If you're a liberal, you should be scared. You should be very scared ;)
Hello joe:
It's true.. The table is set for the right wing to DESTROY 50 years of liberal thought.. Roe is toast.. Gay marriage is finished.. Caring for patients with pre-existing conditions is OVER... Universal health care isn't gonna happen.. People will DIE on the streets, and right wingers will say that's fine, because they're POOR and LAZY and not deserving of life.
The hypocritical fool speaks again. The nerve of fools on the Left lying about people dying in the streets while they support purposely killing viable babies for any reason.
You can not make this stuff up!
These hypocrite Democrats refuse to see their own inhumanity while judging others for far less.
"Lying about people dying in the streets." You are about as young as I thought if you think that is a LIE! I, regretfully, AM old enough to remember and I try NOT to lie … unless jokingly, (that "regretfully" above was half-jokingly ;-)! The weekly death toll was likely not as complete as it would be with today's internet and "up to the minute news", but it was STILL almost weekly! It's YOU that is "making this stuff up"! The nerve of fools! The "hypocrisy" is YOUR "inhumanity while judging others"! (By the way, we DON'T say people died in the streets, usually it was an alley, a river, the woods, etc.) :-(
"Lying about people dying in the streets." You are about as young as I thought if you think that is a LIE! I, regretfully, AM old enough to remember and I try NOT to lie … unless jokingly, (that "regretfully" above was half-jokingly ;-)! The weekly death toll was likely not as complete as it would be with today's internet and "up to the minute news", but it was STILL almost weekly! It's YOU that is "making this stuff up"! The nerve of fools! The "hypocrisy" is YOUR "inhumanity while judging others"! (By the way, we DON'T say people died in the streets, usually it was an alley, a river, the woods, etc.) :-(
Grandpaw what does the above rant mean to you ????????????
Usually you do better than to parrot unsubstantiated or poorly supported talking points from politically biased folks on DNCNN or MSDNC.
Roe is toast.
In Kavanaugh's discussions of philosophy and method during the hearings, he explicitly stated he uses Constitutional text and precedent to guide his determination of constitutionality. That leaves Roe v Wade as settled law, and outside what he says is his purview of decision.
True, while campaigning, Trump said he would choose justices who would overturn, Roe v Wade, but he also said he would make the US government function efficiently. (Dream on!) Both the decisions of Constitutional conservatives and government waste are very far outside the ability of the executive to control, or even influence.
The advantage (particularly to whichever parties are out of power) of putting Constitutional conservatives on the bench is that they do not change things much. A politically conservative version of activist judges like Ginsberg or Soto-Mayor is what you should be worried about, but that is not Kavanaugh.
Gay marriage is finished.
Remember, the word conservative means something completely different when it follows the adverb Constitutionally than it does when following the words politically or socially. It is possible to be a political or social liberal, and still be a Constitutional conservative. In fact, any libertarian will tell you that Constitutional conservatism is the best way to protect social liberals. If the Constitution and precedent do not explicitly give government the right to intrude on citizens' private lives (sexual preference, drug use, etc.) then a Constitutionally conservative justice will uphold the freedom of the citizen.
Caring for patients with pre-existing conditions is OVER.
Not at all true. Preexisting conditions were already covered before Obamacare. That was one of the many things Obama and Congress (and poorly informed late night talk show hosts with sick kids) did not understand or lied about.
HIPAA already protected people from that on the group health insurance market (Company plans, association groups, etc..) Under HIPAA, so long as you have continuous coverage (no lapses in coverage of over 45 days) you could switch insurance companies (like when you change jobs, or lost a job and switched to COBRA), and preexisting conditions are covered. If your coverage lapses for over 45 days, you have to wait a single year before the condition is covered by the insurance company, but after that year, it is in fact covered.
All Congress had to do was extend HIPAA to the individual health insurance market, and if they wanted, extend dependent status to age 26.
Government-run "universal" health care is a foolish idea because GOVERNMENT IS BAD AT DOING EVERYTHING. We ALL do better if we limit what government does because that limits the number of things government will screw up. Conservatives are against universal health care because we do actually want people to have access to good health care. The minute government takes over, it will get even more expensive, and the quality will plummet for everybody.
