Too much Freedom=Chaos, then to Anarchy. Leftists way of life.
...
No, that's NOT caused by "too much freedom", that's caused by poor personal choices.
For those of us who have lived isolated/rural, we have 100% freedom. NOBODY around to get their panties wadded over a few rules getting bent. You wont find too much of that around those isolated homes, though. In fact, a large portion of the reason for being there is to get the hell away from that.
"The Supreme Court has voted to strike down the landmark Roe v. Wade decision, according to an initial draft majority opinion written by Justice Samuel Alito circulated inside the court and obtained by POLITICO.
The draft opinion is a full-throated, unflinching repudiation of the 1973 decision which guaranteed federal constitutional protections of abortion rights and a subsequent 1992 decision – Planned Parenthood v. Casey – that largely maintained the right. “Roe was egregiously wrong from the start,” Alito writes.
“We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled,” he writes in the document, labeled as the “Opinion of the Court.” “It is time to heed the Constitution and return the issue of abortion to the people’s elected representatives.”
Leaks of SCOTUS decisions prior to being published are EXTREMELY RARE throughout the history of the U.S., so while this news should approached with an abundance of caution, the highly partisan and heated nature of this issue and the flood of leaks from all other branches of our government in the past years also tends to make a leak like this unsurprising if it did indeed happen.
I should also mention that, despite what the article says, abortion has been "a constitutionally protected right'.
the religious PIGS appointed to the the court by the nut-con's want to CON-TROLL THEY FAIL TO UNDERSTAND 70% FAVOR THE CURRENT RULES
and your con's are only a 30% faction not a majority
by the way I expect a reaction as the 70% who are NOT con's VOTE that will be a huge loss for the nut-conned at all levels of governments
------------------ Question wonder and be wierd are you kind?
"The Supreme Court has voted to strike down the landmark Roe v. Wade decision, according to an initial draft majority opinion written by Justice Samuel Alito circulated inside the court and obtained by POLITICO.
The draft opinion is a full-throated, unflinching repudiation of the 1973 decision which guaranteed federal constitutional protections of abortion rights and a subsequent 1992 decision – Planned Parenthood v. Casey – that largely maintained the right. “Roe was egregiously wrong from the start,” Alito writes.
“We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled,” he writes in the document, labeled as the “Opinion of the Court.” “It is time to heed the Constitution and return the issue of abortion to the people’s elected representatives.”
-------------
NOTE: Leaks of SCOTUS decisions prior to being published are EXTREMELY RARE throughout the history of the U.S., so while this news should approached with an abundance of caution, the highly partisan and heated nature of this issue and the flood of leaks from all other branches of our government in the past years also tends to make a leak like this unsurprising if it did indeed happen.
I should also mention that, despite what the article says, abortion has never been "a constitutionally protected right'.
The news is very confusing. Nothing has been voted on and if it was then it is putting the power back in the states hands where they can choose what to uphold. I think its along the same lines and "someone" colluded with the Russians. We know how that turned out. The "Government" has grown too big and they are feeling that power slip so they react. Everyone votes then finds out it was fake or misleading. Rinse repeat.
I think you have your percentages backwards, but that's not surprising to me.
that is the con's MYTH
reality is 70 / 30 just in voter registrations
most independents do not have a nut-con spin demo are 40 % ind 30% sorry but that only leaves 30% for the con's no fake news or claims of non-existent frauds will change the numbers
your side after taking careful aim JUST SHOT THEIR OWN FOOT NOV WILL SHOW THE RESULTS OF FAR LESS CON'S
[This message has been edited by ray b (edited 05-03-2022).]
most independents do not have a nut-con spin demo are 40 % ind 30% sorry but that only leaves 30% for the con's no fake news or claims of non-existent frauds will change the numbers
your side after taking careful aim JUST SHOT THEIR OWN FOOT NOV WILL SHOW THE RESULTS OF FAR LESS CON'S
You never say anything of value, and the more you use made-up words, the less sense you make man.
But hey, once you stoop to name calling, you have lost whatever argument you are in. Using "There are more registered bla bla bla than the other guys" is a non starter dude, as there are many places that don't force you to register. It would only be a valid argument if you knew the number of republicans or democrats absolutely. You don't know the number, so anything you say on the subject is pulled from thin air.
