Comments posted organically
SelectSmart.com Homepage
Get out and vote !!!

By islander
November 4, 2022 7:50 am
Category: Politics

(0.0 from 0 votes)
SelectSmart.com SelectSmart.com SelectSmart.com

Share
Rules of
the Post

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


Why it is so VERY, VERY, important that we get out and vote in this mid-term election.

This is a comment from a reader on Marcy Wheeler's blog and he explains why we can't just sit back, hope for the best, and not get out there and do all we can to keep our beautiful country safe from those who will, if they get the chance, turn our country into something ugly. We have seen it happen throughout history and we have seen it happen in other countries during our lifetime...BE SURE TO GET OUT AND VOTE !!

"Communism and Nazism may both have philosophical roots, but opportunists have repeatedly “embraced and extended,” tuned, and applied these ideas to establish social power and control over others (be they willing or not). Communism may always ultimately fail because it doesn’t produce a satisfying long-term response to the question “what’s in it for me?” The Nazis sidestepped this question by focusing and exploiting hate, fear, insecurities rooted in perceived past failures and embarrassments, and nationalism. Trumpism is very much like Nazism in these regards. Trumpism is a coalition of opportunistic, self-dealing, hypocritical, sociopathic grifters with an innate talent for manipulating fools and unprepared minds, but with the advantage of powerful, real-time tools for getting and disseminating information. And, like Nazism, Trumpism has a symbiotic relationship with wealthy parties (individuals and corporations), who have no qualms over using any tools to engage in corruption and expand their wealth and power. Communism, Nazism,and Trumpism are all likely to be unsustainable, but have and will inflict incalculable damage before collapsing.

Democrats have a weaker position in part because rationality and sacrifice, which are needed to address systemic problems, don’t motivate with the power of fear, hate, anger, greed, and selfishness. And, unfortunately, critical thinking skills and altruism appear to be mostly learned, not innate, so Trumpist/GOP efforts to censor information and control curricula hurt Democracy (but are great for any form of kleptocracy)." *

* L. Eslinger

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 "Get out and vote !!!":

  1. by HatetheSwamp on November 4, 2022 8:17 am

    Trumpism is a coalition of opportunistic, self-dealing, hypocritical, sociopathic grifters with an innate talent for manipulating fools and unprepared minds, but with the advantage of powerful, real-time tools for getting and disseminating information. And, like Nazism, Trumpism has a symbiotic relationship with wealthy parties (individuals and corporations), who have no qualms over using any tools to engage in corruption and expand their wealth and power. Communism, Nazism,and Trumpism are all likely to be unsustainable.

    Bahahahahahahahahahaha, ahhhhhhhhhhh!

    And, they say there ain't no such thing as TDS!

    I just posted that no one's buying the Dems' closing argument that a vote for the GOP is a vote to end democracy...

    ...BECAUSE IT'S HATE-BASED MORONISM!

    selectsmart.com


  2. by islander on November 4, 2022 8:32 am

    No it isn't...


  3. by oldedude on November 4, 2022 8:34 am
    And the mindless lebbings are in NAZI lock-step with whatever they are told to say. There is no thought process. They all believe conservatives should be put in gulags in North Dakota to be re-educated, and are just waiting for the sign from "above" (DOJ/FBI or the White House) to start the next civil war. Their first probe of the US system was the summer of love, now it's the real thing.

    We can call each other names and both cite instances. I realize your complete and utter hatred of Trumpism. One that you project to all conservatives. You're too bland to actually think this through.


  4. by oldedude on November 4, 2022 8:38 am
    "Communism and Nazism may both have philosophical roots, but opportunists have repeatedly “embraced and extended,” tuned, and applied these ideas to establish social power and control over others (be they willing or not). Communism may always ultimately fail because it doesn’t produce a satisfying long-term response to the question “what’s in it for me?” The Nazis sidestepped this question by focusing and exploiting hate, fear, insecurities rooted in perceived past failures and embarrassments, and nationalism. Liberalism is very much like Nazism in these regards. Liberalism is a coalition of opportunistic, self-dealing, hypocritical, sociopathic grifters with an innate talent for manipulating fools and unprepared minds, but with the advantage of powerful, real-time tools for getting and disseminating information. And, like Nazism, Liberalism has a symbiotic relationship with wealthy parties (individuals and corporations), who have no qualms over using any tools to engage in corruption and expand their wealth and power. Communism, Nazism, and Liberalism are all likely to be unsustainable, but have and will inflict incalculable damage before collapsing."

