Haha, I read the tea leaves a bit differently. I love how the his spending (aka investing) has raised inflation, his reappointment of Powell has given us a man who reacted much to late to economic factors and contributed to our current dilemma. Imagine if he got his Build Back Better through? A further disaster. The usage of monies in his administration is crazy. "It's Free" folks...Santa is in office.dajo9 said:OdontoBear66 said:Granted, my personal opinions on abortion do not fly in the Republican Party for the most part. But each individual has to prioritize which issues are most important to them, and then see where they fit. So for me, fiscal conservativism is way, way more important than the issues of abortion and other issues, such that I align with that party with some serious disagreements---thus a very proud RINO who despises the extreme conservative wing nuts int the party as much as they despise my thinking. Also very much for clean air, clean water, desalinization, but not to the extremes that our economy suffers while other economies increase their coal production. And on, and on, and on. But choices are nice, just like for women, but with restriction in time (16-20 months).Unit2Sucks said:First - the bolded statement is false. States don't have rights, people do. States have powers and nowhere does the constitution grant states the power to infringe on a woman's right to choose.OdontoBear66 said:Uh, as I have repeatedly posted I am for abortion being legal with some reasonable time limits (roughly 16-20). Aside that I was citing the law as it is. You know, rights not specifically enumerated in the Constitution remaining with the states. So your passion is wonderful, your ascribing views to topics is not. The rigid stances to the left of center oftentimes parallel those right of center. I can but laugh.Unit2Sucks said:Please let us know when people can peacefully object to elimination of their rights. This idea that people who live in ****hole states have to accept whatever their state governments do is a pretty interesting tact. Particularly given that the majority of opinions in many states is pro-choice, but they will still get stuck with laws they don't agree with because politicians aren't always accountable to their constituents, for a variety of reasons.OdontoBear66 said:Of course some will and some won't. The choice is left with the states and the majority of opinions in those states. You and I may not like it but at least get it right.sycasey said:NVBear78 said:cbbass1 said:This is an understandable and human reaction to a horrible injustice.NVBear78 said:cbbass1 said:I don't think that anyone is saying that it's OK to harass.oski003 said:
Saying that it is okay to harass supreme court justices because nut jobs harass abortion clinics is an unfortunate extremist liberal view.
Peaceful protest is not harassment.
I really hate the idea of protestors at people's houses from the left or the right and of course violence against people or property by anyone is not right. Here was another example I saw today regarding the Supreme Court:
"The journalist for Rewire, Caroline Reilly, appeared to suggest more violence after a pro-life group's office was firebombed in Wisconsin over the weekend...
"More of this. May these people never know a moment of peace or safety until they rot in the ground," she wrote in a since-deleted Twitter post on Sunday."
It doesn't make it right, however, and it's counter-productive. The last thing that we need in all this is sympathy for the 5 un-American SCOTUS judges.
Anyone who engages in violence, assault, vandalism, or harassment, in the name of politics should be held accountable. When these acts go unprosecuted, 'small-d' democracy is damaged.
Such is the case here. In the decades since Roe v Wade was decided, Pro-Birth protesters have made a regular practice of harassing, intimidating, and assaulting pregnant women, with few of these cases ever being prosecuted. When these crimes are routinely prosecuted, they become rare.
Let's also not forget the acts of violence committed by police and right-wing domestic terrorists against peaceful BLM protesters. Strange that the response of law enforcement to demonstrations against the murder of innocent civilians by police was to assault the peaceful protesters.
Despite that, #BLM has not called for acts of violence, assault, vandalism, or harassment against law enforcement. They've shown admirable restraint, despite the lack of any real political support from Democrats.
No, this isn't an understandable response at all-abortion would not be banned by this prospective ruling and would go back to the States. This is an attempt at mob intimidation.
This ignores that many states have already passed laws that will instantly ban abortion as soon as Roe is overturned. So yes, the response is very understandable.
Just so I understand, would your silencing of "mob intimidation" apply to all conservatives in California as well? If so, I'm sure they will be pleased to hear that they are no longer permitted to object to any concerns they have about our government, because "it's up to the states".
Second - your personal opinion on abortion isn't particularly relevant when you know very well that the Republican party intends to abolish abortion and is doing so in the majority of states in the country.
And let me add on Friday 13 May, early morning, not knowing where the Elon Musk things go with Twitter, I absolutely love what he is doing. I came from the 60s at Berkeley when Free Speech was the passion of the "far left" as it was considered then (probably tame now). He is really fun---poking the bear.
If you like fiscal conservatism you must hate how much Biden has cut the deficit. Fiscal conservatism always leads to higher deficits.
Let's see. Newest economic suggestion---Let's use Covid funds to "Refund the Police"....What???? Wasn't he all in on BLM organization (not sentiment) and "Defund the Police" just recently? Quite an economic policy. Fingers to the wind.
