From "1,000+ people rally in Downtown Madison to protest seemingly-imminent overturn of Roe v. Wade" (Wisconsin State Journal).
ADDED: I feel a little critical of that chant, both formally and substantively. Formally, I don't like the non-rhyme of "one" and "won." Identical sounds are not rhymes. Substantively, I don't like the violence implied by "fight." There are ways to fight that are not violent, but "fight" combined with "Take to the streets" seems way too much like an endorsement of rioting. And I don't think "Roe was won" by taking to the streets in either peaceful or violent protests.
Here's my quick rewrite of the chant: "Take to the law and fight in court/this is how we can abort."
AND: There are 2 problems with my rewriting of the chant — substantive and formal.
The substantive problem is the idea itself, that it is preferable to fight in court. The pro-abortion side has experienced a devastating loss in court — though perhaps the appearance of loss is a phantom. Maybe the Court will reject the draft. But the fighting in court over this case is over, and the street protests might still affect the Justices. All you need is one person in the draft majority to shift. Maybe a chant directed effectively at Brett Kavanaugh would be the best choice — something like "Justice Brett Kavanaugh/You can make Roe the law."
The formal problems is my assertion that "Identical sounds are not rhymes." From the Wikipedia article "Rhyme." There's a subsection on the concept "Identical rhymes":
Identical rhymes are considered less than perfect in English poetry; but are valued more highly in other literatures such as, for example, rime riche in French poetry.
Though homophones and homonyms satisfy the first condition for rhyming—that is, that the stressed vowel sound is the same—they do not satisfy the second: that the preceding consonant be different. As stated above, in a perfect rhyme the last stressed vowel and all following sounds are identical in both words.
If the sound preceding the stressed vowel is also identical, the rhyme is sometimes considered to be inferior and not a perfect rhyme after all. An example of such a super-rhyme or "more than perfect rhyme" is the identical rhyme, in which not only the vowels but also the onsets of the rhyming syllables are identical, as in gun and begun. Punning rhymes, such as bare and bear are also identical rhymes. The rhyme may extend even farther back than the last stressed vowel. If it extends all the way to the beginning of the line, so that there are two lines that sound very similar or identical, it is called a holorhyme ("For I scream/For ice cream").
In poetics these would be considered identity, rather than rhyme.
पोस्ट्स
९५ टिप्पण्या:
I wonder if there are any clearer examples of the left’s preference for brute force over persuasion than their taking it to the streets response to the Supreme Court’s expected decision that abortion is a democratic question best left to the people to decide?
Roe vs Wade was won by the same flawed institution that gave us Scott vs Sanderson in 1857 and Plessy vs Ferguson in 1896. Our institutions resemble we the people.
Is it? I was under the impression people presented legal arguments and stuff.
It was going to be that all of the right and half of the left would vote for republicans in November; now it half of the right and all of the left voting against republicans in November, thanks to this dem trick and rampant republican "Now let's ban abortion!" stupidity that they counted on.
They don't have the majority of the right that they think they do.
Trump is in so much trouble, if they have him on tape saying that first part on #Jan6.
They sure do not want the state legislatures to make the abortion laws!
, this is how Roe was won
Really? REALLY?
That's HOW Roe was 'won'? by fighting in the streets? REALLY?
Need Proof, that Mad-town idiots are the BIGGEST Idiots on Earth? There you go.
Were they Born stupid? Or did they have to take special stupid school classes for a few years?
Hard to say
Talking heads on the alphabet networks yakking about 'we don't have the votes' [in Congress] to protect abortion.
I submit that the leak of the SCOTUS opinion was all about the midterm elections.
Saint obama said the same thing in his statement. Sounds like calls for an insurrection to me. When can we arrest him?? Isn't that what the left is calling on for Trump?? https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/athena-thorne/2022/05/03/obamas-urge-their-followers-to-take-to-the-streets-to-save-roe-n1594897
Insurrection?
We share a country with people who have no interest in reciprocal treatment.
Like I wrote earlier, big riots this weekend all over the country.