    This I can agree on. It's far more accurate.


  5. by HatetheSwamp on November 4, 2022 8:38 am

    Check out this brief video of Joe the morning after his big Anti MAGA speech the other evening.

    You may not have seen it. As far as I know, only Fox carried it:

    twitter.com


  6. by islander on November 4, 2022 9:27 am

    Tom Nichols wrote in The Atlantic: "To vote for anyone still loyal to a party led by the narcissistic sociopath who put our elected officials and our political system itself in peril is to abandon any pretense of caring whether the United States remains a constitutional democracy. The question is whether enough of us will care, in little more than [four days] from now, to make a difference."

    For those in Ukraine today, keeping their democracy requires the loss of countless Ukrainian lives. For those in Russia, the pursuit of freedom and a better future requires great courage, and risks arrest, imprisonment, and being beaten.

    Yet for those of us in America, keeping our democracy merely requires the courage to speak out, to not be afraid to share appropriate values, and to VOTE. If we do these things, we will shape a better future for our children.

    But if we sit quietly in silence, afraid we might offend a vocal minority that has already betrayed America and democratic values… if we fail to have the courage to even use our voice and take simple actions, we will soon find ourselves in the same situation as the unfortunately people under Putin’s vice.

    If you haven't already ,BE SURE TO GET OUT AND VOTE !!!


  7. by islander on November 4, 2022 9:34 am
    Hate,

    I showed 😀 (Smiley) your twitter link and 😀 just chuckled and said, "I can hardly blame poor Hate for wanting to change the subject!"


  8. by islander on November 4, 2022 9:40 am

    😀 then shoed me this and said that's why he had to chuckle when he saw Hate trying tp change the subject!

    Twitter thread yesterday from David Rothkopf (@djrothkopf):

    "The GOP has been trying to change the subject re: the campaign all year. They don't want it to be about Roe. They don't want it to be about the threat to democracy. They don't want it to be about their plan to end Social Security & Medicare. They don't want it to be about Trump.

    They don't want it to be about the fact they voted against every Dem plan to help people cope with rising prices. They don't want it to be about their votes against the Biden-Dem initiatives that have lifted millions out of poverty and created millions of jobs.

    You can hardly blame them about wanting to change the subject. Their record is terrible. So they lie. And they embrace racism, anti-semitism and hate. And they have had plenty of help from many in the media who have bought into their distractions, deflections and dissembling.

    But the media doesn't get to decide whether this dangerous MAGA charade is successful. You do. You determine what this election will be about. You determine whether democracy will still have a chance, whether our basic rights will be preserved. You do. When you vote."


  9. by HatetheSwamp on November 4, 2022 9:41 am

    It's not changing the subject. That was Joe after his latest "save democracy" speech.


  10. by islander on November 4, 2022 9:52 am

    😀 told me you'd that probably deny that you were trying to change the subject.

    😀 was right !!!


  11. by HatetheSwamp on November 4, 2022 10:01 am

    isle,

    The essence of democracy is for government to address the issues that people really do care about.

    This time around that's inflation and crime. Whether you like it or not.

    If you could, show me Mitch or McCarthy or, heck, OrangeMan, detailing the GOP plan to end Social Security and Medicare. The last time "that feckless dementia-ridden piece of crap" ran that line even the WaPo gave him four Pinocchios.

    ******

    I don't think that there had to be a Red Wave. I think that the GOP was a lock to take the House by at least a little. But, we know that the GOP gained Senate seats in 018. Dems could have won in the Senate in 022.

    The reason there will be a red wave is that even your holy J6 Committee hasn't made Trump the issue.

    AND, people have realized that Dobbs didn't take away availability to abortion.

    Pennsylvania’s bright purple. pb can't watch local broadcast TV with being assaulted by ads claiming that this or that GOP wants to outlaw abortion. Real life proves that to be a lie...and I thank the Dems for those ads because they are securing a historic GOP victory.


