When it comes to rating the job efficiency of the United States Supreme Court it looks as though the glass is half-empty, or perhaps even a bit more than half. 

A very recent Rasmussen Poll taken with a survey of 1,000 likely voters on October 22 and 23, 2009, showed that 40% rated the Court as merely ‘Fair’. That not-at-all favorable number, when coupled with a 14% rating of ‘Poor’ gave the Court a less than favorable rating of 54% from all of those likely voters.

On the other side, only 36% of the likely voters rated the Court as ‘Good’ while a paltry 7% gave the justices an ‘Excellent’ mark for a combined 43% favorable mark.

Two percent of the voters had no opinion or ‘Were Not Sure’.

These poll results were released to the public on October 27, 2009, a little over two and a half months after Sonja Sotomayor was sworn in as an Associate Justice by Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts on August 8, 2009. 

It has not been determined if Sotomayor’s confirmation and swearing in as an Associate Supreme Court Justice had any bearing on the fact that the favorable/unfavorable ratings for the Supreme Court changed, not for the better, after her attaining the position.

The previous poll taken on the subject by Rasmussen Reports was taken in July, 2009 showing more favorable numbers than these latest October positions. For instance, the 43% combined favorable rating in October had been up to 48% in July, a 5% drop in the plus side for performance by the Court.

The number of those voters who thought the Court’s performance was ‘Poor’ rose by 2 points from 12% in July to 14% in October.

The October poll also contained these interesting tid-bits of information about the public’s perception of how the Supreme Court should, as opposed to how, it actually does perform:

While 70% of the voters polled said they think that the Court should base its decisions on the U. S. Constitution only 44% of them think that is what is what principally did determine their decisions, an 8% drop from the July poll that had 52% thinking the Constitution actually did guide their decisions.

My personal feelings are that the liberals that populate the Court do not very often take the actual text and intent of the Constitution when making their decisions accounting for the 26% disparity in numbers between should and actually do in order to accommodate their liberal supporters who would like to see our Constitution abolished including our current White House occupant. These liberal justices have a record of trying to make laws through legal interpretations not envisioned by our founding fathers who declared the Legislative Branch for that purpose.

In this latest October poll more people are showing distaste with the heavy liberal influence in the Court’s decisions as only 20% of those polled felt the Court was too conservative; and contrarily, 36% felt the Justices were too liberal; both numbers up a couple of points from the August poll.  

And finally, Rasmussen Reports conclude from the October poll that while only 29% believe that the Justices are impartial, 55% of the voters say the Justices do have their own political agenda . Then there is always those who are unsure and they amounted to 15% of the total voters surveyed.

In another matter that needs to be made known to the millions of people who have been duped into believing that AARP is a beneficial organization for senior citizens to become a member.

This bit of chicanery has gained that corrupt and money-making outfit many millions of members with the promises that they can get a better deal from AARP. But just ask them how many members have opted out of their organization after the truth about their socialistic practices and acceptance of Obama’s principles as their own was learned.

Now under these new health plans that Obama, Pelosi and Reid are foisting on the public, AARP stands to profit to the tune of millions and millions of dollars more just for lending their name to insurance providers in exchange for a tax-exempt cut of the insurance premiums. By heavily promoting these insurance policies that make people think they are AARP policies they put their liberal political interests ahead of their senior citizen members. AARP is spending millions of dollars in lengthy TV advertising spots aired dozens of times throughout the day.

AARP senior executives are wallowing in the big bucks being generated by all their advertising scams. Their chief executive William Novelli received more than a million dollars in compensation last year according to the National Center for Policy Analysis in an online report dated October 28, 2009.

I left this corrupt, senior citizen money taking socialistic political group a couple of years ago after seeing my money go to ultra-liberal, socialistic/communistic organizations, and people that appalled me. The last straw was when they named Communist and Hugo Chavez follower Harry Bellafonte AARP’s man of the year. Since then I have heard of and read about many others who have woken up and saw the dark side of an organization that was supposed to help and not bilk seniors. 

Take heed and do some checking on their activities, political and operational.