Roe v Wade Overturned

HeavyG

HighHeat said:

lousubcap said:

President Biden has endorsed making an exception to filibuster rules to pass legislation codifying Roe v. Wade into law. “The most important thing to be clear about is we have to codify Roe v. Wade into law and the way to do that is to make sure Congress votes to do that,” Biden told reporters. “And if the filibuster gets in the way, it’s like voting rights, it should be provided an exception for this…to the filibuster,” he said. The filibuster could be changed with a simple majority vote, but not all Democrats in the 50-50 Senate are on board with such a move, saying it would fundamentally change the nature of the Senate and could backfire if the Republican Party takes control of the chamber. Andrew Restuccia and Ken Thomas report for the Wall Street Journal.

Yup, Constitution be damned!

Please show me where the filibuster is mentioned in the US Constitution.

nolaegghead

HeavyG said:

HighHeat said:

lousubcap said:

President Biden has endorsed making an exception to filibuster rules to pass legislation codifying Roe v. Wade into law. “The most important thing to be clear about is we have to codify Roe v. Wade into law and the way to do that is to make sure Congress votes to do that,” Biden told reporters. “And if the filibuster gets in the way, it’s like voting rights, it should be provided an exception for this…to the filibuster,” he said. The filibuster could be changed with a simple majority vote, but not all Democrats in the 50-50 Senate are on board with such a move, saying it would fundamentally change the nature of the Senate and could backfire if the Republican Party takes control of the chamber. Andrew Restuccia and Ken Thomas report for the Wall Street Journal.

Yup, Constitution be damned!

Please show me where the filibuster is mentioned in the US Constitution.

It’s not.  Sometimes questions and statements can be intentionally misleading.  @highheat did you ask your boyfriend if the filibuster was in the constitution?

dmchicago

nolaegghead said:

HeavyG said:

HighHeat said:

lousubcap said:

President Biden has endorsed making an exception to filibuster rules to pass legislation codifying Roe v. Wade into law. “The most important thing to be clear about is we have to codify Roe v. Wade into law and the way to do that is to make sure Congress votes to do that,” Biden told reporters. “And if the filibuster gets in the way, it’s like voting rights, it should be provided an exception for this…to the filibuster,” he said. The filibuster could be changed with a simple majority vote, but not all Democrats in the 50-50 Senate are on board with such a move, saying it would fundamentally change the nature of the Senate and could backfire if the Republican Party takes control of the chamber. Andrew Restuccia and Ken Thomas report for the Wall Street Journal.

Yup, Constitution be damned!

Please show me where the filibuster is mentioned in the US Constitution.

It’s not.  Sometimes questions and statements can be intentionally misleading.  @highheat did you ask your boyfriend if the filibuster was in the constitution?

Your new sig line just made me spit coffee out of my nose.

Except, I'm not drinking coffee, but you get the gist.

HeavyG

nolaegghead said:

HeavyG said:

HighHeat said:

lousubcap said:

President Biden has endorsed making an exception to filibuster rules to pass legislation codifying Roe v. Wade into law. “The most important thing to be clear about is we have to codify Roe v. Wade into law and the way to do that is to make sure Congress votes to do that,” Biden told reporters. “And if the filibuster gets in the way, it’s like voting rights, it should be provided an exception for this…to the filibuster,” he said. The filibuster could be changed with a simple majority vote, but not all Democrats in the 50-50 Senate are on board with such a move, saying it would fundamentally change the nature of the Senate and could backfire if the Republican Party takes control of the chamber. Andrew Restuccia and Ken Thomas report for the Wall Street Journal.

Yup, Constitution be damned!

Please show me where the filibuster is mentioned in the US Constitution.

It’s not.  Sometimes questions and statements can be intentionally misleading.  @highheat did you ask your boyfriend if the filibuster was in the constitution?

I know. I was just hoping they would spend an afternoon using their favorite search engine trying to find it. I'm childish that way.

nolaegghead

lousubcap

I have concluded that the fact that religion owns the top shelf place on the third rail is merited.  Anything else is at least an order of magnitude lower.  
Clearly all the proselytizers in one camp cannot fathom how there are non-believers of their chosen one and embrace another chosen one.  
This has been going on for centuries.  Today and beyond's civilization doesn't stand a chance of sorting/solving this fundamental issue.  
Wish there was a way ahead short of the modern day Crusades.  
Rambling on a Friday night.  Needed to vent a bit-

JohnInCarolina

http://twitter.com/speechboy71/status/1543015290656772098?s=20&t=LQDIZ6Gb_Xz64z3Z9I_Z9g

Ozzie_Isaac

nolaegghead said:

From a comment on Reddit about this exact photo:

JohnInCarolina

Ozzie_Isaac said:

nolaegghead said:

From a comment on Reddit about this exact photo:

I guess it boils down to whether or not you’d prefer to be poor and free or poor and oppressed.  Seems to be an easy call to me.

nolaegghead

Man what a buzz kill.  Thanks for ruining my post…and the forum

Ozzie_Isaac

JohnInCarolina said:

Ozzie_Isaac said:

nolaegghead said:

From a comment on Reddit about this exact photo:

I guess it boils down to whether or not you’d prefer to be poor and free or poor and oppressed.  Seems to be an easy call to me.

I choose wealthy.  Then it doesn't matter what the government is like.

dmchicago

Ozzie_Isaac said:

JohnInCarolina said:

Ozzie_Isaac said:

nolaegghead said:

From a comment on Reddit about this exact photo:

I guess it boils down to whether or not you’d prefer to be poor and free or poor and oppressed.  Seems to be an easy call to me.

I choose wealthy.  Then it doesn't matter what the government is like.

Roman Abramovich has entered the chat. 

Ozzie_Isaac

Real world results:

https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/3544588-10-year-old-girl-denied-abortion-in-ohio/

nolaegghead

That’s just great.  Whatever happens, I’m sure that’s (by definition) His/Her will and the subsequent determinism.  A side effect of omniscience is micromanagement, I guess.

JohnInCarolina

http://twitter.com/lukemcgee/status/1543557519271936001?s=20&t=gRpvrgJOQzKDeExbOkOXUw

JohnInCarolina

Interesting piece by David Frum in the Atlantic, comparing the abortion ruling to prohibition:

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/06/abortion-roe-prolife-movement-prohibition/661402/

I’m not sure I agree with his forecast for how this is likely to play out, but I did find this quote from Mencken interesting:

lousubcap

A good read.  Only history will tell the story.

JohnInCarolina

Ozzie_Isaac

-1 Republican too. A bit late to the show, just hopefully not too late.

HeavyG

I'm seeing more articles lately about how Hillary is what the Dems need to win  in 2024 since Biden is likely toast and nobody seems to like Harris.

I know some folks here voted for Trump mainly cuz they couldn't stand Hillary.

If Hillary were to run in '24 would you still not vote for her or would you still vote for the GOP/Trump cult (whether Trump is the candidate or not)?

Gulfcoastguy

I would still not vote for her. Heck Bill thinks she is crazy.

JohnInCarolina

HeavyG said:

I'm seeing more articles lately about how Hillary is what the Dems need to win  in 2024 since Biden is likely toast and nobody seems to like Harris.

I’d like to see a few of those articles.  To me this argument seems half-baked at best.

Legume

Oh Jeez, let’s not go back in time, we already played that song.

HeavyG

JohnInCarolina said:

HeavyG said:

I'm seeing more articles lately about how Hillary is what the Dems need to win  in 2024 since Biden is likely toast and nobody seems to like Harris.

I’d like to see a few of those articles.  To me this argument seems half-baked at best.

Here's one I just saw this morning:

https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/3544103-now-more-than-ever-democrats-need-hillary-clinton/

As mentioned in the first paragraph they wrote a similar piece for the WSJ a few months ago.

Another from a week ago:

https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/28/politics/hillary-clinton-2024/index.html

I've read a few more in the last few months and some about how Hillary has been disappointed that Biden has not asked for her opinions/advice. Other friends/colleagues have said that she wants to again at least be part of "the conversation".

Hillary has said she won't run in 2024 and has already endorsed Biden - should he decide to run again.

I have no idea if she would ever run for prez again, or if she did if that would actually be a disastrous event for the Dems. Really just curious about the hypothetical.

JohnInCarolina

HeavyG said:

JohnInCarolina said:

HeavyG said:

I'm seeing more articles lately about how Hillary is what the Dems need to win  in 2024 since Biden is likely toast and nobody seems to like Harris.

I’d like to see a few of those articles.  To me this argument seems half-baked at best.

Here's one I just saw this morning:

https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/3544103-now-more-than-ever-democrats-need-hillary-clinton/

As mentioned in the first paragraph they wrote a similar piece for the WSJ a few months ago.

Gee, let’s see who wrote this gem:



I, for one, am shocked - SHOCKED I tell you - that a former campaign consultant/adviser for Hillary is advocating for her to run again.

JohnInCarolina

I did have a good laugh at the suggestion that Hillary would be a “change candidate”.  I mean… come on.

Ozzie_Isaac

HeavyG said:

I'm seeing more articles lately about how Hillary is what the Dems need to win  in 2024 since Biden is likely toast and nobody seems to like Harris.

I know some folks here voted for Trump mainly cuz they couldn't stand Hillary.

If Hillary were to run in '24 would you still not vote for her or would you still vote for the GOP/Trump cult (whether Trump is the candidate or not)?

2016 Trump vs. Hillary?  Knowing what I know now, Hillary. (Jan 6th hearings and anti-American value SCOTUS picks)

lousubcap

@Legume said it- absolutely no need for a "do-over." MSM  is putting air time to the "Joe shouldn't run in 2024" so that piece of the deal is already moving forward.  Both parties can come up with better candidates than Hillary or Cheeto, at least I hope so for the sake of all of us.  FWIW-

HeavyG

Certainly a fair point re Schoen, tho, who else but "Friends of Hillary" would be the most likely to start the whisper campaign?

He's not the only one writing these pieces, and I didn't vet any of the other authors as to their ties to Hillary cuz at this point in the game it's irrelevant.

JohnInCarolina

HeavyG said:

Certainly a fair point re Schoen, tho, who else but "Friends of Hillary" would be the most likely to start the whisper campaign?

He's not the only one writing these pieces, and I didn't vet any of the other authors as to their ties to Hillary cuz at this point in the game it's irrelevant.

Well, Chris Cillizza is the author of the CNN piece, and he is a weapons-grade asshat.