Harriet Miers SCJ

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
61

There may not be a shitstorm, but there will be back alley abortions with coat hangers and the resultant issues that derive from it.

The US might as well head straight back to the stone ages with the way it is going. Totalitarian government based on religious principles. What a joke!

War on drugs. War on crime. War on porn. War on abortion. War on steroids. War on liberalism. War on terrorism. War on rights. Git yer war on…

I think the fact we have so many “wars” really shows a critical lack of flexible thinking. Wars are not good things, they are supposed to be last measures due to how destructive they are to all involved.

Ah well. Better your country than mine. We’ll watch all this and see what NOT do in our own country. Have a blast.

62

Rainjack,

You wouldn’t admit cronyism or allow anyone to criticise the administration if your life depended on it.

Why do you even bother posting?

Putting personal friends into positions of influence is pretty much the definition of cronyism, whether or not she is actually qualified and confirmed.

Your rabid cheerleading stance does little to foster any credibility for your viewpoint.

All that said, she’ll probably get in, and she’ll probably do the job that she and the president discussed before he offered her the position. What world doesn’t work that way?

63

[quote]jackzepplin wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
I don’t think it is wise for Bush to base his choosing of her off the fact that she is anti-abortion. If Roe v. Wade is overturned, it will cause a shitstorm… I think there is some other reason, though I can’t figure it out yet. And I don’t think it is nepotism either, I don’t think that is ole’ W’s style, at least not for the Supreme Court. Even he isn’t that stupid. So yet I wonder…why her?

Shitstorm? Nah. MOST people don’t have the capacity to do anything but bitch. MOST people are pacifists and won’t do a damn thing. It will be water-cooler chatter and major headlines until something else BIG happens.[/quote]

Vroom is right…we are heading straight backward. And there will be a shitstorm. I think you seriously underestimate the vehemence that pro-choice people have. And the strength that most women have, and fierceness that they will oppose this. Things have happened before, grassroots movements pulled together to stop things. It could happen again, especially because there are already pro-choice organizations out there.

As for whoever said about the millions of babies being killed, I understand your point. But Bush is a politician. He is not a Christian first, he’s not a Texan first. He’s a politician. Therefore, I still don’t think he will do something so drastic. Not that I think it will happen, but I could see some rights being eroded slowly, like partial birth abortion (which I really don’t favor anyway).

However, if this woman is indeed a SuperChristian, than shoot me right fucking now. Cause the last thing we need is one of those lamebrained bastards making laws for the rest of us heathens.

64

[quote]vroom wrote:
There may not be a shitstorm, but there will be back alley abortions with coat hangers and the resultant issues that derive from it.

The US might as well head straight back to the stone ages with the way it is going. Totalitarian government based on religious principles. What a joke!

War on drugs. War on crime. War on porn. War on abortion. War on steroids. War on liberalism. War on terrorism. War on rights. Git yer war on…

I think the fact we have so many “wars” really shows a critical lack of flexible thinking. Wars are not good things, they are supposed to be last measures due to how destructive they are to all involved.

Ah well. Better your country than mine. We’ll watch all this and see what NOT do in our own country. Have a blast.[/quote]

Lack of flexible thinking? In our administration? Vroom, surely you must be joking…

65

[quote] vroom wrote:
Rainjack,

You wouldn’t admit cronyism or allow anyone to criticise the administration if your life depended on it.[/quote]

Here’s the definition of cronyism from dictionary.com for those idiots such as yourself that feel the need to opine on a subject that is obviously over their head:
Favoritism shown to old friends without regard for their qualifications, as in political appointments to office

Do you see the pretty boldface type? Can you read it? Now those of you making the charge of cronyism have to prove that she is unqualified to make the charge stick. I wonder how we can prove whether she is qualified or not? Oh…I know…how about the confirmation hearings? How about 101, or so elected officials voting on whether she is qualified to sit on the bench or not?

Until you can prove both parts ofd the equation - shut the fuck up about it…'kay?

I think that question really should be directed to you. What the fuck have you brought to any debate in the last 2 weeks? Whining and bitching about me doesn’t count.

Read the definition from above - It proves this statement of yours to be utter fucking canadian bullshit.

So let me get this straight…the damn ambassador for being “open minded” is telling me to shut up while I am defending a USSC nominee by saying that her qualifications, or lack thereof, will come to light during the confirmation process. Google hypocrit, vroom - I’d bet there is a picture of you on the first page.

