|
Post by Evil Yoda on Apr 9, 2024 16:55:08 GMT -5
So much for the MAGA profession of 'individual rights'. 😤😡🤬 Conservatives have never been interested in individual rights. The rights of corporations to do whatever they want to whomever they want... THAT is their cause.
|
|
|
Post by guido2 on Apr 9, 2024 18:45:50 GMT -5
So much for the MAGA profession of 'individual rights'. 😤😡🤬 Conservatives have never been interested in individual rights. The rights of corporations to do whatever they want to whomever they want... THAT is their cause. Well they did when they were republicans ..... before they flipped to being what we call dems now. Kidding aside. The Cons. (I like that) used to at least sort of pull the Wizard of Oz and keep that sort of thing, being absolutely on the side of the money changers.... it was all on the Q T. Now, it is like they are waving it in our faces and going...... 'nahhh naaah nuh nahhh nuh. ' What are you going to do about it.
|
|
|
Post by ishmael on Apr 9, 2024 20:52:31 GMT -5
Step away from the labels for a minute and "the party" stuff. The people of AZ voted into office a number of people with a particular view on the subject of abortion. That shared view put significant limits on access to abortion. The majority of voters got what they wanted, restrictions on abortion. That's not an internal coup, nor is it outside of political norms; indeed, it is the measure of political norms, i.e., voting for someone and having them deliver on the philosophy for which they were elected. The current version of the GOP is far more to the right than that with which I am familiar, which is why, in good conscience, I cannot vote for Trump.  Conversely, the current version of the Democratic Party is not even in the same zip code as the one with which I am familiar, which is why I cannot, in good conscience, vote for Biden. What policies has Biden pursued that are not traditional D policies? You're right. It's the people, not the policies. I grew up, as did you, I think, with JFK, RFK, HHH, Moynihan, even Jimmy Carter, and on and on. What do we have now? Harris? Schumer? Schiff, AOC, Sanders? The Dems have become a party of incompetent cowards. On the one side, extremists and demagogues. On the other side, cowards and small people. You vote for one or the other. None of them are worth a cup of warm spit.
|
|
|
Post by michiganjoe on Apr 10, 2024 2:06:35 GMT -5
An indication of just how politically devastating this ruling is.
|
|
|
Post by JoyinMudville on Apr 10, 2024 2:38:02 GMT -5
First, let me dispense with what appears to be one of your concerns; I really couldn't possibly care less whether you put much weight behind what I say or not. I absolutely, in no way, support a national ban on abortion. As I have posted multiple times here, I believe such an action would be, IMO, blatantly unconstitutional. Dobbs made the abortion issue a State issue and the agreement or disagreement of Pence and/or Graham is a matter of non-importance. What is, is, the protestations of Graham and Pence notwithstanding. No, it didn’t. It said it was up to the people and their elected representatives to decide. In what world is congress not the people’s elected representatives?
|
|
|
Post by msmaggie on Apr 10, 2024 5:06:47 GMT -5
What policies has Biden pursued that are not traditional D policies? You're right. It's the people, not the policies. I grew up, as did you, I think, with JFK, RFK, HHH, Moynihan, even Jimmy Carter, and on and on. What do we have now? Harris? Schumer? Schiff, AOC, Sanders? The Dems have become a party of incompetent cowards. On the one side, extremists and demagogues. On the other side, cowards and small people. You vote for one or the other. None of them are worth a cup of warm spit. Is a policy or law passed by a "small" person less a policy or law than that passed by a more profound individual? A law enacted is a fact. Your feelings re the person/people who drove its enactment is simply your opinion. And justification, albeit a weak one, for your bothsidesism.
|
|
|
Post by msmaggie on Apr 10, 2024 5:11:53 GMT -5
And we thought dinosaurs were extinct.
|
|
|
Post by rocketwolf on Apr 10, 2024 5:14:07 GMT -5
Ok so then you are saying that what is floating around out there under the guise of Conservatism is actually a zealot crazed .... and pretty messed up group (MAGA) that is pulling the strings in an effort to do exactly the opposite of what you profess? NO. What I am saying is that the people of Arizona have, at least to date, spoken loudly against abortion, just as the people of California have decided to treat it as the equivalent of an indoor sport. States have the authority how they will treat abortion. As to (your words, not mine) "zealot crazed .... and pretty messed up group (MAGA)", no. I don't think they are conservatives. I think they see Trump as a better alternative than Biden. Pretty sad this is our choice.