    Every time I buy groceries or gas, I'm convinced that the GOP is gunna win biiiiiiiiiig! And, Dems keep shouting, "But Trump! But Trump!!!!!"


  12. by Donna on November 4, 2022 10:32 am

    "AND, people have realized that Dobbs didn't take away availability to abortion." - Hts

    Bullshit.

    From fivethirtyeight:

    The same day the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in June, Alabama’s law banning abortion took effect. The next morning, phones began ringing in Georgia.

    “We got nearly 100 calls the day after the Dobbs decision from patients in Alabama,” said Kwajelyn Jackson, executive director of the Feminist Women’s Health Center in Atlanta. In states where abortion remains at least partially legal the phones haven’t stopped ringing.

    Since June, thousands of Americans have crossed state lines seeking abortion, like a pressure wave spreading out from a blast zone. A data set shared exclusively with FiveThirtyEight shows that in the two months after the Supreme Court decision, there were 10,670 fewer abortions as compared to pre-Dobbs estimates. That figure is a net, counting both declines in some states and increases in others, and it shows how a few states are absorbing some — but not all — of the demand for abortions in states where it’s now banned.

    fivethirtyeight.com


  13. by HatetheSwamp on November 4, 2022 11:02 am

    Lotsa hyperbole there, Donna. I have no doubt that, on the extreme left of the progressive Blue MAGA Swampcult, women feel they lost access to abortion.

    You and your Swampcultists can kick and scream all you like but, check the polls. Abortion ain't the leading issue in the election by a long shot. And, among those for whom it is, many support restrictions on abortion, people like Evie and pb.

    Rush used to say that abortion was a sacrament to people on the left. And, to suggest that abortion will be regulated by "the people and their representatives" is akin, to a minute woke minority, to the Catholic Church telling your Italian born great granny that Last Rites is no longer a Catholic sacrament.

    The truth is that, still today, any American woman who wants an abortion can get one.

    The point is that Dems threw many of their eggs (no pun intended) into the "Let's make abortion THE issue" basket and we're about to ride what may be the biggest red wave in history.

    Here, in bright purple Pennsylvania, the Dems are gettin wupped, primarily, over their abortion claim that the sky is fallin.


  14. by islander on November 4, 2022 1:20 pm

    Hate wrote:"The truth is that, still today, any American woman who wants an abortion can get one"

    False.

    If Hate had said "Some American women who want to get an abortion are still able to get one. That would be "true" but it is quite different from what Hate claimed.

    😀 Smiley said Hate probably likes to make everybody laugh at him whenever he says the word "truth"!!

    I told Smiley not to be mean, Hate just doesn't know any better.

    😀 Smiley said he apologizes and he'll try not to hurt Hate's feelings in the future but he just can't make any promises.





  15. by HatetheSwamp on November 4, 2022 1:34 pm

    You are precisely 100% wrong, isle. Nearly all voters know that and that's why Dems claiming that the sky is falling fall on deaf ears.


  16. by oldedude on November 4, 2022 1:40 pm
    "Yet for those of us in America, keeping our democracy merely requires the courage to speak out, to not be afraid to share appropriate values, and to VOTE. If we do these things, we will shape a better future for our children.

    But if we sit quietly in silence, afraid we might offend a vocal minority that has already betrayed America and democratic values… if we fail to have the courage to even use our voice and take simple actions, we will soon find ourselves in the same situation as the [sic]unfortunately people under Putin’s vice.

    If you haven't [sic]already ,BE SURE TO GET OUT AND VOTE !!!"


    I agree yet again, but it's to not teach sexual identity theory to preschoolers and Kindergarteners (as I referenced previously).
    It is to NOT weaponize the federal agencies against citizens that are not guilty of any crime (e.g. the parents that have issues with their children having pornographic books to read in elementary and middle schools)
    It is to avoid illegal search and seizures (Red Flag Laws)
    It is to keep the constitution as the nation's law instead of "feelings"
    It is to assure that non-political administration of justice by state and federal government.

    And very many more.


  17. by Donna on November 4, 2022 2:25 pm

    There are states that outlawed abortions after 6 weeks except in cases where the mother's life would be in jeopardy. Many women don't know they're pregnant at four weeks. Then there's the time to set up an appointment for the abortion. So the law fairly effectively had the desired effect, which was to severely reduce the numbers of abortions at the expense of the civil liberties of those women.





