• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Pro Life / Pro Choice Debate

Highland Deac said:
Can't disagree. If this does turn out to be the Court's decision (and there's no reason to think it won't be), I can't wait to see Chuck Schumer's "strongly-worded" (not) speech on the Senate floor where he castigates "my good friend Mitch McConnell" and other Republicans for supporting this, shakes his head sadly, and then does nothing that will amount to anything. But he lives in a nice house and has done well for himself in DC, so you go, Chuck!
Click to expand...

what do you suggest he does without 50 votes to override the filibuster?
 
ChrisL68 said:
what do you suggest he does without 50 votes to override the filibuster?
Click to expand...

Of course, one reason they only have 50 votes is lack of action on these issues in the past.
 
I can't wait to get home so I can tell my wife to turn off the fuckin' MSNBC.
 
ChrisL68 said:
what do you suggest he does without 50 votes to override the filibuster?
Click to expand...

I'm well aware of the 50-vote problem, I'm talking about the broader focus of his career and his whole approach to politics, which is outdated. IMO, the guy is mentally still stuck in the 80s and 90s when there were still Republicans you could cut deals with. He's not a fighter or even a strong leader, he's a compromiser and is temperamentally unsuited to this time in American politics.
 
BeachBumDeac said:
LOL that you lawyers think these conservative justices have any shame and care about propriety whatsoever. Alito prob leaked it himself to pressure the other justices to stay on his side.
Click to expand...

It has to be almost 90% someone on the conservative side of the court aligned with Alito or Thomas. Maybe the justices directly or a clerk, but the timing doesn't really make sense from the liberal side. If a liberal clerk wanted to leak it, why not do it back in Jan/Feb when the draft was first produced. In terms of election influence, it would have a bigger impact closer to the mid-terms than now.

The leak isn't going to push one of the five to flip against it because they'd clearly just be influenced by the public perception and media firestorm. My guess is Roberts was circulating a moderate opinion trying to get 1 to flip to keep Roe but allow for a 15 week line like the Mississippi law. Someone in the Alito/Thomas camp did this to lock in the 5 votes for the hardcore opinion gutting it completely and setting the stage for a slow roll-back of any privacy/substantive due process case conservative don't like.
 
Highland Deac said:
I'm well aware of the 50-vote problem, I'm talking about the broader focus of his career and his whole approach to politics, which is outdated. IMO, the guy is mentally still stuck in the 80s and 90s when there were still Republicans you could cut deals with. He's not a fighter or even a strong leader, he's a compromiser and is temperamentally unsuited to this time in American politics.
Click to expand...

Exactly. And that goes for several dozen of them who aren't much better than Susan Collins with respect to being "concerned." It's especially frustration because the vast majority of Democrats under 50 saw this coming but the party is run by 70 and 80 something stuck in some glorified past even though they got run over by Newt Gingrich and that ilk when they were getting started.

dcnelso said:
It has to be almost 90% someone on the conservative side of the court aligned with Alito or Thomas. Maybe the justices directly or a clerk, but the timing doesn't really make sense from the liberal side. If a liberal clerk wanted to leak it, why not do it back in Jan/Feb when the draft was first produced. In terms of election influence, it would have a bigger impact closer to the mid-terms than now.

The leak isn't going to push one of the five to flip against it because they'd clearly just be influenced by the public perception and media firestorm. My guess is Roberts was circulating a moderate opinion trying to get 1 to flip to keep Roe but allow for a 15 week line like the Mississippi law. Someone in the Alito/Thomas camp did this to lock in the 5 votes for the hardcore opinion gutting it completely and setting the stage for a slow roll-back of any privacy/substantive due process case conservative don't like.
Click to expand...

Yes. This makes perfect sense.
 
I have nearly zero interest in the leaker-I mean, its a historical curiosity comparitively speaking. I'd get the obsession if someone had leaked the appellate court decision on the Pine Tar game to piss off Yankee fans, but Roe v Wade is a bit more consequential.
 
Last edited:
deactherunner said:
I have nearly zero interest in the leaker-I mean, its a historical curiosity comparitively speaking. I'd get the obsession if someone had leaked the appellate court decision on the Pine Tar game to piss off Yankee fans, but Roe v Wade is a bit more consequential.
Click to expand...

I’m not sure why it matters? What is the benefit of this stuff being secretive anyway? It’s not like the court isn’t stuffed with a bunch of paid for partisan hacks anyway. Does anyone believe that these folks are going to carefully reason with their decisions on some legal or ethical basis? That ship sailed long ago.
 
Deacfreak07 said:
I’m not sure why it matters? What is the benefit of this stuff being secretive anyway? It’s not like the court isn’t stuffed with a bunch of paid for partisan hacks anyway. Does anyone believe that these folks are going to carefully reason with their decisions on some legal or ethical basis? That ship sailed long ago.
Click to expand...

Exactly. These are simply opinions with some vague legal pretext. Opinions.
 
Americans may say they are against overturning Roe but we collectively care far more about accumulating and safeguarding individual wealth than the basics rights and liberties of women and other minorities. And that’s why back alley abortions are on their way back, so that Liberals and conservatives can keep their taxes low and portfolios high.

Hopefully that extra cash you didn’t have to give to help the underprivileged is still around when your teenage daughter gets raped and becomes a mother. Babies are expensive.
 
 
BillBrasky said:
Americans may say they are against overturning Roe but we collectively care far more about accumulating and safeguarding individual wealth than the basics rights and liberties of women and other minorities. And that’s why back alley abortions are on their way back, so that Liberals and conservatives can keep their taxes low and portfolios high.

Hopefully that extra cash you didn’t have to give to help the underprivileged is still around when your teenage daughter gets raped and becomes a mother. Babies are expensive.
Click to expand...

driving to new jersey isn't that expensive though.
 
deactherunner said:
I have nearly zero interest in the leaker-I mean, its a historical curiosity comparitively speaking. I'd get the obsession if someone had leaked the appellate court decision on the Pine Tar game to piss off Yankee fans, but Roe v Wade is a bit more consequential.
Click to expand...

IMO, this whole "outrage" over who leaked the story is nothing more than a GOP and right-wing media attempt to deflect from the real story, which is the Court's decision in this case. The more people get worked up over who leaked the story, the less time conservatives have to spend defending this horrific decision, which puts not only abortion but also gay marriage and gay rights in the crosshairs. And who knows what else they'll go after when they're done with those.
 
BillBrasky said:
Hopefully that extra cash you didn’t have to give to help the underprivileged is still around when your teenage daughter gets raped and becomes a mother. Babies are expensive.
Click to expand...

Silly Brasky. If abortion were 100% illegal in America, it still wouldn’t affect the wealthy.
 
Yeah I don’t give one fuck about the leak. Fuck your norms, this court clearly doesn’t give a shit about precedent. It’s the 21st Century and the justices aren’t these mythical beings deliberating on high. Texts of bills are made available in advance, why not SCOTUS rulings?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top