Liberals Now Like Texas Anti-Abortion Law Tactic?

[Sgt. Pepper]

Liberals have been circumventing the constitution for a looong time. Ridiculous for them to be all self righteous about the constitution now. The supreme court has sided with conservatives when it comes to roe v wade. Overturning roe v wade has nothing to do with the bill of rights like so called liberals want to dismantle. I guess I'm glad I finally left California for reasons like this. We'll probably see an exodus of actual freedom loving Americans from places like California and those states will be left to rot under extreme leftist governments.

Would you mind providing some examples and substantiate how liberals have been circumventing the Constitution for a long time? Thanks, in advance.

 

[SomeRandom]

Exactly!
Tis as though the Dems & Pubs are in a race to the bottom.
All justified by pointing to the other's sins.

Your Dems are considered right wing in pretty much every other country on earth. Including mine and we’re pretty right wing. Having engaged with a number of lefties from the US I’ve come to the conclusion that they only vote Democrat because they dislike the Republicans more. Kind of like how I vote Labour only because they’re a tiny little bit left to the Liberal (conservative party.) I don’t like that party at all. Both deserve each other as far as I’m concerned. But one is the lesser of two evils, so to speak
So of course they share similar tactics. Look at so called “cancel culture.” That was practically invented by the right wing. Now it’s being utilised by lefties in a variety of ways

 

[Revoltingest]

Your Dems are considered right wing in pretty much every other country on earth.

Yeah, we do hear that you're all a bunch'o commies.
Still, from our perspective there are 2 sides of the aisle.

 

[Valjean]

Yeah, we do hear that you're all a bunch'o commies.
Still, from our perspective there are 2 sides of the aisle.

Two factions fighting for power and influence. I think they left any aisles behind decades ago.

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

Your Dems are considered right wing in pretty much every other country on earth. Including mine and we’re pretty right wing. Having engaged with a number of lefties from the US I’ve come to the conclusion that they only vote Democrat because they dislike the Republicans more. Kind of like how I vote Labour only because they’re a tiny little bit left to the Liberal (conservative party.) I don’t like that party at all. Both deserve each other as far as I’m concerned. But one is the lesser of two evils, so to speak

I only registered with the Democratic Party and voted Democratic in the 2020 presidential election because I was rebelling against Trump and his sycophantic supporters in the Republican Party. I was a disgruntled Republican in 2016, so I voted third party rather than vote for Trump or Clinton. It was unbearable for me to vote for Trump, and I wasn't ready to vote Democratic. I was a devoted Republican for 26 years before the 2016 presidential election. It took three years of Trumpism to finally convince me that I had to abandon the Republican Party. So, I left around the time of the 2018 midterms. Joe Biden is the first Democrat I've ever voted for in any election, but he won't be the last one I vote for as long as Trump and his loyal lackeys have control of the Republican Party.

 

[Quetzal]

And the ultimate wet dream of lawyers & all others in the Justice Industrial Complex.

Lawyers are the big winners here, right? I predict they are going to be pulling considerable money from this.

 

[Quetzal]

Hah!
I knew it.
The left knows no ethics or rule of law.
Any tactic, no matter how wrong, is fair game.

There....I feel better now.

I bet that felt good! I will let the glow settle for a moment....

Now then! My concern, and I think this is what you are getting at, is that both sides of the aisle are attempting to circumvent established process. This can be a dangerous precedent. Do I have that right?

 

[Quetzal]

That is bizarre. And as much as I'm fine with restricting access to guns in various ways, it's silly that Newsom would model our law on this weird, likely unconstitutional one in TX. Comes across as more of a "**** you" than a well thought-out policy.

Correct! This is why I am, personally, opposed to this approach.

 

[Quetzal]

I only registered with the Democratic Party and voted Democratic in the 2020 presidential election because I was rebelling against Trump and his sycophantic supporters in the Republican Party. I was a disgruntled Republican in 2016, so I voted third party rather than vote for Trump or Clinton. It was unbearable for me to vote for Trump, and I wasn't ready to vote Democratic. I was a devoted Republican for 26 years before the 2016 presidential election. It took three years of Trumpism to finally convince me that I had to abandon the Republican Party. So, I left around the time of the 2018 midterms. Joe Biden is the first Democrat I've ever voted for in any election, but he won't be the last one I vote for as long as Trump and his loyal lackeys have control of the Republican Party.

The Mrs and I always say that we are waiting for Republicans to try to speak to centrist instead of the extremists. They could get our vote if they would just stop supporting racist legislation, gerrymandering elections, and destroying the planet.

 

[tytlyf]

Let Revoltistan become the libertarian enclave that exists
separately from the libs & cons attacking each other.

The problem with that is you still vote Republican. You also voted for Tr**p. Dangerous.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

The left knows no ethics or rule of law. Any tactic, no matter how wrong, is fair game.

That was probably sarcasm, but I'll answer it as if it weren't.

I see this as a cold civil war. No longer do we have two parties with common national values. We have two parties with mutually incompatible views. One will eliminate the other. If one values ethics and the rule of law, he needs to put them aside when dealing with those who have no ethics and no respect for the law the way a peace loving person picks up a gun to defend his otherwise peaceful way of life, and returns to peaceful living when the war is over, assuming his side prevails. It's just that important to win by any means available short of wear crimes, and if it can be argued that survival depends on committing those as well, you do it.

The Republicans are as much an enemy of America as the Soviet Union was. They are an existential threat to a cherished way of life. They have no scruples themselves, no boundaries, and they have to be engaged in the same manner. As I said earlier, one cannot be unethical to a person with no ethics. One cannot be unfair to a person who is never fair.

