500 Scientists Write U.N.: ‘There is No Climate Emergency’

500 scientists/climate professionals vs 1 autistic kid and we’re still having this controversy?

More than 500 scientists and professionals in climate and related fields have sent a “European Climate Declaration” to the Secretary-General of the United Nations asking for a long-overdue, high-level, open debate on climate change.

Just as 16-year-old Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg addressed the U.N. Climate Action Summit in New York accusing world leaders of robbing her of her future, scientists were begging the United Nations to keep hysteria from obscuring facts.

“Climate science should be less political, while climate policies should be more scientific,” the declaration states. “Scientists should openly address the uncertainties and exaggerations in their predictions of global warming, while politicians should dispassionately count the real benefits as well as the imagined costs of adaptation to global warming, and the real costs as well as the imagined benefits of mitigation.”

The scientists underscored the importance of not rushing into enormously expensive climate action before fully ascertaining the facts.

Hands Off My Gun, Pops

One of these days I will put together a list of the most commonly held incorrect assumptions about popular social attitudes in the US. Included in said list will be the belief that young people are enthusiastic gun grabbers who are finally going to see to it that the American citizenry is forcibly disarmed. David Hogg was an organic phenomenon, grown out of the fertile soil of young men who spent their teenage years playing Call of Duty, after all–nothing manufactured about his story!

From a YouGov survey released a few days ago, results from the three questions addressing gun control by respondent age cohort:

Parenthetically, “buyback” is an Orwellian term. To buy something back, one must first sell the thing. The federal government didn’t sell any of these guns. It didn’t manufacture any of them, either. Such a program would not involve buying anything back–it would involve the theft of the personal property of American citizens in blatant violation of the US Constitution–with forcibly stolen funds, of course.

Why U.S. Patriot missiles failed to stop drones and cruise missiles attacking Saudi oil sites.
The U.S. is having trouble defending against low-flying drones and cruise missiles after years of the Pentagon focusing on longer-range threats.

A lot depends on the word “if”. In any event, the effectiveness of military defensive and offensive gear is a constant see-saw battle. Iran apparently detected this weakness and exploited it.
As has been said: “Only the enemy will tell you where you are weak.”

The United States is sending American troops to the Middle East to provide better air and missile defenses after an aerial attack on Saudi oil targets last week. The raid began around 4 a.m. on the morning of Sept. 14, with explosions rippling across the Kurais and Abqaiq Aramco oil processing facilities inside Saudi Arabia as the sound of defensive automatic machine-gun fire rang in the air.

In theory, the oil facilities both lay under the defensive umbrella of Patriot PAC-2 surface-to-air missile batteries that the U.S. sold to Saudi Arabia to intercept aircraft and missiles up to 100 miles away. However, if Saudi radars detected the 18 triangular drones and seven cruise missiles (judging by recovered debris) that bombarded them last week, they did so too late. Instead, they were forced to fire sporadically with automatic weapons, which didn’t prevent widespread damage that temporarily disrupted shipments of 5.7 million barrels of oil daily — half of Saudi Arabia’s output.

Indeed, while the U.S. troops are intended to provide help against this type of threat — believed to have been launched by Iran — air attacks by low-flying drones and cruise missiles are exactly the types of systems the U.S. is having trouble defending against after years of focusing on longer-range threats.

The Tragedy Of Greta Thunberg
Our Lady of Sorrows

Sixteen-year-old Swedish climate change activist Greta Thunberg lives in the healthiest, wealthiest, safest, and most peaceful era humans have ever known. She is one of the luckiest people to have ever lived.

In a just world, Thunberg would be at the United Nations thanking capitalist countries for bequeathing her this remarkable inheritance. Instead, she, like millions of other indoctrinated kids her age, act as if they live in a uniquely broken world on the precipice of disaster. This is a tragedy.

“You have stolen my dreams and my childhood with your empty words,” Thunberg lectured the world. And maybe she’s right. We’ve failed her by raising a generation of pagans who’ve filled the vacuum left by the absence of faith, not with rationality, but with a cultish worship of Mother Earth and the state. Although, to be fair, the Bible-thumping evangelical’s moral certitude is nothing but a rickety edifice compared to the moral conviction of a Greta Thunberg.