The Commie-Pinko left taking to the streets, including Schumer (D-Insurrectionist) threatening two supreme court justices, is de-facto court packing.
I’m outraged at the mass transphobia on display at that protest. There were far too many signs suggesting that abortion is about women’s rights, clearly cancelling the hard-fought civil right for men to get pregnant. Hate should have no home in Madison, and I hope the Department of Justice will investigate these dangerous fascists who are clearly a threat to our democracy. ��️������️⚧️
Or ya know press congress to enact laws rather than interpret rights through an inherently flawed adjudication process.
This. This is the problem with politicizing the courts. No one should encourage this. It’s the courts job to interpret laws. It’s congress job to write them and get them passed. When a subject is up for debate in court for five decades it’s because the written laws stink on the subject and you need judicial interpretation. Fix the law, not the court.
i DID like the pro life protester that was there with his kids, and his sign telling women
NOT Your Body, NOT Your Decision ... Letting women know, it is The BABY'S body at stake.
Oh? Wait a Minute, That white father of 3, was pro abortion (for Blacks)?? What a RACIST!
Like the white med student (Tessa Meurer), who said:
"As a white girl, i completely support Abortion (for Blacks).. Because it is Genocide"
She ALSO said, that she was TOTALLY in favor of puberty blockers for Trans children, saying:
"Those Freaks, MUST BE sterilized; else they will Breed like nits"
I don’t believe that street protests are “how Roe was won” at all. That chant is lame. As is the way elected officials crowed about how the leaked draft was an affront to “democracy,” completely missing the point that the Court is designed to be a break on the excesses of democracy. The original sin in Roe was the “legislation from the bench” stench of the decision that for fifty years took the issue away from resolution through true legislative debate.
Protests are suddenly cool again.
Feminism, failure to get married or stay married, and childlessness are making people miserable and angry.
Not lack of access to abortion.
What you’re seeing is demonic possession. Satan has convinced the young that only the unlimited and immediate satisfaction of their desires will make them happy and satisfied.
Whatever these people want, I'm for the opposite.
Bring out the Pussy Hats.
Yeah, the Mother’s Day riots.
I openly ask for your reflections on this past 48 hours, AA. I suspect your cruel neutrality has been tested. If I had presented this scenario a week ago as a fictional proposal, would it have seemed as plausible as it has turned out to be? There is such a strong flavor of "by any means necessary" stalking the land today.
In addition, there is always Newton's third law coming to play when red lines keep getting crossed. The times are too damned interesting, but they are what we have.
I'm spooked.
If taking to the streets and fighting really was how Roe was won, isn't that a compelling argument that it needed overruling? Chaos and disorder is no way to organize a constitutional republic of limited and defined powers.
I thought thr chant was "This is what democracy looks like!"
Please make up your (admittedly limited) minds. Do you want democracy or not?
Why is it? The Right is always accused of inciting violence, but the left actually demands violence and acts on on it.
"Take to the law and fight in court/this is how we can abort."
Because democracy is a tool. A perfectly good tool, maybe, even the tool of first resort, but just a tool. If it doesn't get you what you want, there are other tools.
I'm impressed. During the past two years weren't many of these people chanting, "your bodies, my rules"? If history rhymes, the rage should upgrade to, "women of the world unite and withhold sex." I could use a breather....
"What do we want?"
"To kill them babies!"
"When do we want it?"
"Now!"
It appears some of our young people believe they are above the law.
Poor parenting and goddam Lawrence Tribe for his efforts to politicize the Court.
"I don't like the non-rhyme of "one" and "won.""
Stay away from modern poetry! You wouldn't believe all the non-rhymes!
""Take to the streets" seems way too much like an endorsement of rioting."
Right. So? Give them props for honesty. As BLM showed, progs mean it. Your feelings don't matter, except insofar as your love of abortion induces you to abet progressive shenanigans at election time.
"And I don't think "Roe was won" by taking to the streets in either peaceful or violent protests."
True, it was won by judicial invention.
