Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You know- if they retire and step down, the protesting will stop.

Just sayin.’

This is the wet dream of the leftists here.

Don't like a ruling? Then, get out and protest and threaten the Justices who ruled in a manner which you don't approve. Keep at it until you force those with whom you disagree out. It has been your tactic with so many issues.

It won't work though. They have proved that they won't be intimidated by the crazies who think it is their "right" to protest and threaten to force the Justices to change their votes.

The same people who justified the riots during the summer of 2020, claiming that it was "only property damage" or "the ends justify the means" are the people condoning this crap. It's all "civil rights" until someone is hurt or killed. And, even then..... the leftists manage to attempt to justify their threats and violence in absurd ways.

This is why so many are voting out the Democrats who just won't condemn the actions their party is taking.

Of the 450 murders committed by political extremists in the past decade, 4% have been committed by left-wing extremists. 75% were committed by right-wing extremists.

We're not the party of threats and violence.

LOL.
James Hodgkinson. He didn't kill anyone, but his intent was to murder many Republicans.
Nicholas John Roske. Again, he didn't murder anyone but his intent was to do just that.
And, I am sure the people who murdered David Dorn were not classified as "political extremists" even though they were looting and destroying as a result of the George Floyd protests.

And, then, let's remember the "summer of love" killings in Seattle at CHAZ, Again, probably not classified as "political extremists."

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You know- if they retire and step down, the protesting will stop.

Just sayin.’

This is the wet dream of the leftists here.

Don't like a ruling? Then, get out and protest and threaten the Justices who ruled in a manner which you don't approve. Keep at it until you force those with whom you disagree out. It has been your tactic with so many issues.

It won't work though. They have proved that they won't be intimidated by the crazies who think it is their "right" to protest and threaten to force the Justices to change their votes.

The same people who justified the riots during the summer of 2020, claiming that it was "only property damage" or "the ends justify the means" are the people condoning this crap. It's all "civil rights" until someone is hurt or killed. And, even then..... the leftists manage to attempt to justify their threats and violence in absurd ways.

This is why so many are voting out the Democrats who just won't condemn the actions their party is taking.

Of the 450 murders committed by political extremists in the past decade, 4% have been committed by left-wing extremists. 75% were committed by right-wing extremists.

We're not the party of threats and violence.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Carefully worded" deception is how you win a battle but later on lose the much bigger war.

+1
We’re at a crossroads. Do people want the christofascism the GOP and their deep pocket donors are forcing on us, or do we actually want to work to a better America?

Dems are just more discreet about big donors directing policy choices. And the constant use of women and blacks as token everything - nothing ever changes despite the Dems controlling congress and the White House. So - bad as GOP Zia - Dems are no better.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Carefully worded" deception is how you win a battle but later on lose the much bigger war.

+1
We’re at a crossroads. Do people want the christofascism the GOP and their deep pocket donors are forcing on us, or do we actually want to work to a better America?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"A close examination of the carefully worded answers by the three Trump appointees, however, shows that while each acknowledged at their hearings that Roe was precedent, and should be afforded the weight that that carries, none specifically committed to refusing to consider overturning it."

https://www.factcheck.org/2022/05/what-gorsuch-kavanaugh-and-barrett-said-about-roe-at-confirmation-hearings/

The Supreme Court has overturned precedent dozens of times. None of these justices lied.

What was the intended effect of their answers?

“A judge sworn to decide impartially can offer no forecasts, no hints for that would show not only disregard for the specifics of the particular case, it would display disdain for the entire judicial process.”

Ring a bell, ding-a-ling?

Anonymous wrote:I am sure everyone is okay with protests at the homes of the dissenters of the latest cases?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You know- if they retire and step down, the protesting will stop.

Just sayin.’

Wow. I come from a country where this is actually how things work.

Is that really what you want for America? Very sad.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"A close examination of the carefully worded answers by the three Trump appointees, however, shows that while each acknowledged at their hearings that Roe was precedent, and should be afforded the weight that that carries, none specifically committed to refusing to consider overturning it."

https://www.factcheck.org/2022/05/what-gorsuch-kavanaugh-and-barrett-said-about-roe-at-confirmation-hearings/

The Supreme Court has overturned precedent dozens of times. None of these justices lied.

What was the intended effect of their answers?

“A judge sworn to decide impartially can offer no forecasts, no hints for that would show not only disregard for the specifics of the particular case, it would display disdain for the entire judicial process.”

Ring a bell, ding-a-ling?

Anonymous wrote:We have a renegade court drunk on its own power ignoring precedent left and right.

These protests are the fruit of their dishonest labors.

May their days and nights be full of chaos and disharmony.

Anonymous wrote:You know- if they retire and step down, the protesting will stop.

Just sayin.’

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"A close examination of the carefully worded answers by the three Trump appointees, however, shows that while each acknowledged at their hearings that Roe was precedent, and should be afforded the weight that that carries, none specifically committed to refusing to consider overturning it."

https://www.factcheck.org/2022/05/what-gorsuch-kavanaugh-and-barrett-said-about-roe-at-confirmation-hearings/

The Supreme Court has overturned precedent dozens of times. None of these justices lied.

What was the intended effect of their answers?