The Next Presidential Term will see 3 Justices turn 80...

[candycorn]

Didn't we see this thread from you already?

Boring.........

Not particularly helpful to radical republicans, granted. But not boring. These are the stakes;

If you value a woman's right to reproductive choice, you should vote for the candidate pledging to ensure that right--Mr. Obama.

If you think a woman's right to reproductive choice should be left up to the changing winds and variable tides of public opinions and political favor, Governor Romney should be your choice.

Its that simple and it's that big.

 

[candycorn]

Didn't we see this thread from you already?

Boring.........

He believes in the old saying... "If at first you don't succeed, keep on sucking until you do succeed".

Some jokes write themselves....the TOS prevents me from saying it though....

 

[candycorn]

Didn't we see this thread from you already?

Boring.........

He believes in the old saying... "If at first you don't succeed, keep on sucking until you do succeed".

It isn't as if those stakes aren't known, still, its interesting what you all choose to ignore as inconsequential. I think this thread needs to be bumped all day, and thanks for doing your part.

Well thank you. So many threads have no place on the Political forum. At the very least, this belongs here. Secondly and more importantly, spelling out the stakes of an election only helps the process--for both sides--and I would think that is something we could all get behind.

It is, however, instructional if you want to talk about the partisanship of it; if Republicans are in favor of unrestricted spending on campaigns, overturning Roe v. Wade, a firm selling your private data to Google or Exxon, etc.... just come out and say so. There seems to be a lot of shame on the right which I do not understand.

 

[Barb]

He believes in the old saying... "If at first you don't succeed, keep on sucking until you do succeed".

It isn't as if those stakes aren't known, still, its interesting what you all choose to ignore as inconsequential. I think this thread needs to be bumped all day, and thanks for doing your part.

Well thank you. So many threads have no place on the Political forum. At the very least, this belongs here. Secondly and more importantly, spelling out the stakes of an election only helps the process--for both sides--and I would think that is something we could all get behind.

It is, however, instructional if you want to talk about the partisanship of it; if Republicans are in favor of unrestricted spending on campaigns, overturning Roe v. Wade, a firm selling your private data to Google or Exxon, etc.... just come out and say so. There seems to be a lot of shame on the right which I do not understand.

I understand it perfectly, and it isn't shame, as they have no shame, its subterfuge.

 

[theHawk]

It is very likely that the next four years will see a President be able to appoint multiple justices to the high court.

If you value a woman's right to make her own reproductive choices, a court that will favor ordinary Americans and not big businesses as the Roberts court did in Citizens United, that will uphold rights to privacy and limits on Big Brother...you should consider voting for President Obama.

Governor Romney wants to overturn the Roe decision and will likely be able to accomplish that since two of the three justices, Ginsburg and Kennedy, are currently thought to be votes to preserve a woman's right to choose.

Just some food for thought.

Here's a radical idea, why not let the American people vote on and pass laws pertaining to abortion?

Why is it that every other "right" is protected by the constitution and law passed by elected representatives, but abortion is special. We can never be allowed to voice our opinions on the subject, we merely have to accept what a few judges said about it decades ago.

 

[chikenwing]

If you feel that women have too many rights with their body

I always go with the right to life,you know the little girls that are sucked apart, but then that just me.

 

[candycorn]

It is very likely that the next four years will see a President be able to appoint multiple justices to the high court.

If you value a woman's right to make her own reproductive choices, a court that will favor ordinary Americans and not big businesses as the Roberts court did in Citizens United, that will uphold rights to privacy and limits on Big Brother...you should consider voting for President Obama.

Governor Romney wants to overturn the Roe decision and will likely be able to accomplish that since two of the three justices, Ginsburg and Kennedy, are currently thought to be votes to preserve a woman's right to choose.

Just some food for thought.

Here's a radical idea, why not let the American people vote on and pass laws pertaining to abortion?

Why is it that every other "right" is protected by the constitution and law passed by elected representatives, but abortion is special. We can never be allowed to voice our opinions on the subject, we merely have to accept what a few judges said about it decades ago.