[This message has been edited by Fats (edited 05-03-2022).]
maybe if our snowfakes on the rightwings were a bit tougher
and a bit less on the total nutty side there would be no need to refer to them as such
but as long as you want rumps to be elected with LESS votes you have earned the nut prefix to your self labeled CON and damm if I will type out nutty conservative just for your snowflake upset self so nut-con it is
and your side re enforces the nut label every time you attack the vax or masks or call middle of the road old joe a commie or the 100's of other MYTHS you believe with out a bit of proof
your side works hard to earn that nut label be proud of it or try rational facts instead of MYTHS for a change
State rights are key. Keep fed gov small. But that's not acceptable to RATs nor the WEF and those that fund them. One method of thought=RATs One deity=RATs One control=RATs One order=NWO
Now the $$fundraising$$ is starting. Chuckles Schumer grand standing. Amazed at how quickly protesters and rabble-rousers showed up. So many premade protest signs and banners at the ready. Is there teleportation devices around that the public doesn't know of? Was the Watergate fully booked on Sunday?
Bras and high-heels are burning! P**nhub server capacity growing! Now the traffickers of 'parasites' and 'bio-matter', Planned SexualizeDaHood, are jumping in. They see their supply chain may dry/grow up. What to do?
maybe if our snowfakes on the rightwings were a bit tougher
and a bit less on the total nutty side there would be no need to refer to them as such
but as long as you want rumps to be elected with LESS votes you have earned the nut prefix to your self labeled CON and damm if I will type out nutty conservative just for your snowflake upset self so nut-con it is
and your side re enforces the nut label every time you attack the vax or masks or call middle of the road old joe a commie or the 100's of other MYTHS you believe with out a bit of proof
your side works hard to earn that nut label be proud of it or try rational facts instead of MYTHS for a change
They haven't been this upset since their slaves were freed.
quote
Originally posted by cliffw:
I would say they haven't been this upset since Elon Musk bought Twitter.
It doesn’t matter what the left is upset about, the histrionics will always be dialed up to eleven.
To bastardize an adage coined in the middle of the previous century, “The problem expands so as to fill the worry allotted”. Four years ago, they were every bit as upset about what a few college kids did or didn’t do at a frat party over 40 years prior.
The truth is that rather than supporting any position based on ideology, they oppose a position based of who supports it. This is the only course of action available to those who have no viable ideas.
The news is very confusing. Nothing has been voted on
and if it was then it is putting the power back in the states hands where they can choose what to uphold. I think its along the same lines and "someone" colluded with the Russians. We know how that turned out. The "Government" has grown too big and they are feeling that power slip so they react. Everyone votes then finds out it was fake or misleading. Rinse repeat.
First off, the Supreme Court Justices don't "vote".
They hear oral argument on cases from both sides, ("en banc" which means as a group of 9 Justices), or if the court declines to hear oral argument the individual Justices read the legal filings, briefs and amici from both sides that have been admitted into the case.
THEN the individual Justices separately make their own determination / ruling under the Constitution and stare decisis, (prior applicable case law) as they individually see it and they justify their decision with their own individual written opinion. They most often have their own law clerks that assist them in writing their decision.
THEN once this is all done the Chief Justice, in this case Justice John Roberts, looks at all of the other 8 decisions / opinions and appoints a Justice among the majority out of those 8 to write the majority opinion which collectively gathers all of the other majority opinions into one document. The Chief Justice can, and sometimes does, write the majority opinion if he is among the majority.
The draft of that document, (majority opinion) is then sent back around to all of the Justices for any final edits before it is finally published. Individual Justice's law clerks also are allowed to see the draft majority opinion at this point.
The Chief Justice, (Roberts) also appoints one of the minority Justices to write the dissenting opinion which goes through a similar draft and edit process.
At no point do United States Supreme Court Justices participate in any kind of "balloting or vote". Nor should they ever.
------------
NOTE: I think that it is most likely that an "activist" law clerk for one of the Justices broke confidentiality protocol, and also the terms of their employment and maybe the law, and released the copy of the draft majority opinion to the media. It was clearly done in order to exert political pressure on the Supreme Court and into what should be strictly a legal decision.
[This message has been edited by randye (edited 05-03-2022).]
To the jaded and hardened who have already crossed over into this new age—an age in which power and winning are the only tests of virtue, and the old ideas, like civility and respect, now seem twee—the leak might seem normal or even necessary. But it is nothing more than the most recent salvo in our race to the bottom.
To me, the leak is the most important part of this story. But once they figure out who is responsible, that aspect will just fade into obscurity. Unless, of course, they can blame it on Trump, then they will appoint another special council, another inquisition will convene, the results of which will be leaked in October.
