4141
Comments (184)
sorted by:
231
CyclopticErotica 231 points ago +231 / -0

Check out the difference in writing styles in the opinions. Majority opinion is pages of case references and precedence. Liberal response just calls racism and declares it unfair.

69
IncredibleMrE1 69 points ago +74 / -5

It's honestly sad. Elena Kagan is really a smart woman, and that nonsense is what she does.

54
deleted 54 points ago +60 / -6
35
IncredibleMrE1 35 points ago +38 / -3

Evil the lot of them. It's just sad that that's what they put their minds to.

25
disgruntled_patriot 25 points ago +27 / -2

Are megalomaniacal bullies smart or is everyone else just really fucking stupid?

41
Formerlurker92 41 points ago +41 / -0

After a year of masks, I'm tempted to say stupid

21
Dunkin4COVAIDS 21 points ago +23 / -2

"Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that." - George Carlin

The Average IQ is 100. Half of the population is at or below that. I.e. at least 50% of your daily interactions with the general public is with idiots.

5
deleted 5 points ago +10 / -5
5
Seruna_Kanus 5 points ago +5 / -0

Isn't IQ set up such that 100 is always the average, and deviation from that average defines higher or lower rank in the curve?

3
Uh-hickabuh 3 points ago +3 / -0

I guess the question is for me, are iq tests something that adjust for moving averages? So if the average score becomes an IQ of 104 based on the tests for say the last year, does the iq test grading get modified downwards to make that 104 number become the 100 average for the following year/period?

3
CrackerJack2 3 points ago +3 / -0

The I.Q. test is set up to have a median of 100, but it most likely takes a number of years to revise the test.
So the current test results don't necessarily guarantee a 100 median score.
This is especially so if enough people get the "vaccine", a.k.a. the experimental gene therapy shot.

2
MICHIGANisRED 2 points ago +2 / -0

Yes. Even if society got more intelligent, the average would still be 100.

4
CyclopticErotica 4 points ago +5 / -1

Always the handshake accounts with the racial intelligence shit.

2
bighomiebeenchillin 2 points ago +2 / -0

theyre cia shill bot. downvote, report, and move on.

-1
deleted -1 points ago +1 / -2
3
grenades_and_ham 3 points ago +3 / -0

laughs in Somali

2
bighomiebeenchillin 2 points ago +2 / -0

shut your cia shill bot ass up goofy. trump supporters dont play with that racist goofy shit, you dumb fuck

4
A1waysLurk1ing 4 points ago +5 / -1

Passive betas is the real answer.

1% has always gotten shit done.

4
ALargeRock 4 points ago +4 / -0

Perhaps neither. Good people typically live and let live. Peaceful. Evil people fuck with people. Creating conflict.

1
Aoikaze2000 1 point ago +1 / -0

Yes.

13
SurfingUSA 13 points ago +15 / -2

Hitler was plenty smart about central banking and its effects on a populace.

9
Hussar 9 points ago +9 / -0

One of the most mid-wit armchair philosopher "observations" I've ever heard goes something like this:

"All good actions come from wisdom, and all evil actions come from [a lack of] intelligence."

That is, if you're evil it's basically because you're stupid. It's such a brainless and juvenile argument. Because while you can call Josef Stalin, Mao, Ted Bundy, and Adolf Hitler monstrous and cruel, calling them stupid or unintelligent is both false and indirectly insulting to their victims. You can't dominate a nation or elude competent law enforcement for years if you think that 2 + 2 = ham sandwich.

12
masticator_nord 12 points ago +12 / -0

"I am intelligent. I wouldn't do evil things. Therefore those who do evil things must do so due to a lack of intelligence." - mid-wit armchair philosophers

2
Throwingway22 2 points ago +2 / -0

The real dissonance is that they define their actions as intelligent and as not evil, regardless of what those actions are or the consequences of them. Therefore stopping them is stupid and the true evil.

1
A1waysLurk1ing 1 point ago +1 / -0

Disassociation from others, is a phenotype.

Change my mind.

2
Hussar 2 points ago +2 / -0

It's especially ironic because the person who I last saw make that mid-wit observation is morally bankrupt in a way that shocks some on his own side.

To summarize, he's the type of militant neoliberal who would force every red voter from the Midwest to the South into one great big internment camp, all because they're "superstitious God-botherers" and "obsolete ghouls".

3
masticator_nord 3 points ago +3 / -0

Ah, so he's just a guy who knows better than everybody else and if he were given power would totes create utopia with his superior genius. So long as he is allowed to "deal with" those who are too stupid to see his magnificent vision, of course.

