It is humourous to examine the un-equalness of law across the land of equal protection. This week, Justice Clarence Thomas, the only nigger on the U.S. Supreme Court, threw a fit over the denial of cert to a Kansas free speech case. Thomas exposes the fickleness of state interpretations of free speech under the First Amendment.
The Attorney General in Kansas is all upset because his little supreme court in the Land of Oz said it is o.k. to rant about public officials being found dead in a ditch. Silly state statutes claiming ‘reckless disregard to cause fear’ by interpretation of others is overbroad and unconstitutional. The state supreme judges called bullshit on the law, citing that only ‘true threats’ are criminal, fear is a personal problem not a test for protected speech. In Kansas, talking about finding a Connecticut family court judge like, say, Elizabeth Bozzuto, dead in a roadside ditch is free speech. Private emails in Kansas are protected when discussing the demise of Bozzuto by dropping F35 smart bombs in her swimming pool, zapping her with laser beams from the space station, the long range effectiveness of .308 ball ammunition or just a good old colonial application of tar and feathers. Yep, all free speech, protected by the First Amendment.
The rants in Kansas were made by a very upset individual, whose dog had been shot, but the police refused to investigate. All dogs go to heaven, but the thin blue thugs will go to hell for not pursuing the perp. The ensuing rant against the incompetent police is met with a retaliatory arrest for ‘reckless disregard’, making his expressive conduct criminal. Yeah, right. Blue thuggery rules. But the white folk on the state’s high court recognized the Kafkaesque scam on 1A. The remedy provided was to strike down the law as unconstitutional. It is free speech in Kansas to rant about dead dogs, why is it criminal conduct in Connecticut to rant about judges in a court system that kills mothers and babies? The un-equalness of America is astonishing.
Justice Thomas points to Connecticut Supreme Court case upholding the conviction of Ted Taupier for private rants about blog famous family court judge Elizabeth Bozzuto. Thomas believes that the First Amendment allows states to criminalize speech regardless of the intent of the speaker. Whaaaat? Has Thomas lost his black marbles? Thomas gets all wrapped up in the nigger boy’s concern for cross burning, which was the subject of Vignina v Black in 2003. Thomas thinks that the seven crackers of the Kansas high court ‘misread’ the SCOTUS opinion in Black. Thomas plays the race card, stating that speech is threatening and criminal if the imaginary ‘reasonable person’ thinks it is so. Oi vey, the jews own the nigger on the high court.
In Kansas, Taupier burns an effigy of Judge Bozzuto nailed to a cross, it is free speech. Bozzuto’s hurt feelings are not a concern for the First Amendment. In Kansas, Bozzuto’s body can be discussed in a roadside ditch riddled with .308 ball ammunition, on top of the charred remains of Lynda Munro and Holly Wetstone, sprinkled in woodchipper excrement of Aldelman, Pinkus and Heller. Free speech!
Alas, in Connecticut, the same discussion brings out SWAT teams of the speech police. The jews have a special ‘reasonable person’ that finds criticism of the ruling elite to be ‘criminal’. Oi vey … what happened to America … have the jews and niggers destroyed it all?
Nigger Boy Thomas tosses some Orwellian word salad to gloss his feeble understanding of the First Amendment. He claims the Kansas crackers ‘overread’ the ruling in Black. What da fuk does that mean? Thomas makes criminal conviction turn on the interpretation of the imaginary ‘reasonable person’. Fuck that….this is America, who is this fucking reasonable person? Like a patriot gives a rat’s ass about what the ‘reasonable British subject’ thought? A jew ruling from the Talmud is America’s new ‘reasonable person’?
Thomas thinks that the fickle state governments hold power to enact criminal statutes giving police cause to arrest persons for ranting about injustice, based on an un-measurable disregard for what strangers might fear? Well damn, let’s just get a bunch of cotton-pickin’ niggers together and tear down statutes of former slave owners, instilling fear in the caucasian population. Nigger judge sez it is criminal speech!
It is curious to note that the ruling in State v Taupier of Connecticut was written by nigger boy Richard Robinson. Nigger boy Thomas cites Robinson’s black opinion on criminalizing a white man’s speech about a dyke judge to oppose seven Kansas crackers’ decision upholding a white man’s speech about a dead dog. The nigger wants to criminalize any speech not acceptable to the ‘reasonable nigger’. Oi vey, right out of the Talmud. So remember, the next time you tell someone to ‘fuck off and die’ in Connecticut, the flying monkeys are coming for you. But in Kansas, just another way of saying ‘have a nice day’!
Associate Justice Clarence Thomas 
Connecticut’s Robinson
