chasfh Posted June 26, 2022 Share Posted June 26, 2022 (edited) 1 hour ago, Tiger337 said: I read this as Cornyn clapping back at the tweeter by pointing out a previous Court precedent that was also overturned. I don’t think he’s suggesting reinstating Plessy by overturning Brown. I’m not saying he would not mind doing so—maybe he’d like to. I’m just saying I don’t think that’s what’s going on here. Edited June 26, 2022 by chasfh 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motown Bombers Posted June 26, 2022 Share Posted June 26, 2022 Bernie's press secretary. The new generation party. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gehringer_2 Posted June 26, 2022 Share Posted June 26, 2022 (edited) 9 minutes ago, chasfh said: I read this as Cornyn clapping back at the tweeter by pointing out a previous Court precedent that was also overturned. I don’t think he’s suggesting reinstating Plessy by overturning Brown. I’m not saying he would not mind doing so—maybe he’d like to. I’m just saying I don’t think that’s what’s going on here. I'm sure this is true but that is about as in-artfully as you could have expressed it in that tweet. He's going to get hammered. I'll be sure to play my tiniest violin for him..... Edited June 26, 2022 by gehringer_2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger337 Posted June 26, 2022 Share Posted June 26, 2022 37 minutes ago, chasfh said: I read this as Cornyn clapping back at the tweeter by pointing out a previous Court precedent that was also overturned. I don’t think he’s suggesting reinstating Plessy by overturning Brown. I’m not saying he would not mind doing so—maybe he’d like to. I’m just saying I don’t think that’s what’s going on here. The tweeter was Obama (or more likely his ghost tweeter). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMRivdogs Posted June 26, 2022 Share Posted June 26, 2022 2 hours ago, chasfh said: Even pretending a third party candidate could win, good luck establishing a relationship with a Congress none of whom are in the same party as you. A far more likely outcome is a third party candidate securing enough electoral votes (probably in the south and southwest through a, I don’t know, overturn-the-13th-amendment platform or something) to deny any candidate getting a majority, at which point the president gets chosen by the House using that completely asinine one-state/one-vote arrangement that Eastman wanted to unlock a couple years ago. That was the fear in 1968 with Wallace running as a third party. He would pull enough votes to send the election to the house. Or try to work out a deal with one of the parties to throw his votes to a candidate willing to work out a deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted June 26, 2022 Share Posted June 26, 2022 (edited) Wrong thread Edited June 26, 2022 by chasfh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtutiger Posted June 26, 2022 Share Posted June 26, 2022 10 hours ago, CMRivdogs said: That was the fear in 1968 with Wallace running as a third party. He would pull enough votes to send the election to the house. Or try to work out a deal with one of the parties to throw his votes to a candidate willing to work out a deal. Yeah, exactly. You aren't gonna break the entrenched two party system in this country when the risk of voting third party means that you take the power to select the Executive out of the direct power of the voters and place it with the Legislative branch. Voters know this and act accordingly. It's such a stupid system, yet many will still go to the mattresses to defend it, arguably on purely partisan grounds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tigerbomb13 Posted June 26, 2022 Share Posted June 26, 2022 “White life” Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pfife Posted June 26, 2022 Author Share Posted June 26, 2022 14 hours ago, chasfh said: I read this as Cornyn clapping back at the tweeter by pointing out a previous Court precedent that was also overturned. I don’t think he’s suggesting reinstating Plessy by overturning Brown. I’m not saying he would not mind doing so—maybe he’d like to. I’m just saying I don’t think that’s what’s going on here. this is one of the only good explanations I've seen for what he could be possibly saying. I read somewhere too that apparently conservatives think Roe is like Plessy in its terribleness. I can't believe I'm giving him benefit of the doubt but I guess I am Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtutiger Posted June 26, 2022 Share Posted June 26, 2022 Normally can't stand Todd, but he's asking the right question here. People need to understand the ramifications of this ruling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtutiger Posted June 26, 2022 Share Posted June 26, 2022 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oblong Posted June 26, 2022 Share Posted June 26, 2022 In the next few months I bet we will see a doctor or even a mother prosecuted for performing an abortion that will have been done to protect the mother’s health. It will be a mother in her early 40s with two teenage children. An upper middle class family. The kids will be honor students and athletes. That’s the kind of thing that needs to happen so that the general pro life public who thinks this is just about birth control sees the real world consequences. Too many people assume it’s about loose women just wanting to have guilt free sex and just call themselves pro life because of that. Like Rosa Parks the test case has to be carefully selected. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kacie Posted June 26, 2022 Share Posted June 26, 2022 38 minutes ago, oblong said: In the next few months I bet we will see a doctor or even a mother prosecuted for performing an abortion that will have been done to protect the mother’s health. It will be a mother in her early 40s with two teenage children. An upper middle class family. The kids will be honor students and athletes. That’s the kind of thing that needs to happen so that the general pro life public who thinks this is just about birth control sees the real world consequences. Too many people assume it’s about loose women just wanting to have guilt free sex and just call themselves pro life because of that. Like Rosa Parks the test case has to be carefully selected. In the pre-Trump era, maybe. Not now. Little kids being murdered in Sandy Hook and Uvalde didn't move the needle. I can't really see anything that will get the cultists to change their mind. Unless the Democrats can actually get their shit together and get a cohesive message and dictate the narrative and get the media to stop both sidesing everything, I really don't see it happening. Their owning the Libs. That's all they want. They couldn't care less about anyone dying. How many of them died of Covid just so they didn't have to wear a mask or get a vaccine? I've lost hope that anything will actually get through to the psychopaths. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oblong Posted June 26, 2022 Share Posted June 26, 2022 Sadly you might be right. I’m thinking specifically to my mother in law. A devout Catholic. When we mentioned all the scenarios beyond birth control measures she was agreeable. But then we say “ok but that’s not what is going to be the law”. The nuance to this issue needs to be hammered relentlessly. this nation is a joke. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtutiger Posted June 26, 2022 Share Posted June 26, 2022 23 minutes ago, oblong said: Sadly you might be right. I’m thinking specifically to my mother in law. A devout Catholic. When we mentioned all the scenarios beyond birth control measures she was agreeable. But then we say “ok but that’s not what is going to be the law”. The nuance to this issue needs to be hammered relentlessly. this nation is a joke. It's true, there's always this notion that, whenever situations like rape and incest come up, or even life of the mother in some states, the follow up is usually "surely there's gonna be an exception"... Well, folks, there isn't in a lot of places... there is one for life in my state, but rape and incest? You're out of luck. People need to understand that. The couple of Sunday show clips actually did a decent job of highlighting that, but a lot more work needs to be done. People have a right to now what the existing laws are in a state, what the politicians in each state have done to bring about any changes to law, and what laws they have planned now that this ruling has come down. I dont know how much of a difference it makes, but the populace in every state deserves every opportunity to learn. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motown Bombers Posted June 27, 2022 Share Posted June 27, 2022 The Democrat running in my district is pro-choice but he's a 75 year old white male so he doesn't pass the purity test. I'm not really excited or enthused so I'll probably not vote. It's not like there is any difference between him and John James anyways. As a heterosexual white male, I have nothing to worry about. They won't come after my social security and Medicare. At the very least, I'll be dead by the time that happens. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMRivdogs Posted June 27, 2022 Share Posted June 27, 2022 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oblong Posted June 27, 2022 Share Posted June 27, 2022 I saw someone claim on social media that she’s afraid her IUD is in jeopardy. Says it’s the only thing keeping her healthy. I saw other references to certain cancer treatments being in jeopardy because they might cause a miscarriage. I agree that overall the reason why shouldn’t matter. I get it. But those passionate for that reason alone are already voting. You need to get those not voting and those not fully informed what this means. The unintended consequences need to be broadcast far and wide. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gehringer_2 Posted June 27, 2022 Share Posted June 27, 2022 7 minutes ago, oblong said: I saw someone claim on social media that she’s afraid her IUD is in jeopardy. Says it’s the only thing keeping her healthy. I saw other references to certain cancer treatments being in jeopardy because they might cause a miscarriage. I agree that overall the reason why shouldn’t matter. I get it. But those passionate for that reason alone are already voting. You need to get those not voting and those not fully informed what this means. The unintended consequences need to be broadcast far and wide. People do forget that all these things are a large part of what got us Roe in the 1st place and they will all still be there again just like they were 1973 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewsieg Posted June 27, 2022 Share Posted June 27, 2022 https://www.mediaite.com/tv/jim-obergefell-justice-thomas-should-remember-the-right-to-interracial-marriage-is-only-6-years-older-than-roe/ Because hypocrisy always exists, this is my guess of what happens over the next 18 months with SCOTUS. Someone brings this interracial case up. This time though, instead of using the same argument, Thomas votes against it. Roberts, still pissed, gives no legal reasoning and just votes to overturn it. Thomas and his wife are no longer married, the Justice department forces them to testify against each other in a case that further implicates Trump. Thomas resigns and Biden gets a SCOTUS pick. Roberts pushes to hear cases that bring both abortion and interracial marriage up again and they revert both decisions. I'm like 80-85% certain that's what is going to happen. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gehringer_2 Posted June 27, 2022 Share Posted June 27, 2022 10 minutes ago, ewsieg said: I'm like 80-85% certain that's what is going to happen. I like it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.TaterSalad Posted June 27, 2022 Share Posted June 27, 2022 The most likely scenario is Biden gets 1 more Supreme Court Justice pick, but . . . It comes after the Republicans have taken back control of the Senate andMcConnell will delay the nomination until 2024/2025. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motown Bombers Posted June 27, 2022 Share Posted June 27, 2022 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motown Bombers Posted June 27, 2022 Share Posted June 27, 2022 On 6/25/2022 at 10:42 AM, Motown Bombers said: Well, Fetterman is on record as willing to eliminate the filibuster. Flip that from Toomey to Fetterman and you have one more vote for eliminating the filibuster. Not sure who the leading candidate is in WI yet. Val Demings is on record for removing the filibuster. Flipping from Rubio to Demings would be another vote. Tim Ryan is on record supporting removing the filibuster. That's a 3rd vote for removing it. Cheri Beasley has supported removing the filibuster in the past but has been inconsistent on it. Still, there's more potential from her to remove the filibuster than whatever Republican wins North Carolina. That's 5 winnable seats and 5 potential votes to remove the filibuster. It won't happen because too many Democrats are self-loathing. Wisconsin is on board. That's potentially five seats in the senate that will at least consider carving out the filibuster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pfife Posted June 27, 2022 Author Share Posted June 27, 2022 So why do we celebrate the day Jesus was born? Was he not a person before then according to those who purport to be his fan club? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.