The Forum > General Discussion > US Supreme Court Abolishes Constitutional Right to Abortion
US Supreme Court Abolishes Constitutional Right to Abortion
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- 3
- ...
- 22
- 23
- 24
-
- All
Posted by Foxy, Sunday, 26 June 2022 11:40:14 AM
| |
Already posted in 'Logic at last' started by Is Mise.
Posted by ttbn, Sunday, 26 June 2022 11:51:38 AM
| |
The "right" to an abortion does not exist in the Constitution, is against the statute law of the majority of states the majority of the time, does not exist in common law, and exists, or rather existed, only in the decision of the Supreme Court that decided Roe v Wade.
It had no other basis than mere power. They are hoist with their own petard. The latest decision of the Court means that, according to their own theory of rights, the right to an abortion does not exist. But don't worry and don't fret on behalf of women wanting to kill their own offspring in their own womb by tearing it apart limb from limb without anaesthetic. They will only be slightly inconvenienced. Abortion has not been made illegal: the authority to decide has merely been returned to where the Constitution allocates it: to the people and their elected representatives. Any power not specifically granted to the feds is explicitly reserved to the people and the states, end of story. No need for a claque of extremist fundamentalists to impose their arbitrary opinions on the entire populace of the republic Posted by Cumberland, Sunday, 26 June 2022 12:08:22 PM
| |
What I found extremely disturbing was the sobbing and hysteria of mainly young women who apparently want the right to kill babies.
Posted by ttbn, Sunday, 26 June 2022 12:13:26 PM
| |
Hi Foxy,
It might be a case of going from one extreme to the other. I need to read up on what these changes now actually mean. Posted by Armchair Critic, Sunday, 26 June 2022 1:16:32 PM
| |
"US Supreme Court Abolishes Constitutional Right to Abortion"
Completely wrong. The ruling merely passes the setting of the rules surrounding abortion back to the states and it's citizen's, where it always should have been. Posted by mhaze, Sunday, 26 June 2022 1:35:35 PM
| |
The US Supreme court on Friday by a 6-3 majority abolished
the constitutional right to abortion more than 50 years after it was established, leaving individual states to now decide. It's expected to lead to abortion bans in about half of the states. What you need to know about the supreme court's abortion decision can be found at the following: http://theconversation.com/roe-overturned-what-you-need-to-know-about-the-supreme-court-decision-184692 Posted by Foxy, Sunday, 26 June 2022 1:59:37 PM
| |
Will those who shouldn't be breeding now have to forfeit some of their breeding allowances to those who aren't allowed to make decisions over their own bodies ?
Will those who decided they know better financially contribute to the inevitable hardship caused by their "we know what's best" mentality ? Posted by Indyvidual, Sunday, 26 June 2022 3:12:19 PM
| |
Foxy, all you need to know about it is in the original judgment:
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/19-1392_6j37.pdf You need to learn to develop the discipline of consulting original sources, not just swallowing down what propagandists manipulate you into repeating as if it were true. You can't have it both ways. Either the right exists by virtue of the court's decision, or it doesn't. If it doesn't, then there is no such right. And if it does, then there is no such right, by the pro-abortionists' own theory of the existence of the right. Okay? Read the judgment and learn to understand what you are talking about. Posted by Cumberland, Sunday, 26 June 2022 3:13:17 PM
| |
Hi Cumberland,
Thanks for your advice. I'm sure you mean well. However, the US Supreme Court by overturning Roe vs Wade, the 1073 decision that guaranteed federal constitutional protections of abortion rights for American women did a great disservice in my humble opinion. Bans won't stop abortion - they will just alter how people will get them. It will force woman to find service providers in other jurisdictions. To rely on medical abortion through possibly internet sources or to seek illegal and unsafe providers. Don't forget that all sorts of pregnant people need and want abortions. Young and old, poor and rich, black and white, and indigenous, and we're told that even pro-life activists who picket outside clinics sometimes get abortions in the same clinics they are protesting. I've cut and pasted from the following link below - where you can find even more information - they're arguments at least to me are rational: http://theconversation.com/roe-v-wade-overturned-will-more-americans-travel-to-canada-and-mexico-for-abortions-185563 Posted by Foxy, Sunday, 26 June 2022 3:37:06 PM
| |
Oooops - sorry again for my typo. The Roe vs Wade
decision should have read - 1973. Posted by Foxy, Sunday, 26 June 2022 3:39:28 PM
| |
You're right Cumberland. Go to the source. Everything else is partisan propaganda.
But some people prefer to get their information (and opinions) via a partisan filter. Posted by mhaze, Sunday, 26 June 2022 4:05:07 PM
| |
Yes. Some people certainly do!
Posted by Foxy, Sunday, 26 June 2022 4:12:09 PM
| |
Talking about preferences for - partisan filters?
mhaze - you may be interested in watching Channel 31 at 9.20pm this evening. "Trump's American Carnage." Although I doubt if it will fit into your definition of a partisan filter. More like the "fake news," category. Posted by Foxy, Sunday, 26 June 2022 5:14:02 PM
| |
tbbn
They are not "babies" but now their mere existence is more important than the lives of women and their families and in the same week they deregulated firearms - so how precious is life really? All hail the American Taliban. The gays are their next target and after them ... Posted by rache, Monday, 27 June 2022 1:24:38 AM
| |
so how precious is life really ?
rache, I'm sure if placed into the situation that requires deciding, you'd be surprised how you'd find a reason to decide that yours is more important than another's ! Posted by Indyvidual, Monday, 27 June 2022 6:28:33 AM
| |
The baby killers will still be able to get their dirty work done in about half the states; in the meant time they have been given another reason to vent their hatred of America.
And what is it with these females who can't keep their legs together and/or use contraception, tubal ligation, saying no, staying sober enough to say no, etc. What a bunch of tarts. Posted by ttbn, Monday, 27 June 2022 9:19:37 AM
| |
While many people support abortion in certain circumstances; none of those circumstances include convenience, mistakes of the drunken kind, or change of mind. 65% of all Americans do not support ANY abortions after the first trimester. And 100% of Americans probably have no interest at all in what a few Australians think about abortion or anything else; Australians who are unlikely to know about their own country's abortion laws.
I don’t think that our laws include: non-physicians being able to do abortions ( Maryland), and can receive no penalty for the death of a baby up to 28 days old. In Colorado, babies who survive abortions can be left to die or be euthanized. "Blue states are on a mission to codify even the most extreme abortion rights". Before you start 'old womanising' and sticking your beaks into stuff you know nothing about in countries you don’t know, learn about those countries, and in America’s case, get over the idea that they are just-like-us when it comes to life and death, just because they speak English (sort of). Killing by the gun or by abortion: beyond our understanding, and none of our business. Posted by ttbn, Monday, 27 June 2022 10:09:55 AM
| |
Foxy, Please shew us where the right to abortion is to be found in the Constitution.
Posted by Is Mise, Monday, 27 June 2022 10:09:57 AM
| |
Is Mise,
Look up Roe vs Wade, the 1973 decision that guaranteed federal constitutional protections of abortion rights for American women. Posted by Foxy, Monday, 27 June 2022 10:35:48 AM
| |
We have a cadre of folk on this site who treat diversity as an obvious and unmitigated 'good'. More diverse equals better in their mind.
