I wish all discussions could go like this one. We disagree...I respect your take. RFK from what I understand is a climate change nut? (I have not followed him yet, but can feel his support growing for sure)
Obama (always craving attention) calls out obscene coverage submersible got vs a migrant ship sinking
- Thread starter Orangeclad
- Start date
Because social media, and MSM are FOCUSING on the ONLY card that the left has to play. It will never, EVER be enough...not with a criminal in the white house, and EVERYTHING measurable is WORSE. THAt is what matters. And do not believe that people are not starting to notice Brandons huge payoffs from ur enemies. Only the VERY DUMBEST refue that. (Yep...believe it or not...we have a few on this board)
What is important to you as a voter, may not be important to others. Trust that I hate some of the politicians voted in but it's their right.
Disagree. When I arrest someone out on bond/probation from a violent crime and re-arrest them on a new violent crime, they are invariably from a Democratic controlled county/city.
The last one killed an innocent citizen while fleeing from police in their city. They were attempting to serve a warrant for Assault 1st (attempted murder).
We arrested him after a similar pursuit following a violent attack on his baby's momma in my JD. Fortunately no one was hurt when he wrecked out at a VERY high rate of speed.
Clearly he learned his lesson??? WTH was he doing out on bond? He's less than 21 and he has already racked up an impressive list of violent offenses.
As compared to what? The year prior? Certainly not as compared to long-term.
Police chiefs in these major cities run by democrats will say bs that violent crimes are way down for this reason. These left wing nut DA's are charging violent crimes on a much lower scale. You want lower numbers of felony assaults. Charge them as misdemeanors. That doesn't help the woman who loses an eye to what should be a felony now just a misdemeanor. These crime stats are bogus as to what is really going on what with the new classification of charges these Soros backed DA's are using.
You think Obama craves attention? You must really think the trumpster is off the rails, cause it isn’t close.But Mr. Obama, I don't hear you speak of the obscene coverage of ONE black man being killed by a white cop vs the slaughter of young black men in your Chicago every weekend with hardly a drop of media coverage. So Mr. Obama, until you go to Chicago and speak of that, please spare us the lesson on media coverage.
Obama calls out ‘obscene inequality’ in news coverage of OceanGate sub tragedy and sinking of migrant ship
Obama calls out ‘obscene inequality’ in news coverage of OceanGate sub tragedy and sinking of migrant ship
Former President Barack Obama recently blasted the media for fixating on the OceanGate Titan sub tragedy while not covering a recent migrant ship sinking nearly as much.www.foxnews.com
I would place that blame more on DA's and state AG's than police chiefs but I agree with your point.
It’s a Dem talking point. They have been claiming crime, especially violent crime is down and has been trending down for the last 20 years
Police chiefs are angry with these left wing DA's. Keep risking officer lives to arrest violent criminals to then have these offenders, because of no bail laws, put right back on the street in hours.
It's frustrating. Just looking at the one case I listed...
He plead guilty to Assault 1st (that means he caused serious and permanent harm to another with intent) and got almost no prison sentence followed by probation. Other states might refer to our charge of Assault 1st as Attempted Murder btw.
While out on probation, he violated and a probation warrant was signed on him. When the police served that warrant, he attempted to elude them in a vehicle and a person was killed in that pursuit. That's murder, of course.
So he goes to jail for a few months, attends a few hearings and is allowed to bond out on the probation violation and the new murder charge from the eluding. How? Who thought that was reasonable?
He later beats his baby's momma, attempts to elude from us and wrecks out once again. I don't believe that he'll get to bond out again before going to prison for a while this time but he won't remain in our custody for long as the other charges are from the jurisdiction I mentioned earlier so who knows for sure???
As we pulled him out of the wreckage from his latest crash, he screamed, "take it easy...I'm just a kid." The young man knows how to work the system, I'll grant him that.
We have some pretty stupid people here. I guess people running for president and leading in their primary aren't supposed to get any attention while an ex president has to search the newspapers for something to open his trap about. Like I said, some very stupid people here.
Felonies can go dramatically down with a stroke of a pen. Classify them as misdemeanors. That's democrat crime reduction, on paper, NOT ON THE STREET. But I guess all the assault victims are happy to find out the crimes are ONLY misdemeanors.
Plus, you have Soros funded DA not prosecuting, so then once again, the DEMS do not count it as a crime.
LOLOLOL OF COURSE they are!! They are the people who ALWAYS pick the side of the criminal over the innocent victim. They CANNOT deny this. Look at THEIR looters that burn down their cities. Look at the rioters. Those people are NOT from our side.....
