Roe vs. Wade overturned

TBL said:
Even then, it's a large hurdle, more so than any other means. There's a reason it's not the go-to.
Click to expand...
Just pack the court. Gorsuch and Barrett’s seats should have gone to Obama and Biden, respectively. McConnell played dirty pool to get them. They don’t reflect what a majority of people want.

Time for Manchin and Collins to put up or shut up. Put 4 more justices on the court, and pass a national law making abortion a right. Then if that law gets challenged, the wing nut judges will be outnumbered.

The only way to get another amendment would be to completely end gerrymandering. We have too many guaranteed seats in many states. Make most seats competitive so that they more accurately reflect the will of the people. All the “swing state” or “swing district” nonsense isn’t democracy. It‘s a series of power plays by corrupt politicians who want to keep ”their” seats indefinitely.
 
SuperMatt said:
Just pack the court. Gorsuch and Barrett’s seats should have gone to Obama and Biden, respectively. McConnell played dirty pool to get them. They don’t reflect what a majority of people want.

Time for Manchin and Collins to put up or shut up. Put 4 more justices on the court, and pass a national law making abortion a right. Then if that law gets challenged, the wing nut judges will be outnumbered.
Click to expand...
Not going to happen. The Dems will first need to flip 2+ seats in the Senate this midterm. And keep control of the House. Currently Manchin and Sinema (at a minimum) will never end the filibuster and won't be part of a nuclear option. So that's a couple tall hurdles to leap.

Getting over those hurdles is a big ask. Then Dems have to worry about the GOP doing the same once they get back in control. What's to stop the GOP from adding more seats or taking away seats once they're back in control?

I see no appetite for getting DC to statehood. I see no appetite for Puerto Rico becoming a state. Voters will have to elect a congress that will push for that. In the past when Dems had a large enough majority in the Senate, it was with several Blue Dog/moderate/centrist Dems. They were not going to be a part of anything they thought was "radical" and for many voters, including enough Dem voters, court packing and DC statehood is radical.

Too many independent voters. Too many conservative/moderate Dem voters. And far too many voters that aren't interested in voting and/or staying current with their registration.

It can be done. But lots of work over simply talking and whining needed.
 
ronntaylor said:
Then Dems have to worry about the GOP doing the same once they get back in control. What's to stop the GOP from adding more seats or taking away seats once they're back in control?
Click to expand...

That is my concern if the filibuster is done away with. It is currently serving as a buffer to the whims of whichever party is in control.

And control changes.

Since Bill Clinton was inaugurated in 1993, 7 times has the President had a majority in both the House and Senate, (3D, 4R) and only one (Obama in 09 for a year) had 60 votes in the Senate. This is slighty less than half the time (7/16)

So without the filibuster, we could see the party in control pass one thing and then less than 2 years later, see the other party reverse it. People, businesses, local governments and foreign governments want more stability than that.

Just imagine if you would what the Republicans would pass without that buffer. Still want to do away with it? I don't.
 
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1540726655198576641/

(it’s a lengthy Twitter thread, so you should click through to read it)…

It’s not about saving babies’ lives. It never was; it was a manufactured way to generate outrage and energize “conservative” voters. And many of the voters are 1-issue voters. Anti-abortion voters are just one segment; gun lovers are another… They pander to these various single-issue voters. All the while, the real goal is protecting the ultra-rich.

But now the dog caught the car and it doesn’t know what to do. The professional “pro-life” organizers are trying to push it farther, but this will not be the usual motivator for the next elections. So the pool of useful single-issue voters shrinks slightly…

I hope the majority of people who wanted Roe to stay in place are upset enough to vote out the supporters of anti-abortion laws. But maybe they don’t care. I hope they just took it for granted, but will actually participate in Democracy this time now that their rights are being taken away by the Federalist Cabal.
 
Last edited:
Herdfan said:
Just imagine if you would what the Republicans would pass without that buffer. Still want to do away with it? I don't.
Click to expand...
Fuck the filibuster! "...imagine if you would what the Republicans would pass without that buffer" How about all the legislation that was thwarted or delayed by decades due to the filibuster in the hands of racists and extreme right-wing politicians? Most of that progressive legislation, but some of it moderate. The filibuster is a made up rule. Rules can and should be changed when it serves no purpose. The current wielding of the filibuster is a gutless choice. At least get on the got-damm floor and actually filibuster. A single senator has to simply say they'll filibuster and key pieces of legislation is not even brought forward for debate.

Get rid of that bullshit. Pass legislation. And voters will have to elect pols that will listen to them and pass/squash legislation that will benefit them.

If the Dems get over the 50-seat hump in the Senate (and that's counting those brave enough to go nuclear if necessary), maintain control of the House, then it's game time come January 2023. From Day #1 of the next congress the filibuster should be dead. If they want to start out slow and go nuclear on key legislation (Civil Rights and budget bills were proposed for the Nuclear Option), I'm fine with that. But my preferred choice is completely get rid of the filibuster and have Congress debate and either pass or shoot down legislation.
 
www.businessinsider.com

GOP privately worrying overturning Roe v. Wade could impact midterms: 'This is a losing issue for Republicans,' report says

GOP fears the Supreme Court's abortion ruling on Roe v. Wade might shift the focus from the economy and inflation ahead of the midterms elections, Politico reported.
www.businessinsider.com www.businessinsider.com


you-dont-say-nicholas-cage.gif
 
ronntaylor said:
Fuck the filibuster! "...imagine if you would what the Republicans would pass without that buffer" How about all the legislation that was thwarted or delayed by decades due to the filibuster in the hands of racists and extreme right-wing politicians? Most of that progressive legislation, but some of it moderate. The filibuster is a made up rule. Rules can and should be changed when it serves no purpose. The current wielding of the filibuster is a gutless choice. At least get on the got-damm floor and actually filibuster. A single senator has to simply say they'll filibuster and key pieces of legislation is not even brought forward for debate.