  18. by islander on November 4, 2022 2:29 pm
    Hate wrote: "You are precisely 100% wrong, isle. Nearly all voters know that and that's why Dems claiming that the sky is falling fall on deaf ears."

    Smiley had a hard time not laughing at you again Hate, and I complimented him on it. Then 😀 Smiley said, "If I don't laugh out loud at Hate when he spouts his nonsense...Can I at least snicker"?

    And I said, "Oh, OK.


  19. by oldedude on November 4, 2022 7:55 pm
    Donna- But did the federal government make it illegal?

    This is a states rights issue. If you have a problem with it, move to that state and peacefully protest and vote. I think CA has some of the stupidest laws in the world, and is due to bankrupt their state. Hopefully, they'll get no reprieve from the feds.


  20. by Donna on November 4, 2022 10:32 pm

    The majority on the Supreme Court allowed states to effectively outlaw most abortions. So much for the rights of women in those states who are seeking abortions.


  21. by HatetheSwamp on November 5, 2022 3:48 am

    Donna,

    What offends you about government "of the people, by the people and for the people?"

    The majority of the Supreme Court empowered "the people and their representatives" to regulate abortion.

    YOUR BIG BROTHER STUFF IS GETTING INSANE!


  22. by oldedude on November 5, 2022 5:10 am
    "The majority on the Supreme Court allowed states to effectively outlaw most abortions. So much for the rights of women in those states who are seeking abortions."

    False. It's up to the states to say if they take the side of the mother, or the infant. Or, "Is the convenience of the mother worth the life of the child." Again, you're looking at "big brother" to take care of your every need, the way you "feel."

    Do I agree with Alabama's law? No. Will the electorate support the law? Dunno. Maybe. You and I have absolutely no control over this. Ya'lls panties are in wads over things you don't have control over.

    I think CA has some of the stupidest laws on the books. But they are supported by the legislature and those who voted them in to that position. I chose not to go there.

    OTC states (other than californicators, which include new england, and the entire left coast) are offended when californicators feel like they have the "right" to tell them what their laws "should" be.

    You expect instant gratification. Welcome to politics. My guess is that in the next years, states will level out and with the exception of minor differences, they will be pretty much the same.

    Again, Carolyn Myss. If you are so wrapped up in things you don't have control over, you are messing up the things you do.


  23. by Donna on November 5, 2022 6:59 am

    Roe was established federal law for 49 years before reactionary Catholic Republican justices struck it down for religious reasons and disguised it as a states rights issue. In any case, women in states whose legislatures subsequently imposed draconian abortion laws ended the right of women to control their own bodies.

    Not everyone has the financial means to move to another state. Our move from CA to AZ cost us $5400, which we're still trying to pay off.


  24. by HatetheSwamp on November 5, 2022 7:20 am

    Roe never was "law." It was the foisting of abortion on America...and, directly against the will of the "people and their representatives." And, by white men in black robes, no less.

    Now, it's been de-foisted. I know that has to hurt because nearly everything your side has accomplished is through court-ordered foisting.

    One thing that's going to kill Dems in 022 is your insistence that abortion not only be safe and legal, but also cheap.

    I love the way GOPs are handling abortion in the election. Oz did it. Vance did it in Ohio. Point out that their opponent supports abortion up to the time of delivery...AT TAXPAYER EXPENSE. Neither Fetterman nor Ryan objected to that characterization.

    America don't share your thirst for the blood of the unborn.


  25. by Donna on November 5, 2022 7:25 am

    Many Americans wonder how long it's gonna be before those same reactionary Catholic justices do the same thing to same-sex marriage.


  26. by islander on November 5, 2022 7:43 am

    Hate, responding to Donna:"America don't share your thirst for the blood of the unborn"

    This is the kind of statement made by the guy that 😀 Smiley calls "our local drama queen", that accounts for the loss of any credibility Hate might possibly have had at one time.

    Donna doesn't have a thirst for the blood of the unborn.


  27. by HatetheSwamp on November 5, 2022 7:43 am

    Some do. Donna. AND, THEY'RE ALL IGNORING THE FACT THAT ALL OF THE JUSTICES, EXCEPT THOMAS, ARE ON RECORD OPPOSING OVERTURNING OBERGEFELL.