While we're at it, we can vote to take away property as well. Hey, it worked in Germany.

 

[chikenwing]

I never have been able to figure out the connection between "privacy" and "infanticide".

Only a liberal can justify, promote, and gleefully boast about this "connection".

And I've never been able to figure out how 4 cells = 1 baby.

Only a "conservative" gleefully proclaims rights for cells over the rights of women.

Soooo its self denial time once again,how many cells do you think a person has at 10 weeks,or 18 weeks?

It always turns out to be a real person,never a gold fish or a small cuddly puppy

 

[candycorn]

It isn't as if those stakes aren't known, still, its interesting what you all choose to ignore as inconsequential. I think this thread needs to be bumped all day, and thanks for doing your part.

Well thank you. So many threads have no place on the Political forum. At the very least, this belongs here. Secondly and more importantly, spelling out the stakes of an election only helps the process--for both sides--and I would think that is something we could all get behind.

It is, however, instructional if you want to talk about the partisanship of it; if Republicans are in favor of unrestricted spending on campaigns, overturning Roe v. Wade, a firm selling your private data to Google or Exxon, etc.... just come out and say so. There seems to be a lot of shame on the right which I do not understand.

I understand it perfectly, and it isn't shame, as they have no shame, its subterfuge.

Nah, what I mean is that I'm fully in favor of re-electing President Obama merely on the basis of his social issue stances are more in congress with my own. I feel that both parties are totally neaderthalic (sp?) when it comes to fiscal matters. We're dealing with trillions of dollars. I would be surprised if a great many of these people we elect could perform long division much less sit there and responsibly allocate millions of dollars much less billions or trillions. As I'm fond of saying, we are at once (or at least were at one time) subsidizing tobacco growers while fighting smoking with the same federal budget. Both parties do this sort of thing.

But getting back to the point of the thread; if you're a supporter of Governor Romney and what he stands for, simply stand up and say it. Some on this thread have but more often than not, it's been an attack on the thread itself...basically they are trying to "shoosh" me...

If they started this thread, I'd be saying, "Yeah, that's right. If you want 3 more judges who listen to informed debate, vote for Obama. If you want ideologues who will overturn a woman's right to reproductive choice, vote for the Governor." Neither side is especially wrong if they are true to their values is my point.

 

[DontBeStupid]

I never have been able to figure out the connection between "privacy" and "infanticide".

Only a liberal can justify, promote, and gleefully boast about this "connection".

And I've never been able to figure out how 4 cells = 1 baby.

Only a "conservative" gleefully proclaims rights for cells over the rights of women.

Soooo its self denial time once again,how many cells do you think a person has at 10 weeks,or 18 weeks?

It always turns out to be a real person,never a gold fish or a small cuddly puppy

Wow! Someone failed Biology 101!

Never heard of twinning? Or miscarriages?

Seriously ... wow.

 

[theHawk]

It is very likely that the next four years will see a President be able to appoint multiple justices to the high court.

If you value a woman's right to make her own reproductive choices, a court that will favor ordinary Americans and not big businesses as the Roberts court did in Citizens United, that will uphold rights to privacy and limits on Big Brother...you should consider voting for President Obama.

Governor Romney wants to overturn the Roe decision and will likely be able to accomplish that since two of the three justices, Ginsburg and Kennedy, are currently thought to be votes to preserve a woman's right to choose.

Just some food for thought.

Here's a radical idea, why not let the American people vote on and pass laws pertaining to abortion?

Why is it that every other "right" is protected by the constitution and law passed by elected representatives, but abortion is special. We can never be allowed to voice our opinions on the subject, we merely have to accept what a few judges said about it decades ago.

While we're at it, we can vote to take away property as well. Hey, it worked in Germany.

Oh good response! When the outcome of voters isn't what I want lets just make the arguement that democracy doesn't work and bring up Germany.

 

[Vel]

It is very likely that the next four years will see a President be able to appoint multiple justices to the high court.