3
IntrepidBurger 3 points ago +3 / -0

That's objectively not true. Being brutal and vicious alone can result in gaining power, look at all the African warlords. People like to think that those that achieve power must be clever, but all you really need is brutality.

Mao in particular was extremely stupid.

2
Hussar 2 points ago +2 / -0

My larger point was that there's no correlation between high intelligence and having a healthy moral compass.

As for Mao specifically, while it's true that he was exceptionally stupid in some ways (e.g. the war on sparrows which devastated the ecosystem), he was intelligent in other respects, namely his ability to outmanuever Chiang Kai-Shek - to adapt and fight during the Chinese Civil War.

Brutality can get you into power, but to stay in power you need to know where and how to direct that brutality, and how to thank your supporters. Despots and warlords that can't or won't reward their footsoldiers run the risk of being counter-coup'd. We wonder why otherwise incompetent dictators like Maduro haven't been thrown out yet, and it's largely because he's smart enough to keep the military relatively fed and paid.

2
Hank_Baxter 2 points ago +2 / -0

Evil is often intelligent, but never wise.

6
Pepehands 6 points ago +6 / -0

Don't forget trudope

13
Testosteroneape2000 13 points ago +13 / -0

There s a difference between intelligent people and articulate people. They are not the same.

11
NOTWOKE 11 points ago +11 / -0

Hussein O comes to mind as a good example.

6
Throwingway22 6 points ago +6 / -0

He's not even articulate. He can't get two sentences out without a script.

2
A1waysLurk1ing 2 points ago +2 / -0

Aye, 100% puppet.

4
Ocineaa 4 points ago +4 / -0

Bumbling moron Hussein Obama was.

4
Sparks1017 4 points ago +4 / -0

O bongo wasn't articulate, he read from a teleprompter well

4
Testosteroneape2000 4 points ago +4 / -0

Spot on. He is a prime example.

4
BigIronBigIron 4 points ago +4 / -0

Why doubt his intelligence? He got exactly what he wanted, America is totally fucked up now.

3
Testosteroneape2000 3 points ago +3 / -0

Just because he got what he wanted doesn’t mean he orchestrated anything. He is a fool and a puppet.

2
DebbieinDallas 2 points ago +2 / -0

Joe Biden called him articulate and clean. What does that tell you about how Dems view Kenyians?

2
A1waysLurk1ing 2 points ago +2 / -0

He has a Jesuit fist up his ass, when Mike isn't up in thar.

0
BigIronBigIron 0 points ago +1 / -1

Sure, it was the Jesuits at Goldman Sachs that funded his rise, ok buddy

2
DebbieinDallas 2 points ago +2 / -0

What makes you think he was intelligent? His college records which he has sealed? His ability to read off a teleprompter? His endless stuttering when he is off prompter?

1
NOTWOKE 1 point ago +1 / -0

Articulate without intelligence.

4
leet23 4 points ago +4 / -0

A common mistake liberal's make is seeing knowledge and intelligence as the same thing, I have found in my 41 years of life that people who have a good level of both of these also generally have good common sense yet I find liberal's usually have one of the other but rarely all three which goes along way to explain why they are who they are.

11
deleted 11 points ago +11 / -0
5
Saltyminer11 5 points ago +5 / -0

Narcicism actually has a diagnosis code.

2
DebbieinDallas 2 points ago +2 / -0

I used to know a woman who was married to a PhD and he had a military rank, but was retired. He used to wax their motor home in the hot sun and then go inside and watch TV or something because he forgot that you also have to buff off the wax after it dries. Horse Sense is better than high IQ

1
A1waysLurk1ing 1 point ago +1 / -0

Just another run of the mill psychopath, likely.

8
Sparks1017 8 points ago +8 / -0

Is she?

3
Saltyminer11 3 points ago +3 / -0

The opinion doesn't say that she is smart.

1
BigIronBigIron 1 point ago +1 / -0

She's spent a lot of time laining.

8
deleted 8 points ago +8 / -0
3
Throwingway22 3 points ago +3 / -0

The liberal side of the court stopped citing precedent and the Constitution when FDR was in office. Read Roe v Wade, Lawrence v Texas, Casey v planned Parenthood, and Obgerfell. They cite one after the other until the progenitor where they cite feelings and penumbra's. I circle jerk of made up "rights." Kennedy was the worst at this.

12
lostremote- 12 points ago +12 / -0

Who would have thought “Racism becuz.. “ wasnt a valid argument!?

5
Long_time_lurker 5 points ago +5 / -0

Majority opinion is pages of case references and precedence. Liberal response just calls racism and declares it unfair.