    But, Rachel and Joy, the HuffPo and NYT don't tell you that, do they!!!!!?


  28. by HatetheSwamp on November 5, 2022 7:48 am

    Donna doesn't have a thirst for the blood of the unborn.

    pb was using hyperbole as a rhetorical tool. pb gets that nuance is lost on you, isle.

    What Donna's supporting, by implication at least, is that abortion be cheap...free, even.


  29. by Donna on November 5, 2022 8:03 am

    Thank you islander.

    I support freedom.


  30. by Donna on November 5, 2022 8:09 am

    Why wouldn't those same justices also consider same-sex marriage a state's rights issue like they did with abortion? Perhaps the forum's self-proclaimed Constitutional experts can enlighten me on that.



  31. by oldedude on November 5, 2022 8:15 am
    Roe was established federal law for 49 years before reactionary Catholic Republican justices struck it down for religious reasons and disguised it as a states rights issue. In any case, women in states whose legislatures subsequently imposed draconian abortion laws ended the right of women to control their own bodies.
    According to even the liberals' constitutional heroine, Ruth Bader Ginsberg, it was not a sound ruling. It would be different if it were some of the conservative judges, but this is the only time I've agreed with her. The rest of the time, she strictly voted liberal.

    Not everyone has the financial means to move to another state. Our move from CA to AZ cost us $5400, which we're still trying to pay off.
    That would be the cheapest move I've made in my life.

    "Why wouldn't those same justices also consider same-sex marriage a state's rights issue like they did with abortion? Perhaps the forum's self-proclaimed Constitutional experts can enlighten me on that."

    Because they specifically said that in their decision.


  32. by HatetheSwamp on November 5, 2022 11:54 am

    Donna,

    That's a good question and all I know is that in publishing the Dobbs decision the Justices were clear that the principle that settled Dobbs doesn't apply to, specifically, Obergefell.

    It's beyond me but I'm not a lawyer, let alone a judge.

    I'll caution you that, when Joy and Rachel and those other wackos in the Blue MAGA SwampMedia try to rile you up, don't fall for it.

    The Court's been abundantly clear.


  33. by Donna on November 5, 2022 12:35 pm

    Okay, so neither of you can answer why the conservative Catholic activist justices ruled that abortion is a states rights issue but same-sex marriage isn't.

    That's why many of us weren't convinced when conservative justices signaled that they weren't going to address same-sex marriage. It's possible that they said that for political reasons - to prevent an electoral upheaval from the LGBTQ community before the midterms.



  34. by HatetheSwamp on November 5, 2022 1:43 pm

    No, the Supreme Court isn’t coming for gay marriage or contraception next


    Any suggestion that Dobbs threatens those other cases amounts to a claim the majority in Dobbs is lying. That is an assertion, not an argument...

    The majority’s decision has two basic components, each of which is necessary to its decision to overturn Roe. The first is the conviction that Roe was “egregiously wrong” when decided, and the second is the weighing of various factors the court has traditionally invoked under the doctrine of stare decisis (“to stand by things decided”), a practice under which the court generally upholds even questionable decisions in the interest of legal stability—unless special considerations warrant revisiting them. On the first component, we have already seen the basic argument: The court is convinced that Roe established a right (taking away power from the electorate) that was not rooted in our nation’s history or traditions, nor in the concept of ordered liberty. On the second component, the court had many things to say that make it very easy to distinguish the right to contraception established in Griswold v. Connecticut or the right to same-sex marriage granted in Obergefell from the right to abortion created in Roe....

    The court states that the nature of the error in Roe is fundamentally different from any error in those other cases.

    The different politics of same-sex marriage
    Besides the portions of the court’s own argument that indicate it is not a straightforward leap from overturning Roe to overturning Griswold or Obergefell, there are social conditions that differ in each case. As readers of America know well, so deeply held were the differences the court had attempted to settle for once and all in Roe that the decision gave rise to a 50-year movement of resistance among men and women of various faiths (and of none). Roe also deeply divided the political parties and led to annual marches, prayer protests and even, lamentably, occasional violence. Nothing similar has occurred in the case of birth control or same-sex marriage. Furthermore, recent polls show approval of same-sex marriage above 70 percent, but polling on abortion has always shown a much more complicated picture, with most Americans falling into a murky middle between Roe’s regime and, say, Catholic social teaching.