If you value a woman's right to make her own reproductive choices, a court that will favor ordinary Americans and not big businesses as the Roberts court did in Citizens United, that will uphold rights to privacy and limits on Big Brother...you should consider voting for President Obama.

Governor Romney wants to overturn the Roe decision and will likely be able to accomplish that since two of the three justices, Ginsburg and Kennedy, are currently thought to be votes to preserve a woman's right to choose.

Just some food for thought.

Don't you already have a thread on this? Spamming the board is frowned upon .

 

[candycorn]

Here's a radical idea, why not let the American people vote on and pass laws pertaining to abortion?

Why is it that every other "right" is protected by the constitution and law passed by elected representatives, but abortion is special. We can never be allowed to voice our opinions on the subject, we merely have to accept what a few judges said about it decades ago.

While we're at it, we can vote to take away property as well. Hey, it worked in Germany.

Oh good response! When the outcome of voters isn't what I want lets just make the arguement that democracy doesn't work and bring up Germany.

Thanks. I think it got the message across.

Well, the voters haven't voted. The gist was that your rights or my rights shouldn't be held up in a popularity contest.

 

[candycorn]

It is very likely that the next four years will see a President be able to appoint multiple justices to the high court.

If you value a woman's right to make her own reproductive choices, a court that will favor ordinary Americans and not big businesses as the Roberts court did in Citizens United, that will uphold rights to privacy and limits on Big Brother...you should consider voting for President Obama.

Governor Romney wants to overturn the Roe decision and will likely be able to accomplish that since two of the three justices, Ginsburg and Kennedy, are currently thought to be votes to preserve a woman's right to choose.

Just some food for thought.

Don't you already have a thread on this? Spamming the board is frowned upon .

No it was about a woman's reproductive rights.

I wanted this thread to be about Citizens United and privacy issues but we did start to cover the same ground.

 

[GuyPinestra]

Take a good, long look at what your "Right to Choose" produces...

Yep, there's something to really be proud of, huh??

 

[candycorn]

Those are powerful images, no doubt.

 

[salem.hills]

Idk I'd say your right to use abortion as birth control is safe it's a disgustingly low priority for 90% of us I imagine. The obamabot court if he wins with almost certainly limit movement go e health czar power over what goes on your stomach. Stuff like that slowly eroding our liberties further.

 

[Stephanie]

It is very likely that the next four years will see a President be able to appoint multiple justices to the high court.

If you value a woman's right to make her own reproductive choices, a court that will favor ordinary Americans and not big businesses as the Roberts court did in Citizens United, that will uphold rights to privacy and limits on Big Brother...you should consider voting for President Obama.

Governor Romney wants to overturn the Roe decision and will likely be able to accomplish that since two of the three justices, Ginsburg and Kennedy, are currently thought to be votes to preserve a woman's right to choose.

Just some food for thought.

So how does this work? You start a thread and it fails, so you wait a few more days and start the exact same thread expecting a different result?

seems that way

 

[candycorn]

Idk I'd say your right to use abortion as birth control is safe it's a disgustingly low priority for 90% of us I imagine. The obamabot court if he wins with almost certainly limit movement go e health czar power over what goes on your stomach. Stuff like that slowly eroding our liberties further.

Well, again, abortion is just one of the measures that the court could hear.

I heard yesterday that the Koch Brothers will spend more themselves than John McCain spent in 08. The Citizens United case--heard by the court--opened those floodgates.

Your expectation of privacy is up for grabs as well. Does the "do not call" list violate a telemarketer's right to free speech? Can I broadcast your SSN over the airwaves? Should you have to tell the school that your kid will not be getting the smallpox vaccine?

The man who is president for the next 4 years will, perhaps, have the opportunity to shape the court for a generation. Like it or not, those 9 justices will have a big say in the type of world your kids and my nieces grow up in.

Those are the stakes. Abortion is important but it's not the only topic; hence this second thread.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Obama is the worst choice one could make if they want reasonable, well thought out Judges on the High Court. Just look who he already put there.

like roberts?

Worse