It’s not, of course, her fault. Adults have spent a year creating a 16-year-old because her soundbites comport with their belief system. It was “something about her raw honesty around a message of blunt-force fear [that] turned this girl from invisible to global,” says CNN in a news report about a child with a narrow, age-appropriate, grasp of the world.

It should be noted that “blunt-force fear” is indeed the correct way to describe the concerted misinformation that Thunberg has likely been subjected to since nursery school. There probably isn’t a public school in America that hasn’t plied the panic-stricken talk of environmental disaster in their auditoriums over and over again. New York City and other school systems offer millions of kids an excused absence so they could participate in political climate marches this week, as if it were a religious or patriotic holiday.

We’ve finally convinced a generation of Americans to be Malthusians. According to Scott Rasmussen’s polling, nearly 30 percent of voters now claim to believe that it’s “at least somewhat likely” that the earth will become uninhabitable and humanity will be wiped out over the next 10-15 years. Half of voters under 35 believe it is likely we are on the edge of extinction. Is there any wonder why our youngest generation has a foreboding sense of doom?

IGNORANCE ON GUNS: COMMON, BUT INEXCUSABLE

It is remarkable how little most people who are adamantly opposed to firearms know about them. In general, of course, blissful ignorance of guns is perfectly fine. But if you are a legislator, and you set out to ban something, you do have a duty to know what it is you want to make illegal.

Sheila Jackson Lee is the latest to embarrass herself. She wants to ban America’s most popular rifle, and she knows nothing about it. Not only that, she lies in support of her policy preference:

As I said, there is nothing wrong with being ignorant of a subject–unless you are a legislator, and you want to force everyone else to conform to your ignorant views.

No climate emergency for polar bears or walrus means no climate emergency period

We are told the Arctic is warming twice as fast as anywhere else in the world, yet as the internet reverberates with shrill, almost-the-lowest-ice-extent-ever stories, polar bearsPacific walrus, and the most common ice seal species (ringed and bearded seals, as well as harp seals), are all thriving.  Two new videos published by the GWPF on polar bears and walrus confront this conundrum and the conclusion is clear: if there is no climate emergency for polar bears, there is no climate emergency anywhere.


Resident Shoots 2 Home Invaders, Killing 1

Northeast Philadelphia resident shot two men who broke into their home early Monday. One man died, while another was hurt. The incident along Walker Street remained under investigation.


Father/daughter team defends themselves against Salina home invader

A home intruder got a lot more than he bargained for when he tried to break into a Salina home late last week.

A Salina man and his daughter are safe after a home invasion Thursday night.

Ron, “Rodeo,” Griffin had never met the man who kicked in the door to his home on Thursday night, but he wasn’t about to let a stranger harm his daughter.

The man who broke into the home was bleeding from his foot, and told Griffin that he was running away from someone. But when the man closed Griffin’s door and tried to lock it, Griffin felt threatened. He called to his daughter and asked her to grab his gun.

Father and daughter had prepared for emergency situations like the one they encountered Thursday night, and she knew exactly what to do. Griffin was able to hold the man at gunpoint until the police came and took the intruder into custody.

Griffin says he’s proud of his daughter and glad they are safe.


Man shot in attempt to burglarize Sylvan Drive home

The victims of an early-morning burglary and assault turned the tables on their attacker, shooting the 25-year-old suspect, according to police.

Jeremy Brister was transported by Hamilton County EMS to a local hospital around 1:30 a.m. Saturday after police responded to a report of a person being shot on the 600 block of Sylvan Drive.

“Officers secured the scene and called for the CPD Violent Crimes Unit to respond,” reads a news release from the Chattanooga Police Department.

Investigators determined that Brister had entered the residence illegally, assaulting both residents, a 38-year old woman and a male juvenile, before he was shot.

Brister is being charged with aggravated criminal trespass, aggravated burglary and two counts of aggravated domestic assault, according to the release. He is currently at the hospital and will be transported to the Hamilton County Jail after he is released.

White House infighting thwarts movement on guns

Applause

Competing factions inside the White House have stymied efforts to unite behind gun legislation, further delaying President Donald Trump from getting behind any plan.

On one side is Ivanka Trump, the president’s daughter and adviser, and Attorney General William Barr. Both are urging the president to back new firearms restrictions — including expanded background checks for gun sales — insisting he can be the leader who succeeds on an intractable issue that has bedeviled his predecessors and that he can win back moderate suburban voters in the process, according to people involved in the discussions.

