Roe vs Wade vs SCOTUS legitimacy

[hollodero]

(05-12-2022, 08:57 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: The thing to keep in mind is that any attempt to codify Roe would fail. It is dead on arrival because to GOP would filibuster. So by looking to close those loopholes they try to signal that they are taking it seriously (and hoping the people ignore the fact they did nothing about it for 50 years).

I see the narrative, but that imho is not a very good one. For one, let republicans at least filibuster, especially if your point is that you have to get rid of the filibuster to get things passed.

Also, I see a party not doing their best to codify Roe, or to be at least bi-partisan with the two republican senators that could be had. How is that not preferrable, I wonder. But maybe I just don't see it, that's very well possible.

[Belsnickel]

(05-12-2022, 09:13 PM)hollodero Wrote: I see the narrative, but that imho is not a very good one. For one, let republicans at least filibuster, especially if your point is that you have to get rid of the filibuster to get things passed.

Also, I see a party not doing their best to codify Roe, or to be at least bi-partisan with the two republican senators that could be had. How is that not preferrable, I wonder. But maybe I just don't see it, that's very well possible.

Quite a few Democrats wouldn't support the narrower bill if it doesn't provide enough protections. There is no win in the scenario.

I know you've noticed that our political parties are much more loosely organized than they are in Europe. They may have many party-line votes, but parties aren't really anything more than an organization to get people elected. They don't have to share platforms in any way. It's even more of a thing in the Senate where each Senator holds more individual power than members of Congress do. As a result, they are much more likely to vote their own mind.

[hollodero]

(05-12-2022, 09:18 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Quite a few Democrats wouldn't support the narrower bill if it doesn't provide enough protections. There is no win in the scenario.

I know you've noticed that our political parties are much more loosely organized than they are in Europe. They may have many party-line votes, but parties aren't really anything more than an organization to get people elected. They don't have to share platforms in any way. It's even more of a thing in the Senate where each Senator holds more individual power than members of Congress do. As a result, they are much more likely to vote their own mind.

In general I understand that. But in this special scenario, I don't. There are times where a party should be able to agree on a goal that in the end is everyone's. Mitch seems to get his senators in line if it's really crucial for a common goal. At least way better.

What if democrats had 60 senators, they would not be able to protect/codify Roe, even if it was the law of the land they wanted to protect? That would be disappointing and makes it easy for those that want to see it gone.

[grampahol]

(12-05-2021, 02:10 PM)Fan_in_Kettering Wrote: The preborn possess inherent civil rights too.

In certain republican circles a sperm, pre-ejaculation might as well have full citizen rights so watch out when you're whacking off.. You'll be breaking some law..
In any event republicans that like to play this card claim life is so so so precious, but once a fetus is born into this crap world they could care less if the family cat drags it out in the backyard and eats it.. it's always been that way.
A week or so ago I was listening to the local NPR radio broadcast here in South Carolina where they're hell bent on protecting all the girls from some boy who might just believe he's a girl in athletics ONLY. "WE MUST PROTECT THE RIGHTS OF FEMALES." some republican schmuck got up to proclaim while in the very same breath telling every female that even if she's raped or her daddy rapes her she'll still have to give birth to a kid nobody wants to...you know...protect female rights.. You got it..A trans kid, formerly a boy will be prohibited from even trying to compete in athletic competition with a girl even though despite the fact that in grade school it's usually the girls who kick the asses of boys in athletics. But if little Sally gets brutally raped by Biff the jock then tough shit Sally..You have to give birth to Biff Jr..  That's really looking out for female rights...right?
By the way..SCOTUS legitimacy? If certain individual states can completely ignore SCOTUS rulings then individual citizens sure as hell should have the same rights.. I've never been one for the sovereign citizen nonsense, but I could be influenced to change my mind on it.. 

[*Nately120*]

Man, you set that post to some acoustic guitar and you're the next Harry Chapin.

[grampahol]

(05-13-2022, 10:18 AM)Nately120 Wrote: Man, you set that post to some acoustic guitar and you're the next Harry Chapin.

Always wanted to be a folksy kind of singer even though I can carry a tune in a bucket, but not outside of one.. 

My views about Roe were shaped the day the ruling was handed down in the 70s. At the time I knew next to nothing about abortion, legal or not.  My late grandmother was weeping tears of joy telling my late mother about the many times she and many other women held the hands of young women as they bleed to death from back alley abortions gone wrong.. She also very vividly described the many families she knew who were forced to decide which of their children would live and which would starve during the depression.. Roe was no joke to people of that era because they lived it.. Never think those times can't be revisited on any of our families..

[Mickeypoo]

(05-09-2022, 02:35 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Zing!  Well back on topic, it'll be interesting seeing how our society handles an extra million kids per year that have parents that wanted to abort them.  I'm being hyperbolic, but geez even for me that's a grim statement.  Should be interesting if nothing else. 

Well if we round up and deport all the illegals and actually take care of the border we should end up with a net positive.  

