionist seen in photos with this feet on the Speaker's desk is from Arkansas.
He is Richard Barnett from Gravette.
Arkansas needs to know:
(1) For whom does he work?
(2) Who in Arkansas supported him?
(3) Who are his friends and relations that should be disowning him?
Every Arkansawyer that has ever met this shit stain that does not immediately disavow him should be exposed and shamed.
So, does Paxton get his pardon anyway?
Is filing the "big one" enough or did he have to win?
A small town lawyer's read of the SCOTUS Order.
I will allow that I am not a constitutional law expert but here's what I read.
First, the SCOTUS Order is a miscellaneous order - not a signed opinion. This is the original jurisdiction (cases between states) equivalent of a denial of certiorari. The Court simply found that Texas did not have standing to challenge the election process in other states. This decision is obviously correct and the correct reason for the Court to summarily terminate the case. This disposition is a serious slap-down.
Second, the dissent by Alito and Thomas is far from clear. They would allow the case to be filed - in fact it already had - but would deny further relief. The dissent expresses no opinion on the merits of the case. I think the other relief referenced are the various motions to file amici briefs which, of course, are moot. I am unconvinced Scalia and Thomas expressed an opinion concerning the merits of the Texas pleading.
It would have been nice if Alito and Thomas had put on their big-justice robes and stood up for democracy but that is really too much to hope.
Profile Information
Gender: MaleHometown: Arkansas
Home country: USA
Current location: Arkansas, USA
Member since: Mon May 15, 2017, 08:46 PM
Number of posts: 10,801
