CSPAN Survey: Only 43% Can Name a Supreme Court Justice

HOW PATHETICALLY SAD AND UNINFORMED HAS AMERICA BECOME?

As reported at The Hill, according to a recent C-SPAN survey only 43% of likely U.S voters could name “A” Supreme Court Justice. Wow, not all of them, not a majority of them, not even two. What a sad state of affairs. It really makes one wonder just how uninformed of an electorate we rally have in this country that less than half could not name one justice. Making matters worse, probably more than that percentage could name the judges from the final tear of American Idol. Take a good looks below folks, these would be the Justices of the Supreme Court, including the late, great Antonin Gregory Scalia.

What makes matters even more puzzling is that although the majority of respondents were unable to identify a member of the court, 90% of all respondents indicated they felt the Supreme Court had a key impact on their daily life. Let’s understand this, you have no idea the names of the people who impact your lives? HEAVEN HELP US!!!

supreme-court-justices

Only 43 percent of likely U.S. voters can name a Supreme Court justice, according to a C-SPAN survey released Sunday.

The survey comes as President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee, Neil Gorsuch, began confirmation hearings on Monday.

According to the survey, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was named more than her fellow justices, with 16 percent of those surveyed giving her name.

Chief Justice John Roberts followed behind, at 12 percent, and Justice Clarence Thomas was named by 10 percent of people surveyed.

The numbers drop off precipitously from there, with just 3 percent naming Justice Sonia Sotomayor.

Justices Anthony Kennedy, Samuel Alito and Elena Kagan were named by 1 percent, while no one among the 1,032 likely voters surveyed named Justice Stephen Breyer, who was confirmed more than 20 years ago under President Clinton.

Posted March 21, 2017 by
Polls, Supreme Court, WTF | no comments

Supreme Court Justice of the US Skipped President Trump’s Speech As She Has Done Every GOP President, But Attending Democrat One’s is AOK

ONE HAS TO QUESTION HOW AN INDIVIDUAL THAT IS SO POLITICALLY BIAS CAN ACTUALLY SIT ON THE HIGHEST COURT IN THE LAND … SO MUCH FOR JUSTICE BEING BLIND.

Last night Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was a no show for President Donald Trump’s first Address to Congress and it was expected. The 83 year old aging justice, appointed by Bill Clinton in 1993 had no issue attending his joint speeches to Congress, nor Barack Obama’s. However, she was a no show for any of President George W. Bush’s speeches and was AWOL last night as well for President Trump’s first Address to Congress.  t is one thing for a justice of the SCOTUS to not attend any of the presidential joint speeches to Congress or the State of the Union events, but for a justice to only attend for Democrat presidents and not of the GOP makes one scratch their head as to how their judicial judgements could be considered not politically bias. It is troubling for a justice of the SCOTUS to only skip the joint speeches of a particular party, no matter which party it is.

Ginsberg Obama

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg always hugged President Barack Obama before his speeches to Congress. She doesn’t even plan to attend President Donald Trump’s first one.

Ginsburg, who called Trump a “faker” during his campaign, intends to skip Tuesday night’s speech, leaving it to five of her colleagues to represent the court.

Chief Justice John Roberts will join Justices Anthony Kennedy, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan in attendance, court spokeswoman Kathy Arberg confirmed. All are regulars at the annual event. Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito aren’t planning to attend, continuing their past practice.

Alito hasn’t gone to a speech since 2010, the year Obama criticized the justices’ just-issued Citizens United campaign-finance ruling. Obama accused the court of ignoring a century of precedent, a claim that prompted Alito to shake his head and mouth “not true” as Democratic lawmakers directly behind the justices rose to cheer.

Ginsburg, a 1993 appointee of Democrat Bill Clinton, also skipped Republican President George W. Bush’s speeches. She attended all eight of Obama’s.

However, the poetic justice to this partisan justice will be when President Donald J. Trump nominates her successor.

THE O’REILLY FACTOR Discusses President Donald Trump’s Supreme Court Announcement of Judge Gorsuch

A WARNING TO THE LEFT, GO AFTER GORSUCH AT YOUR OWN PERIL …

Bill O’Reilly opines, “If the left starts to smear Gorsuch it will be another nail in the progressive coffin.”

