Comments posted organically
SelectSmart.com Homepage
Display Order:

Anonymous comments regarding the Presidential Candidate Selector
President by Curt_Anderson     March 19, 2024 10:10 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Curt_Anderson (21 comments) [976 views]

NPR under fire after it suspends editor detesting newsroom partisanship: 'Hard left propaganda machine'
Media by HatetheSwamp     April 17, 2024 3:46 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: HatetheSwamp (26 comments) [335 views]

I just voted in the Pennsylvania primary...mail-in
Government by HatetheSwamp     April 18, 2024 7:15 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: HatetheSwamp (3 comments) [106 views]

Trump is daring judge to lock him up by intimidating jurors.
Law by Curt_Anderson     April 17, 2024 9:03 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: HatetheSwamp (1 comments) [37 views]

A Playmate, a porn star, an ex-president and Mr. Pecker. Get plenty of popcorn!
Entertainment by Curt_Anderson     April 14, 2024 3:46 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: oldedude (21 comments) [635 views]

Alameda County District Attorney Pamela Price Faces Recall Vote After Crime Ravages Blue County
Crime by oldedude     April 16, 2024 1:38 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: oldedude (3 comments) [133 views]

NPR editor Uri Berliner resigns after essay accusing outlet of liberal bias
Media by HatetheSwamp     April 17, 2024 9:25 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (1 comments) [93 views]

My oral report about the Battle of Gettisberg Gettysburg by Donnie Trump
Education by Curt_Anderson     April 16, 2024 7:25 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (1 comments) [35 views]

How is your Trump Media Stock doing?
Business by Curt_Anderson     April 4, 2024 11:47 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (20 comments) [514 views]

News outlets say presidential debates are essential. Wrong, they are a waste of time.
President by Curt_Anderson     April 14, 2024 12:32 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (14 comments) [773 views]

Politics selectors, pages, etc.
Republicans: Uh oh!
By Curt_Anderson
August 2, 2022 10:08 pm
Category: Politics

(0.0 from 0 votes)
Rules of the Post
SelectSmart.com SelectSmart.com SelectSmart.com


Rate this article
5 Stars
4 Stars
3 Stars
2 Stars
1 Star
0 Stars
(5=best, 0=poor)

Tonight, the pro-choice side beat the anti-abortion side in Kansas (there aren't many states redder than Kansas) 60% to 40%. Primaries historically see a better Republican turnout than Democratic turnout.

LAWRENCE, Kan. — Voters in Kansas rejected a proposed state constitutional amendment Tuesday that would have said there was no right to an abortion in the state, according to The Associated Press.

Kansas was the first state to vote on abortion rights since the U.S. Supreme Court handed down its ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson's Women's Health Organization.

The vote, for now, preserves access to abortion in Kansas and serves as a rebuke to the regional trend of states significantly restricting access. Since the overturning of Roe v. Wade, Kansas has become an abortion destination for people from other states.

Cited and related links:

  1. npr.org

Comments Start Below


The views and claims expressed by contributors are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views and beliefs of SelectSmart.com. Not every statement made here can be assumed to be a fact.
Comments on "Republicans: Uh oh!":

  1. by HatetheSwamp on August 3, 2022 4:41 am

    I'm not sure how big a deal this is for the GOP. The GOP has become the party of openness and inclusion. Rising GOP star Glenn Youngkin supports legal abortion with restrictions.

    If the vote had gone the other way, it would have been a loss for the Dems with its rigid, intolerant orthodoxy.

    And, I'm not sure how big a win this is for pro-abortion backers of the Women's Health Protection Act that permits abortion to the moment of delivery without any restrictions.

    pb himself is viciously pro-life, as you know. But, as a matter of public policy, pb'd support the Dobbs Law that restricts abortion after 15 weeks. My guess is that the Dems' dream of unrestricted abortion won't become law in Kansas.

  2. by oldedude on August 3, 2022 5:50 am
    Lead,
    I think many conservatives have also gotten to a point and will agree. My wife is much like you. ALL abortion is murder. She doesn't believe that rape and incest should be a reason for abortion. AND she recognizes that in order to work inside a REPUBLIC (not a democracy) you have to give some and be tolerant for the good of the country. No so much on the left.

  3. by HatetheSwamp on August 3, 2022 5:56 am

    OD,

    Your wife is, clearly, a genius.

    I think that the best solution here and now is to restrict abortion according to what the majority of Americans believe, i.e., after 12 or 15 weeks, expose the Dems' Nazi-ish desire to make all abortions legal...

    ...then to struggle to win the hearts of pregnant women.