The reporting is like that, too. I read an MSM article someone posted and found that they were incredibly racist for thinking that minorities somehow can't figure out how to drop vote-by-mail ballots from the Permanent Early Voting list into a box.

The real answer is that it hurts their cheating and they'll point to some "disparate impact" because the fraudulent votes they cast aren't counted and we're really out to get brown people instead of trying to secure the ballot boxes against Democrat cheating.

2
VenusDe 2 points ago +2 / -0

Notice how the media doesn't bother to quote the majority -- only the FEELINGS of the minority.

1
CivilBindle 1 point ago +1 / -0

Liberals cry racism the same way normal people sneeze.

96
Donkeyballs 96 points ago +96 / -0

Common sense isn’t racial discrimination

33
lostremote- 33 points ago +33 / -0

The ones always screaming amount muh racism don’t have a lot of common sense!

7
PromiseImNotASpook 7 points ago +8 / -1

It’s always white teen girls and 40 year old upper middle class suburban housewives.

9
SuperHarleyQuinn 9 points ago +9 / -0

Don’t forget the male “feminists”. They live for screeching at anyone who isn’t fully indoctrinated as well. Those losers can’t make a single argument that isn’t unironically racist, they simply wrap it up in a woke “logic”.

9
Whoopies_tds 9 points ago +10 / -1

That's racist 👆

3
deleted 3 points ago +3 / -0
76
raptoris 76 points ago +76 / -0

What the fuck is that add ? :D

28
OperationCatSpeed 28 points ago +28 / -0

Lol. Trolling...

26
deleted 26 points ago +26 / -0
5
Saltyminer11 5 points ago +5 / -0

Catapillars!

22
deleted 22 points ago +22 / -0
6
Saltyminer11 6 points ago +6 / -0

Here here

11
BasedTemplar 11 points ago +11 / -0

Who would you vote for? The Devil? Or his pawn?

4
CoryInTheHouse1776 4 points ago +4 / -0

Targeted advertising towards OP 🤔🤔🤔

3
JaevlaSkit [S] 3 points ago +3 / -0

Fuck them both

1
RecoveringNPC 1 point ago +1 / -0

They are the same person :-p

52
CommanderInQueef 52 points ago +52 / -0

McConnel vs Biden? Is this a joke?

26
bobobob 26 points ago +26 / -0

They're the same picture.

5
Breadstick4 5 points ago +5 / -0

It should be the dem 2024 running

36
Mainwar 36 points ago +36 / -0

Oh, NOW SCROTUS can head an election challenge?

14
deleted 14 points ago +14 / -0
5
YeDragonEnergy 5 points ago +5 / -0

I hope no one forgets that they’re part of the reason we’re in this shit

36
deleted 36 points ago +36 / -0
25
20MagnusKonrad20 25 points ago +25 / -0

damaged a statute that stands as a monument to America's greatness

WHOA WHOA WHOA! Fact checkers please! I was told, rather explicitly for the last 5 years that America has never been great and that claiming otherwise was a right-wing dogwhislte and code for white supreme pizzas.

2
IAmTheSenate 2 points ago +2 / -0

Ray siz uhm

19
deleted 19 points ago +19 / -0
19
Ebbie8708 19 points ago +19 / -0

Again, why is this taken to the Supreme Court? This is a state issue.

Yet when Texas lead the charge against PA because PA illegal changed their laws to cheat the election, the Supreme Court had sh— to say.

4
sully 4 points ago +4 / -0

It is a State issue until you have to appeal to a higher court. You can escalate really any case as far up as the SCOTUS.

There is a hierarchy of court jurisdictions you have to go through. State courts, then Appeals courts, then SCOTUS. So usually its a state district level (County, District, SC of that state), then it goes to a Circuit Court, then after that SCOTUS.

16
SpaceForceMAGA 16 points ago +16 / -0

My biggest takeaway from this article is the Biden vs McConnell ad. They know we hate McConnell so he is a safe bet to add to an online poll.

7
Bunniefuzz 7 points ago +7 / -0

I never ever answer polls. They are typically bias and inaccurate. About the same as CDC statistics on the coof

13
The_Litehaus_Abides 13 points ago +13 / -0

Now somebody sue California. Ballot harvesting was the reason for the "loss" of the House in 2018.

4
russianbot4673 4 points ago +4 / -0

only problem is this ruling doesn't indicate that scotus would shoot it down in california. state legislatures have authority over their elections, so if the legislative branch of california legalized harvesting there, it's the law. it's a terrible law, but it's their authority to do a terrible law.