On the other side, a group that includes Donald Trump Jr., the president’s son and an avid hunter, and a top aide to acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney, is telling Trump he risks losing support from his conservative base if he pushes too aggressively on new gun control legislation, they say.

Then there’s Trump, who has heard all of these arguments privately but publicly hasn’t committed to any plan. For weeks, he’s left Washington guessing on whether he’d support any gun control legislation and what form the legislation would take.

The competing forces have created paralysis with just about everybody involved in the discussions — most notably senators — and have delayed the White House’s release of its long-awaited package, possibly jeopardizing the effort to enact meaningful legislation following this summer’s mass shootings that claimed dozens of lives.

The White House didn’t initially respond to a request for comment but after publication spokesman Hogan Gidley refuted the story.

“This is ridiculous, we are completely united in developing exactly what the President wants — which are meaningful solutions that will protect the second Amendment, make American communities safer and potentially prevent these types of tragedies from ever occurring again,” he said in a statement.

How dare you’: Greta Thunberg tears into world leaders over inaction at U.N. climate summit

“As a friend says on Facebook, when an emotionally disturbed sixteen-year-old is the spokesperson for your movement, maybe it’s not really about science. “

In an angry and emotional speech at the United Nations climate summit on Monday, Swedish teenage climate activist Greta Thunberg tore into world leaders for failing to act.

“This is all wrong,” Thunberg said, reading from a piece of paper. “I shouldn’t be up here. I should be back in school on the other side of the ocean, yet you come to us young people for hope. How dare you.”

“People are suffering,” the 16-year-old continued through tears. “People are dying. Entire ecosystems are collapsing. We are at the beginning of a mass extinction and all you can talk about is money and fairy tales of eternal economic growth. How dare you.”

“How dare you continue to look away and come here saying you are doing enough,” Thunberg added. “You say you hear us and understand the urgency, but no matter how sad and angry I am, I do not want to believe that. Because if you really understood the situation and still kept on failing to act, then you would be evil. And that I refuse to believe.”……..

Thunberg, who has been nominated for a Nobel Prize for her work raising awareness about climate change, has become an inspirational figure for fellow teens. Last month, she sailed from Europe to the United States on a zero-emission yacht.

Comment:
“Climate crusader Greta Thunberg’s “principled” trip across the Atlantic in a carbon fibre and non recyclable plastic boat is going to require at least four crew members to fly across the Atlantic.
Greta Thunberg’s trans-Atlantic voyage on a ‘zero-carbon yacht’ has been rocked by revelations that crew will fly to New York in a gas-guzzling plane to bring the boat back to Europe.
It is claimed that this would generate more emissions than the yacht saves and threatens to leave the 16-year-old’s plans to chart an environmentally friendly route to the United States in tatters.
On Wednesday, the Swedish eco-campaigner left Plymouth on the Malizia II for a two-week journey to the United Nations headquarters where she will address a climate change meeting.
But last night, it was confirmed that two crew will have to fly to the US east coast city to man the 60ft yacht on its return.
‘We added the trip to New York City at very short notice, and as a result two people will need to fly over to the US in order to bring the boat back,’ a Team Malizia spokeswoman told the Times.
She added: ‘The world has not yet found a way to make it possible to cross an ocean without a carbon footprint.’
And a further two sailors who are currently on board the Malizia II with Greta will use air travel to get back to Europe.
In the immortal words of Homer Simpson, “DOH!'”.

The Curious Case of Andy Ngo
How the mainstream media downplay left-wing violence
.

Many journalists resent Ngo’s politics, ethics, and sudden success. Yet the establishment media’s approach is the same when Ngo is out of the picture. Antifa is a subject that major media outlets tend to cover once, as a box to be checked. Far-left attacks are treated as isolated incidents rather than episodes in an ongoing story. They are not to be covered like violence from the far right or white nationalists. Andy Ngo covers the story that way—and the media do not like it or the mirror he holds up to them.

The establishment media’s lopsided approach to political violence ultimately damages both our politics and journalism. Politics are supposed to function as nonviolent dispute resolution. Weimar-style street brawling is a signpost on the path to the collapse of normal politics, one we ignore at our peril. Pretending that groups such as Antifa are not a problem is a tactic that will be noticed by at least half the country, accelerate the vicious cycle of our political discourse, and desensitize partisans to political violence of all stripes.

