Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:What will destroy the US:
- abortion battles
- borders
- income inequality
They’re all related. The GOP has been hell-bent on bringing back the Gilded Age for a long time. You start by having a mass of desperate people who will work for pennies in nearly any conditions. As good a game as the GOP talks on the border, they want the bodies. Preferably without papers, as they are easier to exploit and you don’t have to provide them any social services. But desperate native born workers are good too, and nothing like a desperate woman to keep your desperate male base sexually satisfied and feeling like he has some control over his miserable, small life.
If the GOP actually wanted to control immigration, they’d mandate eVerify and apply some of those draconian anti-abortion penalties to people hiring illegal immigrants. But they don’t do that, do they? No, because they want the cheap, desperate labor.
It’s all related.
Anonymous wrote:What will destroy the US:
- abortion battles
- borders
- income inequality
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:What will destroy the US:
- abortion battles
- borders
- income inequality
Abortion battles will not destroy the US. Abortion bans are destructive and very unpopular and they will go down at at the ballot box. and the us will survive without them as it did for the last 50 years.
Anonymous wrote:What will destroy the US:
- abortion battles
- borders
- income inequality
Anonymous wrote:What will destroy the US:
- abortion battles
- borders
- income inequality
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
I think Dark Brandon needs to shut off the highway funds to Texas until they decide to start following the Constitution. Texas boys will lose their crap once the potholes get so big they eat their Tahoes.
They are following the Constitution. Banning the use of highways in the commission of a crime is nothing new. If you don't like abortion being a crime, then you should blame Dark Brandon for being so focused on infrastructure that he never bothered to push for Roe v. Wade to be codified when he had the chance
It’s not a federal crime to travel to another state to engage in activity that is legal under federal law or the state where you’re going. Federal funding can and needs to be cut off. If Texas wants to play at independence let them pave their own roads.
It is a state crime. You can try to cut off federal funding, I'm sure speaker Johnson will be really open to that argument. That seems like a precedent that democrats are dumb enough to push for and then wonder why it's used against them when republicans are in power. Democrats had both houses and the presidency and a super politician, but Dark Brandon didn't bother to codify Roe v. Wade and didn't do any at all to address the court the McConnell effectively packed for a generation.
Roe v Wade, the precedent that the lying fascists all said was settled law? Why would he codify a law that was already settled law?
Forced birther clown.![]()
After he was elected when the court was 6-3, the senate and house both blue, and Dobbs on the docket
Again: they all said in their hearings, under oath, it was settled law. Settled law. Do you know what that means, sweetie? It means they’re hacks and it means the court is illegitimate.
According to PP, the mistake was believing Republicans were good people and you could trust them at their word. Guess we’ve learned our lesson there, haven’t we.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
I think Dark Brandon needs to shut off the highway funds to Texas until they decide to start following the Constitution. Texas boys will lose their crap once the potholes get so big they eat their Tahoes.
If you don't like abortion being a crime, then you should blame Dark Brandon for being so focused on infrastructure that he never bothered to push for Roe v. Wade to be codified when he had the chance
When did Biden “have the chance” to codify Roe v. Wade? Which nine or ten Republican Senators would have supported that?
The senate makes the rules. McConnell knows that they can be changed for important issues. Schumer and Biden haven't caught on
When has a majority of the Senate supported nuking the filibuster?
When republicans needed to get judicial nominees through
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
I think Dark Brandon needs to shut off the highway funds to Texas until they decide to start following the Constitution. Texas boys will lose their crap once the potholes get so big they eat their Tahoes.
They are following the Constitution. Banning the use of highways in the commission of a crime is nothing new. If you don't like abortion being a crime, then you should blame Dark Brandon for being so focused on infrastructure that he never bothered to push for Roe v. Wade to be codified when he had the chance
It’s not a federal crime to travel to another state to engage in activity that is legal under federal law or the state where you’re going. Federal funding can and needs to be cut off. If Texas wants to play at independence let them pave their own roads.
It is a state crime. You can try to cut off federal funding, I'm sure speaker Johnson will be really open to that argument. That seems like a precedent that democrats are dumb enough to push for and then wonder why it's used against them when republicans are in power. Democrats had both houses and the presidency and a super politician, but Dark Brandon didn't bother to codify Roe v. Wade and didn't do any at all to address the court the McConnell effectively packed for a generation.
Roe v Wade, the precedent that the lying fascists all said was settled law? Why would he codify a law that was already settled law?
Forced birther clown.![]()
After he was elected when the court was 6-3, the senate and house both blue, and Dobbs on the docket
Again: they all said in their hearings, under oath, it was settled law. Settled law. Do you know what that means, sweetie? It means they’re hacks and it means the court is illegitimate.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
I think Dark Brandon needs to shut off the highway funds to Texas until they decide to start following the Constitution. Texas boys will lose their crap once the potholes get so big they eat their Tahoes.
They are following the Constitution. Banning the use of highways in the commission of a crime is nothing new. If you don't like abortion being a crime, then you should blame Dark Brandon for being so focused on infrastructure that he never bothered to push for Roe v. Wade to be codified when he had the chance
It’s not a federal crime to travel to another state to engage in activity that is legal under federal law or the state where you’re going. Federal funding can and needs to be cut off. If Texas wants to play at independence let them pave their own roads.
It is a state crime. You can try to cut off federal funding, I'm sure speaker Johnson will be really open to that argument. That seems like a precedent that democrats are dumb enough to push for and then wonder why it's used against them when republicans are in power. Democrats had both houses and the presidency and a super politician, but Dark Brandon didn't bother to codify Roe v. Wade and didn't do any at all to address the court the McConnell effectively packed for a generation.
Roe v Wade, the precedent that the lying fascists all said was settled law? Why would he codify a law that was already settled law?
Forced birther clown.![]()
After he was elected when the court was 6-3, the senate and house both blue, and Dobbs on the docket