It doesn’t matter what the left is upset about, the histrionics will always be dialed up to eleven.
Thank you for realizing my point.
Hyperbolic emotion and histrionics completely rule Leftist "thinking" and discourse.
Simply reading all of their "the world is coming to an end" panicked media today over this SCOTUS draft opinion illustrates that, and thus my "freed slaves" reference.
--------
By the way, In other SCOTUS news from yesterday that is sure to also get "the crazy Haiku wing" of PFF emotionally overwrought:
*That decision was unanimous.
.
This seems like a good evening to go out for a ride on my elk again....
[This message has been edited by randye (edited 05-04-2022).]
The news is very confusing. Nothing has been voted on and if it was then it is putting the power back in the states hands where they can choose what to uphold. I think its along the same lines and "someone" colluded with the Russians. We know how that turned out. The "Government" has grown too big and they are feeling that power slip so they react. Everyone votes then finds out it was fake or misleading. Rinse repeat.
Are you suggesting that this might be a "false flag"? If so, that's kind of my thought.
The general consensus is that the Dems are going to take a shellacking in the mid-terms. Might this "leak" just be a ploy to energize them, and maybe to minimize their losses? Wouldn't surprise me a bit.
[This message has been edited by Raydar (edited 05-04-2022).]
Are you suggesting that this might be a "false flag"? If so, that's kind of my thought.
The general consensus is that the Dems are going to take a shellacking in the mid-terms. Might this "leak" just be a ploy to energize them, and maybe to minimize their losses? Wouldn't surprise me a bit.
I believe it is twisted and blown out of proportion. This is a leak without perspective, was it political driven? Doesn't matter it will be 100% used by politicians to manipulate voters. But end of the day this is about the law, its removing the "law" at the federal level and putting it back in the hands of the states where it can be better managed based on the voters and what they want. What works in Florida is not going to work in CA.
End of the day its not directly effecting me anymore. I hope that people can be more responsible, directly or indirectly the ripples from one persons indiscretion can cause a lot of problems. It should not be up to the government to resolve those.
Are you suggesting that this might be a "false flag"? If so, that's kind of my thought.
The general consensus is that the Dems are going to take a shellacking in the mid-terms. Might this "leak" just be a ploy to energize them, and maybe to minimize their losses? Wouldn't surprise me a bit.
I absolutely believe the leak and the ensuing hullabaloo are part of a carefully orchestrated political strategy.
Are you suggesting that this might be a "false flag"? If so, that's kind of my thought.
The general consensus is that the Dems are going to take a shellacking in the mid-terms. Might this "leak" just be a ploy to energize them, and maybe to minimize their losses? Wouldn't surprise me a bit.
I hate to agree with this... but... everything seems too well coordinated.
I also think they knew this was coming anyway, so it doesn't take more than 30-45 minutes to update the draft of a speech that was intended to be given.
I think this hurts Democrats though... with this coming out NOW, it wasn't really planned to come out at any point until June through October (unless I have my dates wrong).
With this coming out early, I suspect much of this drama will wear off.
Most of the country believes that from one day to the next, everyone in the country will be prevented from having an abortion. The reality is that almost every state has provisions for abortion against rape and / or incest (which makes up 1/10th of 1% of abortions). The other reality is that in at least half the states, you can still kill babies whenever you want, to your heart's content. Another reality is that for the other 23-25 states, it's not a total ban, there's still some leeway.
As people lose their **** and actually start looking into it, the "fear" will wear off, and it'll wear off soon... and they'll start going back to the fact that nearly all of us have lost 15-20% of our retirements (yes, I know... everyone else is more awesome and invested in this and that, whatever), and that gas prices and food / commodities continue to go up, while pay does not go up.
They'll forget about killing babies, and remember that they're broke, and vote accordingly.
So if it is planned, the Democrats are just flat-out retarded.
forgot about nixon did we ? he earn the tricky dicky tytle by HARD WORK
ron raygun traded with iran our enemy replacement parts in a very dirty deal to delay the hostages release in 1980 and insure carter did not get re-elected
BuSh2 loss to gore but jeb cheated the counts
gore won by 1/2 MILLION
THE RUMP LOST BY 3 MILLION IN 16 AND 7 MILLION IN 20 and the real nuts still claim he ''won''
btw other then mr O breaking the hearts of racists everywhere I fail to see your point
Are you suggesting that this might be a "false flag"? If so, that's kind of my thought.