[*Nately120*]

(05-13-2022, 12:13 PM)Mickeypoo Wrote: Well if we round up and deport all the illegals and actually take care of the border we should end up with a net positive.  

Ok let's also throw the citizens who hire them in prison for treasonously preferring the hiring of dangerous criminals over law abiding Americans so they can save a buck. 

I'm going to start holding by breath.....now. 

[Mickeypoo]

(05-12-2022, 08:34 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: The Dem playbook with Manchin is honestly baffling to me.  He's a guy with no issues going it alone, so he won't be bullied or intimidated into changing his position.  He's also literally the only Dem, and likely the last for some time, that can win a statewide election in West Virginia, which is as deep red as it gets.  Getting rid of him just ensures a slam dunk GOP Senate seat pickup.




People have very short attention spans, which I'm sure is true in your country as well.  Jan. 6th is already fading rapidly, hence the constant reminder from Dem politicians that it happened.  As far as inflation being a global phenomena, Americans don't give two shits about that.  We aren't used to shortages and high prices.  Whichever party was currently in charge would bear the full brunt of the blame.  Employment numbers also don't mean much when you're paying over $6 a gallon for gas and can't find food to feed your baby.  Unless there's an economic miracle, and history rather disproves that being likely, if even possible, the Dems are going to take it in the shorts.  The real question becomes who gets the GOP nod in '24.  If it's Desantis then I think they've got a virtual lock.  Trump would be more of a toss up.  But that's two years plus from now, a virtual eternity.

I hope Trump doesn't run.  DeSantis/Scott maybe?

[Mickeypoo]

(05-13-2022, 12:28 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Ok let's also throw the citizens who hire them in prison for treasonously preferring the hiring of dangerous criminals over law abiding Americans so they can save a buck. 

I'm going to start holding by breath.....now. 

Sounds good!



I'm kidding of course.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(05-13-2022, 12:44 PM)Mickeypoo Wrote: I hope Trump doesn't run.  DeSantis/Scott maybe?

My preference would be DeSantis/Haley.  Would set Haley up well for a run of her own afterwards.  I really like her, and honestly would prefer her to DeSantis, but no way she gets the nod over him.  I think she'd be a very effective and fair POTUS.

[Belsnickel]

(05-13-2022, 01:26 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: My preference would be DeSantis/Haley.  Would set Haley up well for a run of her own afterwards.  I really like her, and honestly would prefer her to DeSantis, but no way she gets the nod over him.  I think she'd be a very effective and fair POTUS.

No such thing.

[hollodero]

(05-13-2022, 01:26 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: My preference would be DeSantis/Haley.  Would set Haley up well for a run of her own afterwards.  I really like her, and honestly would prefer her to DeSantis, but no way she gets the nod over him.  I think she'd be a very effective and fair POTUS.

I sure would have some things that I wouldn't exactly like about Haley, but imho she'd be a candidate of normalization, a departure from Trumpism, a conservative that will conserve democracy and a huge sigh of relief overall for me.

Just studied the latest polls though (regarding who should be presidential candidate). Trump leads each and every one of them by a significant margin. Meaning, as of now even if it were someone else than Trump, it would be a president of his grace. And since that is still so, I declare every hope that someone actually preferrable could be the candidate as pure wishful thinking.

[grampahol]

(05-13-2022, 01:26 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: My preference would be DeSantis/Haley.  Would set Haley up well for a run of her own afterwards.  I really like her, and honestly would prefer her to DeSantis, but no way she gets the nod over him.  I think she'd be a very effective and fair POTUS.

DeSantis cut his own throat by pissing off Disney and dooming millions of people around Orlando area to foot the bill for everything Disney used to foot the bill for and thus raising taxes for most of Florida. Wait till they all get the tax bill..Haley has about as much hard line conservative appeal as slightly damp used toilet paper and no appeal at all to Democratic voters..
try again Sparky..

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(05-13-2022, 01:46 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: No such thing.

Can I add relatively?  

(05-13-2022, 01:59 PM)hollodero Wrote: I sure would have some things that I wouldn't exactly like about Haley, but imho she'd be a candidate of normalization, a departure from Trumpism, a conservative that will conserve democracy and a huge sigh of relief overall for me.

Just studied the latest polls though (regarding who should be presidential candidate). Trump leads each and every one of them by a significant margin. Meaning, as of now even if it were someone else than Trump, it would be a president of his grace. And since that is still so, I declare every hope that someone actually preferrable could be the candidate as pure wishful thinking.

Yeah, that is my concern as well. I don't want Trump to run again, but if he doesn't he will definitely take on the mantle of kingmaker.  I don't know how this is going to play out, hopefully we get some change in that within the next two years.  Ironically, I think the Dems are doing as much to keep Trump in the forefront as anyone.  If they stopped referencing him every minute in an attempt to tie the entire GOP to him they'd go some way towards reducing his clout.  They are, IMO, literally achieving the opposite of their stated goal by making him the face of the GOP.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(05-13-2022, 02:47 PM)grampahol Wrote: DeSantis cut his own throat by pissing off Disney and dooming millions of people around Orlando area to foot the bill for everything Disney used to foot the bill for. Haley has about as much hard line conservative appeal as slightly damp used toilet paper and no appeal at all to Democratic voters..
try again Sparky..