Well - There are at least 2 justices on the bench right now that have done a 180 since being confirmed. That’s what I don’t get about all you cronyism whiners. Bush loses any power over Miers the day she puts on the robe. She could turn out to be another Ginburg for all anyone knows.

How many worlds have you lived in, vroom? In reality - I think there is only one world. But I could be wrong.

66

[quote]vroom wrote:
There may not be a shitstorm, but there will be back alley abortions with coat hangers and the resultant issues that derive from it.
[/quote]

That is the biggest load of horseshit propaganda I have ever heard. Please quit calling me a cheerleader if you are going to use bullshit pro-abortion propaganda like this in your posts.

Prove that it will happen, or shut the fuck up.

67

[quote]vroom wrote:
There may not be a shitstorm, but there will be back alley abortions with coat hangers and the resultant issues that derive from it.
[/quote]

The argument that something shouldn’t be illegal because some people will still do it anyway is, on its face, absurd.

68

RJ,

That was a very powerful argument! Everything you said was damnned straight. Let’s hold her up to the light of day; if she is qualified, outstanding.
Also, to the other guys, just because someone is a friend or whatnot, doesn’t mean they are not qualified. It does leave GW open to this criticism however. Remember when some guy made the mistake of saying ‘niggardly’ at an NAACP convention? Many people are just plain dumb.

69

[quote]nephorm wrote:
vroom wrote:
There may not be a shitstorm, but there will be back alley abortions with coat hangers and the resultant issues that derive from it.

The argument that something shouldn’t be illegal because some people will still do it anyway is, on its face, absurd.[/quote]

Exactly! Why not legalize Meth or Cocaine? According to Vroom’s logic, homicide shouldn’t be made illegal, cause it’s still gonna happen in back alleys anyway.

70

Anyone that believes abortion will become illegal in the US is kidding themselves.

Some on the right fervently pray and donate money to politicians hoping it will happen. It won’t.

Some on the left talk up the artificial threat to get donations from the pro-abortion crowd.

You get the completely mindless people that buy into the theory (and the incredibly partisan people that spread the word) that the US is going to turn into a religious theocracy if the Republicans appoint whoever to the Supreme Court. Get real. There are places you cannot even say Pledge because the word God is in it.

71

WRT the abortion issue. The pro-death crowd wants to fool everyone into thinking that overturning R. v. Wade means an end to abortion. That is as wrong as thinking that the coat hanger industry will see boom years if the case is reversed.

Overturning R. v. Wade gives power back to the states to let them decide their own course of action wrt abortion. Let the people decide. But that’s what scares the pro-death crowd. If left in the hands of the people - abortion on demand would be severely curtailed.

72

Rainjack, quit being such an asshole. I don’t have to prove jack squat to voice an opinion and neither do you. I know your hero big dick Cheney swears a lot, but it doesn’t mean you have to.

It happened in the past, when abortions weren’t available, what makes you think dumb young people won’t panic and do stupid things when they get pregnant now?

I know you can do a lot better a job than this at having a discussion. Why don’t you shelve the hatred and put some thought into your posts?

Nep, I wasn’t trying to say it shouldn’t be illegal because of this. I’m trying to point out where we are possibly heading.

While you can’t make laws based on the fact that people will or won’t do something anyway, you can certainly look at the impact on society that those laws might have. In fact, it would be stupid not to do so.

What I saw is a lot of hysteria due to the topic at hand, instead of careful consideration of items that are related to the topic in order to allow one to make a good decision.

–

Another impact on society will be that stupid young people that get pregnant will be crappy parents without a shot a getting an education and getting a good income. They will be drain on the economy and suck back your taxes as welfare after the teenage father runs off and leaves the young girl to raise the child on her own.

Of course, other options are available at all stages, but open your eyes and look at how forcing people to bear children when they don’t want to is a huge interference in their life.

If you are religious, have faith that God does things for a reason and that God wants people to exercise their own choices as part of his determination of their judgment.

If people can make no choices, how are they to be judged then?

Anyway, that seems to be the outcome of many religion inspired policies. Teach ID in school, don’t let children get educated with that there evil science at all.

Force young kids, once they’ve “sinned”, to bear the fruits of their fornication. That way they won’t be able to go to school and get educated or otherwise succeed in life.

Everybody needs to move to New Hampshire and “live free or die”.

73

Is this whole place full of knee-jerking dumbasses?

74

[quote]vroom wrote:
Is this whole place full of knee-jerking dumbasses?[/quote]

You’re the only one I’ve seen so far.

75

[quote]vroom wrote:
It happened in the past, when abortions weren’t available, what makes you think dumb young people won’t panic and do stupid things when they get pregnant now?
[/quote]

People used to ride horses to school, too. Big fucking deal. It’s called progress.