The general consensus is that the Dems are going to take a shellacking in the mid-terms. Might this "leak" just be a ploy to energize them, and maybe to minimize their losses? Wouldn't surprise me a bit.
Not sure what you mean by this being a "false flag".
The leak did indeed happen and Chief Justice Roberts confirmed it yesterday.
He also directed the Marshall of the Court to investigate to find the leaker.
I firmly believe that it was an activist law clerk and he or she will be, at a minimum, ushered out of the Supreme Court and disbarred for life from practicing law and will forever be a pariah in the legal community......which of course makes them a prime candidate scumbag to be employed by MSNBC or CNN
[This message has been edited by randye (edited 05-04-2022).]
yes my bias is one man one vote all count the same EVERYWHERE
NO realestate votes just people and dred scott 3/5's and jim crow are states rights that were and are WRONG
Perhaps you should find another country to live in then, as the People have never elected the President directly by popular vote. Brush up (or maybe read for the first time) on the written arguments by the Founding Fathers concerning the establishment of the Electoral College and the safeguards it builds in to our process.
Jim Crow and the 3/5's? Oh, I agree, but did you know that both those were due to the Democratic slave holders wanting to strip rights from the freed slaves (Jim Crow laws) and Democratic slave holders wanting to count slaves as whole persons in the population of their states (even though the slaves had no vote at the time) in order to get more seats in the House of Representatives. The 3/5ths Compromise prevented over representation by the South.
Both of your examples are Democrat dirty tricks from ages ago, as are your examples from earlier posts.
If you're gonna express your arguments, you should have some facts behind your arguments - not the disinformation you have been fed from where ever you get it from.
Perhaps you should find another country to live in then, as the People have never elected the President directly by popular vote. Brush up (or maybe read for the first time) on the written arguments by the Founding Fathers concerning the establishment of the Electoral College and the safeguards it builds in to our process.
Jim Crow and the 3/5's? Oh, I agree, but did you know that both those were due to the Democratic slave holders wanting to strip rights from the freed slaves (Jim Crow laws) and Democratic slave holders wanting to count slaves as whole persons in the population of their states (even though the slaves had no vote at the time) in order to get more seats in the House of Representatives. The 3/5ths Compromise prevented over representation by the South.
Both of your examples are Democrat dirty tricks from ages ago, as are your examples from earlier posts.
If you're gonna express your arguments, you should have some facts behind your arguments - not the disinformation you have been fed from where ever you get it from.
Have you ever taken a History class?
WHY IS IT EVERY CON WHO TRYS THE GOP TALKING POINTS OF THE MYTH
and try to blame the democratic party forgets totally all those bygone demo's WERE CON'S FIRST AND FOREMOST and at that time the LIBERAL'S WERE THE REPUBLICANS
perhaps why you say ''Both of your examples are Democrat dirty tricks from ages ago, as are your examples from earlier posts.'' not understanding the evil of the conned has NO one home IT SLITHERS AS IT MOVES
and rather then call the slave owners members of a party why not ID them by their ideology that is the same as yours ''screw you I got my stuff and I will not care or share'' IE THE NUT CON'S
those slavers are your guys not the GOP of 1865 but sadly became the Gop of the raygun by 1985 understand where and how they really came from NOT THE MYTH
------------------ Question wonder and be wierd are you kind?
Perhaps you should find another country to live in then, as the People have never elected the President directly by popular vote. Brush up (or maybe read for the first time) on the written arguments by the Founding Fathers concerning the establishment of the Electoral College and the safeguards it builds in to our process.
Jim Crow and the 3/5's? Oh, I agree, but did you know that both those were due to the Democratic slave holders wanting to strip rights from the freed slaves (Jim Crow laws) and Democratic slave holders wanting to count slaves as whole persons in the population of their states (even though the slaves had no vote at the time) in order to get more seats in the House of Representatives. The 3/5ths Compromise prevented over representation by the South.
Both of your examples are Democrat dirty tricks from ages ago, as are your examples from earlier posts.
If you're gonna express your arguments, you should have some facts behind your arguments - not the disinformation you have been fed from where ever you get it from.
Have you ever taken a History class?
Now you did it.
We will get "treated" to another round of the old Leftist myth that "the parties switched sides".
--------
OOPS....too late. I see Leftist Fairytale Story Hour already started.
[This message has been edited by randye (edited 05-04-2022).]
Topic Closed
