120 points

Weird, I appear open to pushing Clarence Thomas into the Grand Canyon. He’s such an astoundingly shitty human being that I don’t understand how he lives with himself.

permalink
report
reply
99 points

I don’t understand how he lives with himself.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

I mean, I get that, but there’s no amount of money that could make me do the things he’s done because I’d hate myself in a way money can’t fix. He (and the rest of the conservatives on the court) have hurt so many people and I don’t know how they aren’t even a little bothered. It’s like they’re legal robots who can’t feel empathy.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Your first mistake is thinking that people like Thomas actually feel empathy for other people that aren’t them. There’s been studies on this - wealth, especially extreme wealth, physiologically changes how your brain processes things like empathy, altruism, etc.

permalink
report
parent
reply
68 points
*

The US has tranferred $2 triliion to the wealthy since 1976 losing the war on drugs. Making drug addiction illegal is just a way to justify transferring another $2 trillion to the wealthy. It’s not about ending drug addiction. It’s about profit with a side dish of punishing those that they think they are better than.

permalink
report
reply
54 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
reply
27 points

Not being a wealthy white hard right Christian will be illegal. The point is to make it impossible for people to live legally, so you can just push them around any way you like.

permalink
report
parent
reply
42 points

I had some good shit typed out about addiction and booze (two posts in a row!), but then I mostly-read the article and see that he wants to get rid of a ruling which overturned a law making narcotics illegal (assuming the story didn’t just use that word).

So I’m now wondering if he would hold onto that until big pharma is off the hook for their role in the opiate epidemic.

permalink
report
reply
33 points

So I’m now wondering if he would hold onto that until big pharma is off the hook for their role in the opiate epidemic.

  • Get the most lower class Americans struggling for healthcare (dawn of country)
  • Have them stick to their low paying jobs because they have healthcare (Dawn of the 20th century)
  • Get them hooked on opiates a rigged FDA approved of due to the company that made it funded the studies and had them on the board
  • Make them dependent on them when they get injured by buying doctors
  • Now you have a low income addict to a drug. Job fucks him over? Arrest him for homelessness. Police terry stop him? Arrest him for drug possession. He starts questioning how it all happened, “you’re some kinda commie lib hippy, arrest him!”

Thomas wants liberals in jail, he doesn’t care how.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points
*

And now that he’s in prison, he can be a slave for corporate profit. Truly wonderful, the mind of a capitalist is

permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points

“Thomas said in his opinion in the case that he would like to “dispose” of a 1962 ruling that struck down a California law that criminalized being addicted to narcotics, reported Newsweek.”

Should this be interpreted literally?

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

I interpret this as a metaphor for life.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

I’m looking at it more like the literal usage of the word “addicted”.

Like, even if an addict legitimately quits, they still might feel addicted for many years later. Is that illegal? 🤔

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

I’m confused as to how that would even work

permalink
report
parent
reply
40 points
*

“In an appropriate case, the Court should certainly correct this error,” Thomas wrote.

Thomas is making called shots now for rich people with private prisons. What a muppet.

permalink
report
reply
3 points

There’s 158 private prisons in the US. That’s roughly 2.5% of detention facilities in the US. People talk like the majority of prisons are privately owned but it’s actually quite rare.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

The amount of privately owned facilities isn’t a good metric. The amount housed in private prisons is that being about 8% combine the two and it gets uncomfortable.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

We’ve already had judges doing cash for prisoners, cash for kids, corruption. They don’t need all the budget to attract judges, a few prisons gets the job done.

permalink
report
parent
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That’s all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

Community stats

  • 13K

    Monthly active users

  • 7K

    Posts

  • 124K

    Comments