I am not worried about the US splitting up, either, with a caveat. If Lincoln was able to hold the Union together despite wide cultural differences in the mid-1800s, we can do the same. As long as we have a leader like Lincoln.
Printable View
I am not worried about the US splitting up, either, with a caveat. If Lincoln was able to hold the Union together despite wide cultural differences in the mid-1800s, we can do the same. As long as we have a leader like Lincoln.
You need to wake up ... What do you think Jan 6th was about?... fascism for sure. What about the trump supreme court justices who said they would not repeal Roe and did it anyway? Not hard to fathom that was a religious opinion for at least the handmaiden (and probably the others). Yeah, both fascist dictatorship and theocracy.Quote:
Originally Posted by LDAHL
Why do you think Democratic Senators have been asking that question during confirmation hearings for the past 30 years? It's because they all know it didn't meet constitutional muster. What you should be asking is why the liberal justices, knowing Roe was damaged, didn't concur with the majority.Quote:
Originally Posted by frugal-one
I think you should put a little more effort into your 'fathoming'.Quote:
Not hard to fathom that was a religious opinion for at least the handmaiden (and probably the others). Yeah, both fascist dictatorship and theocracy.
As I recall, Lincoln did not in fact hold the Union together. The country split, there was a rather violent civil war, cities were burned, and hundreds of thousands of people died.Quote:
Originally Posted by catherine
Why do I get the impression that Rob salivates for this kind of activity?Quote:
Originally Posted by bae
Czechoslovakia split into the Czech Republic and the Slovak Republic peacefully.
Our 19th Century split would have been peaceful as well if the north hadn't invaded the south.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yppej
Your impression us very much incorrect. I'm just a hard core realist is all. And I do believe long term the US is better served splitting up. RobQuote:
Originally Posted by iris lilies
Should have been is very much incorrect.
I don’t think it’s in this country’s best interest to split and don’t believe it will happen.
https://www.nps.gov/people/george-s-james.htmQuote:
Originally Posted by Alan
Yes, Fort Sumter was an unfinished fort when Federal troops occupied it just weeks after South Carolina seceded. It probably had to do with Charleston Harbor being an important commerce point for the state and could be effectively shut down by cannon fire from Sumter.Quote:
Originally Posted by bae
That is your opinion. For over 50 years, and other times trying to overturn Roe, did not meet muster. It is the right trying to enforce their "christian" beliefs on others. There NEEDS to be a separation from church and state. This whole thing is total B.S. The trump justices LIED during questioning. They should be taken off the court IMO. Even some of the republicans who questioned them are SHOCKED that they went against their responses that they would not overturn. It is a travesty!Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan
It was Ruth Bader Ginsburg's opinion too. She believed it should have been decided under the equal protection clause rather than as a privacy right as it would be a little less shaky. The current Supreme Court have now given the legislature a means to make it right if they're actually interested in doing so. I would think you'd celebrate that.Quote:
Originally Posted by frugal-one
I know that plays well on cable news and daytime talk shows but I think the right is more interested in insisting that constitutional rights actually be referenced in the constitution and not allowing the court to be used as a grantor of rights when it's the responsibility of Congress to do so through time tested processes.Quote:
It is the right trying to enforce their "christian" beliefs on others.
If anyone is/was my hero it was RBG and SHE is the one who got Roe through, as well as, many other needed laws. And, yes it is christian beliefs, more specifically Catholic beliefs…that are being forced through. I think more supreme court justices should be put in place since trump abandoned Garland and pushed the handmaiden through in a few weeks. Kavanaugh (spell?) was questionable too. It would make for a more equitable division of beliefs. Or just get rid of the lying bast…ds!
So you're good with perjury as long as it's not perjury about a damn blowjob. Got it. Thanks for clarifying your priorities.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan
Now you’re just making stuff up. RBG was famously critical of the legal reasoning behind Roe. It’s a matter of record. She was appointed to the SCOTUS many years after the decision, so even if she had been willing to put her name to that hot mess of emanations and penumbrae, she wouldn’t have been in a position to “get it through”.Quote:
Originally Posted by frugal-one
I stand corrected. RBG was a proponent of women’s rights and here are her words about Roe:
“My criticism of Roe is that it seemed to have stopped the momentum on the side of change,” Ginsburg said. She would’ve preferred that abortion rights be secured more gradually, in a process that included state legislatures and the courts, she added. Ginsburg also was troubled that the focus on Roe was on a right to privacy, rather than women’s rights.
“Roe isn’t really about the woman’s choice, is it?” Ginsburg said. “It’s about the doctor’s freedom to practice…it wasn’t woman-centered, it was physician-centered.”