Good lord, you really swallowed those Dem talking points without even chewing. 

[grampahol]

My secret wish is that all the subpoenas and subsequent charges and possible trials all come down right before the mid-terms to doom the rube party..  I have zero use for them..   A party convicted of attempting to overthrow our government? That'll go over well come election day if it shakes out on time.. 

[hollodero]

(05-13-2022, 02:47 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Can I add relatively?  


Yeah, that is my concern as well. I don't want Trump to run again, but if he doesn't he will definitely take on the mantle of kingmaker.  I don't know how this is going to play out, hopefully we get some change in that within the next two years.  Ironically, I think the Dems are doing as much to keep Trump in the forefront as anyone.  If they stopped referencing him every minute in an attempt to tie the entire GOP to him they'd go some way towards reducing his clout.  They are, IMO, literally achieving the opposite of their stated goal by making him the face of the GOP.

At times I feel you have a tendency to put more blame on Democrats for things than they deserve.

For one, Trump is the face of the opposition party, how could one just ignore him. It's also not like they are helping him out of any slumps. For me, the ones that are responsible for the ongoing presence of Trump, first and foremost, are still those that sing his praises. It's also not feasible, imho, to not tie the whole GOP to him. Who aside from singular figures is not fully on board with him again really.

The Dems could do better, they always could, they often appear not quite competent really. It's the Roe effect - sure Dems made mistakes, but those that are mainly responsible for overturning Roe are still the judges that do so and the party thant wants them to.

Of course, this is a comment rather small in importance.

[*Nately120*]

(05-13-2022, 02:47 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Yeah, that is my concern as well. I don't want Trump to run again, but if he doesn't he will definitely take on the mantle of kingmaker.  I don't know how this is going to play out, hopefully we get some change in that within the next two years.  Ironically, I think the Dems are doing as much to keep Trump in the forefront as anyone.  If they stopped referencing him every minute in an attempt to tie the entire GOP to him they'd go some way towards reducing his clout.  They are, IMO, literally achieving the opposite of their stated goal by making him the face of the GOP.

I'm not going to pat democrats on the back, but Trump has our entire political system by the balls and like any abuser, we are his until he decides it's over.  Maybe I give him too much credit, but we've seen first hand what happens to longstanding members of the GOP who don't kiss his rings.  I thought he might be done after the 1/6 thing and a number of members of the GOP said enough is enough, but they saw how the voters sided and changed their tune right quick.

It's just the way it is right now.  You can quit smoking after the doctor tells you your lungs are full of cancer, but the damage is done.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(05-13-2022, 03:21 PM)hollodero Wrote: At times I feel you have a tendency to put more blame on Democrats for things than they deserve.

For one, Trump is the face of the opposition party, how could one just ignore him. It's also not like they are helping him out of any slumps. For me, the ones that are responsible for the ongoing presence of Trump, first and foremost, are still those that sing his praises. It's also not feasible, imho, to not tie the whole GOP to him. Who aside from singular figures is not fully on board with him again really.

The Dems could do better, they always could, they often appear not quite competent really. It's the Roe effect - sure Dems made mistakes, but those that are mainly responsible for overturning Roe are still the judges that do so and the party thant wants them to.

Of course, this is a comment rather small in importance.

(05-13-2022, 04:32 PM)Nately120 Wrote: I'm not going to pat democrats on the back, but Trump has our entire political system by the balls and like any abuser, we are his until he decides it's over.  Maybe I give him too much credit, but we've seen first hand what happens to longstanding members of the GOP who don't kiss his rings.  I thought he might be done after the 1/6 thing and a number of members of the GOP said enough is enough, but they saw how the voters sided and changed their tune right quick.

It's just the way it is right now.  You can quit smoking after the doctor tells you your lungs are full of cancer, but the damage is done.

I think both of your are misunderstanding my point a bit.  I don't place the lions share of the blame on the Dems for this, or even a majority of it.  What I am saying is that they are achieving the exact opposite of their stated intent by constantly invoking Trump as the face of the GOP.  You're both certainly correct that he currently is, in most ways.  But the Dems are only further cementing that with their current tactics and calling him King MAGA.  They're literally assisting that which they claim to abhor.  Would Trump go away if they stopped?  No, certainly not right away, but it would be a start.  Instead they're adding fuel to the fire instead of trying to put it out.  I get it, they think it's part of a winning strategy for the mid-terms, but I don't think it's helping and it's definitely hurting.

Also, Hollo, you may be correct that I am too hard on the Dems.  It's veyr possible as CA is run by some of the dumbest and most ideological inane asshats I have ever seen in my life.  They make my life miserable and have caused thousands of people to be victimized.  So, yeah, I probably am too hard on them nationally.  But I've been far too tainted by the brand off bullshit they shovel in this state,