So I guess "call your legislator and demand they be a liberator" is too on the nose with the opinion?
By all means, let’s have that national discussion of WHAT abortion is and WHO abortion kills. No euphemisms, just plain truth.
Riot in places where abortion is legal. Brilliant.
The reports from women at abortion clinics are heartbreaking: some women here tell me they feel “gutted,” “devastated,” and “like someone has died.”
You can't make this stuff up.
https://twitter.com/Yamiche/status/1521502226249830401?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1521502226249830401%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fpjmedia.com%2Fcolumns%2Fstephen-kruiser%2F2022%2F05%2F04%2Fthe-morning-briefing-democrats-find-a-new-lunatic-fringe-after-scotus-leak-n1594938
"If taking to the streets and fighting really was how Roe was won, isn't that a compelling argument that it needed overruling? Chaos and disorder is no way to organize a constitutional republic of limited and defined powers."
This is a good argument but only up to a point.
1. If fighting in the streets rather than cogent legal argument produced the Roe decision, then it was wrongly decided, but...
2. The wrongness of a decision is only one factor in deciding whether to overrule a case, and it's really not enough that the old case is wrong. It needs to be badly wrong. The Dobbs draft talks about Roe being "egregiously wrong."
the little kid with the vulgar prop. that's a nice touch.
"I wonder if there are any clearer examples of the left’s preference for brute force over persuasion than their taking it to the streets response to the Supreme Court’s expected decision that abortion is a democratic question best left to the people to decide?"
Public demonstrations are "brute force?"
"Stay away from modern poetry! You wouldn't believe all the non-rhymes!"
Thanks for the warning. But I'm not objecting to the complete absence of rhyme, where no rhyme is intended. I'm objecting to repeating the same sound — one/won — as if it's a rhyme.
Not all chants are rhymes — e.g., "This is what democracy looks like" — but I think that one — "Take to the streets and fight as one, this is how Roe was won” — was meant to be the rhyming kind — e.g. "Ho Ho Ho Chi Minh/Viet Cong are gonna win."
Here's my quick rewrite of the chant: "Take to the law and fight in court/this is how we can abort."
The party line is that it's not about being for abortion, it's about being for "choice." So you'd need a rhyme for that or for "autonomy" or for "my body myself."
"the little kid with the vulgar prop. that's a nice touch."
Yes, that bothered me.
I've long objected to the use of kids in protests. They should not be holding signs that with words they can't understand and believe.
But this one shows a child saying "fuck": "STFU ALITO." We're told her name and age. She's 7. She should not be displayed with the word "fuck" associated with her. And in any case, she cannot understand the substance of the sign and she shouldn't be made to express such hostility. She's 7.
Are children in favor of abortion? The little girl was born, but should we visualize other children beside her, ghost children, the aborted.
American Liberals go on offense, conservatives play defense when it comes to threats ("I'm going to secure my property and dare Obama and the ATF to come in here after my guns"). However, liberals have heretofore usually stopped at being intimidating and destroying objects - setting fires, breaking windows. Conservatives mutter right from the start that they are armed and will hurt people if they need to. This makes each group look more dangerous and out-of-control to the other, as it breaks a limitation that had set for their own group, and thus looks worse. My worry is that both groups are breaking their own rules over the last few years, as they have in other countries before now. Liberals are more willing to pick human targets, conservatives more willing to go out to protest or stop protests.
The 1849 Wisconsin “quickening” abortion law is pretty much the 15-week Mississippi law in Dobbs.
Maybe the Court will reject the draft
I see we've reached the "bargaining" phase of the 5 stages of grief.
Only 2 more to go!
2. The wrongness of a decision is only one factor in deciding whether to overrule a case, and it's really not enough that the old case is wrong. It needs to be badly wrong. The Dobbs draft talks about Roe being "egregiously wrong."
You have to be illiterate to think Roe is not “egregiously wrong.”
“The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”
“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.[6]”
Abortion is clearly and specifically mentioned right there for everyone to see. My second grader figured it out.