Turning a blind eye to left-wing violence may have the corollary effect of burning up whatever moral and institutional capital the establishment media have left. The media will be seen as knuckling under to—or even embracing—Antifa’s core beliefs. After all, many progressives already believe hate speech is no different from physical assault, which is the root of Antifa’s belief in preemptive violence.

To blame Andy Ngo for injuries he suffered while reporting on Antifa, even if one finds him biased, is to tacitly accept Antifa’s general demand that its members are not to be photographed or identified on threat of violence. No respectable journalist would accept that demand from the Ku Klux Klan. Those who accept it here will similarly lose public respect. The establishment media need to do the right thing covering left-wing violence, if only out of self-interest. Whether they will is another story.

Latest Mac Pro to be made in Texas after securing tariff exemptions.

Apple is boosting its commitment to the American workforce, part of a push to invest hundreds of billions into the U.S. economy.

In a major announcement on Monday, Apple said it will build its redesigned Mac Pro in Austin, Texas.

The move comes three days after U.S. trade officials approved exemptions that allow Apple to import key Mac Pro parts from China without them being subject to tariffs.

“The Mac Pro is Apple’s most powerful computer ever and we’re proud to be building it in Austin,” Apple CEO Tim Cook said in a statement. “We thank the administration for their support enabling this opportunity.”

DNA Is Held Together By Hydrophobic Forces

“….for I am fearfully and wonderfully made.

Keep trying to convince me that this complexity is merely the result of random insensate chance.

Researchers at Chalmers University of Technology, Sweden, disprove the prevailing theory of how DNA binds itself. It is not, as is generally believed, hydrogen bonds which bind together the two sides of the DNA structure. Instead, water is the key. The discovery opens doors for new understanding in research in medicine and life sciences. The researchers’ findings are presented in the journal PNAS.

DNA is constructed of two strands, consisting of sugar molecules and phosphate groups. Between these two strands are nitrogen bases, the compounds which make up organisms’ genes, with hydrogen bonds between them. Until now, it was commonly thought that those hydrogen bonds were what held the two strands together.

But now, researchers from Chalmers University of Technology show that the secret to DNA’s helical structure may be that the molecules have a hydrophobic interior, in an environment consisting mainly of water. The environment is therefore hydrophilic, while the DNA molecules’ nitrogen bases are hydrophobic, pushing away the surrounding water. When hydrophobic units are in a hydrophilic environment, they group together, to minimise their exposure to the water.

The role of the hydrogen bonds, which were previously seen as crucial to holding DNA helixes together, appear to be more to do with sorting the base pairs, so that they link together in the correct sequence.

The discovery is crucial for understanding DNA’s relationship with its environment.

“Cells want to protect their DNA, and not expose it to hydrophobic environments, which can sometimes contain harmful molecules,” says Bobo Feng, one of the researchers behind the study. “But at the same time, the cells’ DNA needs to open up in order to be used.”

“We believe that the cell keeps its DNA in a water solution most of the time, but as soon as a cell wants to do something with its DNA, like read, copy or repair it, it exposes the DNA to a hydrophobic environment.”

Reproduction, for example, involves the base pairs dissolving from one another and opening up. Enzymes then copy both sides of the helix to create new DNA. When it comes to repairing damaged DNA, the damaged areas are subjected to a hydrophobic environment, to be replaced. A catalytic protein creates the hydrophobic environment. This type of protein is central to all DNA repairs, meaning it could be the key to fighting many serious sicknesses……………

The researchers studied how DNA behaves in an environment which is more hydrophobic than normal, a method they were the first to experiment with.

They used the hydrophobic solution polyethylene glycol, and step-by-step changed the DNA’s surroundings from the naturally hydrophilic environment to a hydrophobic one. They aimed to discover if there is a limit where DNA starts to lose its structure, when the DNA does not have a reason to bind, because the environment is no longer hydrophilic. The researchers observed that when the solution reached the borderline between hydrophilic and hydrophobic, the DNA molecules’ characteristic spiral form started to unravel.

Upon closer inspection, they observed that when the base pairs split from one another (due to external influence, or simply from random movements), holes are formed in the structure, allowing water to leak in. Because DNA wants to keep its interior dry, it presses together, with the base pairs coming together again to squeeze out the water. In a hydrophobic environment, this water is missing, so the holes stay in place.