  4. by islander on August 3, 2022 7:10 am
    The abortion issue has plainly been a political ploy for Republicans. They used it to gain the votes of a certain percentage of the voters who were so anti-choice that they would never vote for any politician who acknowledged being pro-choice...And it worked of course. Their big mistake was that they carried it too far by actually managing to get RVW overturned which was what their anti-choice extremists wanted.

    It was a major error for Republicans since overturning RVW was NOT what theAmerican people wanted.

    What we’re all witnessing is many Republicans now acknowledging that RVW was reasonable and they agree with virtually all that RVW guaranteed for woman, so how can they get out of the hole they have dug for themselves?

    First they have to subtly acknowledge that they, like most of the American people agree with what RVW stated but those rights should not have been guaranteed by the Constitution despite the fact that they had been for the past 50 years...so they took those rights away from women.

    What those Republican politicians have to do now is try and convince the American people that depending on where you live in this country, the people in that area can deny a woman her rights even though most Republicans and the American people support those rights. The very rights that had been Constitutionally guaranteed and acknowledged, even by their own Supreme Court nominees, to be settled law.



    They have opened up a hornet’s nest for themselves...


  5. by HatetheSwamp on August 3, 2022 7:29 am

    I know this is your post and not something from Heather, there, isle. This is not quite as insane as hers.

    Re: "What those Republican politicians have to do now is try and convince the American people that depending on where you live in this country, the people in that area can deny a woman her rights even though most Republicans and the American people support those rights."

    What's really happening, isle, is that the Court is remember that our citizens' Bill of Rights has a Tenth Amendment.

    Y'nes just love a tidy little life in which your Big Brother Court foists, undemocratically, its will on every American.

    We, on the other hand, are content. We celebrate the Court's reestablishment of a "nation of the people, by the people and for the people." Why does that offend your ilk.

    BTW, I'm not holding my breath on the Dems dropping their support for abortion without restriction, as it would be the moment of delivery which they voted for numerous times.

    My prediction is that the first party to suggest abortion restricted after 12 or 15 weeks will win the political battle.

    The Dems are very far from that.

  6. by Curt_Anderson on August 3, 2022 11:46 am
    Islander,
    I agree with you. HtS and others are kidding themselves if the don't think this is a political harbinger.

    The Republicans remind me of the dog that finally caught the car. Now what?

  7. by HatetheSwamp on August 3, 2022 12:28 pm

    HtS and others are kidding themselves if the don't think this is a political harbinger.

    Of what?

  8. by Curt_Anderson on August 3, 2022 12:36 pm
    A harbinger of the election in November. In larger than previously realized numbers pro-choice voters will show up at the polls to vote for pro-choice candidates.

  9. by HatetheSwamp on August 3, 2022 12:41 pm

    I'm sure that a larger than usual number of pro-choicers will vote this fall but very few voters...on either side vote first and foremost on abortion related issues.

    But, you follow the polls. You know what concerns voters now: Inflation, high gas prices first and foremost.


  10. by islander on August 3, 2022 12:44 pm

    Curt, the GOP knows the problem they have created for themselves. Some, like Hate will try to blame the Dems by using straw-man arguments that depend on the American people not being able to see through them.



    We have, however, always supported RVW but the GOP pretended that they were anti-choice in order to win votes. Unfortunately for them, they went too far in their wooing of the extremists. They held out the carrot in the stick (overturning RVW) never really expecting that it would be overturned or what they would do if it were.

  11. by Curt_Anderson on August 3, 2022 12:53 pm
    I just saw survey of issues that Americans are concerned and care about. Inflation, high gas prices and abortion were all very high on the list.

    The difference is that other than knee-jerk conservatives and cultists, people don't believe that Republicans can wave a magic wand and solve inflation and high gas prices. People do believe that Republicans will institute draconian abortion laws--because they have.

    Btw, gad prices will be considerably lower in November, that impacts prices on a lot of things.

  12. by Donna on August 3, 2022 12:54 pm
    True, but the Dems have extremists too: the wokies. And even when the Dems don't incorporate woke policies into their platform, i.e. defund the police, they get saddled with it by association.

    Both parties have done their share of overreaching, and I think most Americans are getting sick to death of it.


  13. by HatetheSwamp on August 3, 2022 1:03 pm

    Agreed, Donna.

    I'm convinced that the first side to settle on an abortion restriction beginning in the 12th or 15th week will will the issue.

  14. by Curt_Anderson on August 3, 2022 1:20 pm
    Roe v. Wade had protected abortion access up until the point that a fetus can live outside the womb — typically set at 22 or 24 weeks of pregnancy.

    Conservatives see abortion as a moral issue. Liberals see it as a women's rights issue and a health care issue. Pro-life Republican voters won't be satisfied with 12 or 15 week limit in an effort to spit the baby (pardon the expression).