People that support Roe are just showing everyone how they really don’t care about what words mean or how the constitution is supposed to work and clearly don’t give 2 shits about judicial reasoning.
Notice the complete lack of any actual analysis of Alito’s actual words by the ghouls and baby part sellers.
"Here's my quick rewrite of the chant: "Take to the law and fight in court/this is how we can abort."
The problem is that it says the quiet part out loud.
How about; “We really love the rule of law. Do what we say or get hit in the jaw?”
Why not campaign to get abortion laws through the legislature? Much better than replying on judges to make the laws you can't persuade your fellow citizens to support. That's how it was done in Europe. Through Parliaments. Gives political legitimacy and much more secure. Once the right realised that the left was trying to achieve its contentious objectives through the Courts rather than through the legislature, they started appointing right wing judges. So, I don't have sympathy for the left about Roe. They should have pushed for legislation, but they preferred easy wins, not democratic wins.
Looks like we have a potential winner. Yale law grad USSC clerk on the road to being disbarred?
https://twitter.com/willchamberlain/status/1521685968939630592?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1521685968939630592%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fnalert.blogspot.com%2F
How many states have "abortion rights" written into their laws or their constitution? Isn't Winsconsin rather liberal socially?
The same people that chanted about "baby killers" during Vietnam are the baby killers now.History goes full circle.
"What you’re seeing is demonic possession. Satan has convinced the young that only the unlimited and immediate satisfaction of their desires will make them happy and satisfied."
Isn't it always this way with the young? (I mean, aside from the loony demonic possession talk and all.)
There’s what’s right and what’s wrong. It can be as simple and straightforward as that, absent the legal gibberish, the narcissism, the lack of ethics and morals.
Hey hey hoe hoe, ending Roe is a big phat No!
Women are back!
Last night, all the local elected democrats were espousing their pro-abortion bona fides on the evening news.
The TV camera stayed focused on the podium, and failed to reveal the size of the over-wrought protestors.
Pro-abortion mob vs. Right to Life of Unborn…
Competing interests
Why are the DemCong so addicted to violence? Their ideas are so good that they must be imposed by force?
It's a death cult.
The left has more in common with radical Islam than they realize...
I've never understood the left's obsession with killing babies. It's a religion to them. It's as if they are told "Sacrifice that baby on the altar of Baal and you will have happiness and wealth for your remaining days", and they all nod their heads in agreement, then stab the knife into their child's skull.
Take that religion away from them and they are all miserable.
It's sickening.
Or maybe, just lobby your state legislators to pass laws on abortion.
"You have to be illiterate to think Roe is not “egregiously wrong.”"
Even so, there are 3 other factors in deciding whether to overrule, and they don't have to do with the wrongness of the original decision.
"Looks like we have a potential winner. Yale law grad USSC clerk on the road to being disbarred?"
I have no idea who it is, but I think you're overestimating the damage of disbarment for the leaker. Assuming it's a law clerk, that is, a person at the beginning of their career, I believe if they openly admit and talk about what they did and why, they can get an excellent position as a law professor and write about it for the rest of their career. You don't need to be a member of the bar to be a law professor. You can float supremely above mere practice of law. This leaker will have many admirers, and the topic of the ethics of leaking is important beyond the topic of abortion. There is also the topic of politics and the Supreme Court.
Because abortion prevents the birth of children of the deplorables/undesirables, i.e., the socialists, communists, liberals, etc., collectively “the Left,” I’m all for it. For every child exterminated with extreme prejudice in the womb today, that’s one fewer eligible voter 18 years from now. And those exterminated won’t have any children, grandchildren, etc.
We know that Lefty women are more likely than other women to have abortions. We also know that to the extent parents are political/religious, they will try to pass their values down to their children and encourage them to vote as they vote. Of course, those values don’t always stick given the mass indoctrination/brainwashing taking place in our education system. But more likely than not, those values probably do influence the offspring.
James Taranto of the WSJ wrote a very interesting article on this in 2005: “The Roe Effect, The Right to Abortion Has Diminished the Number of Democratic voters.”