That leaves Roe v Wade as settled law, and outside what he says is his purview of decision.
Not necessarily. As you said, he “he explicitly stated he uses Constitutional text and precedent to guide his determination of constitutionality.”
There is nothing in the Constitutional text about the “penumbras and emanations” that validates Roe v Wade. When text does not support precedent, a Constitutional conservative would overturn in favor of the text.
What did Kavanaugh MEAN when he looked the left wing Senators in the eye, and told them that "what goes around, comes around"???
Immediately prior to that statement, Kavanaugh discussed how unjust and disastrous is the tactic of character assassination through vague and uncorroborated and unsubstantiated accusations.
In that context, "What goes around, comes around" means that the tactic those particular Democrats were employing is likely to be used against them as some later date.
I agree. It is not like either party cornered the market on unscrupulous behavior in support of political goals.
There is a very big problem with giving credence to accusations that are not supported by physical evidence, corroborating witnesses, or even relevant details. It makes it possible to torpedo ANY candidate or nominee for anything, REGARDLESS OF POLITICAL AFFILIATION, and ruin their future opportunities with nothing more than a vague story set far enough in the past that it is impossible to reliably investigate.
If allowed to be effective, such a tactic would ultimately mean the end of the ability for the republic to function.
For the record, sitting on Garland's nomination is another instance where "what goes around, come around" applies in the sense Kavanaugh said it. Sitting on the letter for six weeks, delaying the secondary hearings, pushing for unlimited FBI investigation, etc. were all about delaying the vote until after the midterms so the Democrats (assuming they won a Senate majority) could do to Kavanaugh what the Republican Senate did to Garland.
ALL Americans deserve better from both sides. (There is a valid reason Congress' approval rating is generally in single digits, and usually lower than that of herpes.)
ALL Americans benefit from high standards for justice and fair play.
ALL Americans deserve to be safe from the effects of unsubstantiated and uncorroborated accusations.
Kavanaugh is correct, if we let mere accusations be enough to destroy one guy's life, rest assured that what goes around will come around.
Tell me this.. What did Kavanaugh MEAN when he looked the left wing Senators in the eye, and told them that "what goes around, comes around"???
If you say "what goes around comes around", that insinuates that the peron(s) you are talking to are doing something they wouldn't want to ever be done to them or ever "come around".
Universal health care isn't gonna happen.. People will DIE on the streets, and right wingers will say that's fine, because they're POOR and LAZY and not deserving of life.
We already have universal healthcare for those who need it. What do you think the VA, the Indian hospitals, medicare and medicade fo exactly?
Are you happy we aren't fining people under the cruel ACA?
If you're a liberal, you should be scared. You should be very scared ;)
Hello joe:
It's true.. The table is set for the right wing to DESTROY 50 years of liberal thought.. Roe is toast.. Gay marriage is finished.. Caring for patients with pre-existing conditions is OVER... Universal health care isn't gonna happen.. People will DIE on the streets, and right wingers will say that's fine, because they're POOR and LAZY and not deserving of life.
But, we have hope.
excon
STUPOR STUPID pay close attention here to a key word because words matter in your very small world. Where is your "EVIDENCE" ?
One can only hope that a true honest Justice will read the Constitution where it says, we all have a right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness, and do his job!
You can't pick and choose which groups of innocent people have no right to life. The extreme Democrat Party tells us that even viable unborn babies have no rights.
This barbaric thinking is the beginnings of another Godless communistic dictatorship.
You don't understand what a conservative is Excon. You assume they are like Liberals. They aren't. Conservative means you don't go around changing and destroying everything, but protect what is there. Liberal means you are constantly changing things and destroying them with no concern with the aftermath.
The themes of each ideology can be summed up with one word for each.
Mark this post in your memory as an example of your own soft hysteria.
Gay marriage isn’t going anywhere.
Border security is Constitutional and not anti-immigration.
Roe V Wade..yeah maybe that’s overturned since it has nothing at all to do with the Constitution. But that doesn’t mean abortion will be federally banned. They will remain just as available in California and just about equally unavailable in Georgia.