    So even a cynical legal realist who believes judges are doing more politics than law would have to acknowledge a bright distinction between the politics of abortion and those of birth control or same-sex marriage. To be sure, there are some anomalous cases (narrow questions about whether certain forms of birth control may also act as abortifacients, for example), but these don’t make the distinction hard to see. They stand out because the distinction is easy to see...

    Finally, we might note that in addition to Justice Thomas’s solo concurrence calling for the revisiting of those other cases, Justice Kavanaugh wrote separately to emphasize just those social facts that I raised above, as well as his own commitment to the argument that the opinion of the court does not cast doubt on those other precedents. Further, Justice Gorsuch famously authored the opinion in the landmark Bostock case that said employment discrimination against gays and lesbians is discrimination on the basis of sex and thus violates the Civil Rights Act of 1964. It seems very unlikely that either justice is eager to revisit Obergefell, let alone Griswold. Recall that even Justice Alito, in his confirmation hearings, agreed with the extension of the right to contraception established in Griswold’s to unmarried couples: “I do agree with the result in Eisenstadt,” he testified, saying he felt free to do so because no case is ever likely to reach the court asking it to rule otherwise.


    Donna,

    It's hard for someone not legally trained to break this down. It's hard for a seeker of Truth to find a nonpartisan and intelligent analysis.

    OD and pb are the truth seekers here.

    So, as a seeker of truth, and from a source more articulat and better informed than anyone here, and to quote Jesus. "Ler not your heart be troubled."

    *****

    Also, and I can't account for this here.

    As you know, I listen regularly to that gay Guy Curt's never heard of. He's in a same-sex marriage. I've heard, in real time, I'd guess more than two hours of his monologues on Dobbs and Obergefell. Gay Guy knows his stuff. He wholeheartedly embraces Dobbs. He's probably more convincedly pro life than is pb.

    Guy Benson could not possibly be less concerned that Dobbs is going to lead to a reversal of Obergefell.

    I think you'd live a more peaceful life if you expanded your perspective. In this case, your mind could have been set at ease a looooooooong time ago.

    americamagazine.org


  35. by Donna on November 5, 2022 2:25 pm

    Thanks for posting that.

    "Roe also deeply divided the political parties and led to annual marches, prayer protests and even, lamentably, occasional violence. Nothing similar has occurred in the case of birth control or same-sex marriage."

    I'm not concerned about birth control.

    Since the 2015 Obergfell ruling was decided, 29 states still have constitutions that include bans on same-sex marriage and/or other types of unions, and 31 have statutes that ban same-sex marriage and/or other types of unions, although these are all defunct under the Obergefell ruling...

    So there's a lot of opposition in the US to same-sex marriage. Still puzzled why the 49-year old ruling had to be struck down and turned over to the states, but the 7-year old ruling which has almost as much opposition as the 49-year old ruling is okay. Btw, both Roe and Obergfell rulings were/are supported by a majority of Americans, so IMO it would be unjust to reverse either ruling.


    en.wikipedia.org


  36. by HatetheSwamp on November 5, 2022 4:08 pm

    Donna,

    I copied far less than that whole article so feel free to read it at your leisure.

    The point of the article is that Roe was a decision begging to be reversed. Even Ruth Bader Ginsberg thought it was bad law, even though she believed abortion should be legal...

    ...and, it is.


  37. by Donna on November 5, 2022 4:30 pm

    You mean this?:

    The seven to two judgment in Roe v. Wade declared “violative of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment” a Texas criminal abortion statute that intolerably shackled a woman’s autonomy; the Texas law “except[ed] from criminality only a life-saving procedure on behalf of the [pregnant woman].” Suppose the Court had stopped there, rightly declaring unconstitutional the most extreme brand of law in the nation, and had not gone on, as the Court did in Roe, to fashion a regime blanketing the subject, a set of rules that displaced virtually every state law then in force. Would there have been the twenty-year controversy we have witnessed, reflected most recently in the Supreme Court’s splintered decision in Planned Parenthood v. Casey? A less encompassing Roe, one that merely struck down the extreme Texas law and went no further on that day, I believe and will summarize why, might have served to reduce rather than to fuel controversy.



    time.com


  38. by HatetheSwamp on November 5, 2022 6:04 pm

    Not so long ago, Curt and I were chatting about liberal Justices running a scheme to apply the Fourteenth Amendment where it doesn't really belong to nullify the Tenth Amendment...and to foist lib policies on an innocent population.