The 1973 Roe decision was made by a Supreme Court comprised of 9 men. This new decision was made by the most diverse Supreme Court in history - 3 women, one black, one Puerto Rican. Be careful what you wish for.... _____________________________________________________________________ Foxy suggested I watch "Trump's American Carnage." But I already had. I enjoy a little comedy occasionally. The blurb for this rubbish reads..."'American Carnage' Is Donald Trump's Legacy From emboldened white supremacists to a raging pandemic to a siege of the U.S. Capitol, the Trump presidency was just as dark as his 2017 inaugural speech.". And so on. How anyone can't see that as partisan is beyond my understanding. ___________________________________________________________________ The mayor of New York hates the decision and wants women to have the right to abortion up until the day of birth - but don't call them baby killers, nosiree. Up until the DAY OF BIRTH. Still, with the SCOTUS decision these people can get what they want - if they can convince their electorate it's valid. A recent poll found a majority in favour of banning abortion after 15 weeks, bar for exceptional circumstances. Posted by mhaze, Monday, 27 June 2022 11:01:30 AM
| |
The feminists' mass political killings of innocent human beings now amount each year to half the number of people killed in the second world war.
So how do they deal with the ethics of what they are doing when confronted with it? Why, exactly the same as the Nazis - DENY THE HUMANITY of the victims of their aggression, the untermenschen of the woke brigade. But they know perfectly well that what they are saying is not true, because if they're not killing a human being, then what is the purpose of abortion? They know they're lying. Disgusting. Repulsive. Anti-human. Anti-truth. Anti-ethics. Anti-humanity. It's also a direct lie that they are pro-choice, since they are anti-choice on everything else. Their entire ideology is nothing but a welter of policy demands to force everyone else into obedience with it. Pro power for its own sake, that's all. The rest is lies. Shame. Posted by Cumberland, Monday, 27 June 2022 11:16:24 AM
| |
Here are some other perspectives:
http://politico.com/news/magazine/2022/06/25/post-roe-america-roundup-00042377 Posted by Foxy, Monday, 27 June 2022 11:42:22 AM
| |
Foxy,
You said that abortion was a right under the Constitution, if you can’t answer a question on an assertion that you made then don’t fob people of with a lookup. Posted by Is Mise, Monday, 27 June 2022 11:47:35 AM
| |
Let's all remember that 3 three of the six judges who voted for this were Trump appointees.
Yet another victory for Trumpism. Posted by mhaze, Monday, 27 June 2022 11:50:11 AM
| |
Is Mise
You know that there was no right to abortion under the US Constitution; so does Ms. All-mouth-and-bloomers, which is why she is not responding. Probably too busy frantically looking at ABC sites and other hard Left sources to help her out. You seem to enjoy taunting her and 1405. Pretty boring, mate; and it only encourages them. Both are a waste of space, and so predictable that it's not worth reading their bumf in the first place. Posted by ttbn, Monday, 27 June 2022 12:05:48 PM
| |
mhaze,
Yes it shows how far - lying, stealing, and pandering to racism can get a person in US politics. I still shudder at Trump's famous - "fine-people on both sides" reaction to the murderous mob in Charlottesville early in his presidency. I used to think that perhaps a racist, incompetent, ignorant, greedy guts - wasn't as bad as I thought he was. Boy was I wrong. Is Mise, Find someone else to fight and argue with. I'm not interested - if you can't understand what it was that I referred to - it's your problem not mine. Posted by Foxy, Monday, 27 June 2022 12:07:33 PM
| |
Foxy,
Got yourself into a corner again. Your reference to the Constitution of the US was either a repetition of something you read or just pure makebelieve. Posted by Is Mise, Monday, 27 June 2022 12:13:32 PM
| |
Is Mise
The Constitutional interpretation was always divorced from anything other than judges' own political preferences; which is why the 6-3 result was described as 'raw judicial power - the same as it was when Democrat-appointed judges ran the show. Posted by ttbn, Monday, 27 June 2022 12:41:04 PM
| |
"I still shudder at Trump's famous - "fine-people on both sides" reaction to the murderous mob in Charlottesville early in his
presidency." Foxy, demonstrating that no matter how often or how clearly its explained to her, she is determined to not understand. Posted by mhaze, Monday, 27 June 2022 1:11:18 PM
| |
mhaze
Such people are ideologues who allow other people to do their thinking for them. There is no point in arguing with them because they are totally incapable of rational thought on their own. Their thoughts are the thoughts of others, and those others just tell them what to say and think; not how to deal with contrary opinions from outside their thought bubbles or dunghills. They have another look at their source, and sure enough, black is still white, so all they can do is continue repeating the error. The rest of us read, listen to, or watch other opinions and ideas, to see what we are up against. Sometimes, we even change our minds. Not so with the 'friends of the ABC' and useful idiots for Marxism. Posted by ttbn, Monday, 27 June 2022 1:39:24 PM
| |
Is Mise,
A couple of things: I never said it was in the constitution. You need to read what I actually did say as well as the links I gave. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roe_v._Wade# http://theconversation.com/roe-overturned-what-you-need-to-know-about-the-supreme-court-decision-184692 mhaze, You're just as determined to believe what you want about Trump as I am. So why am I at fault - and you're not? ttbn, Watch your toxicity - it's increasing. Take it easy. Posted by Foxy, Monday, 27 June 2022 2:18:45 PM
| |
Ah, here comes mhaze with his usual rubbish assertions which he is becoming so well known for.
He claims:“"US Supreme Court Abolishes Constitutional Right to Abortion" Completely wrong. The ruling merely passes the setting of the rules surrounding abortion back to the states and it's citizen's, where it always should have been.” The court had decided in Roe vs Wade that constitution did indeed provide right to an abortion via the 14th amendment. On January 22, 1973, the Supreme Court issued a 7–2 decision holding that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides a fundamental "right to privacy", which protects a pregnant woman's right to an abortion. The Court also held that the right to abortion is not absolute and must be balanced against the government's interests in protecting women's health and prenatal life. The Court resolved these competing interests by announcing a pregnancy trimester timetable to govern all abortion regulations in the United States. During the first trimester, governments could not regulate abortion at all, except to require that abortions be performed by a licensed physician. During the second trimester, governments could regulate the abortion procedure but only for the purpose of protecting maternal health and not for protecting fetal life. After viability, which includes the third trimester of pregnancy and the last few weeks of the second trimester, abortions could be regulated and even prohibited, but only if the laws provided exceptions for abortions necessary to save the "life" or "health" of the mother. The Court also classified the right to abortion as "fundamental", which required courts to evaluate challenged abortion laws under the "strict scrutiny" standard, the most stringent level of judicial review in the United States.” End of story. The court, made up of a number of Trump's right wing toxic appointments, has now decided to revoke that decision. So saying the “US Supreme Court Abolishes Constitutional Right to Abortion” is entirely appropriate. Posted by SteeleRedux, Monday, 27 June 2022 4:01:06 PM
| |
Dear Is Mise,
You should also read the above since you seem incapable of looking up a highly relevant link Foxy provided to you. Do you need a lesson on how to click a link or is comprehension your failing and you prefer pre-packaged little sound bites because anything more than a couple of sentences turns your mind to mush? How about a modicum of effort mate, it really shouldn't be that much to ask. Posted by SteeleRedux, Monday, 27 June 2022 4:01:21 PM
| |
Dear Foxy,