When Greta goes to Guangzhou

thunberg1
That’s Greta with her aged hippy Mum & Dad all wearing antifa T-shirts.
You have to wonder if Greta’s mental defects are due to all the hash & other drugs her parents did.

The climate change activism, and in particular, its more hysterical Extinction Rebellion/School Strike “we’re all going to die” variety, are very much a Western phenomenon, despite the issue of climate change (formerly known as “global warming”) itself being of course global in nature. This is arguably because the governments and the peoples of the developing world are far more concerned about lifting themselves out of poverty and getting ahead in life than what the weather might be like in half a century from today.

Conversely, in the developed, world where the populations enjoy the highest standards of living ever achieved in history, the middle classes are comfortable enough materially and barren enough spiritually to fully enjoy that extra luxury of self-flagellation and moral angst.

At the heart of the New Catstrophism lies an inconvenient truth: the United States – or Australia – could cut their emissions to zero today (or by 2030) and it would make a negligible difference to the global temperatures.There are two reasons for that: firstly, the CO2 emissions in the United States, the European Union, Canada and Australia have actually been declining in the past 10-15 years. Secondly, the CO2 emissions throughout the developing world have been skyrocketing. And this is not just in relative terms, which disregard the massively different starting points, but in absolute terms. Consider these two graphs, prepared by Robert Rapier at Forbes:

emissions1emissions2

While China now produces more CO2 than the United States and the European Union put together, the Asia-Pacific region (which does include a few industrialised countries, like Japan, Taiwan and South Korea, but is mainly in the “developing” category, with China, India and Indonesia the most prominent examples) emits nearly twice as much CO2 as the United States and the European Union combined. And rising.

This is what you always have to keep in mind whenever you hear about the great progress being made in China (and to a lesser extent in India) in embracing the renewables. It’s a case of “yes, but…” It might be true, as far as it goes, yet still India’s coal-powered electricity generation capacity is expected to increase by over 22 per cent to 2022; China itself, for whatever else it’s doing with wind and hydro, is also building hundreds of new “old” power stations as it’s creating the largest middle class in history. And while it’s true that in emissions per capita the developing world still leads the rest of the world where all the billions live, the climate only cares about the absolute numbers.

St Joan of Arc of the Children’s Crusade against Carbon, Greta Thunberg, should be going to Beijing or Bangalore and staging her protests there instead of, or at least in addition to, Sweden or New York. She should be hounding President Xi and Prime Minister Modi about their shameful emissions. She should be leading throngs of Asian kids out of schools for her Friday student strikes. She should be castigating the industries and the consumers of the developing world for destroying the planet and killing humanity in the process. She should be doing all this if she were serious about the global nature of the problem. But I won’t be holding my breath.

Lee’s other declarations that prove she’s got nothing but crap-for-brains

Of course, her district has been so gerrymandered so as to assure her continued election as long as she desires.

Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee of Texas proclaimed that the Constitution is 400 years old. In other words, its writing would predate the Pilgrims. But while she may be spending her time avidly re-watching the Pocahontas in hopes of getting a glimpse of John Smith jotting down the phrase “We The People,” you can read some more of Jackson Lee’s greatest hits below:

If You Believe They Put a Man on Mars

In 1997, while on a trip to the Mars Pathfinder operations center in California, Jackson Lee asked if the Pathfinder had succeeded in taking a picture of the flag planted on Mars by Neil Armstrong in 1969. Needless to say, Jackson Lee, then a member of the House Science Committee, had confused Mars with the Moon. (Despite the alliterative names, they are very different astral bodies. Mars is a planet that orbits the Sun and has never been visited by man. In contrast, the Moon, which is a satellite of Earth and orbits our planet, has been visited six different times by astronauts).

Two Vietnams, One Gaffe

While Jackson Lee is a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, she seems to be badly in need of a new atlas. In 2010, she compared the war in Afghanistan to Vietnam, an analogy that has often been invoked by Democrats. But the lesson she took from that was unique, to say the least. “Today, we have two Vietnams, side by side, North and South, exchanging and working.” Jackson Lee went on to caution: “We may not agree with all that North Vietnam is doing, but they are living in peace. I would look for a better human rights record for North Vietnam, but they are living side by side.” South Vietnam has not existed for almost 40 years since North Vietnamese forces took Saigon and reunified the former French colony in 1975.