Some will roll out the trite, "Then you're no better than they are." What? Of course we are. That's like saying that if somebody shoots at you, and you return fire, that you're no better. Of course you are. But that's not the point. I don't need to be better to them than they are to me and mine.

The Republican Party is simply no longer compatible with Americanism - democracy, rule of law, church-state separation, etc.. The left and right are no longer compatible. They will war until one marginalizes and disempowers the other. The Republicans are more than halfway there now, and marching forward with more of their theocratic, white ethnocentric, and anti-democratic agenda as we are seeing in Texas. We know who they are, and they are not us. They are enemy, not compatriots, just like Putin, just like the Taliban. Can you be unfair or unethical to them? Do you owe them the same treatment that you do your own?

The Mrs and I always say that we are waiting for Republicans to try to speak to centrist instead of the extremists. They could get our vote if they would just stop supporting racist legislation, gerrymandering elections, and destroying the planet.

If they would just stop being anti-egalitarian, anti-democratic, and anti-life, you could see supporting them? Was that sarcasm? It's hard to know any more.

And as much as I'm fine with restricting access to guns in various ways, it's silly that Newsom would model our law on this weird, likely unconstitutional one in TX. Comes across as more of a "**** you" than a well thought-out policy.

Why can't it be both? I see it as a potentially effective warning and a means to diminish gun culture.

Is it also an FU? Maybe. Why shouldn't it be?

Think of it as sanctions. Is a partial boycott of the Olympics a FU to China, or threats regarding Russian aggression on its border with the Ukraine a FU to Putin? Maybe. I see it as similar to what Newsome is doing. It's pushback.

 

[Revoltingest]

The problem with that is you still vote Republican. You also voted for Tr**p. Dangerous.

Why do you vote for Nazis?

 

[Revoltingest]

That was probably sarcasm, but I'll answer it as if it weren't.

I see this as a cold civil war. No longer do we have two parties with common national values. We have two parties with mutually incompatible views. One will eliminate the other. If one values ethics and the rule of law, he needs to put them aside when dealing with those who have no ethics and no respect for the law the way a peace loving person picks up a gun to defend his otherwise peaceful way of life, and returns to peaceful living when the war is over, assuming his side prevails. It's just that important to win by any means available short of wear crimes, and if it can be argued that survival depends on committing those as well, you do it.

The Republicans are as much an enemy of America as the Soviet Union was. They are an existential threat to a cherished way of life. They have no scruples themselves, no boundaries, and they have to be engaged in the same manner. As I said earlier, one cannot be unethical to a person with no ethics. One cannot be unfair to a person who is never fair.

Some will roll out the trite, "Then you're no better than they are." What? Of course we are. That's like saying that if somebody shoots at you, and you return fire, that you're no better. Of course you are. But that's not the point. I don't need to be better to them than they are to me and mine.

The Republican Party is simply no longer compatible with Americanism - democracy, rule of law, church-state separation, etc.. The left and right are no longer compatible. They will war until one marginalizes and disempowers the other. The Republicans are more than halfway there now, and marching forward with more of their theocratic, white ethnocentric, and anti-democratic agenda as we are seeing in Texas. We know who they are, and they are not us. They are enemy, not compatriots, just like Putin, just like the Taliban. Can you be unfair or unethical to them? Do you owe them the same treatment that you do your own?



If they would just stop being anti-egalitarian, anti-democratic, and anti-life, you could see supporting them? Was that sarcasm? It's hard to know any more.



Why can't it be both? I see it as a potentially effective warning and a means to diminish gun culture.

Is it also an FU? Maybe. Why shouldn't it be?

Think of it as sanctions. Is a partial boycott of the Olympics a FU to China, or threats regarding Russian aggression on its border with the Ukraine a FU to Putin? Maybe. I see it as similar to what Newsome is doing. It's pushback.

So you to are joining the race to the bottom, eh.
Try giving people more of a reason to vote for
your side than matching wrongful tactics & goals.

 

[tytlyf]

Why do you vote for Nazis?

Libertarianism has never worked anywhere in the world. Isn't the closest example Somalia? Most libertarians I see always vote republican.
We've seen the corporate Republican agenda destroy this country and the middle class. It's time to end the cycle.

 

[74x12]

"Freedom loving?"

And isn't the greatest freedom of all the freedom to tell other people what they must and mustn't do?

Oh like vaccine mandates?

 

[Revoltingest]

Libertarianism has never worked anywhere in the world.

And that makes you vote for Nazis, eh.

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

I'm editing my post because I misunderstood what Revoltingest was talking about. Again, my apologies.

 

[Revoltingest]

Using Godwin's law in your post weakens your argument...

You're new here, & misreading an old joke.
He says I'm Republican.
I say he's Nazi.

He feels the need to do this every now & then.
Who am I to refuse, eh.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Oh like vaccine mandates?

What, have you never heard of those? I can speak to what we have in Ontario, but I rather suspect that there are similarities around the world -- that led to the eradication of terrible diseases. Is there nothing like the following where you live? I'll bet there is.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Immunization of School Pupils Act requires parents to provide proof of immunization (or appropriate exemption documents) for certain diseases if their children attend school in Ontario.

Children enrolled in primary or secondary school must have proof of immunization against the following diseases:

• diphtheria
• tetanus
• pertussis (whooping cough)
• polio
• measles
• mumps
• rubella
• meningococcal disease
• varicella (chickenpox) – required for children born in 2010 or later

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

You're new here, & misreading an old joke.
He says I'm Republican.
I say he's Nazi.

He feels the need to do this every now & then.
Who am I to refuse, eh.

Couldn't figure out whether to give you a "Funny" frube --- or giggle. So I did both.

Giggle.