Biden/Harris 2020

[annabenedetti]

Right. The whole point of the political strategy behind abortion is not to actually outlaw it, but only to kick it down the field and use it as a political football to score points with the voters. I mentioned earlier that there is a fair percentage of the Republican base who are single-issue voters. If a re-Publican candidate merely pretends to be "against abortion" (as so many of them do), he will automatically receive their votes. So we have thoughtless voters empowering hypocritical politicians. The hypocritical politicians win and everybody else loses, including the anti-choice voters.

For years, as a dutiful Republican, I got my voting sheet after Mass on a Sunday before the election, and went down the ballot choosing the candidates approved by the pro-life campaigns. I was taught, and I believed, that I could never vote outside the pro-life block. Until two things: 1) I realized that even with a GOP-controlled congress and White House, nothing substantive had changed. And 2) I fully understood the Principle/Doctrine of Double Effect. And then I left the GOP, back in 2012. I'm still pro-life, but now I understand what you've said in your post here.

 

[ok doser]

 

[annabenedetti]

Mitch McConnell is doing his part to remake judiciary

McConnell works closely with the Federalist Society, which is at the forefront of conservative judicial thinking, and he helped the group draft Trump's list of 25 potential Supreme Court nominees. He well understands the power of the judicial branch to shape policy and mobilize voters.

McConnell laid the groundwork for this moment with a startling move just hours after Justice Antonin Scalia's unexpected death in February 2016. He announced the Senate wouldn't consider Obama's nominee because it was a presidential election year. He followed through on that vow, holding the seat open until after Trump took office. Democrats remain livid over the move to this day, calling it a stolen seat.

. . . .
​

After Republicans won control of the Senate in 2014, McConnell became leader — and the confirmation of Obama's nominees started grinding to halt. As Trump was about to take office, there was what some call an emerging vacancy crisis, with some 100 openings in the judiciary.

Scott Jennings, a former George W. Bush administration official and longtime McConnell strategist, said the Senate leader saw in the judicial openings the opportunity to "restore some balance."

Jennings said, "It became clear to him that one of the things he could do is set up the next president to remake the judiciary."​

 

[ok doser]

"It became clear to him that one of the things he could do is set up the next president to remake the judiciary."

And how would that have worked out if your hero Hillary had become the next president?

 

[ok doser]

I'm still pro-life ...

How do you balance that against your feminist ideals of bodily autonomy with regards to "reproductive rights"?

 

[ok doser]

 

[User Name]

For years, as a dutiful Republican, I got my voting sheet after Mass on a Sunday before the election, and went down the ballot choosing the candidates approved by the pro-life campaigns. I was taught, and I believed, that I could never vote outside the pro-life block. Until two things: 1) I realized that even with a GOP-controlled congress and White House, nothing substantive had changed.

The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, John Roberts, is a Catholic. Here are a few of his quotes regarding the abortion issue: "Roe v. Wade is the settled law of the land...It’s settled as a precedent of the court, entitled to respect under principles of stare decisis...There’s nothing in my personal views that would prevent me from fully and faithfully applying that precedent."

So much for doser's deluded pipe dream that re-Publican politicians will get Roe v. Wade overturned by stacking the courts with more conservative judges like John Roberts.

 

[annabenedetti]

The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, John Roberts, is a Catholic. Here are a few of his quotes regarding the abortion issue: "Roe v. Wade is the settled law of the land...It’s settled as a precedent of the court, entitled to respect under principles of stare decisis...There’s nothing in my personal views that would prevent me from fully and faithfully applying that precedent."

So much for doser's deluded pipe dream that re-Publican politicians will get Roe v. Wade overturned by stacking the courts with more conservative judges like John Roberts.

Nor will a GOP-controlled legislature accomplish anything.

Rand Paul in 2018, when the GOP held both houses of Congress:

Paul introduced an amendment to an appropriations package Thursday that would defund Planned Parenthood specifically, but keep federal funding for women’s health service organizations that do not perform abortions. “There are over 10,000 community health center facilities across the country, providing health services to more than 27 million patients – compared with 2.4 million who use Planned Parenthood services,” claimed the press release from the senator’s office.

But Paul’s amendment was thwarted. “My amendment would end funding to Planned Parenthood,” Paul said on the Senate floor. “My amendment is already included in the House version, and yet my amendment is now being blocked by Republicans.”

Why would a bill to defund Planned Parenthood, something Republicans have campaigned on for basically forever, be stopped by a Republican-controlled Senate?

The larger question remains this: Why would a Republican-led Senate squash an amendment to do something virtually every Republican, from President Trump to members of Congress, have vowed to do? Some might complain that this was not the right way to accomplish this objective. But Republicans have controlled the Senate for how long now? When is the right way going to manifest itself?

When are Republicans going to deliver on this basic agenda item that has long been promised to their pro-life constituency? They have the White House and Congress—for now.
​

 

[ok doser]

Kamala: an enemy of the second amendment

https://bearingarms.com/cam-e/2020/08/11/kamala-harris-right-to-own-a-gun/

 

[User Name]

The larger question remains this: Why would a Republican-led Senate squash an amendment to do something virtually every Republican, from President Trump to members of Congress, have vowed to do?

Many conservative politicians are nothing if not hypocritical. They would never actually impede abortion even if they could, because if they did, what would they do when their mistresses turn up pregnant? Wouldn't want the wifey to find out! For that reason among so many others, they will continue to stumble and fumble around on abortion. They may make a few apparent symbolic gestures against it, but they will never actually do a lot to stop them from happening. Meanwhile, the sheep will continue voting for the wolves in sheep's clothing, confident that they are doing the right thing.

 

[annabenedetti]

Kamala: an enemy of the second amendment

https://bearingarms.com/cam-e/2020/0...-to-own-a-gun/

You got nothing.

Sen. Kamala Harris, whose stump speech includes impassioned calls for banning assault weapons and universal background checks, put it very simply: Yes, she owns a firearm.

"I am a gun owner, and I own a gun for probably the reason a lot of people do -- for personal safety," the California Democrat said Thursday. "I was a career prosecutor."

. . . . "We are being offered a false choice," Harris said to reporters, after talking about her own gun ownership. "You're either in favor of the Second Amendment or you want to take everyone's guns away. It's a false choice that is born out of a lack of courage from leaders who must recognize and agree that there are some practical solutions to what is a clear problem in our country."

 

[ok doser]

Yes, she owns a firearm.

Your whole argument is that she's a hypocrite?

 

[annabenedetti]

Your whole argument is that she's a hypocrite?

Your whole argument is she's an enemy of the 2nd. amendment. Your own link showed she's not.

 

[ok doser]

Your whole argument is she's an enemy of the 2nd. amendment. Your own link showed she's not.

"Shall not be infringed"

 

[User Name]

Why would a bill to defund Planned Parenthood, something Republicans have campaigned on for basically forever, be stopped by a Republican-controlled Senate?

When David Duke was running for public office back in the '80s and '90s (as a Republican of course), he used to say that he was pro-life...for White people. But if people of color wanted to get abortions, that was ok with him. Today, Republican politicians are not openly racist like David Duke was, but quite a number of them do privately sympathize with those views. After all, if a low-income woman of color decides to get an abortion, that is likely one less Democratic voter they will have to worry about. So of course, Republican legislators will stumble and fumble around, and ultimately fail to defund an organization like Planned Parenthood that provides abortions.

 

[chair]

Judging from the panicked reactions here, she must be a good choice.

 

[Rusha]

Judging from the panicked reactions here, she must be a good choice.

She is ...the GOP and trump were hoping for Rice in the same way they were hoping for Bernie.

 

[ok doser]

Judging from the panicked reactions here, she must be a good choice.

:darwinsm:

 

[ok doser]

I would love to see Biden or Harris respond to a reporter's question seeking their reaction to the murder of little five year old Cannon Hinnant, and the total apathy from the main stream media about this story.

 

[User Name]

Wrong thread.