So abort on, lefties, the nation is counting on you!
https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB122695016603334449
Women at an abortion clinic feel "gutted, devastated . . someone has died". Yup--several someones die each day at your average abortion clinic.
I'm agnostic on whether abortion should be permitted or not--in some cases it's both necessary and morally right. In other cases, not so much. In some countries (supposedly Russia is one) abortion is simply the preferred method of contraception/birth control with women getting three or four or even more abortions in the course of their sexual lives.
I believe if they openly admit and talk about what they did and why, they can get an excellent position as a law professor and write about it for the rest of their career.
Why not? It worked for Anita Hill and the Weathermen.
I simply do not understand your complete lack of outrage about this leak. the leak was far more destructive of our republic than the Jan. 6 "insurrection". Is there any step too far? How will you react if some Leftwing nut cake kills a Justice?
Even so, there are 3 other factors in deciding whether to overrule, and they don't have to do with the wrongness of the original decision.
So your position is that a wrong judicial decision cannot be overruled simply because it was wrong?
This leaker will have many admirers, and the topic of the ethics of leaking is important beyond the topic of abortion.
Let's not be flippant. Leaking judicial internal workings is dangerous! There is no reasonable ethical explanation. Are you suggesting there is a valid time and place for these sorts of leaks?
Should this person have admirers after this act? In any component of the legal field? Beyond the topic of abortion, does the court system work if judges can be influenced outside the rules of procedure? This leak is designed to influence outside the rules of SCOTUS. If we proceed down that road there will be other attempts to influence other cases. The whole point of a judicial system is that there are rules to follow. Argue with logic and words instead of fists and violence.
In third world countries, judges are typically the targets of things like car bombs. There are no rules. Do we want that in our country?
Courts are built around the rules. You argue your case in Court. According to the rules. When it doesn't go your way you don't bribe a clerk (implicitly or explicitly) to try and influence your case.
We don't want court cases decided in the public sphere. That leads to violence in the streets. It's only because there are rules in place that the Court has any legitimacy.
I don't want to presuppose your stance on an alleged leaker being allowed to teach the law. But I would hope that as a former law professor you would encourage your colleagues to the best of your ability to never hire such a person. It destroys the institution you purported to care about.
At a minimum I would expect that any leaker should be charged with contempt of court. It certainly meets Black’s Law Dictionary definition:
Contempt of court is defined as any act which is calculated to embarrass, hinder, or obstruct a court in the administration of justice, or which is calculated to lessen the authority or dignity of a court.
If there are no penalties it will happen again and with more frequency. Slippery slopes do exist. The leak is a bigger deal than overturning Roe.
I simply do not understand your complete lack of outrage about this leak.
Me too. It's either corrupt or obtuse.
If she thinks the leak is ethical in this instance, I'd welcome an explanation.
I don't think "Roe was won" by taking to the streets in either peaceful or violent protests
To the contrary. As you well know, Roe was won by RAW JUDICIAL POWER. Roe was one because of the power of the powerful. Period. Certainly history, science, justice and right reason had nothing to do with it.
I give a pass to the rime. There ought to be another syllable in the second line, though.
The last line of Rodgers and Hart’s “Spring is Here” is
“Spring is here, I hear.”
The French must rely on rhyme riche because the French are terrible at writing poetry.
This is obviously my prejudice, but few doubt the superiority of verse written in English. Linguists often attribute this to the French language, which is strange, because Spain produces so much excellent poetry, and they are both romance languages.
German poetry (romance language) is also superior to French poetry, as is Russian poetry (not romance, rivals England). Why? Maybe national identity runs deeper than we currently admit. America is certainly an outlier mongrel, language and culture-wise, and we used to produce an extraordinary number of excellent poets.