The Supreme Court decision was indeed abysmal and has left millions of American women at the mercy of religious hard right state legislatures. But I'm not sure we can crow too loudly. Essentially America on abortion has been returned to what we have here in this country where states make the laws for their individual jurisdictions. We are lucky that the sort of toxicity isn't prevalent here but it one day could be, and we have no federally mandates set of rights to prevent it. Posted by SteeleRedux, Monday, 27 June 2022 4:32:07 PM
| |
SR,
The decisions about abortion have been passed to the states. The ability to have an abortion hasn't been abolished. QED. "has left millions of American women at the mercy of religious hard right state legislatures." It's as though these people think of the state governments as some sort of occupying power. FYG, the state legislatures are elected by the people. so saying the decision is now in the hands of the legislature is the same as saying its in the hands of the people. Ever heard of democracy? In that regard, those who read the actual judgement rather than partisan filters of the judgement, will have seen an interesting comment as regards voting. It seems that women vote is disproportion numbers to men. In Mississippi (remember this was all about Mississippi!!) women make up 51% of potential voters but 55% of actual voters. Checking this statistic, it seems to hold in most parts of the country. So if legislatures do indeed decide to restrict abortion more than the current norm, it'll be women who voted for that. Posted by mhaze, Monday, 27 June 2022 5:15:43 PM
| |
"You're just as determined to believe what you want about Trump
as I am. So why am I at fault - and you're not?" Its not a question of belief. Its a question of facts and that's the difference. When Trump said there were many fine people on both sides, that was a fact. That your partisan filters sought to distort it is the basis of your belief. Posted by mhaze, Monday, 27 June 2022 5:18:25 PM
| |
Foxy,
yYou said that the US Supreme court had abolished a Constitutional right, to be a Constitutional right it must be in the Constitution. You fail again. Posted by Is Mise, Monday, 27 June 2022 5:57:15 PM
| |
Steele,
Read the above. Posted by Is Mise, Monday, 27 June 2022 6:01:09 PM
| |
Dear Steele,
Thank You for explaining things further. I thought the links I gave were quite clear and easy to understand. I think that Is Mise does have comprehension problems - either that or he's simply looking for an argument. He's probably hen-pecked at home. As for Donald Trump? Well, mhaze is right. They don't hardly make 'em like him any more - but just to be on the safe side, he should be castrated anyway. Posted by Foxy, Monday, 27 June 2022 6:23:06 PM
| |
Is Mise,
Read Steele's comments on page 6, about constitutional rights. Posted by Foxy, Monday, 27 June 2022 6:27:59 PM
| |
Dear mhaze,
Mississippi? Really? The state where the black poverty rates are over 30% and draconian law and order is needed just to keep a lid on the place. Where the percentage of evangelical Christians is second only to Alabama, where the percentage of registered voters compared to eligible voters is at 60%, markedly below the country average, and with some of the most stringent voter ID rules. That state? I think there is a lot of things occupying white women voters in Mississippi. It will be interesting to see how it impacts the Legislature voting in 2023 though. So to the broader notion of state vs federal democracy. There is little doubt that Mississippi would still be a strongly segregationist state without federal civil rights intervention. The right to an abortion really should be a civil rights issue trumping the States who wish to ban it completely. Dear Is Mise, No you read the above and switch your brain on. The constitution says of the right to bear arms, it was to be done within a well regulated militia. That has been extended to individuals by the Supreme Court which ruled this shouldn't be restricted to those in a well regulated militia. So do you regard the right of individuals to bear arms constitutional mandated even though it isn't expressly stated within the constitution? Posted by SteeleRedux, Monday, 27 June 2022 7:03:16 PM
| |
Steele,
It is expressly stated within the Constitution, understanding of English is all that is needed, the militia is dependent upon the peoples’ right tp bear arms. Posted by Is Mise, Monday, 27 June 2022 7:14:04 PM
| |
According to Fox, the decision has been seen as showing that the Supreme Court has reined in judicial activism at last. The Court ruled in 'the name of common sense' and within the true Constitutional meaning.
Posted by ttbn, Monday, 27 June 2022 9:59:29 PM
| |
mhaze,
Donald Trump's words as US President Joe Biden stated - "assigned a moral equivalence between those spreading hate and those with the courage to stand against it." People have a right to their opinions but no one has a right to be wrong with their facts. And your posting record on this forum not only speaks for itself - it shouts out loud. Posted by Foxy, Tuesday, 28 June 2022 9:57:00 AM
| |
Horrible, baby killing females our now screeching about 'withholding sex' if they can't shag and kill the result. It's a pity that they haven't kept their knees together previously.
Posted by ttbn, Tuesday, 28 June 2022 10:11:18 AM
| |
Is Mise,
I have not failed. I can't be held responsible for your comprehension skills. Comprehension, inventiveness, direction, and criticism: intelligence is contained in these 4 words. Posted by Foxy, Tuesday, 28 June 2022 10:14:35 AM
| |
Is Mise,
This may help: http://nbcchicago.com/news/local/what-is-the-14th-amendment-and-how-is-it-connected-to-abortion-rights-roe-v-wade-2/2865134/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unenumerated_rights Posted by Foxy, Tuesday, 28 June 2022 10:48:46 AM
| |
The pro abortionists are doubling down on their violent attitudes to life by continuing to riot and tell decent people that 'if abortion isn't safe, neither are you'.
Democrat politicians are shouting about how evil the Supreme Court is. It's right when it is stacked with Democrat nominees, but wrong when Republican-nominees are in the majority. Typical petulance and immaturity from the loopy Left and their uncontrolled violence. Posted by ttbn, Tuesday, 28 June 2022 10:50:09 AM
| |
The "loopy left" and uncontrolled violence?
Well - Last week Congress passed a bill to bolster security for Supreme Court Justices and their immediate family members. President Biden signed the bill into law on June 16. There are political violence warnings: http://cbsnews.com/news/supreme-court-abortion-ruling-political-violence-warning/ It is a volatile situation in the US. We saw the lawless action at the Capitol as an example. President Biden has made it quite clear that: "We must stand against violence in any form, regardless of your rationale." Perhaps things will improve. Violence against abortion clinics rose in 2021 according to a report from the National Abortion Foundation. Now with new laws - hopefully things will change. Posted by Foxy, Tuesday, 28 June 2022 12:03:35 PM
| |
Foxy,
Convoluted reasoning. Posted by Is Mise, Tuesday, 28 June 2022 12:28:29 PM
| |
"Donald Trump's words as US President Joe Biden stated -
"assigned a moral equivalence between those spreading hate and those with the courage to stand against it." Well not Biden, but those who tell him what to say. Here's the thing that seems so difficult for you to understand. Two broad groups of people gathered that day. One group wanted to tear down some statutes of people they hated. The other group wanted to protest and defend the statues because they didn't hate them. Now since the group who wanted to tear down the statues were broadly on the left, people like Foxy assume they were the good guys. And since the people who opposed the tearing down were broadly of the right, people like Foxy assume they were all bad guys. That's the level of 'thought' that goes on in the 'mind' of people like Foxy. But here's the thing. Within those two broad groups, there were other smaller groups. Within the group wanting to defend the statues were people who just wanted to express their view that the statues should stay. But there were also people who not only wanted the statues to stay but wanted to use violence to achieve that. And within the group that wanted the staues to go, were people who just wanted to express their views that the statues were racist and should go. But there were also people who wanted to use violence to achieve the aim of tearing down what they saw as racist symbols. Hopefully, Foxy will be able to discern from that who among those various sub-groups were good people and who weren't. But I doubt it. Posted by mhaze, Tuesday, 28 June 2022 1:06:40 PM
| |
Yes SR, that Mississippi. How many other Mississippi States do you know?