|
|
|
Post by ishmael on Apr 10, 2024 5:32:56 GMT -5
You're right. It's the people, not the policies. I grew up, as did you, I think, with JFK, RFK, HHH, Moynihan, even Jimmy Carter, and on and on. What do we have now? Harris? Schumer? Schiff, AOC, Sanders? The Dems have become a party of incompetent cowards. On the one side, extremists and demagogues. On the other side, cowards and small people. You vote for one or the other. None of them are worth a cup of warm spit. Is a policy or law passed by a "small" person less a policy or law than that passed by a more profound individual? A law enacted is a fact. Your feelings re the person/people who drove its enactment is simply your opinion. And justification, albeit a weak one, for your bothsidesism. Oh yeah. And the other thing is the stupefied arrogance of the left. You want to believe Biden and his ilk are capable, you should do so. But don't denigrate my opinion because I think the lot of them couldn't lead water downhill.
|
|
|
Post by ishmael on Apr 10, 2024 5:33:49 GMT -5
NO. What I am saying is that the people of Arizona have, at least to date, spoken loudly against abortion, just as the people of California have decided to treat it as the equivalent of an indoor sport. States have the authority how they will treat abortion. As to (your words, not mine) "zealot crazed .... and pretty messed up group (MAGA)", no. I don't think they are conservatives. I think they see Trump as a better alternative than Biden. Pretty sad this is our choice. Couldn't agree more and have posted that same thought many times.
|
|
|
Post by msmaggie on Apr 10, 2024 5:59:50 GMT -5
Is a policy or law passed by a "small" person less a policy or law than that passed by a more profound individual? A law enacted is a fact. Your feelings re the person/people who drove its enactment is simply your opinion. And justification, albeit a weak one, for your bothsidesism. Oh yeah. And the other thing is the stupefied arrogance of the left. You want to believe Biden and his ilk are capable, you should do so. But don't denigrate my opinion because I think the lot of them couldn't lead water downhill. You're funny. How dare I denigrate your opinion?!?! Cuz "stupefied arrogance" is practically a valentine. BTW, it should be stupefying. Hey look, arrogance!
|
|
|
Post by pickle20 on Apr 10, 2024 6:25:10 GMT -5
Another unforced error by republicans.
I feel a split happening soon, between staunch pro-lifers and Trump/his supporters who are beginning to realize that abortion bans are a major losing issue.
|
|
|
Post by michiganjoe on Apr 10, 2024 6:27:18 GMT -5
Here's something I can guarantee: Trump will be asked about his support for a nationwide ban and it's a question he'll refuse to give a yes or no answer to.
This issue is a millstone that the Dems must hang around the neck of Republicans.
|
|
|
Post by pickle20 on Apr 10, 2024 6:37:31 GMT -5
Trump is going to give whatever answer he feels gives him the best chance to win in November. I am pretty certain he doesn't care about abortion as an issue and I wouldn't be surprised to learn he's paid for a few in his lifetime.
|
|
|
Post by ishmael on Apr 10, 2024 7:08:01 GMT -5
Oh yeah. And the other thing is the stupefied arrogance of the left. You want to believe Biden and his ilk are capable, you should do so. But don't denigrate my opinion because I think the lot of them couldn't lead water downhill. You're funny. How dare I denigrate your opinion?!?! Cuz "stupefied arrogance" is practically a valentine. BTW, it should be stupefying. Hey look, arrogance! Actually, stupefied is correct in that it is the past tense, referring to something that has gone on from the past and into the present day, whereas your term refers to something in the future. A dictionary is your friend.
|
|
|
Post by ishmael on Apr 10, 2024 7:10:20 GMT -5
Another unforced error by republicans. I feel a split happening soon, between staunch pro-lifers and Trump/his supporters who are beginning to realize that abortion bans are a major losing issue. Could be. The ? is will it be enough to the pro-lifers stay home?
|
|
|
Post by msmaggie on Apr 10, 2024 7:22:55 GMT -5
You're funny. How dare I denigrate your opinion?!?! Cuz "stupefied arrogance" is practically a valentine. BTW, it should be stupefying. Hey look, arrogance! Actually, stupefied is correct in that it is the past tense, referring to something that has gone on from the past and into the present day, whereas your term refers to something in the future. A dictionary is your friend. Stupefying as a verb is present progressive tense. But that is irrelevant as it's an adjective in the usage illustrated. Things are stupefying. People are stupified. Consider a simpler example. Stupefy means shock. Would you say "shocked arrogance" or "shocking arrogance"?
|
|
|
Post by ishmael on Apr 10, 2024 7:37:49 GMT -5
Actually, stupefied is correct in that it is the past tense, referring to something that has gone on from the past and into the present day, whereas your term refers to something in the future. A dictionary is your friend. Stupefying as a verb is present progressive tense. But that is irrelevant as it's an adjective in the usage illustrated. Things are stupefying. People are stupified. Consider a simpler example. Stupefy means shock. Would you say "shocked arrogance" or "shocking arrogance"? "Shock" is the second definition, according to Webster link , the first being to make stupid of groggy. And clearly, the arrogance of the left, IVO the likes of Harris, AOC and Biden's cabinet, the first definition applies.