The constitution says that all people have the right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Abortion is absolutely an issue going directly against the constitution.
The Democrat Party supports no restriction abortions of VIABLE babies!
Maybe the court will live up to the constitution and once again protect those lives.
Are you disputing that declaration and do you believe only certain people deserves those right's?
Neither. I was merely stating relevant facts.
The Declaration of Independence is a phenomenal piece of rhetoric that articulates in clear historical context the philosophy of citizen-government relations that is responsible for the improvement of more lives than any other thing except the invention of soap and the spread of free market capitalism.
That does not change the fact that there are innumerable laws that diminish our liberty, thus making it "alienable." There is no law that grants the right to "the pursuit of happiness." The Declaration of Independence is of no relevance in a court of law, and offers no legal protections of any kind.
Hogwash, I guarantee you if some State tried to take away an innocent's person's right to life, that Declaration along with the Constitution would be the only defense they would use.
For you to split hairs on these things, to excuse abortions, makes you sound like an activist Democrat denying any viable baby their rights.
People have been so brainwashed by the Left, that the very mention of giving back viable babies their right to life, makes you deny the undeniable.
You need to read what I wrote, without pretending I wrote more. I was making a very simple point with a VERY narrow scope.
For you to split hairs on these things, to excuse abortions, makes you sound like an activist Democrat denying any viable baby their rights.
I wasn't referring to abortion at all.
I was just pointing out that the Declaration of Independence has no LEGAL authority. As I told you that I believe the principles it articulates are extraordinarily beneficial to all. However, being beneficial does not magically make it into a law. It is not "splitting hairs" to draw a clear distinction between something that is a law, and something that is not.
Again, when you add into my posts things that I did not actually write, you misunderstand me.
You responded to my remarks concerning a viable unborn Baby's right to life and our Constitution
No. I responded to only one sentence in your post, and I copied that one sentence into my post and bolded it. That was the signal that it was the sentence to which I was responding. Had I been responding to one of your other sentences, I would have copied that sentence, bolded it, and then responded to it. (The sentence of yours that I bolded and responded to was, "The constitution says that all people have the right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness.")
You chose to shoot down the notion that our Declaration of Independence and our Constitution would have an impact on any court's future decision.
No, the US Constitution absolutely impacts every US court's decision (or at least it should) because the Constitution is a law. In fact it is the foundational law with which EVERY other law in the nation must agree.
By contrast, because US courts rule on the application of US laws, and the Declaration of Independence is not a law, that document has no legal standing in US courts. Thomas Payne's treatise Common Sense articulated the same principles as the Declaration of Independence, yet it also has no standing in a US court of law because it is a court of law, not a court of very good ideas.
Like I said. The Constitution sets limits on how and when the government will deprive people of their life, Liberty, and property (pursuit of happiness). There is a Constitutional requirement for due process. And the government deprives people of these all the time.
Like I said and I repeat.....other than the barbaric act of No Restriction abortions, our American Government will NEVER take an innocent person's right to life because of our Constitution and first Amendment.
Hopefully our viable babies will soon get their inalienable rights back.
The Government NEVER takes an innocent person's right to life.
You are a sad little retard. Ever hear of George Stinney? He is just one of many examples of the miscarriage of justice in the US, not to mention all the innocent children that die when you bomb third world countries. But they aren't fetuses so who cares, right?
Don't you worry. Roe v Wade is HISTORY.. Gay marriage is HISTORY. Immigration (except for white people) is HISTORY..
I mourn for my beloved country..
excon
STUPOR STUPID lets go through this again okay ! Pay close attention to the key word if you can. Where is the "EVIDENCE" of your FEAR MONGERING ? You scared little gurl Socialist !
A "true, honest judge" … that LIED through his teeth UNDER OATH, will be reading the Constitution. You are correct AGAIN! "where it says, we ALL have a right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness"! THAT includes WOMEN not just "viable babies"! That includes the "Democrat party" AND the Republican Party, as extreme as it is! We ALL also have another "right"! The right to VOTE, WITHOUT it being gerrymandered to the advantage OF those "extreme" conservatives that have TAKEN OVER the Republican Party! THEY are truly "godless" (except when in public) AND leading U.S. toward a dictatorship, whatever political view you want to call it!