I was going to say SR's reply was standard for him, but its really standard for the left as a whole. Since the citizens of Mississippi have reached a conclusion ( a democratic conclusion ) that the left doesn't like, clearly the decision making must be taken from them and given to others who will make the right (ie left) decision. They think that's how democracy works. Sad but true. Posted by mhaze, Tuesday, 28 June 2022 1:11:58 PM
| |
The signs of the breakdown of Western society are all there: currently, in America at least, people are thinking and acting like animals, with the wholehearted support of a handful - the same three of them anyway - posters acting similarly, if only theoretically, because their own lives are theoretical, acted out on line.
I read, in passing, this morning that what the US now has re abortion butchery is the same as we have here, in Australia. So, there is really no need for loony Left Australians to be pontificating about what has happened in another country. They would out screaming in Melbourne or Sydney if they had the courage of their convictions. Posted by ttbn, Tuesday, 28 June 2022 1:30:29 PM
| |
mhaze,
If you want to acknowledge facts - the facts are that things need to be looked at in context. White supremacists terror was rising and Trump's words kneecapped the ability to fight back. Instead of asking for calmness his comments made things worse. Comments like telling the Proud boys - "stand back and stand by." His comments like - "We will never give up. We will never concede. It doesn't happen..." "We won this election and we won it by a landslide." "If you don't fight like hell you're not going to have a country anymore." Trump willfully made statements that in context resulted, encouraged, and resulted in lawless action at the Capitol. Posted by Foxy, Tuesday, 28 June 2022 1:34:41 PM
| |
Is Mise,
Convoluted reasoning? Facts don't come with a warning label. _____________________________________________________________________ Now back to the topic. Our PM has stated that people are entitled to their own views but not to impose their views on women for whom this is a deeply personal decision. "This decision has caused enormous distress and it is a setback for women and their right to control their own bodies and their lives in the US. It's a good thing that in Australia this is not a matter for partisan political debate." Posted by Foxy, Tuesday, 28 June 2022 2:30:55 PM
| |
Oh so now that I've shown that the line that still makes you shudder was nothing to shudder about, you just move onto a list of other misunderstood quotes that supposedly make you shudder.
Well here's a few more quotes that should make to shudder.... "‘If They Bring a Knife to the Fight, We Bring a Gun". " I want you to argue with them and get in their face" "If you get hit, we will punch back twice as hard" Pretty shudder-worthy heh? Oh that disgraceful Trump. Oh wait...they were from Obama. Quick Foxy, hit the erase button. Mustn't read anything that doesn't suit the narrative. Posted by mhaze, Tuesday, 28 June 2022 2:43:56 PM
| |
If there was a Constitutional right to abortion how could the Court abolish it?
Posted by Is Mise, Tuesday, 28 June 2022 6:03:05 PM
| |
mhaze,
A half a pound of tupenny rice A half a pound of treacle Mix it up and make it nice Pop! Goes the weasel But in this case the mix didn't work. Trump still stank! You asked me - "Pretty shudder-worthy heh?" Yes! - It is shudder-worthy certainly. And disgraceful. And yes you do need to hit that erase button for posting what suits your narrative without giving the full quotes or explaining the context in which they were made. The posts when given in full and taken in their proper context of when they were made - give a full and totally different picture to the one you're trying to present with the selective bits you've posted - with no explanations. Shame on you. You even resorted to attributing the last quote you gave to Obama when in fact it was made by conservative Rush Limbaugh's rant on "Obama's America." I am appalled at your pathetic attempts at trying to put Barack Obama in the same category at Donald Trump. That's not cool! Posted by Foxy, Tuesday, 28 June 2022 7:05:08 PM
| |
Is Mise,
You'll never find out if you don't read the given links. I don't have the time or the crayons to explain it all to you. Posted by Foxy, Tuesday, 28 June 2022 7:08:04 PM
| |
Foxy,
You reveal your shallow knowledge once again, the SCOTUS cannot change the Constitution, suggest that you do a little research. Posted by Is Mise, Tuesday, 28 June 2022 7:27:47 PM
| |
Is Mise,
How about you doing your own research? As Steele told you - you have to make some effort to read the links given and try to research the information. If you can't - none of us can help you. Here we go again: http://supremecourt.gov/about/constitutional.aspx http://nbcchicago.com/news/local/what-is-the-14th-amendment-and-how-is-it-connected-to-abortion-rights-roe-v-wade-2/2865134/ Posted by Foxy, Wednesday, 29 June 2022 10:40:16 AM
| |
Is Mise,
If you think my knowledge is shallow - lets see evidence of your knowledge - something of substance to back up your claims - there's a good chap. Put your money where your mouth is. Posted by Foxy, Wednesday, 29 June 2022 10:44:02 AM
| |
Foxy,
The US Constitution can only be changed by law, and the SCOTUS has followed the law, I read your links and the Justices of the Supreme Court agree with me Amendment 14 does not apply, they threw out the convoluted reasoning of their predecessors. To repeat they did not change the Constitution and there never was a Constitutional right to abortion. Note that the SCOTUS. is now much more diverse, having three women members. Posted by Is Mise, Wednesday, 29 June 2022 11:31:52 AM
| |
Is Mise,
"In their scathing joint dissent, the Supreme Court's liberal justices wrote: "The majority has overturned Roe and Casey for one and only one reason - because it has always despised them, and now it has the votes to discard them. The majority thereby substitutes a rule by judges for the rule of law." This conservative majority would allow states to "ban abortion from conception onward because it does not think forced childbirth at all implicates a woman's rights to equality and freedom," said the dissent by Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayer, and Elena Kagan. "Today's Court, that is, does not think there is anything of constitutional significance attached to a woman's control of her body and the path of her life," it said. "A state can force her to bring a pregnancy to full term, even at the strongest personal and familial costs." That's why the ongoing violence continues in the US. You should know this because the following link was given earlier - apparently you did not read or understand it: http://cnbc.com/2022/06/24/roe-v-wade-overturned-by-supreme-court-ending-federal-abortion-rights.html Posted by Foxy, Wednesday, 29 June 2022 12:17:38 PM
| |
Oh, suddenly Foxy wants some context.
When discussing Charlottesville, Foxy treated context like it was poison. Absolutely no fine people on the side she opposed. Thousands of them and not a single fine person. That was Foxy's 'context'. But mention just a few of the Obamessiah's violent remarks, and suddenly Foxy trips over herself to talk context. This apparently is what's called even-handed in Foxyland. It also amply explains why she misunderstands so much of what goes on around her. Posted by mhaze, Wednesday, 29 June 2022 1:27:06 PM
| |
mhaze,
Opinions are like arse-holes. Everybody has one. And on this forum some of us do find opinions that are repugnant to us. On the up-side - these opinions come from total strangers - people who normally would not be part of our social circle or with whom we would not indulge in debating. However, here we all are. And of course we can always turn off our computers and not take part - if and when it suits us. I stand by my comments to you Sir. I did give Donald Trump's comments in context and I did give them in their totality. You did not do that with your attempts to smear President Barack Obama - and you can try to wriggle out of it as much as you like - your post speaks for itself. Including tha fact that you attributed a quote to Obama that he did not make. Bad form Posted by Foxy, Wednesday, 29 June 2022 2:27:20 PM
| |
I was watching live some of the events of Charlottesville as they unfolded.
mhaze is right, the left were out of control on that occasion and the right were fairly well behaved for the most part, but the media spun it, as they always do to suit whatever narrative it is. I keep telling you all - The media isn't unbiased. They highlight narratives they want us to hear; And suppress the information they don't want us to hear. Posted by Armchair Critic, Wednesday, 29 June 2022 2:38:57 PM
| |
" I stand by my comments to you Sir."
