[Garth Tater]

There’s an adage even now that the Court follows the election returns.

If they hold their oaths to uphold the Constitution in such little disregard I don't see how you can have any faith in them to do anything other than what is in their own best interest. Follow the election returns? Okay, how about following the road of least resistance? Or following the road that doesn't result in their crimes or sexual misconduct being exposed? Or how about just following the path that lines their pockets with gold?

Threats or bribes? Lead or silver? Doesn't matter to me. John Roberts exposed himself as nothing but a tool of our would-be masters and words can't hide that fact.

[HiTech RedNeck]

Well their own best interest IS in bowing to the winds of politics. Generally, the election returns reflect this, with some fussy timing factors approximated away.

[HiTech RedNeck]

Please notice that Ben Franklin was said to have remarked, “A republic, if you can keep it.”

That little word “keep” has momentous import. A republic is not a static thing, but a dynamic one. A ship won’t sail in doldrums. It can try to tack against a head wind, but won’t make progress nearly as fast that way, and if the pressure is to just do something, anything, it will use the prevailing winds as tail winds.

It’s been a while since we’ve had convinced believers, either Christian or Jewish, on the Court. What we think of as the right wing of the Court are that way culturally, mostly as Catholics. This is weaker than being a convinced believer. Trump would be wise to nominate people who have the personal spiritual resources to buck shifting winds when it is right.

[HiTech RedNeck]

But anyhow, even a weather vane will do the right thing if the wind keeps in the right direction. There are multiple factors. Don’t fret about the wrong, as this fretting will distract from what can be done to encourage what is right.