Your assumptions that we’ll have alleys strewn with dead babies and bloody coat hangers is just the type of fear mongering that marginalizes this type of logic.

Maybe the fear of pregnancy will make them think just a little bit about the consequences before bumping uglies.

It shouldn’t be the courts decision anyhow. Overturn Roe v. Wade and let the people decide. State by state - put it in the hands of the people - or is that somehow wrong?

And if it is wrong - please tell me why letting the people decide is such a bad thing.

76

[quote]vroom wrote:
Prove that it will happen, or shut the fuck up.

Rainjack, quit being such an asshole. I don’t have to prove jack squat to voice an opinion and neither do you. I know your hero big dick Cheney swears a lot, but it doesn’t mean you have to.

It happened in the past, when abortions weren’t available, what makes you think dumb young people won’t panic and do stupid things when they get pregnant now?

I know you can do a lot better a job than this at having a discussion. Why don’t you shelve the hatred and put some thought into your posts?

The argument that something shouldn’t be illegal because some people will still do it anyway is, on its face, absurd.

Nep, I wasn’t trying to say it shouldn’t be illegal because of this. I’m trying to point out where we are possibly heading.

While you can’t make laws based on the fact that people will or won’t do something anyway, you can certainly look at the impact on society that those laws might have. In fact, it would be stupid not to do so.

What I saw is a lot of hysteria due to the topic at hand, instead of careful consideration of items that are related to the topic in order to allow one to make a good decision.

–

Another impact on society will be that stupid young people that get pregnant will be crappy parents without a shot a getting an education and getting a good income. They will be drain on the economy and suck back your taxes as welfare after the teenage father runs off and leaves the young girl to raise the child on her own.

Of course, other options are available at all stages, but open your eyes and look at how forcing people to bear children when they don’t want to is a huge interference in their life.

[/quote]

Well, tough shit. Most people by the time their in middle school know the possible ouotcome of having sex. The new parents can either step up to the plate & live up to their obligation, or give the kid up for adoption. Until we can ask the baby whether or not it wants to live, we, as a society, are obligated to protect it’s life.

77

[quote]vroom wrote:
Exactly! Why not legalize Meth or Cocaine? According to Vroom’s logic, homicide shouldn’t be made illegal, cause it’s still gonna happen in back alleys anyway.

Is this whole place full of knee-jerking dumbasses?[/quote]

Absolutely. God forbid you take it one issue at a time. What applies for one must apply for all.

And if you don’t believe there were back alley abortions, you are a retard.

Using that great meth analogy, did you see the Holocaust? No? Does that mean it didn’t exist? Gimme a fucking break.

78

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
vroom wrote:
Exactly! Why not legalize Meth or Cocaine? According to Vroom’s logic, homicide shouldn’t be made illegal, cause it’s still gonna happen in back alleys anyway.

Is this whole place full of knee-jerking dumbasses?

Absolutely. God forbid you take it one issue at a time. What applies for one must apply for all.

And if you don’t believe there were back alley abortions, you are a retard.

Using that great meth analogy, did you see the Holocaust? No? Does that mean it didn’t exist? Gimme a fucking break.[/quote]

What do you mean? Of course there used to be back alley abortions. Did someone say there weren’t?

I just saw people noting that we should not automatically make something legal just because if it is illegal people will do it anyway.

79

[quote]vroom wrote:
Exactly! Why not legalize Meth or Cocaine? According to Vroom’s logic, homicide shouldn’t be made illegal, cause it’s still gonna happen in back alleys anyway.

Is this whole place full of knee-jerking dumbasses?[/quote]

It’s comments like this that I relish in the fact that you are not near as smart as you’d like people to think you are. It doesn’t surprise me that you are a consultant. The common phrase in our office is, “Those who Can’t, Consult.”

Sincerely,

Dumbass

80

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
vroom wrote:
Exactly! Why not legalize Meth or Cocaine? According to Vroom’s logic, homicide shouldn’t be made illegal, cause it’s still gonna happen in back alleys anyway.

Is this whole place full of knee-jerking dumbasses?

Absolutely. God forbid you take it one issue at a time. What applies for one must apply for all.

And if you don’t believe there were back alley abortions, you are a retard.

Using that great meth analogy, did you see the Holocaust? No? Does that mean it didn’t exist? Gimme a fucking break.[/quote]

I didn’t say that this didn’t happen.

Tap on your head really, really hard with your index finger and repeat, “Think, think, think!”