The Tea Party Took My Baby Away

In a workshop around the 2010 convention of the NAACP in Kansas City, Jackson Lee said that the Klansmen of the past are now Tea Party members. In her somewhat incoherent statement, the Texas congresswoman said “All those who wore sheets a long time ago have now lifted them off and started wearing uh, clothing, uh, with a name, say, I am part of the tea party.” She then went criticize these Tea Partiers for being among “those who said Congresswoman Jackson-Lee’s braids were too tight in her hair.”

Michael Jackson, Global Humanitarian

After the 2009 death of Michael Jackson, Sheila Jackson Lee went to Los Angeles to speak at the memorial service of the pop star where she mourned him as “someone who will be honored forever and forever and forever and forever.” The congresswoman ended her valedictory to a man she described as “our icon” by saying “Michael Jackson, I salute you.” While speaking, she held up a copy of House Resolution 600, which she introduced to honor the best-selling musical artist. Her resolution though didn’t go anywhere in the House. After all, very few members of Congress were eager to mourn a man with a well-documented history of allegations of sexual predation on young boys.

Where Is My Seafood Meal?

Early in her tenure in Congress, back in the days when airlines still served food, Jackson Lee would demand the ability to make multiple first class reservations on Continental Airlines and then cancel them freely according to her schedule. The airline did not appreciate this. The culminating point was when Jackson Lee boarded a flight back to her Houston district and discovered the first class menu didn’t include the seafood option that she wanted. The congresswoman started screaming “Don’t you know who I am? I’m Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee. Where is my seafood meal? I know it was ordered!”

Sheila Jackson Lee Confuses AR-15 for 10 Moving Boxes and a Heavy Machine Gun

Introducing her new gun-control legislation on Monday, Congresscritter Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas) proved conclusively that she’s just too uninformed to go anywhere near the subject. She claims to have “held an AR-15 in my hand,” which weighed as much as “10 boxes that you might be moving.” She also claimed the rifle fired a .50 caliber round, and that “these kinds of bullets need to be licensed and do not need to be on the street.”

https://twitter.com/jason_howerton/status/1176145894061879302

THE FICTION OF NON-PARTISAN JUDGES AND JUSTICES

From a 9th Circuit dissent by Judge Alex Kozinski:
Judges know very well how to read the Constitution broadly when they are sympathetic to the right being asserted……… When a particular right comports especially well with our notions of good social policy, we build magnificent legal edifices on elliptical constitutional phrases —or even the white spaces between lines of constitutional text………But, as the panel amply demonstrates, when we’re none too keen on a particular constitutional guarantee, we can be equally ingenious in burying language that is incontrovertibly there.

A certain man was quoted about the lawyers of the time that would “strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel.” if either would advance their agenda.
It was not seen as being to their credit.
Even today, we are still afflicted with such hypocritical jurisprudence.

In a talk at Brigham Young University, Justice Neil Gorsuch denied that the Supreme Court is split along partisan lines. Chief Justice Roberts has made a similar denial. He disputes the idea that there are Obama judges and Trump judges.

Amy Coney Barrett, a conservative jurist who would like to join Gorsuch on Roberts on the Supreme Court, has echoed the Chief Justice’s view. At a conference at the College of William & Mary, she said: “The chief justice, I think, articulated what members of the judiciary feel.”

Gorsuch, Roberts, and Barrett are all presenting a myth. The Supreme Court is sharply divided along partisan lines. It’s true that some of the Republican appointees can be quirky in their votes at times. However, the four Democratic appointees vote as a block in the vast majority of controversial cases. And in these cases, at least four of the five Republican appointees typically line up on the other side.

The same pattern applies at lower levels of the federal judiciary. Do Gorusch, Roberts, and Comey think it’s a coincidence that leftist lawyers invariably want to bring their cases before Democratic appointees on the West Coast?

When I practiced law, I could almost always accurately predict how the tough the sledding would be in a non-frivolous civil rights case, for example, the minute I ascertained whether the district court judge had been appointed by a Republican or a Democrat. And this was in a less partisan environment than the one that exists today.

Why, then, do brilliant judges like the three mentioned above insist on the fiction of non-partisanship? One reason is that judges, and Justices in particular, want to believe they and their institution are special. Naturally, they chafe at the notion that they are just politicians in robes. There’s nothing special about that status.

Judges and Justices also want their decisions to be respected. If they are little more than politicians, there’s no reason to respect what they say.