12
hodlmybeer 12 points ago +12 / -0

The Democrats will still cheat anyway. They know all that matters is the vote total, no matter how you get it.

10
AbrahamLincoln 10 points ago +10 / -0

I thought scotus told us they weren't allowed to uphold election laws.

6
Bunniefuzz 6 points ago +6 / -0

That's what I heard.

9
War_Hamster 9 points ago +10 / -1

Happy Hamster dance!

Not only did SCOTUS just uphold States' rights to conduct their own elections but they also denied the Dems' premise of systemic racism.

This decision will have legs.

Any other ruling would have been an Unconstitutional usurpation of States' rights and it would have been done on the basis of minorities needing special protections. Avoiding that can of worms is an even bigger deal than just the election integrity implications.

2
SurfingUSA 2 points ago +3 / -1
1
War_Hamster 1 point ago +2 / -1

Bookmarked. Will be using this one.

8
MarginofFraud 8 points ago +8 / -0

Sounds like that DOJ lawsuit against GAs new election laws is heading for some troubled waters.

2
Omgwtfbbq 2 points ago +2 / -0

I’ve seen parts of it. I’m no lawyer, but it seems like a joke. In those parts, it says the law had no black support, was passed on a party line, and championed by Georgia legislators that supported the Texas lawsuit.

1
MarginofFraud 1 point ago +1 / -0

It is. It's just a lame attempt to call every rule in GA racist. With today's SCOTUS ruling, that lawsuit isn't going to hold up anymore.

6
MAK90 6 points ago +6 / -0

The left: liberals are smarter and more educated.

Also the left: liberal minorities are so stupid they can't figure out how to vote.

6
mivvan 6 points ago +6 / -0

What is "tragic" here is that 3 justices are openly for allowing the rigging of elections and against even minimal election integrity

5
ModernKnight 5 points ago +5 / -0

"Kagan wrote, joined by the other two liberal justices." Other two? I see 2 moderate justices on the court, the rest are liberal.

3
SurfingUSA 3 points ago +3 / -0

Thomas believes in natural law. I would call that farther away from lib than just "moderate."

It's interesting to me that the dissenters are Kagan, joined by Breyer and Sotomayor -- and that the ostensible conservatives really hung together here, meaning Roberts even, ACB, and Kav.

The comments section should prove insightful:

https://legalinsurrection.com/2021/07/supreme-court-upholds-arizona-ballot-harvesting-restrictions/

Let's see, so far:

5CommoChief | July 1, 2021 at 10:45 am This ruling seems to significantly impact the DoJ complaint v GA election laws. Particularly the out of precinct voter portion. The absentee ballot procedures as to who may ‘handle’ ballots and the State interest in regulation/oversight of third parties who seek to ‘handle’ ballots.

1
SurfingUSA 1 point ago +1 / -0

another comment:

amatuerwrangler | July 1, 2021 at 11:13 am That dissent is pathetic. A law that requires people to vote in their own precinct is suppressing black votes? Limiting delivery of a ballot to 1) the voter, 2) a relative, 3) a member of the household, 4) the mailman, 5) an election official (did I miss any) is suppressing votes? Give me a break!

Are black people really so incompetent that they cannot mail a letter? Or are they that short of family or household members? (Anyone can say they are a relative or household member and how would you prove otherwise??)

These dissenting justices are the worst enemies the black Americans could ever have.

4
FORMERCHILDSTAR 4 points ago +4 / -0

Kagan should know better, but like many on the left they serve the prince of darkness and are liars from the beginning.

3
MythArcana 3 points ago +3 / -0

Now do California where ballot harvesting originated.

3
HappyPedeInCA 3 points ago +3 / -0

How stupid do they think minorities are?

1
dogcatfud 1 point ago +1 / -0

Apparently lots of POCs are dumb enough to allow themselves to be brainwashed by the left. The Dems thrive on these sheep to live for handouts. The few minorities that think for themselves are branded as traitors and sellouts, often by members of their own race.

3
z89101 3 points ago +4 / -1

Excellent👍

2
ComradeSanders 2 points ago +2 / -0

I’d like to congratulate non-white Americans for their victory today. Democrats may not think you’re capable of living up to the same rules and guidelines as white people, but at least the Supreme Court does.

2
Anonymous117 2 points ago +2 / -0

Who would you vote for? Biden or McConnell

They are the same picture

2
47urOFH3d 2 points ago +2 / -0

If a change disproportionally affects certain racial groups, wouldn't reverting the change do the same for the remaining groups? Maybe the VRA is poorly written, to the point of being useless?