  15. by islander on August 3, 2022 2:07 pm

    I think most reasonable people who have a basic understanding of the economic issues we are facing know why gas prices around the world are so high right now and they know why inflation is skyrocketing around the world. 

When the party in power is not the one they voted for however all that goes out the window and it makes sense to them to blame it on the current administration that they want to replace with their team.

    Arguing over these kinds of issues under those conditions like that is like arguing over whose favorite football team is better, and in cases like that it can, for a short time, be entertaining but it is really just a waste of time and after a while it can get boring.

    But their are real differences between the philosophies of the two major parties in this country and it’s much more difficult to discuss and debate those differences when the mind set is such that “my team is always best” and “the football was not deflated”. 

Real worthwhile and interesting discussions can take place, but is is much easier to argue over whose team is better.



    The abortion issue for example will never really be resolved until people can come to an agreement over whether frozen embryos are people, and whether we should grant a 27 year old frozen embryo the same rights and treat it the same as we treat a thinking, feeling, baby or mother. By the way, an embryo that had been frozen for 27 years was implanted in a woman who successfully gave birth to a fully developed "baby".

  16. by HatetheSwamp on August 3, 2022 2:11 pm

    Pro-life Republican voters won't be satisfied with 12 or 15 week limit in an effort to spit the baby (pardon the expression).

    SPLIT the baby?

    The only abortion bill Dems have voted on allows abortion with no restriction to the moment of birth.

    Radical.

  17. by HatetheSwamp on August 3, 2022 2:21 pm

    isle,

    Moderate, independent voters decide elections.

    If they don't like the condition of the economy, they vote against the party in power.

    This is the highest inflation rate in the US since we were in our 20s and 30s. That's a lot for the party that owns the Oval Office and both Houses of Congress to overcome.

  18. by Curt_Anderson on August 3, 2022 2:40 pm
    "The only abortion bill Dems have voted on allows abortion with no restriction to the moment of birth." -HtS

    Wrong, as usual.

    The Women’s Health Protection Act, would have enshrined the protections of Roe v. Wade into law. IOW, WHPA would have codified Roe v. Wade.

    Roe v. Wade (1973)
    The Supreme Court case that held that the Constitution protected a woman’s right to an abortion prior to the viability of the fetus.
    The Court divided the pregnancy period into three trimesters. During the first trimester, the decision to terminate the pregnancy was solely at the discretion of the woman. After the first trimester, the state could “regulate procedure.” During the second trimester, the state could regulate (but not outlaw) abortions in the interests of the mother’s health. After the second trimester, the fetus became viable, and the state could regulate or outlaw abortions in the interest of the potential life except when necessary to preserve the life or health of the mother.
    law.cornell.edu
    washingtonpost.com

  19. by HatetheSwamp on August 3, 2022 2:48 pm

    The Women’s Health Protection Act, would have enshrined the protections of Roe v. Wade into law. IOW, WHPA would have codified Roe v. Wade.

    That's a lie. I've read the bill four times. The WHPA permits abortion without restriction up to the moment of delivery.

    You should suspend yourself for lying.

  20. by Curt_Anderson on August 3, 2022 2:59 pm
    Maybe you misread it four times.

    WHPA does NOT legalize abortion on demand up until the moment of birth. It does allow abortion to protect the health and life of the mother That's to avoid cases like this one:

    Texas woman speaks out after being forced to carry her dead fetus for 2 weeks
    The same surgical procedure that is used to treat a miscarriage is also used for terminating pregnancies. New Texas anti-abortion laws have doctors nervous to perform procedures for miscarriages, forcing this woman to carry her dead fetus in her womb for two weeks.







    politifact.com
    wfmz.com

  21. by HatetheSwamp on August 3, 2022 3:13 pm

    Show me ANY restriction on abortion in the bill.

  22. by Curt_Anderson on August 3, 2022 3:15 pm
    Show me the bill. You must have a link. You said you read it four times.

  23. by HatetheSwamp on August 3, 2022 3:18 pm

    There you go, bubba.
    congress.gov

  24. by Curt_Anderson on August 3, 2022 3:27 pm
    SEC. 4. PERMITTED SERVICES.
    (a) General Rule.—A health care provider has a statutory right under this Act to provide abortion services, and may provide abortion services, and that provider’s patient has a corresponding right to receive such services, without any of the following limitations or requirements:

    (8) A prohibition on abortion at any point or points in time prior to fetal viability, including a prohibition or restriction on a particular abortion procedure.

    (9) A prohibition on abortion after fetal viability when, in the good-faith medical judgment of the treating health care provider, continuation of the pregnancy would pose a risk to the pregnant patient’s life or health.



    Did you really read that four times?

  25. by HatetheSwamp on August 4, 2022 3:37 am

    Read that again.