    This Court is reasserting the power of the legislature and the people it represents through the Bill of Rights.

    No more foisting for the moment, for good or ill.


  39. by Donna on November 6, 2022 7:21 am

    Why is the 14th Amendment argument apparently being upheld by the Republican justices (or so they're saying) regarding same-sex marriage? I haven't been happy with any of the explanations that have been offered.



  40. by HatetheSwamp on November 6, 2022 7:50 am

    Donna,

    My advice to you, since you care. Make an appointment with a professor of Constitutional law in a law school.

    I know Religion Clause decisions because of my coursework in school back in the day.

    What I can say generally is that in the middle of the last century, liberal Justices neutralized the Tenth Amendment in order to expand the power of Big Brother by applying the Fourteenth Amendment to state laws.

    In the case of the Religion Clauses of the First Amendment in the Bill of Rights, I've noted here several times, that after the Constitution was ratified, several states had established State Churches. They were never challenged. They died out on their own.

    That Supreme Court decision in the 60s that ended prayer in public schools came about because liberal Justices chose to pretend away the Bill of Rights...the Tenth Amendment...by jumping on a scheme to use the Fourteenth Amendment to crush the rights of citizens and states DEMANDED by the Bill of Rights.

    That's what I actually know...generally.

    What I understand in the Dobbs decision is that this Court weighs the Tenth Amendment more heavily than the Fourteenth.

    That decision that ruled for the coach who was fired for praying after games? Tenth Amendment. The Rights of citizens over government.

    But, if you want more specifics, SS is not the place to seek them.


  41. by Donna on November 6, 2022 7:58 am

    I thought maybe someone here would know.

    "That Supreme Court decision in the 60s that ended prayer in public schools..." - Hts

    That's deceptively framed. Prayer wasn't ended in schools, faculty-led prayer was ended in public schools.



Go To Top

Comment on: "Get out and vote !!!"

* 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


From our contributors:
Display Order:

MTG wants investigation into why Trump wasn’t told about Chinese balloons
Politics by Curt_Anderson     February 6, 2023 6:20 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: (0 comments) [32 views]


Chinese spy balloons invaded American airspace three times during the Trump presidency
President by Curt_Anderson     February 5, 2023 9:18 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Donna (25 comments) [474 views]


Ilhan Omar Accused Of Appropriating Alabama Culture By Marrying Relative
Humor by HatetheSwamp     February 6, 2023 2:21 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: (0 comments) [7 views]


Biden Resides Over Best Employment Numbers of Any Four Year President In Only Two Years
Charmed by Ponderer     February 3, 2023 3:47 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: oldedude (40 comments) [430 views]


Most in new ABC/WaPo say Biden hasn’t achieved much in first two years
President by HatetheSwamp     February 6, 2023 1:52 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: oldedude (1 comments) [13 views]


NY Times: Immigration Rebound Eases Shortage of Workers, Up to a Point
Government by Curt_Anderson     February 6, 2023 1:38 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: (0 comments) [22 views]


Would "that feckless dementia-ridden piece of crap" have ever acknowledged the Chinese Balloon had he not been busted by an amateur photographer?
President by HatetheSwamp     February 5, 2023 5:21 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: HatetheSwamp (12 comments) [97 views]


Most Democrats Don’t Want Biden To Run In 2024, AP-NORC Poll Finds
President by HatetheSwamp     February 6, 2023 4:55 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: HatetheSwamp (2 comments) [47 views]


A New Book that Curt Really Ought to Read
Books by oldedude     February 2, 2023 7:19 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: oldedude (45 comments) [567 views]


DeSantis Admin Revokes Liquor License of Orlando Venue That Hosted Sexual Drag Show for Children
Gay & Lesbian by HatetheSwamp     February 5, 2023 11:54 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Curt_Anderson (4 comments) [61 views]


Politics selectors, pages, etc.