|
|
|
Post by mrsmlh on Apr 10, 2024 7:42:28 GMT -5
Actually, stupefied is correct in that it is the past tense, referring to something that has gone on from the past and into the present day, whereas your term refers to something in the future. A dictionary is your friend. Stupefying as a verb is present progressive tense. But that is irrelevant as it's an adjective in the usage illustrated. Things are stupefying. People are stupified. Consider a simpler example. Stupefy means shock. Would you say "shocked arrogance" or "shocking arrogance"? And the funniest part is that he is showing he is the most arrogant
|
|
|
Post by msmaggie on Apr 10, 2024 7:59:24 GMT -5
Stupefying as a verb is present progressive tense. But that is irrelevant as it's an adjective in the usage illustrated. Things are stupefying. People are stupified. Consider a simpler example. Stupefy means shock. Would you say "shocked arrogance" or "shocking arrogance"? "Shock" is the second definition, according to Webster link , the first being to make stupid of groggy. And clearly, the arrogance of the left, IVO the likes of Harris, AOC and Biden's cabinet, the first definition applies. Again, people are stupified. Things, like arrogance, are stupifying. How do you make a thing groggy? Now look up what stupifying means. dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/stupefyingstupefying adjective (SURPRISING) very surprising or shocking: stupefying arrogance I find it stupefying that anyone would want to harm a baby.
|
|
|
Post by pickle20 on Apr 10, 2024 8:54:59 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Evil Yoda on Apr 10, 2024 10:15:51 GMT -5
Conservatives have never been interested in individual rights. The rights of corporations to do whatever they want to whomever they want... THAT is their cause. Well they did when they were republicans ..... before they flipped to being what we call dems now. Kidding aside. The Cons. (I like that) used to at least sort of pull the Wizard of Oz and keep that sort of thing, being absolutely on the side of the money changers.... it was all on the Q T. Now, it is like they are waving it in our faces and going...... 'nahhh naaah nuh nahhh nuh. ' What are you going to do about it. They got in bed with the religious right around 45 years ago, and those folks have never respected freedom, except to the extent that you are free to make the same choices they do.
|
|
|
Post by guido2 on Apr 10, 2024 14:54:37 GMT -5
What policies has Biden pursued that are not traditional D policies? You're right. It's the people, not the policies. I grew up, as did you, I think, with JFK, RFK, HHH, Moynihan, even Jimmy Carter, and on and on. What do we have now? Harris? Schumer? Schiff, AOC, Sanders? The Dems have become a party of incompetent cowards. On the one side, extremists and demagogues. On the other side, cowards and small people. You vote for one or the other. None of them are worth a cup of warm spit.I know this is all perception on my part. But all I know, is that pretty much every time a MAGA/GOPer comes up with a 'brilliant' idea. You can bet that in the long haul, you better bring the Vaseline. On the other hand, I will say .... while it is true sometimes..... that the road to hell is paved with good intentions.... that at least the Dems tend to work and not subvert the system to try to make us peons lives a little better. Do they always get it correct? Nope. But do they actually screw up others peoples lives (see the strike down of Roe and now the 1864 if you need a reference.) the answer is NO. IMHO. Now if you can provide something that the Dems did that really messed up peoples lives. I mean like 1/3 to 1/2 the population. NOT, some rich guy or a handful that po'ed that they couldn't do what they wanted. Please provide such things/rules/policies that I may have missed. Thanks!
|
|
|
Post by guido2 on Apr 10, 2024 15:09:15 GMT -5
An indication of just how politically devastating this ruling is. I'll say it..... she is a political whore. BTW she isn't alone. And yeah both parties. But hmmm I don't remember hearing of such humongous flip flops like this with the Dems.
|
|
|
Post by guido2 on Apr 10, 2024 15:10:25 GMT -5
Trump is going to give whatever answer he feels gives him the best chance to win in November. I am pretty certain he doesn't care about abortion as an issue and I wouldn't be surprised to learn he's paid for a few in his lifetime. Trump cares about one and one thing only. Donald J. Trump. PERIOD!
|
|
|
Post by zenwalk on Apr 10, 2024 15:14:55 GMT -5
This is great news. The SS Trump is leaning mightily taking on water. What's next? Enforcing dancing bans in Euclid Kansas?
|
|
|
Post by zenwalk on Apr 10, 2024 15:17:10 GMT -5
I'll say it..... she is a political whore. You're half right, guido.
|
|
|
Post by guido2 on Apr 10, 2024 15:17:35 GMT -5
I'll say it; What the fxck?
|
|
|
Post by zenwalk on Apr 10, 2024 15:19:43 GMT -5
I'll say it; What the fxck? LOL LOL. And these nipple heads were worried about sharia law.
|
|
|
Post by guido2 on Apr 10, 2024 15:52:39 GMT -5
And we thought dinosaurs were extinct. Well if he feels so damn strongly about this. Maybe he should strongly suggest that 'the boys' but mr. happy away, read the Bible. Idiot.
|
|