Notice New Justice to be announced by 7/9/18

[MarAzul]

Probably will be through in the Senate before the end of summer.
If the person follows the Constitution, what is the complaint?

Roe v Wade?

Well look how much better off we would be.
No longer would we be wasting time hearing every candidates position on this subject every Federal election.
Dang! I do not even care to know for each candidate, it is a personal matter.

If it were up to each state as it should be, or it is settled with amendment to the Constitution, that's that.
There is not a federal law generally prohibiting abortion, Nor should there be

Either way, no sense in debating this issue over and over again, because of a bogus court ruling, like the past 40 years. Worse yet, abortion is simply a device for politicians to use in pandering to the groups in the electorate. Perhaps it works in a state or two, but it is ridiculous at the federal level.

It could become a non issue by completing the course as it should have years ago.

 

[MarAzul]

When the time comes to vote on the issue here in Oregon, I think I will take my instruction from the women in my family. Vote according to the wisdom they provide.

 

[jlprk]

Wheeaa! It's payback time! Won't let a nomination come to a vote in a president's last 12 months? Now, let's try delaying it for the next 2 1/2 years! Pissed-off Democratic senators will have a lot of fun causing headaches on this one.

 

[theprunetang]

When the time comes to vote on the issue here in Oregon, I think I will take my instruction from the women in my family. Vote according to the wisdom they provide.

This is the most agreeable thing I can remember you posting.

 

[MarAzul]

This is the most agreeable thing I can remember you posting.

Really!
Here I thought you liked the ones about the whales.

 

[theprunetang]

Really!
Here I thought you liked the ones about the whales.

Those too. I just don't usually get the warm and fuzzy feelings from your politically slanted posts, and vice versa for me, I'm sure. Just wanted to give you a digital high five

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

Wheeaa! It's payback time! Won't let a nomination come to a vote in a president's last 12 months? Now, let's try delaying it for the next 2 1/2 years! Pissed-off Democratic senators will have a lot of fun causing headaches on this one.

Yeah, but democrats are cucks. Good luck trying to stop it.

 

[DaLincolnJones]

Probably will be through in the Senate before the end of summer.
If the person follows the Constitution, what is the complaint?

Roe v Wade?

Well look how much better off we would be.
No longer would we be wasting time hearing every candidates position on this subject every Federal election.
Dang! I do not even care to know for each candidate, it is a personal matter.

If it were up to each state as it should be, or it is settled with amendment to the Constitution, that's that.
There is not a federal law generally prohibiting abortion, Nor should there be

Either way, no sense in debating this issue over and over again, because of a bogus court ruling, like the past 40 years. Worse yet, abortion is simply a device for politicians to use in pandering to the groups in the electorate. Perhaps it works in a state or two, but it is ridiculous at the federal level.

It could become a non issue by completing the course as it should have years ago.

Nice post.

I was thinking that it is funny that right out of the box, the Dems are pointing at the most controversial issues that they can and railing how it is the end of the world. I honestly do not believe that this is the most important issue to be addressed. I do not think that there is yet the political will to take on this while there are so many basic governmental issues to be corrected. One that comes to mind is addressing rulings by lower courts that inhibit executive power to intact legal, often enacted policies, based upon extreme political leanings.

So much of the desires of this administrations desires are tied up in the lower courts, and it is just now that SCOTUS is able to rule to overturn bad political based rulings. Of course, the Dems want find a way to continue strategy used to this point, but for anyone that would not prefer to make a precedence of enabling a sitting president, regardless of party, from choosing to bring before congress those he or she would like to see be promoted to the Supreme Court, I would caution this thinking.

 

[MarAzul]

promoted to the Supreme Court

I am curious to see what sort of shenanigans they have in mind. I can see nothing legal they can do. It would seem the Constitutional path is clear.
I suppose they can use every parliamentary delay possible, but it would not change the inevitable. I think the days of being able to Bork a Bork are over.

 

[DaLincolnJones]

I am curious to see what sort of shenanigans they have in mind. I can see nothing legal they can do. It would seem the Constitutional path is clear.
I suppose they can use every parliamentary delay possible, but it would not change the inevitable. I think the days of being able to Bork a Bork are over.

Yeah, I tend to agree. The concern is that while it is logical to look at how things usually are ran, and the path intended, we on middle and the right, tend to take the process for granted.

The left is very good at being able to bang pots and pans, get naked and yell from their nasty ass vajayjays and screaming to the rafters with the blessing of the media. It is sad to say that this behavior has evolved beyond a political belief, to what is now super cool and groovy to the kids. These are the uninformed dunderheads that we will leave this country to in a few short years.

I pity my grand children.

 

[CupWizier]

Yeah, I tend to agree. The concern is that while it is logical to look at how things usually are ran, and the path intended, we on middle and the right, tend to take the process for granted.

The left is very good at being able to bang pots and pans, get naked and yell from their nasty ass vajayjays and screaming to the rafters with the blessing of the media. It is sad to say that this behavior has evolved beyond a political belief, to what is now super cool and groovy to the kids. These are the uninformed dunderheads that we will leave this country to in a few short years.

I pity my grand children.

I pity them as well

 

[MarAzul]

Yeah, I tend to agree. The concern is that while it is logical to look at how things usually are ran, and the path intended, we on middle and the right, tend to take the process for granted.

The left is very good at being able to bang pots and pans, get naked and yell from their nasty ass vajayjays and screaming to the rafters with the blessing of the media. It is sad to say that this behavior has evolved beyond a political belief, to what is now super cool and groovy to the kids. These are the uninformed dunderheads that we will leave this country to in a few short years.

I pity my grand children.

