The Super Supremes

The only people in America who have permanent, no-take back jobs, are members of the Supreme Court. (And those guys who are always eating in their car at Sonic.) That basically means that they can do just about anything they wish because no one can retract their work. They decide something, even if only with a 5 to 4 decision and, like Captain Picard, say, “Make it so.”
Some are champing for a larger court. I generally agree. My idea comes from Pizza Hut. Remember when they came out with their Supreme pizza? It should have had more stuff on it than any regular pizza. But, no, there were spaces on the pizza that were just cheese, or even just bread. Not acceptable to me.
Then they came out with the Super Supreme pizza. That one was supposed to be even more loaded with stuff. Try one. It is a pretty good pizza, and one of my faves, but you can see many places with no stuff. And they don’t always put stuff back near the edges. Can you already see where I am going with this?
American law is often decided by a single vote on the Supreme Court. I believe that is not a reasonable result. My offering is that the Supreme Court needs to operate like a criminal trial jury. It only takes one juror to hang it. And either the defendant is let go or gets another trial. Only Oregon does not require unanimity for most felonies. But it does for first degree murder.
Therefore, I propose a Super Supreme Court. I do not care how it is convened. But here is a possibility: Any Supreme Court decision which is not unanimous must go to the Super Supreme Court, made up of, perhaps, the justices of all the U.S. District courts. We have 94 of them. And if they do not render a supermajority vote (such as 75 percent), the case is dismissed and the previous court’s decision stands.
While we are at it, changing names of things, I have some suggestions. That musical trio that included Diana Ross had a pretty good name. They were Supremes. Most groups’ names of that generation were whimsical, but I do not recall others that told us how good they thought they were. I think I would have even listened to a group called the “Pretty Goods.” And, I’ll admit, the Supremes would have been great no matter the name.
How about other descriptors that might be over the top? Super models, for instance. Yeah, they are skinny and get lots of money, but Super? A better moniker would be Overpaid Models. Not Super. They can’t even fly.
And how about those people who are bosses of drug sellers? Drug Lords? Somehow calling them Lords also seems too much. How about Purveyors of Misery?
One thing I will never buy is anything called “designer.” Designer jeans, for instance, cost a lot more than undesigned jeans. But aren’t all clothing items designed by someone? Let’s call that stuff “Jacked-Up-Price Jeans.”
Also, be careful of European cut shirts. Americans won’t fit.
Then, we come to the term Trophy Wife. I have conflicting ideas about that one. Probably there are guys who marry extremely young, beautiful women because of the money the women hope to get someday soon. In my heart of hearts I believe that I won first prize when I married my wife. But I wouldn’t call her a trophy, I just call her honey.
And I’d make Pizza Hut change that “super” pizza’s name to Just Pretty Good Pizza.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s