By the way, in France, abortion is legal until 14 weeks, and after that, two doctors must confirm that carrying the baby will cause the mother serious physical harm or death, or the child is either not viable or will suffer extreme pain from birth defects or death outside the womb. Spain is the same. Germany allows abortion on demand until 12 weeks and then imposes mandatory counselling and the restrictions common to France and Spain. Ironically Ireland allows abortion on demand up to 14 weeks, while in Britain and Russia it's 12 weeks. Only the U.S. allows abortion on demand far into the second trimester. For example, in the state of Georgia, it's still 22 weeks, (for now, as restrictive laws work through the courts). In New York State, 24 weeks, with rules for allowing abortion until the point of birth being very, very expansive, practically non-existent, and nothing like the medical restrictions placed in Europe and most of the U.K. Ironically, in Finland, the liberal's delight, there is no abortion on demand, though doctors rarely deny an abortion. Before 12 weeks, one doctor must approve, with some exceptions for automatic access, such as having four children already; 12 to 20 weeks are increasingly more restrictive and require two doctors to concur. Only the life of the mother may be considered after 20 weeks.
People I've met from these countries in the context of my former pro-choice job before I became pro-life -- I met several delegations -- were universally troubled by our policy of abortion on demand up to viability and our abject failure to involve the police when an adult brings in under-aged girls for abortions, a very common occurrence. We were essentially abetting child rape. Of course that was a long time ago: now many of these same countries don't bother to do anything about the rape of certain children, thanks to identity politics.
@This person: "Looks like we have a potential winner. Yale law grad USSC clerk..." Not very convincing. But that's police work: you line up reasonable suspects and then try to check them out. This was just step one.
Ann's right: you can certainly be a law professor without being permitted to practice law because you can't pass the ethics test or you have been disbarred. See, for example, Bernardine Dohrn and Elinor Raskin. Hell, they were hired as law professors because they killed cops.
Whoever leaked this will be teaching at an Ivy League law school very soon.
This leaker will have many admirers, and the topic of the ethics of leaking is important beyond the topic of abortion.
It's what the left does. Remember the leaking of Trump's telephone call to another head of state? That was worse and was unpunished. Nixon should have burned the tapes. He just didn't realize the FBI had set him up.
We've gotten so used to thinking we can actually predict the future that Madison liberals (and lots of other people) are protesting something that hasn't happened yet.
It's like the world forgot "don't count your chickens till they're hatched" and "if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all" in one, fell, swoop.
Roe was passed through coalitions of doctors and lawyers who met and worked with each other to decide which state would present the most compelling case. First it was to be Georgia, named Doe v. Bolton, but the Texas case, Roe v. Wade was addressed first that day and Doe was passed later in the day. Margie Pitts Hames, the lead lawyer in Doe, was a brilliant attorney but was quite cruel to her client, publicly calling her mentally ill. I never met Hames but she represented some clinics with terrible reputations for doing third trimester abortions and killing babies after live births, one of which was closed after Hames' death.
I interviewed several of the surviving Doe v. Bolton group, and none of them seemed comfortable with abortion on demand going so far into the second trimester, nor uncoupling abortion on demand so much from what they envisioned: abortions provided safely to married women with abusive or abandoning husbands and/or to poor women who had too many children to support already. I have always wondered: how did we end up so different from European standards?
You don't need to be a member of the bar to be a law professor.
Yes, Bernardine Dohrn, a known terrorist, was a law professor at Northwestern.
Tells you a lot about law schools.
"This leaker will have many admirers, and the topic of the ethics of leaking is important beyond the topic of abortion."
That was my first thought when the news broke. The clerk is a hero to the cause.
The larger problem with your rewrite is that it uses the word "abort."
You can't just *say* that's what you want, even though it is! You have to say "choice" or "privacy" or discuss it in terms of your own body, your own rights, etc.
The motte is "a woman should control her own body/have privacy etc" and everyone agrees with that.
The bailey is "I want to be able to get an abortion whenever I want, at whatever point in my pregnancy, for whatever reason I want" and many fewer people agree with that.
You can't just chant that you want to abort!
"And in any case, she cannot understand the substance of the sign and she shouldn't be made to express such hostility. She's 7."
Progressives want to teach seven year olds (and younger) about sex, against the wishes of their parents. Where does what a child "shouldn't be made to" fit in here?