President Trump Picks Appeals court judge Neil Gorsuch for SCOTUS

TRUMP TAPS JUDGE GORSUCH FOR SCOTUS …

Last night President Donald J. Trump nominated federal appeals court judge Neil Gorsuch for the Supreme Court. Trump could not have selected a better candidate for the job to replace the deceased U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia.

“Standing here in a house of history, and acutely aware of my own imperfections, I pledge that if I am confirmed I will do all my powers permit to be a faithful servant of the Constitution and laws of this great country.”

President Trump nominated Colorado federal appeals court judge Neil Gorsuch for the Supreme Court on Tuesday, opting in the most important decision of his young presidency for a highly credentialed favorite of the conservative legal establishment to fill the opening created last year by the death of Justice Antonin Scalia.

Gorsuch, 49, prevailed over the other finalist, Thomas Hardiman of Pennsylvania, also a federal appeals court judge, and Trump announced the nomination at a televised prime-time event at the White House.

“Standing here in a house of history, and acutely aware of my own imperfections, I pledge that if I am confirmed I will do all my powers permit to be a faithful servant of the Constitution and laws of this great country,” said Gorsuch, with his wife Louise at his side.

Gorsuch pledged to be impartial and independent, and respectful of his place in government.

“It is the role of judges to apply, not alter, the work of the people’s representatives,” he said. “A judge who likes every outcome he reaches is very likely a bad judge.”

Posted February 1, 2017 by
Supreme Court | no comments

RINO & Failed GOP Establishement Presidential Candidate John McCain Says, ‘I don’t know’ if Donald Trump will be better for Supreme Court than Hillary Clinton

I GUESS THIS IS MCCAIN’S IDEA OF BEING MAVERICKY …

UNBELIEVABLE … Sen. John McCain (Rino-AZ) says in an interview that he does not know whether Donald Trump will be better in nominating justices to the US Supreme Court than Hillary Clinton. Seriously? If McCain a so-called Republican, does not know whether the GOP candidate for President would or would not be better in selecting possible justices to the SCOTUS over a bed-wetting liberal and proven liar like Hillary Clinton,  maybe its time for him to retire. If you ever wondered what happened to the Republican party, look no further than “mavericky” GOP Senator John McCain.

What a bunch of crap coming from the RINO and former failed establishment Republican presidential candidate. This fools answer is to block Hillary Clinton’s SCOTUS nominees, yet in the same breath he is saying that he does not know if Trump would be any better? As stated at Hot Air, this is the one subject we know that all Republicans can agree with when it comes to The Donald. Trump has already released a list of 20 potential SCOTUS nominees and none would be questioned by Republicans. Sadly, this is what has gone wrong with the Republican party, establishment candidates need to be flushed out and replaced with those that actually care about the country and not their own political power.

CNN:

Trump has released lists of 21 potential justices. He has pledged to choose from among those 21 when making Supreme Court selections, in a move that has earned him praise from conservatives, including his former rival in the Republican primary, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz.

Asked on the Dom Giordano program on 1210 WPHT Philadelphia radio whether Trump was the superior candidate on issues like the Supreme Court, the Arizona senator replied, “Uh, first of all, I don’t know, because I hear him saying a lot of different things.”

Hillary Clinton_John McCain

Later in the interview, McCain used the opportunity to make the case for fellow Republican Sen. Pat Toomey, who is locked in a close battle to retain his Senate seat in Pennsylvania. McCain promised that Republicans would be “united against any Supreme Court nominee” put forth by Clinton.

“I promise you that we will be united against any Supreme Court nominee that Hillary Clinton, if she were president, would put up,” McCain said. “I promise you. This is where we need the majority and Pat Toomey is probably as articulate and effective on the floor of the Senate as anyone I have encountered.”

This is exactly the kind of Republican establishment BS that Americans have grown sick and tired of. Really, the gutless and spineless establishment Republicans like McCain are going to unite and block a Hillary Clinton SCOTUS nominee? No you are not. The GOP was given control of the House to stop Obamacare, they did nothing. The GOP was given control of the Senate to repeal Obamacare and balance the budget, they did nothing. What makes any Republican think these gutless wonders would stand up to Hillary Clinton?

Next Page →

Support Scared Monkeys! make a donation.

 
 
  • NEWS (breaking news alerts or news tips)
  • Red (comments)
  • Dugga (technical issues)
  • Dana (radio show comments)
  • Klaasend (blog and forum issues)
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Close
E-mail It