The constitution says they serve "in good behavior", so that could be seen as a restriction on setting term limits. The only way to remove one is impeachment.
Who would challenge it?
My question is, who brings suit? You can't bring suit if you're not an injured party. The justices can't bring suit without recusing themselves. This is quite the conundrum.
It would take a constitutional amendment, something that isn't going to happen.
Justices can just rule it unconstitutional.
Doing nothing productive with your life, everything revolves around social drama, getting permission to take a shit...
I enjoyed my time at school. But you've got to ask yourself, if the best time of your life was at school that means you've made bad decisions, so what did it prepare you for really? School failed you.
The truth is that school fails all of us.
There hasn't been a non disappointing android release since KitKat.
That's not true either, almost every racist I run into on the internet talks mad shit about republicans for supporting Israel. Most of them wouldn't vote for either party. I saw multiple news articles about klansmen in 2016 supporting Hillary Clinton on the grounds that she was anti desegregation when she worked on the Goldwater campaign in the 60s.
I've met numerous liberals and leftists that were racist in private. Hell, Che Guevara was an outspoken racist. I don't think racism is partisan, there are just people like that out there.
The algorithms killed the platforms. They've become vapid, empty holes that only attract people addicted to them like junkies.
The internet can be fun, but you're not going to find it on the platforms. You're only going to find fun in places where people talk to each other. And even then, if you're thin skinned you're going to wind up in an outrage filled circlejerk. If you loosen up and go where the algorithms don't exist you can have a good time.
This is so wrong it's absurd, it gives you absolutely no information on the history of this conflict. The current conflict dates back to the early 20th century, well before world war 2.
No matter what you think of it, someone's going to try to guilt and browbeat you. Support the Palestinians? You're antisemitic and support terrorism. Support Israel? You're supporting an oppressive apartheid state. So who cares whether you're allowed, this is the world we live in, no matter what you think about anything there's someone out there who's going to call you a bad person for it. Just learn about things before you form an opinion, use your judgment and critical thinking and then figure out the truth of whatever it is.
Personally, I don't support either side. I can see how they both kind of brought each other's retaliation on themselves. I just lament innocent people dying and dislike how it affects me.
Misuse lol. People need to get their panties out of their butthole. You build a photo generator and get mad when someone uses it to make a picture of Marx with tits. Who cares? Crybabies can cry about it.
It's never going to happen.
What do you expect? Communists always block their people from seeing opposing viewpoints, because their ideas don't hold water. They're like a cult.
Seriously, this person has no clue. They're talking about this like it's more of the same old conflict we are all used to. This is of a completely different character than anything we have seen. There will be no concessions, no ceasefire. Israel is fucking mad. And when they get mad they seriously fuck up whoever they are mad at in a very efficient and indisputable fashion. They might offer a ceasefire after they've exacted a very high cost in retaliation. The Gaza strip is royally fucked.
Seriously, this person has no clue. They're talking about this like it's more of the same old conflict we are all used to. This is of a completely different character than anything we have seen. There will be no concessions, no ceasefire. Israel is fucking mad. And when they get mad they seriously fuck up whoever they are mad at in a very efficient and indisputable fashion. They might offer a ceasefire after they've exacted a very high cost in retaliation. The Gaza strip is royally fucked.
Nelson Mandela was a terrorist, and also a hero.
Being a terrorist, objectively with no emotional connotations connected, is about tactics. Plenty of freedom fighters use terroristic tactics. Plenty of groups that aren't labelled terrorists use terrorist tactics. A key strategy in warfare is to inspire fear in your enemies. The underdog always has these tactics in his back pocket, and often it's his most powerful weapon. Sometimes he's a brute and a wannabe dictator or aspiring genocide committer, sometimes he's a freedom fighter, often enough he's both.
At the end of the day, all warfare involves killing people for strategic reasons. It's brutal. Hurling mud with the word "terrorist" does nobody any good in understanding the situation. It is very useful though in propagandizing a population and bypassing their critical thinking capability for an emotional reaction. Sanitizing war though as if there's a good boy type behavior and a bad boy type behavior is senseless. In war, the worst things that can happen to people happen to people, always and forever. People engaging in war do what they need to do. Whether its right or wrong depends on whether you buy their narrative about their motivations, and whether you have unwavering universally applied principles of right and wrong.