So do you still think that there were no 'fine people' among the people who marched in favour of the statues in Charlottesville? None? I suspect you'll dodge that one. Oh and all the quotes I had about Obama were either from his own mouth or from White House officials passing on what he said. That you don't want it to be true, isn't the same thing as it not being true. I know that might shock you. Posted by mhaze, Wednesday, 29 June 2022 2:53:35 PM
| |
mhaze,
Not good enough Sir. Your last quote that you attributed to Obama was made by conservative Rush Limbaugh in his rant on "Obama's America." The other quotes you did not give in their proper context. As for there being any good people amongst the violent mob? I'm sure that there are "good" people everywhere. However, Trump willfully made statements that in context resulted, encouraged and resulted in lawless action. Obama did no such thing. Therein lies the difference. Posted by Foxy, Wednesday, 29 June 2022 3:18:25 PM
| |
mhaze,
You're the one wanting things to be true. When they're not. I'm the one simply stating facts - that are on record and are true. People have a right to their opinions but no one has a right to be wrong in their facts. Opinions are not facts. Posted by Foxy, Wednesday, 29 June 2022 3:22:51 PM
| |
Foxy,
" Rush Limbaugh in his rant on "Obama's America." Limbaugh's speech was given in November 2009. The Obama advice to "punch back twice as hard" was given in August 2009. Let me know if you need help working out which came first and who was quoting who. "Trump willfully made statements that in context resulted, encouraged and resulted in lawless action." Trump's comment about fine people came AFTER the events in Charlottesville. Let me know if you need help working out if the speech caused the violence or was a response to the violence. Posted by mhaze, Wednesday, 29 June 2022 3:50:25 PM
| |
Dear Foxy,
Well done for picking up mhaze's misattributing one of the three quotes. He certainly is running true to form. He really puts such little effort into homework nowadays. Posted by SteeleRedux, Wednesday, 29 June 2022 5:51:32 PM
| |
Dear mhaze,
Rubbish. Under your scenario there would still be segregation in Mississippi. The Civil Rights Bill in 64 was opposed by most of the Southern Senators from both sides. “On February 10, 1964, the House of Representatives voted in favor of the bill, HR 7152. When the House-passed bill arrived in the Senate on February 26, 1964, Majority Leader Mike Mansfield placed it directly on the Senate calendar rather than refer it to the Judiciary Committee, chaired by civil rights opponent James Eastland of Mississippi. On March 9, when Mansfield moved to take up the measure, southern senators launched a filibuster against the bill. The Senate debated the bill for sixty days, including seven Saturdays. At the time, a two-thirds vote, or sixty-seven senators, was required to invoke cloture and cut off debate in the Senate. Since southern Democrats opposed the legislation, votes from a substantial number of senators in the Republican minority would be needed to end the filibuster. Minnesota Senator Hubert Humphrey, the Democratic whip who managed the bill on the Senate floor, enlisted the aid of Republican Minority Leader Everett M. Dirksen of Illinois. Dirksen, although a longtime supporter of civil rights, had opposed the bill because he objected to certain provisions. Humphrey therefore worked with him to redraft the controversial language and make the bill more acceptable to Republicans. Once the changes were made, Dirksen gained key votes for cloture from his party colleagues with a powerful speech calling racial integration "an idea whose time has come." On June 10, a coalition of 27 Republicans and 44 Democrats ended the filibuster when the Senate voted 71 to 29 for cloture, thereby limiting further debate. This marked the first time in its history that the Senate voted to end debate on a civil rights bill. ” When an issue impacting the whole nation and is values is at stake having it decided at a Federal level just as when the Supreme Court banned the execution of child offenders in 2005. Posted by SteeleRedux, Wednesday, 29 June 2022 5:56:52 PM
| |
Foxy
what I understand and you don’t is that the Court cannot change the Constitution, so if abortion rights existed under the Constitution then they can’t be abolished. It was you who stated that the SCOTUS had abolished abortion rights Posted by Is Mise, Wednesday, 29 June 2022 6:06:34 PM
| |
Dear Is Mise,
Mate what is it with you and comprehension. The individual right to bear arms outside the bounds of a well regulated militia is NOT in the constitution. Indeed the only way the activist Supreme Court in 2008 in a 5-4 decision was able to deliver a judgement that as a 'right' was to infer from the writings on one of the founding fathers on the subject. “In a dissenting opinion, Justice John Paul Stevens stated that the court's judgment was "a strained and unpersuasive reading" which overturned longstanding precedent, and that the court had "bestowed a dramatic upheaval in the law"” So the right was not explicit in the constitution at all and was only granted via the Supreme Court of the time inferring it. Why is this so difficult for you to understand? Posted by SteeleRedux, Wednesday, 29 June 2022 6:40:28 PM
| |
Steele,
I have the same problem in understanding it as the current. SCOTUS. As regards the Second Amendment, it doesn’t confer the right to bear arms to the citizens, it recognises an existing right. Posted by Is Mise, Wednesday, 29 June 2022 6:51:12 PM
| |
mhaze,
Tell you what - give us a link to exactly where Obama said as you claim: : We will push back twice as hard," and in what context this was said because I can't find it - and I doubt if Obama would ever incite violence of any kind. So please do tell. As for Trump's statements? I've already made it clear to you that with his statement that instead of condemning the violence of the murderous mob and saying that there were "good people on both side..." "With those words the President of the US assigned a moral equivalence between those spreading hate and those with the courage to stand against it." I can't believe that you're seriously still trying to defend this lunatic. When even today we hear from his former staffers - on what a crazy nutter the man really was. Totally mental and of unsound mind. And you're seriously comparing him to Obama? Come on - are you for real? Dear Steele, I'm now beginning to wonder about mhaze's mental stability. As for Is Mise? The less said the better. Posted by Foxy, Wednesday, 29 June 2022 7:18:00 PM
| |
Foxy,
Indeed the less said the better otherwise you’ll appear to be a bigger fool. Posted by Is Mise, Wednesday, 29 June 2022 7:51:40 PM
| |
Dear Is Mise,
You claim: "As regards the Second Amendment, it doesn’t confer the right to bear arms to the citizens, it recognises an existing right." Not it patently didn't. The Supreme Court had to go out of its way to confer that right. "It was not until 2008 that the Supreme Court definitively came down on the side of an individual rights theory. Relying on new scholarship regarding the origins of the Amendment, the Court in District of Columbia v. Heller12 confirmed what had been a growing consensus of legal scholars—that the rights of the Second Amendment adhered to individuals." http://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/amdt2-1/ALDE_00000408/ This was the product of an activist court so why couldn't it have done the same with abortion rights? Posted by SteeleRedux, Wednesday, 29 June 2022 9:28:43 PM
| |
Steele,
Because abortion rights are not conferred by the Constitution, just the same as the right to KEEP and BEAR arms is not conferred by it. Read the Second Amendment then apply to it the construction of the English sentence that you learned in school. Posted by Is Mise, Wednesday, 29 June 2022 9:40:38 PM
| |
Dear Is Mise,
Keep and bear arms as part of a well regulated militia was the right. And just as the right to privacy was part of the Roe vs Wade decision a constitutional right regarding militias was extended to individuals. Or does it bear repeating yet again? Posted by SteeleRedux, Wednesday, 29 June 2022 10:50:43 PM
| |
One of the judges responsible for the overturning of Rowe vs Wade, Justice Clarence Thomas, is reported as having said that, in the future, the Supreme Court might have to overturn other substantive due process precedents, such as anal sex, gay marriage, etc.