The abortion supporters and Democrats are already rioting in LA.
Good. This reaction is exactly what we want. Especially in deep blue cities so the rest of us can see it on TV,.
Roe was won because of the power of the powerful. Period. Certainly history, science, justice and right reason had nothing to do with it.
I think that is exactly right. Professor Robert George of Princeton, in his statement yesterday:
In fact, what sustained Roe for forty-nine years was precisely the prestige, influence, and power of people in academia, journalism, entertainment, key professions and professional associations, the great philanthropies, politics, and the corporate world who were deeply invested in maintaining it, despite its manifest lack of intellectual credibility.
Anything but take it to those vile voters.
Wendybar and others ask "Why are the statements and actions of the left today different from the statements and actions of Trump supporters leading up to Jan 6?" What makes the latter "insurrection" and the former "legitimate protest"?
"Vote for state legislators who support
Women's right to abort."
It may be hard to chant, but it is an effective strategy.
Wave the bloody tampon.
I think you're overestimating the damage of disbarment for the leaker
How exactly did you discover my estimate? Was it a darn penumbra again?
"There are no rules. Do we want that in our country?"
Asked and answered. BLM/Antifa riots- err... mostly peaceful protests.
Asked about abortion, he’s clear.
“I’m very pro-choice,” Trump says. “I hate the concept of abortion. I hate it. I hate everything it stands for. I cringe when I listen to people debating the subject. But you still — I just believe in choice.”
gadfly said...
Asked about abortion, he’s clear.
“I’m very pro-choice,” Trump says. “I hate the concept of abortion. I hate it. I hate everything it stands for. I cringe when I listen to people debating the subject. But you still — I just believe in choice.”
And he still did more for the pro-life movement than any other President in history.
Because it's what you do, not what you say you believe, that matters.
Now, he's also done a lot for sane and honest members of the "pro-choice" / pro-abortion side, too.
because now you can stop lying about Roe / Casey, and engage in honest discussion.
And now that you have to actually convince your neighbors, rather than rely on SCTUS to bully them into irrelevance, you have a chance to start talking and acting in a sane and honest manner.
65% of Americans believe that States should be able to outlaw abortion starting in the 2nd trimester. Which means that 65% of Americans think that the law being fought over in Dobbs is a perfectly reasonable one.
So, you can be abotion absolutists, and lose in almost every State, or you can engage in reasonable compromise, and win
Your choice
rhhardin said...
It was going to be that all of the right and half of the left would vote for republicans in November; now it half of the right and all of the left voting against republicans in November, thanks to this dem trick and rampant republican "Now let's ban abortion!" stupidity that they counted on.
1: The decision was going to come down by July, well before the November elections
2: Tim Ryan, fresh off winning the Dem nomination for US Senator in Ohio, just announced he things there should be absolutely NO limits on abortion, that a woman should be able to get one any time before birth.
At least 80% of Americans oppose this position. But it's what will be demanded by the people who control the Democrats' "mindspace", for lack of a better term.
Unless the Dems can shut up their Left end, and that hasn't happened in over a decade, the decision is Dobbs is going to help the GOP in November, not hurt it.
Because a Party running on the "We Love Partial Birth Abortion" platform does not have a winning message
The alacrity, unanimity, and force of the Democratic Party's response to the Dobbs leak speaks volumes about their core problem: they've won so much and so often that they have run out of the kind of galvanizing causes they need to fuel the sense of permanent crisis that enables them. They have been reduced to claiming that our worth as a nation hinges upon such absurdities as transgender rights, or a 7 trillion dollar soft infrastructure bill that has no meaning other than the words "7 trillion", or student loan forgiveness, or a racialist spoils system, or an end to restrictions on immigration. So here at last is something they can get their base to riot about.
Of course, the enduring theme can't be said out loud: we want government money and power to be funneled to our pals, so that they will allow us to have lots of money and power. It's low rent greed and nihilism, dressed up. And it's pervasive and durable.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा