Leaked Supreme Court Decision signals majority set to overturn Roe v. Wade

[Rev. Rye]

Looking a bit closer at this, there were a few more things I was unaware of:
1) That there were actually calls for RBG to resign sometime in 2013-4, but, at least on her end, there was no real reason to leave, since, despite her age, she was still mentally sharp enough to do her duties.
2) Apparently, Judge Roberts is only halfway on board with the decision, with him okay with banning abortion after 15 weeks, but still being against overturning Roe and Casey.

That said, it speaks volumes about IA's beliefs that he blames, of all people, Ginsburg, and not, you know, the right-wing judges who are actually endorsing the decision, or people like Mitch McConnell who decided to jack the system and refuse to allow a vote on any candidate the Democratic party wanted to nominate.

Worth noting, the approach McConnell has decided is standard operating procedure doesn't have much of a basis in the past. The last case of a Supreme Court Justice leaving during an election year when the Presidency and Senate were controlled by different parties was in 1888, but that candidate was confirmed 41-20. The closest thing to a precedent I can find is when Fillmore tried and failed to nominate Edward Bradford to the Court in 1852, but I could find no reasoning behind why they did so. With this in mind, I cannot imagine RBG would have expected McConnell to pull some bullshit out of his ass in 2016.

Even his more recent apparent stance of not committing to ANY of Biden’s nominees if the Republicans control the senate doesn’t even have any precedent before 2016, and is, indeed, contradicted by David Souter and Clarence Thomas being confirmed by a Democratic controlled senate during the first Bush administration during my lifetime.

[The Architect Of Fate]

What sidetrack?  You came in and delivered their line.  You're late, I'd already read it (and enjoyed a hearty laugh at the premise, too).  Womp womp.\

Google notifications are amazing.  It's why I always know what you fucking nuts are going to say before you get here.

Yup, it's like clockwork. The Reich wing sphere gets all hot and bothered by something and IA rushes over and repeats it.

[Irreligious Atheist]

Looking a bit closer at this, there were a few more things I was unaware of:
1) That there were actually calls for RBG to resign sometime in 2013-4, but, at least on her end, there was no real reason to leave, since, despite her age, she was still mentally sharp enough to do her duties.
2) Apparently, Judge Roberts is only halfway on board with the decision, with him okay with banning abortion  after 15 weeks, but still being against overturning Roe and Casey.

That said, it speaks volumes about IA's beliefs that he blames, of all people, Ginsburg, and not, you know, the right-wing judges who are actually endorsing the decision, or people like Mitch McConnell who decided to jack the system and refuse to allow a vote on any candidate the Democratic party wanted to nominate.

Worth noting, the approach McConnell has decided is standard operating procedure doesn't have much of a basis in the past. The last case of a Supreme Court Justice leaving during an election year when the Presidency and Senate were controlled by different parties was in 1888, but that candidate was confirmed 41-20. The closest thing to a precedent I can find is when Fillmore tried and failed to nominate Edward Bradford to the Court in 1852, but I could find no reasoning behind why they did so. With this in mind, I cannot imagine RBG would have expected McConnell to pull some bullshit out of his ass in 2016.

Even his more recent apparent stance of not committing to ANY of Biden’s nominees if the Republicans control the senate doesn’t even have any precedent before 2016, and is, indeed, contradicted by David Souter and Clarence Thomas being confirmed by a Democratic controlled senate during the first Bush administration during my lifetime.

RBG was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer in 2009, and she had survived colon cancer before that. No one is saying she wasn't mentally sharp enough. She took a huge risk in not resigning due to her health issues and history. Her ego and love for the work wouldn't let her step down. You may not like that I brought her up, but hero worship and a refusal to criticize your own side is not how you grow and learn from mistakes. Constructive criticism is.

My post said that the decision was awful news, so I think it should go without saying that I am not in favour of the people that made that awful decision. If you didn't get that out of my post, then you clearly didn't want to get that out of my post and you were looking for something to be bothered by. Me straying from the hero worship of RBG speaks volumes to you about my beliefs? I couldn't be any more pro abortion and I have no issue with a woman or transman getting an abortion on their due date. I like you Rev, but you're barking up the wrong tree here acting like me not specifically spelling out the words "Republicans bad" tells you all you need to know. You're right much of the time, but not this time, and you're not a mind reader.