Get rid of that bullshit. Pass legislation. And voters will have to elect pols that will listen to them and pass/squash legislation that will benefit them.

If the Dems get over the 50-seat hump in the Senate (and that's counting those brave enough to go nuclear if necessary), maintain control of the House, then it's game time come January 2023. From Day #1 of the next congress the filibuster should be dead. If they want to start out slow and go nuclear on key legislation (Civil Rights and budget bills were proposed for the Nuclear Option), I'm fine with that. But my preferred choice is completely get rid of the filibuster and have Congress debate and either pass or shoot down legislation.
Click to expand...
The filibuster isn’t in the constitution. And it favors the minority party, so that could be either party. BUT it also favors a party that doesn’t want to get anything done: the GOP is the culprit there.

Of course the Republicans want to keep the filibuster. They run on a platform of complaining about everything “Washington” does. It’s far less beneficial to the Democrats. They should take it out back and put it out of its misery.

Until then, one guy who earned fewer votes than the mayor of Baltimore can shut down the entire American legislative process. What a joke.
 
Last edited:
I was perusing a military message board… so most folks are pretty young, but fairly conservative.

Almost everybody is upset at this decision. A lot of the posts are about figuring out what they can do if/when they get assigned to a state without abortion rights. Will the DoD allow them to turn it down? Will they offer services on-post? I believe Congress has laws against any federal funding of abortions… so paying a military doctor to perform one is probably out of the question.

This is a perfect example of why “it should be up to the states” is nonsense. In addition to people who cannot afford to leave their state and travel 1000 miles for an abortion, military members get sent to a new post every 2-3 years.

Seeing so many otherwise conservative people fuming over this, I think this is going to backfire on the Republicans big-time. If inflation and/or gas prices stay high, maybe it won’t be enough. But I really hope it is. I’d love to see a blue wave as a response, thereby showing the Republicans what a losing issue this is. Even Trump knows it’s a loser…but of course he picked crazy justices to appease the evangelical base so they’d overlook his indiscretions.
 
Last edited:
Another thing I learned today. It’s not the law, but many hospitals have policies requiring a husband’s permission if a woman wants to get her tubes tied. None of them require the same for a vasectomy. And it’s most prevalent in the same areas that have now banned abortion. But sure, the abortion ban is all about saving fetuses, and has NOTHING to do with taking away women’s reproductive rights…. MY ASS.

www.distractify.com

Woman's OBGYN Told Her She Needed Her Husband's Permission to Get Her Tubes Tied...in 2020

They wouldn't sign off on the procedure without permission from her husband, as if he owns her or something.
www.distractify.com www.distractify.com

In some states, there are laws on the books that aren’t observed due to lower court rulings. The issue has never come all the way to the Supreme Court. Conceivably, this court COULD take such a case.

WHAT THE F!@# is wrong with this country?
 
ronntaylor said:
Bingo!! That's why I don't worry about its demise. Kill the fucker and get to work.
Click to expand...
I remember “repeal and replace” they promised for YEARS for which they only needed 50 votes since it was part of budget reconciliation… and they couldn’t even pass THAT! I’m not worried about what they will do if the filibuster goes away. The only thing they care about is taking over the judicial branch and they already nuked the filibuster for that x3.
 
SuperMatt said:
I remember “repeal and replace” they promised for YEARS for which they only needed 50 votes since it was part of budget reconciliation… and they couldn’t even pass THAT!
Click to expand...

The Democrats did an amazing crochet job on the ACA. Tan-suit-guy insisted that it be revenue neutral, so just about anything the Rs tried to do to kill it cost the government money. The Rs/Ts complained that the bill was something like 700 pages long, and, from their perspective, that was a legitimate complaint. It was so intricate that they could not just grab onto it and repeal it without breaking other stuff.

This is the way, when you have the opportunity, to fight loud morons: design things that are so elaborate that they cannot easily find what they are trying to burn down or cannot set it on fire without choking on the smoke.
 
SuperMatt said:
The filibuster isn’t in the constitution. And it favors the minority party, so that could be either party. BUT it also favors a party that doesn’t want to get anything done: the GOP is the culprit there.

Of course the Republicans want to keep the filibuster. They run on a platform of complaining about everything “Washington” does. It’s far less beneficial to the Democrats. They should take it out back and put it out of its misery.

Until then, one guy who earned fewer votes than the mayor of Baltimore can shut down the entire American legislative process. What a joke.
Click to expand...

The mid terms might be a test run on this. So we’ll see, but I imagine the GOP would use the opportunity to pass unpopular legislation but then get their ass booted out of office as a result. Right now they’re high off their own supply but that level of addiction doesn’t end well.
 
Chew Toy McCoy said:
The mid terms might be a test run on this. So we’ll see, but I imagine the GOP would use the opportunity to pass unpopular legislation but then get their ass booted out of office as a result. Right now they’re high off their own supply but that level of addiction doesn’t end well.
Click to expand...
Like I said before: history shows they can‘t pass anything. The fears of the filibuster are unfounded and benefit the Republicans.

Many other countries have parliamentary systems with a simple majority needed. Many of them have far better social safety net systems and reasonable gun laws than we do. Our system benefits the wealthy minority. Even without the filibuster it does, but the filibuster makes it even worse. Will it ever go away? I don’t know. A lot of Senators LOVE that they can shut everything down single-handedly whenever they feel the need to get some attention.
 
Back
Top