2
603win 2 points ago +2 / -0

It’s wild times in clown world when the headline reads that the supreme court upholds the law

2
Lol_Garrus 2 points ago +2 / -0

"WhO wOuLd yOu vOtE fOr?"

Neither of those fucktwats.

2
NOTWOKE 2 points ago +2 / -0

That this is a Supreme Court issue is at all is sad.

2
RohdKill_2020 2 points ago +2 / -0

Now do the other states.

2
Captain_MAGA 2 points ago +2 / -0

Will this only effect Arizona or does it become case law to ban ballot harvesting in the whole country now?

1
russianbot4673 1 point ago +1 / -0

i don't see how it could, and i don't think that would even be a good thing. because the constitution says that state legislatures have authority over their own elections. the state legislature in california passed a law there legalizing harvesting. i think it's a terrible law but it's their authority, not scotus', to govern how they do their own elections.

if scotus could over-rule california's voting laws, then they'd be able to do that everywhere. which is not something the constitution allows them to do. not sure we'd want that.

2
dantehman81 2 points ago +2 / -0

Laws don’t matter if there no punishment for breaking them.

1
TNVol 1 point ago +1 / -0

😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

1
BoatingAccident 1 point ago +2 / -1

SCOTUS... maybe not as cucked as people think. Maybe more in store.

1
sneak 1 point ago +1 / -0

I'm sure they would like cocaine mitch to run

1
Diana 1 point ago +1 / -0

Why do these Dems never have to show proof as to exactly how these groups are incapable of complying with these election integrity rules?

1
SneedsFeedNSeed 1 point ago +1 / -0

Dumb USA people. I had to show my ID to exchange 50's for 100's at my bank. No ID should be necessary for that - dare it be called racist tooooo?

1
NotAnotherNPC 1 point ago +1 / -0

Almost makes me want to go to twitter to collect some tears... but not quite enough interested in dealing with that cesspool.

1
Xuvial 1 point ago +1 / -0

Ok cool, but fuck SCOTUS. They're the reason we're in this mess to begin with. They turned traitor when the election was stolen.

1
snoopy3210 1 point ago +1 / -0

This article is full of shit!

It falsely claims that conservative justices said that the state's interest in election integrity justifies racial discrimination! Alito clearly said that the democrats didn't prove any discrimination by banning ballot harvesting.

Alito simply added that even if some statistic showed some group disparity after the ballot harvesting ban, (those who give up their ballot to harvesters aren't necessarily voting BTW), banning that practice was still justified to keep the chain of custody. That's not complicated! Propaganda by the associated press about elections is so wrong! That may explain why AP have its offices in the same building than Hamas.

1
buckeyeminuteman 1 point ago +1 / -0

Everybody knows that POC are too stupid to figure out how to get a photo ID and figure out what precinct they should be voting in. Democrats are morally superior because they are always looking out for the little POC.

1
LordScatmanJohn 1 point ago +1 / -0

Lol how do you like the false dichotomy between potatus and turtleman? Theyre equally shitty imo.

1
russianbot4673 1 point ago +1 / -0

i don't like alito's reasoning here. he says that it's because of the state's 'interest' in the integrity of elections. how about it's because the constitution grants the states' legislature authority over their own elections? how about that?

1
Desperado 1 point ago +1 / -0

Schumer immediately ventured some "sky is falling" rhetoric. It's all so fucking tiresome. Even a cunt like Schumer must be exhausted. When will they ever learn?

1
DennJW 1 point ago +1 / -0

Spoiler Alert: The court will be packed, and will decide on its own to revisit this, or the CCP-DOJ will ask it to.

They know what's coming. This is a "non-partisan" SMOKESCREEN.

1
TheWinningNeverStops 1 point ago +1 / -0

I laughed for a minute straight after reading the title

1
farstriderr 1 point ago +1 / -0

Whoever dissented to this needs to be removed.

1
ravioli_king 1 point ago +1 / -0

A ballot is a ballot. Just uphold the same standards per county, per district. All ballots are treated equally.

1
BasedTemplar 1 point ago +1 / -0

This is an open and shut case.

1
DestroyerofCobwebs 1 point ago +1 / -0

Disgusting AP as usual, giving no space to the well reasoned decision by Alito and the majority of the court, instead focusing on the petulant ramblings of Kagan.

Democracy was a failed idea in Ancient Greece, it's failed every time it has been tried, it would fail today. Strong nations don't let every joker who can fog a mirror vote on topics of national consequence.

1
BloodDe 1 point ago +1 / -0

Hint if a law doesn’t mention a race it’s not racist