Man I hear you! The devolution of the rule of law under the Constitution during my life time has been appalling. It seems we maybe have approached under Obama, now hardening under Trump as close to Civil conflict, as in the days of Lincoln. I am beginning to think there is a therapeutic value in cleansing the incivility from time to time. Perhaps we are overdue as we are beyond any appearance of civility, working on defined rule of law only now.

I don't think we should leave this to the Grand kid, nor send the young ones to battle. Perhaps it is on the ones old enough to remember better days to do one last fight.

 

[MarAzul]

I pity them as well

Interesting how you chipped in with your pity. Hate disguised as pity is hard to sell.

 

[DaLincolnJones]

Man I hear you! The devolution of the rule of law under the Constitution during my life time has been appalling. It seems we maybe have approached under Obama, now hardening under Trump as close to Civil conflict, as in the days of Lincoln. I am beginning to think there is a therapeutic value in cleansing the incivility from time to time. Perhaps we are overdue as we are beyond any appearance of civility, working on defined rule of law only now.

I don't think we should leave this to the Grand kid, nor send the young ones to battle. Perhaps it is on the ones old enough to remember better days to do one last fight.

I understand your point.

When those like Michael Moore make a call for his loyalists to "Put their bodies on the line", and media morons to parrot such talk, one has to wonder if they even have an idea of what they are talking about.
Also funny..those with zero military experience are the ones who yell the loudest.

For the most part, I have to have faith that people just want to live a good life. At some point, all of the silly rhetoric has to become tiresome for those who currently are spoon fed, and they get on with being content in living in one of the best countries in the world.

If not, and the continue with their desire to become a third world country, full of daily strife, and on the brink of civil war, well my friend, they will be in for a rude awakening.

 

[DaLincolnJones]

Interesting how you chipped in with your pity. Hate disguised as pity is hard to sell.

meh..take it for what it is. I would rather not see this thread take the same course as most and become another "I hate Trump" diatribe.

 

[barfo]

meh..take it for what it is. I would rather not see this thread take the same course as most and become another "I hate Trump" diatribe.

Then maybe stop delivering the softball over the plate?

Also funny..those with zero military experience are the ones who yell the loudest.

barfo

 

[DaLincolnJones]

Then maybe stop delivering the softball over the plate?

barfo

Then maybe stop delivering the softball over the plate?

Maybe allow honest discourse be just that, and not look for reasons to troll?

 

[MarAzul]

meh..take it for what it is. I would rather not see this thread take the same course as most and become another "I hate Trump" diatribe.

Right! 7/09/18, it will be back on track.
@barfo can get specific.

 

[CupWizier]

Interesting how you chipped in with your pity. Hate disguised as pity is hard to sell.

That was definitely a dumb response. Try again.

 

[Stevenson]

Clearly no one on this thread has had a unwanted, or worse, pregnancy. Being upset you have to hear candidates talk about the issue is not a real problem.

 

[Stevenson]

There is not a federal law generally prohibiting abortion, Nor should there be.

A very, very flawed analysis.

No, there is no "federal law," there is something much deeper and stronger - a constitutional right to privacy, under which the right to make decisions about your own body, among other things, are considered fundamental. Other fundamental rights include the right to free speech and freedom of religion.

 

[bodyman5000 and 1]

A very, very flawed analysis.

No, there is no "federal law," there is something much deeper and stronger - a constitutional right to privacy, under which the right to make decisions about your own body, among other things, are considered fundamental. Other fundamental rights include the right to free speech and freedom of religion.

So wouldn't that mean you have the right to do your own abortion?

If corporations are people wouldn't you think unborn children could be considered people?

 

[barfo]

So wouldn't that mean you have the right to do your own abortion?

If corporations are people wouldn't you think unborn children could be considered people?

If corporations are people then Trump is a mass murderer.

barfo

 

[bodyman5000 and 1]

If corporations are people then Trump is a mass murderer.

barfo

Self defense

 

[MarAzul]

A very, very flawed analysis.

No, there is no "federal law," there is something much deeper and stronger - a constitutional right to privacy, under which the right to make decisions about your own body, among other things, are considered fundamental. Other fundamental rights include the right to free speech and freedom of religion.

Not sure what triggered your response. It seems unrelated to my statement, "There is not a federal law generally prohibiting abortion, Nor should there be".

 

[MarAzul]

Being upset you have to hear candidates talk about the issue is not a real problem.

Forty five years of the same drivel from hundreds of candidates is redundant as hell and pointless to boot. The issue was never solved, it was covered in bullshit but not buried.

 

[bodyman5000 and 1]

I sense a smartass comment here. Wonder if there was an emoji attached....hmmm

 

[MarAzul]

In thinking through the events of the past 45 years as to why the appointment of a SC justice has become so political, no single event seems to hold the answer. It has been 45 years since the Roe V Wade decision became the law. Even though this ruling really has no basis in law and lacks specific support in the Constitution, it did not begin the left right polarization of the appointments.
Justice Scalia, known to follow the original intent of the Constitution, was appointed 13 years later than the Roe v Wade ruling, received a 98 to 0 vote of approval in the Senate.

So clearly the the Democrats began altering their view of the court upholding the Constitution since then. I do not remember Democrats having a group view of ignoring the Constitution in favor of creating law by precedent even though it has been done a few time. Not really always a left right thing historically. But it is now. It seems to have begun in the last 25 years while I was not watching, as I missed it.

Anyone know what set the Democrats on this track?

 

[MARIS61]

Then maybe stop delivering the softball over the plate?

barfo

You seem oblivious to the fact that President Trump is a man working towards world peace, and has already been more successful at it than any President in our lifetimes.

 

[barfo]

You seem oblivious to the "alternative fact" that President Trump is a man working towards world peace, and has already been more successful at it than any President in our lifetimes.

FTFY.

barfo