Journal the_mad_poster's Journal: Meet Alito 21
A man who believes the only thing lower in the pecking order than a dirty liberal is a dirty whore out of her burkha.
There's nothing that warms the cockles of my heart quite like a guy who argued that a woman who gets raped, deceived (e.g. - tampering with birth control), or beaten by her husband can't get an abortion unless she... asks her husband if it's okay.
Nice. Way to go righties. You're real outstanding examples of the human species. Thanks for spreading the love.
I blame Sandra Day O'Connor. (Score:2)
But thats what you told me 4 years ago! What if a Dem doesn't get elected next time?
Well, then we'll invent some kind of new medical technology to keep you alive until they do get elected!!
Re:I blame Sandra Day O'Connor. (Score:1)
Re:I blame Sandra Day O'Connor. (Score:1)
And get over 2000 already. They won it fair and square. Besides, that was also the DNC's fault for going with another uncharismatic dumbass like Al Gore. But don't blame me, I voted for Bill Bradley.
And if we (Dems) nominate another uncharismatic dumbass or that bitch Hillary instead of Howard Dean, Bill Bradley, hell even John Edwards would be OK, we'll lose again. And we'll deserve
Take THAT, future generations (Score:2)
Re:Take THAT, future generations (Score:1)
Re:Take THAT, future generations (Score:2)
Re:Take THAT, future generations (Score:2)
Re:Take THAT, future generations (Score:2)
Re:Take THAT, future generations (Score:1)
Re:Take THAT, future generations (Score:2)
1. If the GOP still controls Congress, there will be Federal legislation to attempt to outlaw abortions. (if it can actually pass is another question entirely)
2. If the Democrats control Congress, there will be Federal legislation to keep the law as it currently stands.
3. Regardless of what Congress does many states will pass laws to keep things as they are now, while many other states outlaw abortion to one degree or another.
4. All of these laws will be challenged in cou
Re:Take THAT, future generations (Score:2)
The relevant questions are:
1. Will Kennedy move closer to Souter-Bryer-Ginsberg-Stevens in his voting/legal philosiphy? (essentially taking over the O'Connor role)
2. Where will Roberts voting/actual decisions fall in the ideological spectrum of the court?
Re:Take THAT, future generations (Score:2)
I don't like it one little bit. The thing that gets me is that when Clinton chose a nominee, there were dozens of well qualified possible choices. When Bush chose a nominee, there were about a handful.
Re:Take THAT, future generations (Score:2)
Well actually depending on your criterea there are plenty of potential nominees for Bush to choose from. It isn't like there aren't a fair number of conservative/libertarian judges, legal scholars, lawyers, current and former members of Congress and the like.
Heck just look at some of the alternatives to Meirs
Luttig (Score:2)
On the flipside, it also would have been better if he had picked a full blown 'Constitution in Exile' type who wants to overturn almost every Federal law and Supreme Court decision since 1898 since many moderate Republicans might have a problem voting for a completely rabid Federalist Society follower.
Right. (Score:2)
Would it be bad for the country for the supremes to overturn Roe v Wade? Damn straight it would. Would it be bad for the country to have a nominee who's a crony of a criminal president? Much much worse. And don't give me that "hold one 4 more years" shit either. She's OLD. She wants time with her family and husband before one or both of them kick it. Damn if y
Re:Right. (Score:1)
Quit playing this "oh we have to be fair" bullshit. The guy is a mysognistic fuck and that's why he appeals to that subset of the conservatives that still gets all bleary eyed when it thinks about the "good old days" where you could just pop a bitch in the left eye to make he
Re:Slippery Slope Guy. (Score:1)
100% of the potential health problems are on the woman.
100% of the medical decisions are hers to make.
All the guy does is spurt for 2 seconds, roll over, and go to sleep. To argue that he should have any legally enforced say after that is idiotic emotional nonsense. Abortion is a medical procedure, the woman is the only one involved medically. Simple as that.
In a trusted, loving relationship, they'll balance it out on
Re:Slippery Slope Guy. (Score:2)
Only if one, against science and common sense, does not define a fetus as a member of homo sapiens. To say that an abortion does not "involve" a fetus is like saying the standard birth process does not "involve" a fetus. The only difference is, after a natural birth you a human child that is alive and and after an abortion you have a human child that is not.
Re:Slippery Slope Guy. (Score:2)
Not really. It can just as easliy be defined as a parasite, feeding off the host body, depriving it of nutrients, health, and well-being. In that sense, abortion can be looked at in the same vein as other invasive surgical procedure to remove diseased or infected tissue, such as masectomies, de-worming, or draining an abcess.
As far as I'm concerned, a fetus is a parasite and not a living human being until it
Re:Slippery Slope Guy. (Score:2)
Ok, but - it still is a creature, and it still is a human by virture of membership of homo sapeins. No matter how you choose to look at it, you cannot change these fundamental, sci