[Rev. Rye]

The post says, in full, this:

This is awful news. RBG really should have put the ego aside and stepped down so Obama could nominate someone else.

It’s nice that you see this as bad. The thing I have a problem with is that, after this, you go on to place blame, not not only do so, but put the blame on someone whose contribution to this problem was miniscule and made perfect sense at the time (can anybody actually find any evidence that people were aware the Republicans were hatching a plan to not even bother with a vote to confirm any nominee that Obama fielded?) and leaving out, well, the people who were actually railroading the Supreme Court into this. You devoted 17 words of 21 in that post to this spurious claim, therefore, it seems justified to focus on it.

Also, about mind reading, you do know I have autism, right? I can only go with what I see and what I’ve learned. What I’m seeing is a questionably worded post and I’ve learned you have a history of saying some dodgy stuff.

[The Grand Nudger]

Yes yes yes, RBG was a tireless worker in the good fight, the real shame is that her career didn't end sooner.

[The Architect Of Fate]

It's funny that Conservatives are smugly pulling their tired immature "you mad bro " routine because if I had a dollar for every stupid culture war thing the rights fly into a total meltdown over I would be richer than Elon Musk (Green M&Ms, A dude wearing a dress, Some kids making cringy tik tok videoes)

[The Grand Nudger]

White supremacists showing their ass in busy intersections, failing to shut down commerce, as was their objective.

[Rev. Rye]

Honestly, thinking a bit about it, if we were to play the game IA's been playing, of trying to blame ANYONE but the Republicans who've been fighting tooth and nail to jack up the system and make this happen, why not blame Barack Obama? When the Republican-controlled Senate decided they wouldn't hold a vote on any Supreme Court nominee Obama appointed, there was a good chance Obama could have just decided that, because the Senate wasn't going to do their job of advising and consenting, it would be necessary to just put Garland on the court, and Constitutional scholars have made that exact argument. But he was too busy taking the high road to do so. Frankly, Anton Walbrook had the right idea:

If you let yourself be defeated by them, just because you are too fair to hit back the same way they hit at you, there won't be any methods *but* Nazi methods! If you preach the Rules of the Game while they use every foul and filthy trick against you, they will laugh at you! They'll think you're weak, decadent! [...] This time you're fighting for your very existence against the most devilish idea ever created by a human brain - Nazism. And if you lose, there won't be a return match next year... perhaps not even for a hundred years.

And the fact that Alito's opinion heavily implies that any rights that did not exist in 1787 are disposable makes the second part more poignant.

And this is from someone who actually DID vote for Obama three times, just to be clear.

[Belacqua]

trying to blame ANYONE but the Republicans

The Republicans are to blame. The Democrats are to blame too.

Obama campaigned on codifying the right to choose into law. During his first two years he had majorities in both houses of Congress. He did nothing at all to try to keep his campaign promise. He said it was "not a high priority." 

Hillary Clinton chose a pro-life running mate, and made it clear that she thought abortion rights were not something she would spend political capital on. She and Pelosi thought that a focus on such rights would drive away the more right-wing wavering Republicans they want to lure into voting Democrat. For years, the strategy has been to appeal more to the center-Right voters, and just assume that anyone vaguely Left-wing will vote Dem because there's no other choice. 

Republicans are to blame for their activity. Democrats are to blame for a near total lack of meaningful activity. 

Currently Dems have the White House, the House, and 50% of the Senate (where Harris would be the tie-breaker). Is there a push to rush to codify Roe into law while the possibility exists? No, Biden, true to form, spent the day at a munitions factory, doing infomercials for missiles. He is pro-war, pro-corporate profit, and indifferent to what the Dem base (likely soon to be the ex-base) wants. 

The Dems will certainly continue to use abortion rights in their campaign ads, saying that if you don't vote for them the Reps will take away your rights. All the while, they do nothing to secure those rights.

[Ranjr]

[quote pid='2101247' dateline='1651794514']
This quote feature is odd to me.  Where can I

 


And this is from someone who actually DID vote for Obama three times, just to be clear.

 
Not to brag, but I voted for Obama 11 times, which is only have as many times I voted for Biden in Michigan alone.
[/quote]