That could be fun. Posted by ttbn, Wednesday, 29 June 2022 11:02:21 PM
| |
Steele,
If you failed English at school that’s your problem not mine. Posted by Is Mise, Thursday, 30 June 2022 8:30:50 AM
| |
Dear Is Mise,
Given that would also apply to the 9 Supreme Court justices who ruled that the wording of the second amendment did not automatically confer that right rather it had to be inferred by researching the intend of the drafters and the discussions at the time, I think you are on a hiding to nothing mate. Time to give it a miss. Posted by SteeleRedux, Thursday, 30 June 2022 8:54:02 AM
| |
SR,
You're right. What I said about Mississippi and segregation was rubbish. But then again it was also completely true. How can it be both rubbish and true? Because I said ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about Mississippi segregation. Nothing, nada, nix. You tried to change the subject from abortion to segregation and I, realising that it was utterly moronic, just let it pass uncommented. But you remain wedded to this stupid idea ie they were once segregationist therefore their citizens have no right to make laws about abortion. Idiotic. BTW, the ALP once favoured the White Australia Policy therefore they have no rights to make policy about climate change. Posted by mhaze, Thursday, 30 June 2022 10:06:00 AM
| |
Dear Steele,
I am so grateful to have you on the forum! Is Mise, Calm down, take a deep breath, and hold it for 20 minutes. mhaze, Don't get defensive. Improve your argument. Still waiting for the Obama link. Posted by Foxy, Thursday, 30 June 2022 10:19:07 AM
| |
Foxy,
I give up. You hate Trump (there's that famous tolerance again!) and truth runs a distant second. His comment about Charlottesville was about the violence but you think it caused the violence. You agree that there were good people on both sides but think that Trump was wrong to say it. You think that Obama would never say anything violent and sustain that belief by ignoring everything he said that could be construed as encouraging violence. And now you tell me that you don't even know the timing of the 'punch' comment having previously been assured that Rush said it first. BTW, I don't think Obama's words incited violence or were intended to so so just as I don't think that Trump's words incited violence or were intended to do so. (see, that's how unbiassed works). But people like you and the people you rely on to tell you what to think have an incurable case of Trump Derangement Syndrome such that there is no reasoning possible any longer. I doubt you'll read this, much less understand it...but for what it's worth- http://twitter.com/ClayTravis/status/1541864388587560962 Posted by mhaze, Thursday, 30 June 2022 10:21:04 AM
| |
mhaze,
This is becoming rather sad. You need to stop digging your own hole here. I don't hate anyone. But as far as Trump is concerned his actions speak for themselves. You are most certainly entitled to your incorrect opinion. But you are beginning to look silly on this forum. And I hate to watch you making a fool of yourself. You haven't provided me with the Obama link - instead you give me Twitter - which is funny - because - "On 7th January 2021 - Twitter temporary locked the account of Donalt Trump after multiple controversies, including the use of the platform to undermine the results of the 2020 Presidential election and to allegedly incite the 2021 US Capitol attack." Twitter blog posted: "After close review of recent Tweets from the @realDonaldTrump account and the content around them - specially how they are being received and interpreted on and off Twitter we have permanently suspended the account due to the risk of further incitement for violence." And you're seriously using Twitter to defend Trump? You know what - enough already. "I'm gonna need you to put those few remaining brain cells together and work with me here, okay? I'm not interested in what you have to say (any more). Good Bye. Posted by Foxy, Thursday, 30 June 2022 11:11:46 AM
| |
" much less understand it..."
As predicted. Posted by mhaze, Thursday, 30 June 2022 11:39:58 AM
| |
Worse than anyone could have predicted.
Much worse. It was the biggest disaster in the history of American presidential politics. Nothing but four years of inept leadership, lies, chaos, and corruption, - followed by violence. And now the country will be paying the price thanks to the smuck judges he appointed. Posted by Foxy, Thursday, 30 June 2022 12:54:34 PM
| |
Excuse my typo - it should read - schmuck judges.
Posted by Foxy, Thursday, 30 June 2022 1:05:57 PM
| |
"It was the biggest disaster in the history of
American presidential politics. Nothing but four years of inept leadership, lies, chaos, and corruption, - followed by violence. " " much less understand it..." Posted by mhaze, Thursday, 30 June 2022 1:16:35 PM
| |
The wild-eyed lunatic known as AOC in US POLITICS has said that the Supreme Court should be suspended because it has denied the rights of "pregnant persons", and the tame audience was clapping before she opened her gob to say it.
Don't like what a court of law decides? Suspend it! That could happen in the US under the the Biden regime, which, since the beginning of the year, has had the highly politicised FBI arresting and locking up people who question the validity of the election of a halfwit. Posted by ttbn, Thursday, 30 June 2022 2:19:47 PM
| |
Truth will always be truth regardless of lack of
understanding, disbelief or ignorance. Understanding for some is just too much hard work. And unfortunately the - "Mutual lack of understanding carries carries the threat of imminent and violent destruction." ( Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn). The lack of understanding is certainly the problem here - and for the judges it was why they voted to void abortion rights. This link explains abortion facts: http://amnesty.org/en/what-we-do/sexual-and-reproductive-rights/abortion-facts/ Posted by Foxy, Thursday, 30 June 2022 2:50:27 PM
| |
Foxy
You haven't bothered to read the original Supreme Court judgment have you? You will see that the "constitutional right" to abortion isn't in the Constitution. Go ahead. Read it. You might learn something. The Roe v Wade court made it up as a matter of political interference in government, by saying it is based on a "right to privacy", which also isn't in the Constitution. They found support for it in the fourteenth amendment, but abortion was illegal in the vast majority of them at the time it was enacted. The tenth amendment reserves to the people and the states the powers that the Constitution does not delegate to the feds. Go ahead. Read it. Since the Constitution does not delegate a power on abortion to the feds, this means there is no right to abortion as a matter of federal power, which means you've lost the argument, end of story. Even if you were right, the "right" has no existence other than in the ruling of the court from time to time. So you've lost the argument any way you look at it. Your idea that, in federal USA law, the ABC outranks the judicial authority of the Supreme Court is just laughable brainwashed confusion. Besides, you far-left anti-human extremists have just spent the last two years arguing AGAINST the concept of bodily autonomy, remember? And you're against income taxation in general, because people have to use their body to earn the income, and you're "pro-choice", right? Pffft! Not even the leftists believe their own nonsense. And how did this particular "right" - killing your own offspring [translation for non-brainwashed totalitarians: "wrong"] - get to be the holiest sacrament in your nutty violent political cult anyway? Posted by Cumberland, Thursday, 30 June 2022 9:04:59 PM
| |
Sentence: “ A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”
Subject of the sentence: A well regulated militia. Which subject depends on the right of the people to keep and bear arms. In no way does the right of the people depend on the existence of the militia. Equally obvious is that there is no granting of a right to keep and bear arms , merely a statement that their existing right to do so shall not be infringed. Basic English. Posted by Is Mise, Thursday, 30 June 2022 9:24:11 PM
| |
Cumberland,
In order to insult me, I must first value your opinion. Nice try, though. Posted by Foxy, Friday, 1 July 2022 9:53:38 AM
| |
By now, Australian tragics surely should have satisfied their desire to enmesh themselves in the American media frenzy.
Posted by ttbn, Friday, 1 July 2022 10:01:36 AM
| |
As I stated earlier - truth will always be truth
regardless of lack to understand, disbelief, or ignorance. And as Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn pointed out - "Mutual lack of understanding carries the threat of imminent and violent destruction." We can see this from what is happening in the US. Understanding for some is just too much hard work. I've given links that explain abortion rights in this complex issue. I can't be held responsible for how people interpret things: http://britannica.com/event/Roe-v-Wade http://amnesty.org/en/what-we-do/sexual-and-reproductive-rights/abortion-facts/ Posted by Foxy, Friday, 1 July 2022 10:26:18 AM
| |
Foxy,
Of course you can’t be held responsible for how the Justices of the SCOTUS interpret things. Posted by Is Mise, Friday, 1 July 2022 11:02:29 AM
| |
And the hits just keep coming....
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/supreme-court-epa-climate-pollution-ruling-1376017/ The poor leftists are becoming utterly deranged. More victories for the court that Trump fashioned. Posted by mhaze, Friday, 1 July 2022 11:58:29 AM
| |
The Justices will need enhanced personal security.
Posted by Is Mise, Friday, 1 July 2022 12:28:07 PM
| |
The US Supreme Court is rolling back democracy
backwards - not only with abortion rights, gun laws, and now regarding pollution. Americans should be concerned as to what's next? A quote seen on a bumper sticker: So tell me folks, Where should I go? To the left, where something's right? Or to the right, where nothing's left? Posted by Foxy, Friday, 1 July 2022 2:15:17 PM
| |
A few more links for interest:
http://politico.com/news/magazine/2022/06/30/court-made-america-less-democratic-00043549 http://reuters.com/world/us/reactions-us-supreme-court-ruling-carbon-emissions-2022-06-30/ "The world has forgotten, in its concern with Left and Right, that there is an Above and Below." (Glen Drake). Posted by Foxy, Friday, 1 July 2022 2:29:43 PM
| |
The Scotus is applying the law, however much the law benders do not like it.
Remarkable the number of those sworn to uphold the Constitution who seem willing to betray their oath for political expediency. Posted by Is Mise, Friday, 1 July 2022 2:31:58 PM
| |
"The Justices will need enhanced personal security."
Oh I wouldn't have thought so. After all the left haven't got a violent bone in their body... http://www.huffpost.com/entry/brett-kavanaugh-threatened_n_62a0b230e4b04a6173491103 All their protests are utterly peaceful.... http://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftse1.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DOIP.YqIjo58b10TEivYNWwfYhgHaDt%26pid%3DApi&f=1 Posted by mhaze, Friday, 1 July 2022 2:33:47 PM
| |
You’re probably right, the Democrats are known far and wide for their peaceful protests and respect for the rule of law and how they crack down on illegal protests, the fires are only incidental along with the looting.
Posted by Is Mise, Friday, 1 July 2022 2:55:04 PM
| |
Americans come in all shapes and sizes
Often presenting in different guises They come from all political persuasions Gun-totting hillbillies to tax evaders There's the greedy ones with dirty hands Spiritual beggars making demands Pointing fingers and causing fights It's hatred and violence they want to ignite America has lost its way - it is very sad to have to say That the home of the free and the home of the brave Is being destroyed - by the Trumpsters raves! Posted by Foxy, Friday, 1 July 2022 3:36:09 PM
| |
cont'd ...
A man who feels he was born to rule Claims he was cheated - and that's not cool The people voted and kicked him out Yet he's still screaming for an election re-count This man's doing the country wrong He needs to be shown where he belongs He needs to be punished for the damage he's done In a court of law - but not by a gun! He can continue to scream, rant, and rave, Republicans all, must stand up and be brave Get rid of this cancer, this knave's got to go He belongs in a circus - where he can be on show. But ruling the country is just not his scene He's not even-handed - he's nasty and mean Republicans all, you've just got to see This guy's not for you - please let him be! Posted by Foxy, Friday, 1 July 2022 4:55:22 PM
| |
That’s all we need, doggerel.
Posted by Is Mise, Friday, 1 July 2022 4:56:29 PM
| |
For many a long generation.
American was run to benefit the credentialed Those saps in flyover nation Were considered quite inconsequential. But then down a golden escalator Came the saps’ promised trump card And tho’ the elites called him a traitor His followers knew that was a can-ard. He promised an American change He promised the deplorables a fair-go And thus elites went into total derange As they saw their benefits lost to their foe And so, the elite so scared Gathered their media and bureaucratic forces We have to get this Trump-guy ensnared In lies the woke class endorses They dreamed of fabricated rape claims That would keep Trump’s pick, Kavanagh From fulfilling their joint aims Of getting a good man on the bar. But Trump got his man and one more To take their place on Supreme Court And jointly overturn abortion folk-lore And the deplorables smiled at what they’d wrought. Posted by mhaze, Friday, 1 July 2022 5:10:56 PM
| |
Lets take a real look folks at Donald Trump, A Retrospective:
A look back at the 1,462 worst days in American Presidential history: http://vanityfair.com/news/2021/01/donald-trump-worst-president-ever Posted by Foxy, Friday, 1 July 2022 5:44:07 PM
| |
I can see Foxy, that you’re a real 51st State enthusiast.
Posted by Is Mise, Friday, 1 July 2022 6:03:34 PM
| |
Donald Trump's a nutter?
Most agree that's true He's a total crazy who doesn't care for you He's the one who matters, It's him he cares about He's the one who's always right Of that he has no doubt Some may call him racist He claims that isn't true He really loves folks of all stripes Just keep them in a zoo So vote for him as President If he's your kind of guy While the rest of us will scratch our heads And ask the question - WHY? Posted by Foxy, Friday, 1 July 2022 6:15:03 PM
| |
The same Supreme Court has put it up Joe again by knocking back his climate ratbaggery, ruling that only Congress can make such decisions, not just Joe and his tame authority.
Posted by ttbn, Friday, 1 July 2022 6:56:58 PM
| |
"Another devastating decision by the Trumpster appointed
judges that aims to take the US backwards!" So sad. http://politico.com/news/2022/06/30/supreme-court-hand-cuffs-biden-on-major-climate-rule-00043423 Posted by Foxy, Saturday, 2 July 2022 11:12:01 AM
| |
My apologies for the typo.
Here's the link again: http://politico.com/news/2022/06/30/supreme-court-handcuffs-biden-on-major-climate-rule-00043423 Posted by Foxy, Saturday, 2 July 2022 11:20:37 AM
| |
Thanks Foxy. I mentioned this new decision yesterday. Glad you caught up.
Yet another example of the beneficial consequences of the Trump triumph. Posted by mhaze, Saturday, 2 July 2022 11:45:49 AM
| |
"And ask the question - WHY?"
Well I've spent half a decade trying to explain why. But views that weren't arrived at rationally, can't be rationalised out of those views. This morning's article explains it as well as anything else I've seen.... http://accordingtohoyt.com/2022/06/30/it-is-us-at-the-gate/ I suspect it'll make no sense to you. The great Selena Zito (http://salenazito.com/) has been trying to explain it to the credentialed class for years. Reading some of her stuff might help. Try this thought experiment. You're a steel-worker. Your father and grandfather also. Everything you know and love relies on the local factories. The shops, the town hall, the school. Then people from the other side of the country decide that your life and livelihood is surplus to needs. They pass laws that close down your factory, relocating it overseas. They have no sympathy for you. They mock your lost livelihood by telling you to "learn to code". They degrade you as red-necks, hillbillies, bitter, clinging to you guns and religion (both of which the credentialled neither like nor understand). You fight to save your heritage but the full force of the federal government is weighed against you. Then salvation! The Tea Party arrives, promising to use the government to save all that you love, bring back the factories and the jobs. You elect Tea Party Republicans and wait for them to fulfil their promises. Then...nothing. The Republicans you elected submit to the deep state and abandon you. Then this bloke comes down the escalator, promising you that indeed your jobs can come back, your heritage saved. That your kids won't be sent overseas to fight the credentialled classes wars. You don't quite trust him but he seems genuine. And he's the only one offering you hope. The rest have already betrayed you before. So you vote for him and indeed he does what he said. He is opposed every day in every way by those who've spent decades destroying your heritage. But the jobs return. The factories also. Not as many as you'd like but hope abounds. That's why you'll continue to vote for him. Posted by mhaze, Saturday, 2 July 2022 12:15:51 PM
| |
mhaze,
Well said. Posted by Is Mise, Saturday, 2 July 2022 12:46:16 PM
| |
Here's a link from the Brookings Institution.
The Institution's staff represent diverse points of view and Brookings describes itself as non-partisan. Various media outlets have alternatively described Brookings as - centrist Liberal or right-wing: http://brookings.edu/blog/fixgov/2016/11/09/tea-party-and-trump-presidency/ Posted by Foxy, Saturday, 2 July 2022 2:38:35 PM
| |
"Brookings describes itself as non-partisan."
Well they wouldn't lie about something like that, would they? Since 1990, 96% of all Brookings Institute political donations have gone to the Democrats. Yep, that sounds like the sort of non-partisan Foxy likes! (BTW zero donations to Republicans since 2014.) So Foxy, any sympathy for our steel-worker? The sad thing is that people like Foxy as duped into thinking they are supporting the worker by supporting the Democrats. Understanding that the Democrats is now the party of Wall St, billionaires and the credentialled class, eludes them. Posted by mhaze, Saturday, 2 July 2022 4:34:27 PM
| |
I liked the way that the Democrats stood up to the looters and rioters, pity that they have so clogged up the courts with prosecutions.
Posted by Is Mise, Saturday, 2 July 2022 4:58:54 PM
| |
mhaze,
It appears that quite a great deal alludes you: http://nbcnews.com/business/economy/trump-steel-tariffs-raised-prices-shriveled-demand-led-job-losses-n1242695 http://factcheck.org/2019/08/trumps-steel-industry-claims/ Posted by Foxy, Saturday, 2 July 2022 8:17:08 PM
| |
mhaze,
Here's 50 reasons the Trump administration is bad for workers from the Economic Policy Institute: http://epi.org/publication/50-reasons/ Posted by Foxy, Saturday, 2 July 2022 8:37:55 PM
| |
So that's a no to the steel workers from Foxy. Oh and let's all pretend she didn't fall for the Brooking Institute propaganda.
From one of her links.... "Iron and steel mill jobs have gone up by 4,500 from January 2017 to June, a 5.6% increase" and (from a link in the link) "The new four-year master agreement, which takes effect immediately, includes significant wage increases in each year of the contract, maintains high quality, affordable health care coverage and strengthens retirement benefits for the union’s 1,850 members at four iron ore mines in Michigan and Minnesota." Why would these people support Trump? Its a mystery....to Foxy. Posted by mhaze, Sunday, 3 July 2022 8:14:25 AM
| |
mhaze,
I won't do this song and dance with you. I'm going to let the music play out. There is nothing to be gained by further conversation. Posted by Foxy, Sunday, 3 July 2022 10:26:16 AM
| |
That’s glaringly obvious.
Posted by Is Mise, Sunday, 3 July 2022 10:52:24 AM
| |
Whenever Foxy realises she's talk herself into a corner, she declares the discussion over.
Just a few other observations.... Foxy asked why people would vote for Trump and I explained it. Foxy's response was to try, in her own inept fashion, to explain why those fools were wrong. She knew what was good for them better than they did. That, in a nutshell and in a very small way, explains it all. Those who consider themselves smarter than the deplorables, who think they know what's good for others, who demand the right to make decisions for those deplorable others, can't imagine that the deplorables see things differently. That in essence is the Trump revolution. Foxy et al will never understand it and never accept it. Posted by mhaze, Sunday, 3 July 2022 11:04:57 AM
| |
I'd previously mentioned that some on the left wanted unfettered abortion up to birth. None of the pro-abortion crowd here denied it.
This explains better than most, what the real issues were.... http://twitter.com/i/status/1540486945981227009 Posted by mhaze, Sunday, 3 July 2022 11:07:54 AM
| |
Now back to the topic.
More than 3,000 people demonstrated outside the State Library of Victoria in Melbourne's CBD. Protests occurred across major cities in Australia, including Melbourne, Sydney, and Hobart. Thousands rallied across the country - we're told "in a show of solidarity with abortion rights protesters in the United States following the over turning of Roe v Wade." " As well as responding to the limiting of abortion access in the US, the protests across the cities were organized to also draw attention to how expensive and difficult abortions can be within Australia." There's more at: http://abc.net.au/news/2022/07/02/australians-demostrate-support-for-abortion-access/101203583 The web tells us that out of pocket expenses for a surgical termination of pregnancy under 12 weeks is approximately $470 if you hold a current Medicare card. I wonder how that compares with other surgical procedures? Posted by Foxy, Sunday, 3 July 2022 11:08:45 AM
| |
Shews that thousands of Australians haven’t got a clue on how the US Constitution works.
Posted by Is Mise, Sunday, 3 July 2022 2:03:49 PM
| |
Glaringly obvious.
Posted by Foxy, Monday, 4 July 2022 10:49:26 AM
| |
Glad that you agree.
Posted by Is Mise, Monday, 4 July 2022 11:24:08 AM
| |
Is Mise,
Oh, it was nothing. Posted by Foxy, Monday, 4 July 2022 11:39:53 AM
| |
Well, it’s been sometime since I gave my understanding of the basic sentence that is the Second Amendment and no responses neither from the failed English student or the one who holds a Master’s Degree in that language; ah, weii, I suppose that I’ll just have to bide a while . . .
Posted by Is Mise, Tuesday, 5 July 2022 3:17:39 PM
| |
Is Mise,
I will give that all the consideration it deserves. This is an A and B conversation, C your way out. Posted by Foxy, Tuesday, 5 July 2022 4:54:41 PM
| |
Foxy,
Apparently the simplicity of the sentence is beyond you’re exalted comprehension. I would have thought that, with your superior knowledge of English, that you would have jumped at the chance to shew all and sundry how wrong I am. Posted by Is Mise, Tuesday, 5 July 2022 5:32:42 PM
| |
Is Mise,
There's no point in playing chess with a pigeon. Posted by Foxy, Tuesday, 5 July 2022 8:51:01 PM
| |
Foxy,
You can’t dispute my analysis of the Second Amendment, but you won’t admit it. No worries, you’re inadequacies are there for all to see. Posted by Is Mise, Tuesday, 5 July 2022 9:26:00 PM
| |
Is Mise,
Criticisms are like homing pigeons. They always return home. Posted by Foxy, Tuesday, 5 July 2022 9:46:24 PM
| |
Foxy,
Come on, be a sport shew everyone what an idiot I am at English; all you need to do is explain one simple sentence, perhaps you could get Steele to assist you. Posted by Is Mise, Wednesday, 6 July 2022 9:45:49 AM
|
constitutional right to abortion more than 50 years
after it was established, leaving individual states
to decide. It is expected that there will be abortion
bans in about half of the states.
Will Australia follow suit?
Your thoughts please.