I can respect your take, TT. I just wonder how many Uvaldes, Derek Chauvins, Supreme Court decision overturns, and January 6ths can this nation endure, especially in this stressful, unstable Putin as madman/inflation as enemy environment? But if there were a way to avoid splitting, the above issues would need to be addressed down to their DNA.Quote:
Originally Posted by Teacher Terry
Rob
Expressing an opinion which is subject to change is not perjury.Quote:
Originally Posted by jp1
They didn’t change their minds in such a short time. They deliberately lied to get confirmation. It’s really disgusting but no one has integrity anymore.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan
I think it had more to do with a case brought before the court which required a ruling based upon actual constitutional principles and being forced to abandon suspect rulings in defense of proper jurisprudence.Quote:
Originally Posted by Teacher Terry
When you read the actual quotes, it seems that nominees (regardless of which president is doing the nominating) have learned to couch answers to specific partisan questions in the most ambiguous way possible. Look at the most recent appointee’s refusal to define what a woman is. I think it’s possibly the only reasonable response to opinion-shopping politicians.
When Kavanaugh was asked about abortion in his confirmation hearing….
“It’s settled as precedent of the Supreme Court,” Kavanaugh said. “One of the important things to keep in mind about Roe v. Wade is that it has been reaffirmed many times.”
p
Kavanaugh's lack of character might have been reaffirmed many times if Trump's FBI had bothered to check out the thousands of tips they got to that effect.Quote:
Originally Posted by frugal-one
More news showing republican lack of concern for veterans voting down things they previously were in favor of (ie burn pits).
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/con...ct-a-rcna40516
Moronic trump back in the news with Saudi-backed golf on his course and disparaging the PGA.
https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/28/polit...bia/index.html
I am sure if I looked I would find more disgusting republican news.
That vote was pure vindictiveness. They were upset because of the possible upcoming reconciliation. Ditto with their derailing of the Chips Bill. And a birth control bill, among others.Quote:
Originally Posted by frugal-one
And, in other news, more January 6th texts are missing: "Text messages on the phones of former President Trump’s acting Homeland Security Secretary Chard Wolf and acting Deputy Secretary Ken Cuccinelli were lost in a “reset” of government phones, The Washington Post reports." (Tickle the Wire) Convenient.
i’m going to ask you, do you really want supreme court nominees deciding their ruling before doing the important work of hearing cases evaluating evidence and processes, and deliberating with peers? I mean if we’re going to do that then why bother to have them even deliberate?Quote:
Originally Posted by Teacher Terry
I do not want that. And Supreme Court justices are capable of changing their mind even if actually on the Supreme Court.
We all change our mind on issues and that is a GOOD thing. Remember how that guy Barack Obama and the presidential nominee Hillary Clinton changed their minds about gay marriage? If I voted them in based on their original idea of gay marriage, do I call them liars later when they change their mind?
IL.. They lied. It was a VERY short time. The rulings were already decided previously. Look at #264 above.
I am going to vote today. You can bet it will not be for the lying republicans. And, yes, they are lying “bleeps” in my state.
Okay---let's get one thing clarified---I, will be voting for ALL Republican candidates, except for several Libertarians. I will NOT be voting for ANY candidate who is affiliated with that Democratic Party. Hope that helps you some. Attachment 4639
So you won’t be voting in the Republican primary? That’s probably best for all concerned.Quote:
Originally Posted by frugal-one
As stated above, I voted today….primary… not just republican. Can’t believe you’re voting for traitor Ron Johnson. Your head is in the sand. Seems mostly old people that I know are voting republican. They only watch fox news and believe the fodder they are being fed.Quote:
Originally Posted by LDAHL
ridiculous for all reasons stated above. Quit watching Fox news.Quote:
Originally Posted by littlebittybobby
What’s this fixation people have with Fox News? I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that half their viewership was hatewatchers from the number of times they bring it up. It seems to be a required element of the cartoonish stereotype construction process.Quote:
Originally Posted by frugal-one
Okay---I'm just sitting here, wondering how I can quit something I'm NOT doing? I just never watch Fox News. Einstein didn't watch Fox, so why should I? Ha--gotcha. See? But yeah---Mr Dahl may be right---this accusation of "watching Fox News" may be projection by the accuser, of their own behaviors. I have noticed libs make a LOT of assumptions, upon which to justify their beliefs. Plus, do a LOT of name-calling and lashing out at people who don't accept their ideology. See? Hope that helps you some.Attachment 4643
This is always frugal-one’s advice, stop listening to Fox News. I got that several times from her and it’s hilarious because for most of the years of my adult life I haven’t even had a mechanism to watch Fox News because we didn’t have cable TV. Now in Hermann we have cable TV but I just don’t watch it. I don’t watch anything on the television set Other than occasional binges of HGTV And I always regret that.
These days all media are biased in support of their preferred demographic. I think anyone with an interest in politics needs to consume a little from each if they really want to be well informed. Anyone who constantly berates one, or even worse the consumers of one, is probably too partisan to be worthy of my concern, I'll reserve that for those who get their news from late night comedy shows.
Who of right mind, would strictly get their news from a comedy show? Ever hear of parody, Alan?
littlebobby... trump was the massive name caller, if you remember ... and a few of his current minions have followed suit.
I cannot rationalize people voting republican with all that has happened. I have voted republican in the past when there was such a thing. I don't believe the current party is of that ilk. Enough said.
Your posts remind me of a poster back in the GWB days who got all her political news from Jon Stewart. These days she probably gets it from Rachel Maddow. Same/Same, oddly enough.Quote:
Originally Posted by frugal-one