Page 9 of 10 FirstFirst ... 78910 LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 91

Thread: So Did Trump Cave? Is he weakened?

  1. #81
    Senior Member iris lilies's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    13,543
    Quote Originally Posted by LDAHL View Post
    Feelings and emotion have been part of politics from pretty much the dawn of civilization. I doubt you could even run a viable democracy on mere factuality. But I think that right now the feeling/factuality mix is running a bit rich. The Kavanaugh confirmation seemed to me to be more about emotional reactions to a sort of narrative than any particular facts of the accusations against one particular man. The President seems only to deal in facts when he contradicts himself.

    We indict people based on emotionally charged symbols, and substitute indictment for argument. Show some people a picture of a kid in a red hat, and thatĀ’s all they need to know. Likewise a kneeling football player. Social media only accelerates the process of transmitting feelings broadly.

    I donĀ’t know at what point not believing someoneĀ’s feelings have a strong basis in fact becomes dismissal. IĀ’m sure it does if youĀ’re cavalier enough about it. But we live in a culture with such a swirl of contradictory feelings and beliefs itĀ’s probably impossible to respect them all. I might feel abortion to be a horrific evil. You might consider it to be a sacred right.
    That difference may never be resolved at a rational level. ThatĀ’s why I think itĀ’s foolish to treat politics as a substitute for religion, with eternal verities.
    Distilled, this means feelings are not facts!!!? who knew!!!

    That said, I am not entirely confident that Roe V Wade would not be overturned or, more likely, reconsidered with slight modifications. I cannot predict the future. But given my extensive legal background (hahahaha! ) my cursory look at how often the Supremes take up an old case with no new information shows: hardly ever. Those of you all atwitter with fear, check that out.

    I agree that neonatal technological advances create a new age of viability for a fetus, so that might be reason to re-hear a case.

    Abortion is a thorny issue and I do not respect those who are unable to understand both sides of it. The woman and the state have intetest in this issue, and it us naive to think rither one is without interest.

  2. #82
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    4,667
    Quote Originally Posted by jp1 View Post
    Yes, they should have allowed a full FBI investigation once the accusations came to light. Since they didn't we'll never know the truth beyond the fact that he has committed perjury multiple times and made it abundantly clear that he has no interest in being an impartial jurist.
    The prior half dozen being insufficient.

  3. #83
    Senior Member jp1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    4,226
    What? The half dozen people they actually were allowed to interview? What does that have to do with all the relevant people that didnt get interviewed? If the republicans ever hope to be more than the party of old and uneducated white men they need to figure out how to at least look like they actually care about anyone else. The sham kavanaugh investigation may have gotten them a supreme court seat but judging from the exit polls a couple months ago there are an awful lot of women who arent buying the whole ‘he was fully vetted’ storyline.

  4. #84
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    New Hampshire
    Posts
    115
    Quote Originally Posted by jp1 View Post
    Yes, they should have allowed a full FBI investigation once the accusations came to light. Since they didn't we'll never know the truth beyond the fact that he has committed perjury multiple times and made it abundantly clear that he has no interest in being an impartial jurist.
    I agree. Whatever that was that was televised, it was not an investigation. And now the waters have been so muddied that I'm not sure a real investigation is possible.

    I will say that his ranting during the second half of that made me question his suitability for the SC, based on his personality alone. But we are stuck with him.

  5. #85
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    New Hampshire
    Posts
    115
    There are many states that have abortion laws on the books that are currently not enforced, due to Roe vs Wade. However, if Roe vs Wade is ever overturned, those laws will come into force.

    So while there are some who say Roe vs Wade will not be overturned, there are a lot of people who are planning for that.

  6. #86
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    6,396
    So looked up the NY law and it appears it has to be a devastating reason to get a abortion after 24 weeks. Why carry a baby to term that dies at birth?

  7. #87
    Senior Member iris lilies's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    13,543
    Quote Originally Posted by Teacher Terry View Post
    So looked up the NY law and it appears it has to be a devastating reason to get a abortion after 24 weeks. Why carry a baby to term that dies at birth?
    I would actually like someone to start a new thread about this New York law which is getting a lot of attention from either side of the abortion issue.


    A couple days ago Rush Limbaugh was screeching for an entire hour about it. On the same day, Cuomo was beating his chest in noisy braggadocio about it. There is so much noise it is hard for me to understand what is different today, on January 29, 2019, that was not in effect in the state of New York on December 29, 2019.

    But people share our heated up about it

  8. #88
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    6,396
    I never understood why people are against things that they wouldn’t choose. No one is forcing someone to live a certain way. Whatever happened to live and let live?

  9. #89
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    3,507
    Quote Originally Posted by iris lilies View Post
    I would actually like someone to start a new thread about this New York law which is getting a lot of attention from either side of the abortion issue.


    A couple days ago Rush Limbaugh was screeching for an entire hour about it. On the same day, Cuomo was beating his chest in noisy braggadocio about it. There is so much noise it is hard for me to understand what is different today, on January 29, 2019, that was not in effect in the state of New York on December 29, 2019.

    But people share our heated up about it
    So does this thread need to be locked until December of 2019, or do you have a time machine?

  10. #90
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    4,667
    Quote Originally Posted by Teacher Terry View Post
    Whatever happened to live and let live?
    Or live and let die, as the case may be?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •