The Next Four Years

[Sinjorri]

The Supreme Court is just one of the many reasons to re-elect President Obama. The court does not need more far right ideologs that spout Hannity's and Limpbaugh's talking points from the bench. 70% of the country opposed the Citizens United ruling. A President Romney would double down on that crap.

Of course partisan hacks HATE the First Amendment.

Wrong. We "hacks" (hello pot, have you met kettle?) love the 1st Amendment...we just don't think the wealthy should be able to purchase more free speech than everyone else.

Are you calling the majority of Americans "partisan hacks" because they think Citizens United is bad for our political system?

In Supreme Court Ruling on Campaign Finance, the Public Dissents - ABC News

u lost free speech with certain laws, deal with it. I hate it but thats the way people wnated to tell others how to talk.

 

[Si modo]

The Supreme Court is just one of the many reasons to re-elect President Obama. The court does not need more far right ideologs that spout Hannity's and Limpbaugh's talking points from the bench. 70% of the country opposed the Citizens United ruling. A President Romney would double down on that crap.

Of course partisan hacks HATE the First Amendment.

Wrong. We "hacks" (hello pot, have you met kettle?) love the 1st Amendment...we just don't think the wealthy should be able to purchase more free speech than everyone else.

Are you calling the majority of Americans "partisan hacks" because they think Citizens United is bad for our political system?

In Supreme Court Ruling on Campaign Finance, the Public Dissents - ABC News

Here's a clue: The SCOTUS interprets the law and how they apply to cases. The LEGISLATURE makes law, not the SCOTUS.

Write your Congressman to reform campaign laws. Legislation is not the role of the judicial branch.

 

[candycorn]

So not only is Romney going to nominate justices based on their desire to overturn Roe, they are going to be confirmed and then the court is going to hear a Roe-based case. This, based on one quote from Romney's website, which could just as likely be pandering to his base as an honestly held opinion. Oh, and with no current history of anyone making a serious attempt to overturn Roe that I'm aware of.

I'm sorry, this is a stretch at best. As Si aptly pointed out, it's a wedge issue.

I'll agree with the first part and take you to task on the second part.

One never knows where Romney will land on any topic. That is a given. Obama has flip flopped/lied on a number of issues as well.

The governor says he wants Roe overturned. We have that in writing--for what it's worth.

But it raises above the level of a parlor game...

He likely will have the opportunity to replace Ginsberg and Kennedy on the Court.

As we saw with the ACA ruling, one needn't have a plaintiff to have a case heard before the court so there will be no issue in a test case being brought up. Why bring one up now when you know it won't be approved?

Anyway, as for a wedge issue, in some ways, social issues are the ONLY issue before voters. Neither major party has shown any responsibilty when it comes to the fiscal situation. So why not vote based on social issues? There seems to be no difference in the net result of fiscal policies; does there?

 

[Si modo]

Of course partisan hacks HATE the First Amendment.

Wrong. We "hacks" (hello pot, have you met kettle?) love the 1st Amendment...we just don't think the wealthy should be able to purchase more free speech than everyone else.

Are you calling the majority of Americans "partisan hacks" because they think Citizens United is bad for our political system?

In Supreme Court Ruling on Campaign Finance, the Public Dissents - ABC News

u lost free speech with certain laws, deal with it. I hate it but thats the way people wnated to tell others how to talk.

Exactly. As Roberts recently said, it is not the job of the SCOTUS to change the law that the people voted in, unless it's unconstitutional.

Maybe folks will get smarter, but based on a lot of posts in this thread alone, I will not hold my breath.

 

[candycorn]

In the next four years, there will likely be at least 2 or 3 slots on the Supreme Court open up due to the age of the justices. Ruth Ginsberg is in questionable health and three othe justices (Kennedy, Scalia and Breyer) are all in their 70's.

If you're a woman who values the ability to make reproductive choices on your own, you should vote for the President since he is committed to letting you keep your right to make that choice.

It is the truth that the republican nominee has been on both sides of the abortion issue in the past. Where the nominee will end up when selecting a new justice and what litmus test he will apply to that selection is up in the air.

Even a swing of one vote could overturn Roe v. Wade. If given the opportunity, conservatives will take that chance to overturn this landmark ruling.

Just something to consider before you go into the polling place and fill out your ballot this November.

This is Candycorn and I approved this message.

Thanks for mentioning this, the SCOTUS is one of the key reasons I'm voting for anyone other than a liberal for POTUS.

he he he...doesn't sound like a ringing endorsement for Governor Romeny...or am I wrong?

 

[Sinjorri]

So not only is Romney going to nominate justices based on their desire to overturn Roe, they are going to be confirmed and then the court is going to hear a Roe-based case. This, based on one quote from Romney's website, which could just as likely be pandering to his base as an honestly held opinion. Oh, and with no current history of anyone making a serious attempt to overturn Roe that I'm aware of.

I'm sorry, this is a stretch at best. As Si aptly pointed out, it's a wedge issue.

I'll agree with the first part and take you to task on the second part.

One never knows where Romney will land on any topic. That is a given. Obama has flip flopped/lied on a number of issues as well.

The governor says he wants Roe overturned. We have that in writing--for what it's worth.

But it raises above the level of a parlor game...

He likely will have the opportunity to replace Ginsberg and Kennedy on the Court.

As we saw with the ACA ruling, one needn't have a plaintiff to have a case heard before the court so there will be no issue in a test case being brought up. Why bring one up now when you know it won't be approved?

Anyway, as for a wedge issue, in some ways, social issues are the ONLY issue before voters. Neither major party has shown any responsibilty when it comes to the fiscal situation. So why not vote based on social issues? There seems to be no difference in the net result of fiscal policies; does there?

as u stated so im not disagreeing but an executive order is written words as well so u are right about both people flip flopping.

 

[candycorn]

Dear Candycorn

Whether it is women's rights or the economy, the choice is obvious.

I hear Rush Limbaugh has recently come out against women voting?

I know i heard him say it, not sure if he is now pretending it was sarcasm or not

Since we know the entire GOP takes direction from the likes of that scumbag, we might want to take this election deadly serious and we might want to take the rightwing terrorists attempts to prevent you and me from voting, equally deadly serious

this is it, either we are able to vote, all of us (obama cant lose if we all vote) or there will be consequences

You have a batshit crazy view of terrorism. There is nothing wrong with tough voter ID laws. If the Democrats are banking on those who can't muster enough chutzpa to come up with a satisfactory ID, they deserve to lose.

That being said, the States/Feds should make voter ID cards have facial IDs on them as well. Just make the card you get in the mail a picture ID when you register to vote. Problem solved.

 

[Sinjorri]

In the next four years, there will likely be at least 2 or 3 slots on the Supreme Court open up due to the age of the justices. Ruth Ginsberg is in questionable health and three othe justices (Kennedy, Scalia and Breyer) are all in their 70's.

If you're a woman who values the ability to make reproductive choices on your own, you should vote for the President since he is committed to letting you keep your right to make that choice.

It is the truth that the republican nominee has been on both sides of the abortion issue in the past. Where the nominee will end up when selecting a new justice and what litmus test he will apply to that selection is up in the air.

Even a swing of one vote could overturn Roe v. Wade. If given the opportunity, conservatives will take that chance to overturn this landmark ruling.

Just something to consider before you go into the polling place and fill out your ballot this November.

This is Candycorn and I approved this message.

Thanks for mentioning this, the SCOTUS is one of the key reasons I'm voting for anyone other than a liberal for POTUS.

he he he...doesn't sound like a ringing endorsement for Governor Romeny...or am I wrong?

i think hes voting against the liberal? unless u meant Romney is a liberal too?

 

[Sinjorri]

Dear Candycorn

Whether it is women's rights or the economy, the choice is obvious.

I hear Rush Limbaugh has recently come out against women voting?

I know i heard him say it, not sure if he is now pretending it was sarcasm or not

Since we know the entire GOP takes direction from the likes of that scumbag, we might want to take this election deadly serious and we might want to take the rightwing terrorists attempts to prevent you and me from voting, equally deadly serious

this is it, either we are able to vote, all of us (obama cant lose if we all vote) or there will be consequences

You have a batshit crazy view of terrorism. There is nothing wrong with tough voter ID laws. If the Democrats are banking on those who can't muster enough chutzpa to come up with a satisfactory ID, they deserve to lose.

That being said, the States/Feds should make voter ID cards have facial IDs on them as well. Just make the card you get in the mail a picture ID when you register to vote. Problem solved.

make it equal for all? funny concept lets ride with it.

 

[candycorn]

some wnat a small but active? why is that so bad? how is the seat belt over reach doing for u, i hear a lot of women now when they get pulled over and the cop gives them a ticket because the child took it off and mommy dindt know and next thing she knows the cops hauling her in for child abuse, a bit of a stretch im sure but its possible. Everyone always told me "they will never MAKE u wear a seatbelt in the back" and here we are.

let me do that again


some of us wnat a small but active government, why do u feel that that is bad?

THe seatbelt law has now been overreached since anyone in a car needs a seat belt, lots of people told me personally that would never happen, and now it has.

People were all for the seat belt laws, stil mothers starting finding out the kids can take them off and when being pulled over by a police officer they were getting two tickets, one for the infraction and one for the child not wearing a seat belt. Sucks now but in theory it sounded grand. Utopia has its price.

When you start dealing with a woman's uterus; thats when I "feel that [it] is bad".

If you're for the overturning of Roe, vote for the Governor.
If you want to protect a woman's reproductive rights, vote for the President.

 

[candycorn]

Thanks for mentioning this, the SCOTUS is one of the key reasons I'm voting for anyone other than a liberal for POTUS.

he he he...doesn't sound like a ringing endorsement for Governor Romeny...or am I wrong?

i think hes voting against the liberal? unless u meant Romney is a liberal too?

What day is it? The governor seems to be more liberal on some days as opposed to others.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EQwrB1vu74c&feature=results_main&playnext=1&list=PL088BA38C3077AA41]Still Voting For 'Mitt Romney'? - YouTube[/ame]

 

[BDBoop]

In the next four years, there will likely be at least 2 or 3 slots on the Supreme Court open up due to the age of the justices. Ruth Ginsberg is in questionable health and three othe justices (Kennedy, Scalia and Breyer) are all in their 70's.

If you're a woman who values the ability to make reproductive choices on your own, you should vote for the President since he is committed to letting you keep your right to make that choice.

It is the truth that the republican nominee has been on both sides of the abortion issue in the past. Where the nominee will end up when selecting a new justice and what litmus test he will apply to that selection is up in the air.

Even a swing of one vote could overturn Roe v. Wade. If given the opportunity, conservatives will take that chance to overturn this landmark ruling.

Just something to consider before you go into the polling place and fill out your ballot this November.

This is Candycorn and I approved this message.

Can I feel free to Facebook this message?

 

[Si modo]

let me do that again


some of us wnat a small but active government, why do u feel that that is bad?

THe seatbelt law has now been overreached since anyone in a car needs a seat belt, lots of people told me personally that would never happen, and now it has.

People were all for the seat belt laws, stil mothers starting finding out the kids can take them off and when being pulled over by a police officer they were getting two tickets, one for the infraction and one for the child not wearing a seat belt. Sucks now but in theory it sounded grand. Utopia has its price.

When you start dealing with a woman's uterus; thats when I "feel that [it] is bad".

If you're for the overturning of Roe, vote for the Governor.
If you want to protect a woman's reproductive rights, vote for the President.

See, there are three branches of ......

Oh, wait....you never understood that in the first place.

Tragic. Like a train wreck. Soon this thread will get too graphic even for my tastes is epic fails.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

In the next four years, there will likely be at least 2 or 3 slots on the Supreme Court open up due to the age of the justices. Ruth Ginsberg is in questionable health and three othe justices (Kennedy, Scalia and Breyer) are all in their 70's.

If you're a woman who values the ability to make reproductive choices on your own, you should vote for the President since he is committed to letting you keep your right to make that choice.

It is the truth that the republican nominee has been on both sides of the abortion issue in the past. Where the nominee will end up when selecting a new justice and what litmus test he will apply to that selection is up in the air.

Even a swing of one vote could overturn Roe v. Wade. If given the opportunity, conservatives will take that chance to overturn this landmark ruling.

Just something to consider before you go into the polling place and fill out your ballot this November.

This is Candycorn and I approved this message.

Roe V Wade will not be overturned. We should be concerned with the disastrous economy and massive debt.

 

[Pho_King]

In the next four years, there will likely be at least 2 or 3 slots on the Supreme Court open up due to the age of the justices. Ruth Ginsberg is in questionable health and three othe justices (Kennedy, Scalia and Breyer) are all in their 70's.

If you're a woman who values the ability to make reproductive choices on your own, you should vote for the President since he is committed to letting you keep your right to make that choice.

It is the truth that the republican nominee has been on both sides of the abortion issue in the past. Where the nominee will end up when selecting a new justice and what litmus test he will apply to that selection is up in the air.

Even a swing of one vote could overturn Roe v. Wade. If given the opportunity, conservatives will take that chance to overturn this landmark ruling.

Just something to consider before you go into the polling place and fill out your ballot this November.

This is Candycorn and I approved this message.

With the exception ofrape, women make their reproductive choices 100% of the time. Rape will never be made legal. What you mean, candy corn, is vote for Obama if you want women to be guaranteed the right to deny fathers their paternity, and children their vitality.

 

[BDBoop]

In the next four years, there will likely be at least 2 or 3 slots on the Supreme Court open up due to the age of the justices. Ruth Ginsberg is in questionable health and three othe justices (Kennedy, Scalia and Breyer) are all in their 70's.

If you're a woman who values the ability to make reproductive choices on your own, you should vote for the President since he is committed to letting you keep your right to make that choice.

It is the truth that the republican nominee has been on both sides of the abortion issue in the past. Where the nominee will end up when selecting a new justice and what litmus test he will apply to that selection is up in the air.

Even a swing of one vote could overturn Roe v. Wade. If given the opportunity, conservatives will take that chance to overturn this landmark ruling.

Just something to consider before you go into the polling place and fill out your ballot this November.

This is Candycorn and I approved this message.

With the exception ofrape, women make their reproductive choices 100% of the time. Rape will never be made legal. What you mean, candy corn, is vote for Obama if you want women to be guaranteed the right to deny fathers their paternity, and children their vitality.

Dear Misogynist;

She really doesn't need to translate for her.

xoxo

Boop

 

[Pho_King]

Just like only morons believe guns will be taken away by Democrats.

Yet everytime a Democrat gets elected that becomes the Republican war cry and NEA membership gets a boost.

Wedge issues - more emotions than thought.

Always.

Back to the topic,

A woman's reproductive choice isn't an emotion...it's a health concern.

When that "reproductive choice" takes place after the reproduction, you are right. It is a health concern. For the baby involved. It's actually a life or death concern.

 

[Pho_King]

The worst the Supreme Court could do is overturn Roe v. Wade, which would have no effect or very little effect.

Actually, no. The worst they could do is overturn Roe v Wade and declare an zygote a full citizen from conception. Judicial over reach. Much like the Citizen United case. This would have such a devastating impact on our country, we might never recover.

Much like roe v wade as well.

 

[Papageorgio]

In the next four years, there will likely be at least 2 or 3 slots on the Supreme Court open up due to the age of the justices. Ruth Ginsberg is in questionable health and three othe justices (Kennedy, Scalia and Breyer) are all in their 70's.

If you're a woman who values the ability to make reproductive choices on your own, you should vote for the President since he is committed to letting you keep your right to make that choice.

It is the truth that the republican nominee has been on both sides of the abortion issue in the past. Where the nominee will end up when selecting a new justice and what litmus test he will apply to that selection is up in the air.

Even a swing of one vote could overturn Roe v. Wade. If given the opportunity, conservatives will take that chance to overturn this landmark ruling.

Just something to consider before you go into the polling place and fill out your ballot this November.

This is Candycorn and I approved this message.

My wife and I discussed this and she is of a different opinion, first she doesn't think Roe v Wade will ever be brought before the court again, and the court leans conservative anyway. She believes you are appealing to women emotionally instead of intellectually, which offends her.

Just something to consider.

 

[Pho_King]

There is plenty of hypocrisy to go around...thats for sure. If the teams are divided into two, I'm not on either team. Which is why I'm for voter registration laws, think that unions are their own worst enemy, and think that we should keep the prisoners at Gitmo until they die. I don't think that many on the left would agree with me on these hot-button issues.

Putting aside the scorecards for a second; here is what Governor Romney says on his website:



-Those aren't scare tactics, he believes Roe should be overturned--FACT.
-Four supreme court justices, Kennedy, Breyer, Scalia, and Ginsburg are 70+ y/o--FACT.
-Whomever is President from 2012-2016 will be able to likely appoint 1-3 justices--FACT as much as it can be as as much as human aging dictates.
-Governor Romney says he wants Roe overturned. He will likely have that opportunity if elected--FACT.

If you value a woman's right to choose her own reproductive rights, you should vote for Obama. If you would like for a woman to have her bodily functions regulated by politicians, you should likely cast your vote for Governor Romney. FACT

See im with the pro lifers on this, but hear me out on my opinions":


The female doesnt have control of her body when the child is in her, she does not tell it when to eat, she does not tell it when to grow, shes an incubator and protector of the child while its in the womb. Thats how humans do it but DONT see it as. Now regardless of how else u want to spin it, how come libs are willing to give a murder and criminals a second chance but kill off an innocent baby? I dont see that logic.

I hear you out on your opinions. I don't see how you reduce a human being to being an incubator devoid of rights. The abortion/capital punishment argument is food for thought. I'm not totally against capital punishment althought I'm anti-death penalty in most cases.

So, I take it you're for outlawing abortion across the board; not giving it back to the states as Governor Romney wants to do? Total outlawing of abortion?

What is the problem you have with "reducing a human being to being an incubator devoid of rights"? Aside from the extreme hyperbole in your characterization ( women will not be denied, say, their right to breathe), you do believe in denying unborn children that right.