  26. by HatetheSwamp on August 4, 2022 3:40 am

    that provider’s patient has a corresponding right to receive such services, without any of the following limitations or requirements    :

  27. by oldedude on August 4, 2022 5:32 am
    This just doesn't pass the smell test.... for medical reasons. And as we know, the LWO supporters "assume" it's okay to lie to get their point across*.... And then of course, she's someone that uses blogging as her income. I'm not calling anyone a liar at this point. It just doesn't make sense from a medical perspective.

    *Kavanaugh, Coney Barrett, "if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor," "you have to pass the bill to read the bill," the protests are 'peaceful,' etc.

  28. by islander on August 4, 2022 7:11 am

    To understand SEC. 4. PERMITTED SERVICES Requires the ability to hold and understand a complex thought.
    What it doesn’t say “anywhere’ is The WHPA permits abortion without restriction up to the moment of delivery like the ant-choice crowd dishonestly tries to say it does.

    For example...(a) General Rule.—A health care provider has a statutory right under this Act to provide abortion services, and may provide abortion services, and that provider’s patient has a corresponding right to receive such services, without any of the following limitations or requirements:

    It doesn’t say, without any restrictions or requirements "period". That would be quite different from what it actually says. It carefully explains which prohibitions would not be allowed

    Here’s what it does say.

    8) A prohibition on abortion at any point or points in time prior to fetal viability, including a prohibition or restriction on a particular abortion procedure.

    It doesn’t simply say, abortion is permittedat any point or points in time which is what the anti-choice crowd claims it says, the anti-choice crowd conveniently leaves out “prior to viability”. That means ‘after viability’ prohibitions could be applied. In fact (9) explains the circumstances under which an abortion is permitted after viability.

    9) A prohibition on abortion after fetal viability when, in the good-faith medical judgment of the treating health care provider, continuation of the pregnancy would pose a risk to the pregnant patient’s life or health

    Notice the circumstances under which an abortion after viability is permitted (if the patient's life or health is threatened). That’s a far cry from the anti-choice crowd’s false claim that the “The WHPA permits abortion “without restriction” up to the moment of delivery”...

  29. by HatetheSwamp on August 4, 2022 7:30 am


    What the bill does is to isolate ALL conceivable "limitations or requirements" that could stand in the way of abortion being available without restriction up to the moment of delivery and it outlaws them.

    I'll go back, with you, isle, to my challenge to Curt. Show me ANY restriction on abortion in the bill.

    And, if you would, splain to me why you feel the need to claim that the bill doesn't allow for abortion without restriction up to the moment of delivery.

    Do you, personally, disagree with the bill if it, in fact, does allow for abortion without restriction up to the moment of delivery. If so, how?

  30. by Curt_Anderson on August 4, 2022 10:21 am
    HtS, I've ably demonstrated that you are wrong in believing that the WHPA allows abortion with no restriction to the moment of birth. See my posts and links above in comments #18, #20 and #24.

    Just as subjectively believing a falsehood doesn't make a lie true, your being obtuse doesn't make the truth a lie.

  31. by HatetheSwamp on August 4, 2022 10:53 am

    So, I'm dense.

    In what circumstance would the WHPA deny a woman an abortion?

  32. by Curt_Anderson on August 4, 2022 11:16 am
    "So, I'm dense.

    In what circumstance would the WHPA deny a woman an abortion?" --HtS

    After fetal viability and the woman's health is NOT at stake. The AMA defines fetal viability which is generally the 24th week of gestation although weight and other factors are considered so viability could be longer or shorter. A doctor's capricious ignoring of the AMA's and accepted definitions of viability would cost them their license.

  33. by islander on August 4, 2022 11:16 am

    Hate wrote:"In what circumstance would the WHPA deny a woman an abortion?"

    If you want to know the circumstances under which a particular state can restrict abortions you would have to look at the abortion laws of that state.

    The bill isn’t designed for that purpose as much you seem to believe it was or want it to be. 

The bill only gives circumstances under which states “cannot prohibit or restrict abortions”.

    And I would not support a bill that permits abortion without restriction up to the moment of delivery any more than I would support a bill that prohibits abortion under any and all circumstances.

  34. by HatetheSwamp on August 4, 2022 11:37 am

    That's the point of the WHPA. It FEDERALIZES abortion law.

Go To Top

Comment on: "Republicans: Uh oh!"


* Anonymous comments are subject to approval before they appear. Cookies Consent Policy & Privacy Statement. All Rights Reserved. SelectSmart® is a registered trademark. | Contact SelectSmart.com | Advertise on SelectSmart.com | This site is for sale!

Find old posts & articles

Articles by category:

SelectSmart.com
Report spam & abuse
 SelectSmart.com home page