Reply To: Justice in the balance as Trump faces Supreme Court picks

John W

I actually do take into consideration the differences in ideologies. I understand words are to be “defined”, and art is to be “interpreted”. Some will agree, some will not, and some go their own way. In fact, I don’t always see eye to eye with myself. I get that. And that’s actually a good thing. But, when the term “sex offender” or “pedophile” is used, the human brain goes into some sort of crazy, irrational, forget how to think mode.

This is a basis for my analysis:
I accessed google and typed, “Sex Offender laws signed by Clinton”. Then I did the same with Bush, them Obama. And because I live in Missouri, I did the same for Jay Nixon, Blunt, Waggoner, and McCaskill. Guess what? Presidents, Governors, Congressmen and women, Dems, Reps, Libs, Cons, no matter the flavor, age, gender, race, or religion, they have done whatever they could to take away my rights, to punish me and my family and/or anybody who speaks well of me, and to use people like me for political grandstanding. All the other stuff about what kind of liberals and conservatives they are becomes mumbo jumbo.

In 2012, a couple of political science professors analyzed more than 900 state supreme court justices trying to determine their ideology based on various factors. Even though, they admitted their findings could not place definitive label, I, in my opinion could see that the majority of judges were liberal, but, so what. There are a lot of fine outstanding liberals as well as conservatives.

I’m not going to “google” these judges by name for I think it would be futile, but I will take a guess at how many of them care of my plight. I come up with the number “zero”. Simply because an attorney who argues for the state will use the magic words of “sex offender” or “pedophile”. We already know from past experience what will happen to their brains.

I know that my outlook is bleak. I hope I’m wrong. I’ve never wanted to be more wrong in my life.