@pyr666 Yes, and I could be wrong too. But the development I've seen, is that people that get their info from the internet are growing fast. I don't think any young people today actually watch any news on the tv. It's so much more practical to just go on to the net and just click on any story you want to read. I doubt anyone really bother much about watching tv anymore. Everyone I know of almost never does, but the older generations ofc, and they only use the net to pay bills.
@chrisknappER Yeah they will probably ban growing it so that corporations and the government can earn lots of money of us. Anyway, it's better than how it is now. And if you look at the penalties (for my country at least), you'll see that growing weed is punished much much harder than making booze. In most cases your just fined if you make some booze, grow some weed and you could be put in jail for months and years depending on size of the crop.
dun think there should be TV in Court....... becos the accused is innocent until proven guilty.... There is a lot of ways to understand a court..... it need not be at the expense of the suffering of another human being
@fuunguus lol, all the ads on television just bother me so much. Trying to watch a movie and you'll have to watch 30m of ads, OMG. Little segments filled with demands. Do this, do that, buy this, and your life will be awesome, bla bla bla. I swear, I get aggravated by the ads, they have nothing but a negative effect on my mood, and that makes me hate their products. Fucking giving me literally hundreds of demands everyday, fuck television. All hail piracy.
Seems like most of these responses are very positive. Makes me suspicious as to what might be some good reasons *not* to televise Supreme Court hearings. I imagine it's less important for the Supreme Court (given those cases are mostly public knowledge anyhow) and more important for the precedent that will set for state and local courts, and the impact that will have on the process of law and the rule of the mob in regards to both the practice of law and the rules that judges pronounce in a court of law.
@sidiggy1 but who are we to question them thats their way of thinking somehow we are below them and too stupid to know what want well i say CONFEDERACY FIGHTING TERRORISM SINCE 1862 STATES RIGHTS is how the constitiution is constructed but they have already pissed on it and dont care
What's the difference Congress is on tv c-span1-3 so is are us supreme hidding there opinion or the desion we have a some courts have creamers in the courts so I think it would be a good idea to have a creamra in the high courts hey its my opinion
As well worded as that question was.. She manages to weasel out of it by agreeing with the concerns of the question while not genuinely responding with personal similar views expressed on her own words. Further proof that she is lying is that she forces a joke and smiles it off until the room is persuaded she is a good girl once she perpetuates a debate on what everyone has come to a conclusion on. Nothing solved, just give the people hope with one more millimeter toward their goal
Answer starts at 4:04
Thank you for posting this, CSPAN.
@pyr666
Yes, and I could be wrong too. But the development I've seen, is that people that get their info from the internet are growing fast. I don't think any young people today actually watch any news on the tv. It's so much more practical to just go on to the net and just click on any story you want to read. I doubt anyone really bother much about watching tv anymore. Everyone I know of almost never does, but the older generations ofc, and they only use the net to pay bills.
Arlen Specter sounds like Rich Little impersonating Arlen Specter.
She will be a great justice
@Hipsterrunoff c-span is awesome, what are you talking about...
What's this talk of banning books?
I would LOVE televised supreme court hearings. Let's see what they're really doing up there.
@KMAObama Dean of Harvard law... solicitor general... what more do you want?
@chrisknappER
Yeah they will probably ban growing it so that corporations and the government can earn lots of money of us. Anyway, it's better than how it is now. And if you look at the penalties (for my country at least), you'll see that growing weed is punished much much harder than making booze. In most cases your just fined if you make some booze, grow some weed and you could be put in jail for months and years depending on size of the crop.
dun think there should be TV in Court....... becos the accused is innocent until proven guilty.... There is a lot of ways to understand a court..... it need not be at the expense of the suffering of another human being
@captainkill1 Ok? lol, im not going to argue who does more name calling...
they give speaches because they dont know how to answer the questions
@fuunguus
lol, all the ads on television just bother me so much. Trying to watch a movie and you'll have to watch 30m of ads, OMG. Little segments filled with demands. Do this, do that, buy this, and your life will be awesome, bla bla bla. I swear, I get aggravated by the ads, they have nothing but a negative effect on my mood, and that makes me hate their products. Fucking giving me literally hundreds of demands everyday, fuck television. All hail piracy.
Is it me or does this guy sound like Richard Nixon ?
open season cause you cant do your damn job thats why americans are outraged
Seems like most of these responses are very positive. Makes me suspicious as to what might be some good reasons *not* to televise Supreme Court hearings. I imagine it's less important for the Supreme Court (given those cases are mostly public knowledge anyhow) and more important for the precedent that will set for state and local courts, and the impact that will have on the process of law and the rule of the mob in regards to both the practice of law and the rules that judges pronounce in a court of law.
@captainkill1 People that argue with phrases and name calling are among the least intellectual and of the lowest of logical IQ...
@sidiggy1 but who are we to question them thats their way of thinking somehow we are below them and too stupid to know what want well i say CONFEDERACY FIGHTING TERRORISM SINCE 1862 STATES RIGHTS is how the constitiution is constructed but they have already pissed on it and dont care
@pyr666
Oh noes! Decisions based on what the public want?! We cant have that! It would be a disaster! For instance, weed would be legalized :O
Also their is no such thing as a living constitution if that's the case the government can change the meaning of it at anytime!
What's the difference Congress is on tv c-span1-3 so is are us supreme hidding there opinion or the desion we have a some courts have creamers in the courts so I think it would be a good idea to have a creamra in the high courts hey its my opinion
As well worded as that question was.. She manages to weasel out of it by agreeing with the concerns of the question while not genuinely responding with personal similar views expressed on her own words. Further proof that she is lying is that she forces a joke and smiles it off until the room is persuaded she is a good girl once she perpetuates a debate on what everyone has come to a conclusion on. Nothing solved, just give the people hope with one more millimeter toward their goal
What an ugly Marxist swine.
Fortunately we don't pick judges for their looks.