I think most of what you said is unfounded paranoia, BUT I very much agree with you on the essence of your most important point.
We ALL also have another "right"! The right to VOTE, WITHOUT it being gerrymandered...
I am with you in that I think gerrymandering is an abomination, and subverts representational government.
But you know damned well it is not just Republicans who gerrymander. I live in a district that was specifically gerrymandered to favor Democrats.
I am not sure that there is a sure-fire way to eliminate stacking the deck by the unscrupulous bastards that run both parties. However, I could make peace if the rule were that districts had to be rectangles
- Exactly 4 sides
- Exactly 4 ninety-degree corners
- - Except on state borders
- - - A single continuous and contiguous section of border would complete the district
- - - Without adding any extra sides or angles to connect to the border.
This would help representative government actually start to represent the citizens instead of the leadership of both parties.
Three terms (or partial terms) for the House of Representatives.
There are other things I think would be useful.
- No political fundraising or campaigning for any candidate or office while holding any Federal office or otherwise being employed by the Federal government. Under the current system, there is too much room for conflict of interest.
- You cannot run for one office while holding another. Your term is over the minute you announce candidacy (or sign up to be on the ballot) for any office (federal, state, or local) other than your current office. Again, conflict of interest.
- Institute strict limits on taxpayer-funded travel.
- - I think one round trip to your home district per year for Congressional office holder only (no wives or families) is sufficient.
- - AND no using Air Force One, Marine Corps One, etc. to do anything that is not critical to the business of the country: No using it to take family vacations in Africa. No using it to go to hold rallies or give speeches. That is what TV is for. The US taxpayers should not be funding a gold-plated taxi service. If the President wants to go to Camp David, etc. for vacation, he/she can feel free to pay the bill, including the cost of the the military jet escort.
The US taxpayers should not be funding a gold-plated taxi service.
1) There are MANY Christian liberals. African Americans are FAR more Christian than most white RWers!
2) Most Libs do NOT complain about con' stances on God, They complain about them trying to tell us we must swear our allegiance to "God", fuck the Constitution! That's the ONLY side of the fence I play!
Your last line is so ridiculous, it doesn't deserve an answer, Crotch!
In 2013, the United States Internal Revenue Service (IRS) revealed that it had selected political groups applying for tax-exempt status for intensive scrutiny based on their names or political themes. This led to wide condemnation of the agency and triggered several investigations, including a Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) criminal probe ordered by United States Attorney General Eric Holder.
Initial reports described the selections as nearly exclusively of conservative groups with terms such as "Tea Party" in their names.
Death to America (Persian: مرگ بر آمریکا Marg bar Āmrikā) is an anti-American political slogan and chant which has been in use in Iran since the inception of the Iranian Revolution in 1979.[1] Ayatollah Khomeini, the first leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran, popularized the term.[2]
Most Libs do NOT complain about con' stances on God, They complain about them trying to tell us we must swear our allegiance to "God", fuck the Constitution! That's the ONLY side of the fence I play!
While leftists command allegiance to them and their ideology or be hunted down and run out of restaurants.
Your last line is so ridiculous, it doesn't deserve an answer, Crotch!
A "true, honest judge" … that LIED through his teeth UNDER OATH, will be reading the Constitution. You are correct AGAIN! "where it says, we ALL have a right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness"! THAT includes WOMEN not just "viable babies"! That includes the "Democrat party" AND the Republican Party, as extreme as it is! We ALL also have another "right"! The right to VOTE, WITHOUT it being gerrymandered to the advantage OF those "extreme" conservatives that have TAKEN OVER the Republican Party! THEY are truly "godless" (except when in public) AND leading U.S. toward a dictatorship, whatever political view you want to call it!
Does the nominee and now justice spark fear to your daily life Grandpaw ?
Grandpaw was Grandson just a "VIABLE BABY" ? The twisted confused thoughts of the mentally ill Left has been exposed and you Grandpaw run with that crowd !