And I know you know who appoints them and financially supports them
I can only imagine. It would definitely make me frustrated and deflated at times.
There is a tough decision between not allowing someone the right at bail, considering they wasn't convicted of a crime.
But there should be someway to protect the public better. I had a friend that was on probation and then committed murder, while on probation. Just stupid and senseless.
We have Aniah's Law now which does allow bail to be denied to violent offenders so there's no longer an excuse for the courts.
I agree - but let's remove "dumb". Rather, let's call it "emotional" buyers and voters. That is my wife and my youngest daughter (attending Stanford right now). Both have IQs well above 140.
On paper, they should, without question vote Republican - economy, immigration, crime, immigration, inflation, immigration, etc.
They see Abortion and it is both a policy and a symbol. It is about what (mostly) white men want to do with their bodies.
When you understand the symbolic value, their world view becomes clear and, to some extent, understandable. Who cares on inflation if you have a baby that you do not want, a father will not support, the state will not support, and your career and dreams are over. Make every religious or moral argument you want, this is how this is viewed and it is showing up, again, and again, and again, at the polls and in critical races.
Take abortion off of the table, and Republicans win in massive margins. And - if you think that Trump is TRULY pro-life, you are nuts. To his significant political credit, he was savvy enough to know that this was a way to get a hesistant part of the Republican base to support him. He would go back to being pro-choice as he wants no part of this discussion.
This does not matter ne single bit. What matters is that he place THREE conservative CONSTITUTIONALIST SC judges on the bench, and is 100% responsible for overturning a HORRIBLE ruling. (R vs W) Even old bag Bader admitted as much. You need to look at some polling......when it gets down to it...this ruling does not effect many people. Middle aged women do not have many abortions.
RBG said that it was under the wrong statue, she felt it should have been argued under equal protection and not privacy.
She 100% thought it was constitutional.
What a POS!But Mr. Obama, I don't hear you speak of the obscene coverage of ONE black man being killed by a white cop vs the slaughter of young black men in your Chicago every weekend with hardly a drop of media coverage. So Mr. Obama, until you go to Chicago and speak of that, please spare us the lesson on media coverage.
Obama calls out ‘obscene inequality’ in news coverage of OceanGate sub tragedy and sinking of migrant ship
Obama calls out ‘obscene inequality’ in news coverage of OceanGate sub tragedy and sinking of migrant ship
Former President Barack Obama recently blasted the media for fixating on the OceanGate Titan sub tragedy while not covering a recent migrant ship sinking nearly as much.
For the life of me, I don't understand single-issue voters. I don't understand how they can possibly funnel everything down to one issue. No offense intended to your wife and daughter but it's a childish view of the world.
I believe that abortion is about the most evil thing that we participate in on planet earth. However, I also don't believe that the government has any business being involved with abortion in any way, especially with regards to funding it but also in banning it.
At some point during pregnancy ALMOST everyone agrees it is murder. So, based on those cultural standards, putting some limit on it makes sense.
People who perform partial birth abortions should be convicted of murder. There is no doubt what they are doing and no debate to defend their actions.
She also 100% believed that RvW was unconstitutional. I believe that was his point.
He knew that...just very slow witted lib diversion attempt I beat down his statement
She did not, she just didn't like the statue it was protected under at that time.
splitting hairs...she did not believe it was decided properly. So she would not have supported it.
She critiqued the ruling based on its structure and stated that it was far too sweeping and that she didn't necessarily agree with the constitutionality of Roe.
She was clearly pro-abortion but from a scholarly legal standpoint, she disagreed with Roe. That's a pretty bold statement from a pro-abortion SC justice.
She wanted a different kind of case to afford abortion rights for women.
That's what I said lol....She thought Roe should've been argued under equal protection and not privacy.
...and she disagreed with the structure of Roe and believed that it would be overturned.
She was candidly critical of Roe at times.
Ruth Bader Ginsburg Wishes This Case Had Legalized Abortion Instead of 'Roe v. Wade'
When Ginsburg was confirmed to the Supreme Court 25 years ago, she explained why
...and she disagreed with the structure of Roe and believed that it would be overturned.
She was candidly critical of Roe at times.
Ruth Bader Ginsburg Wishes This Case Had Legalized Abortion Instead of 'Roe v. Wade'
When Ginsburg was confirmed to the Supreme Court 25 years ago, she explained whytime.com
BINGO was his nameo...and she disagreed with the structure of Roe and believed that it would be overturned.
She was candidly critical of Roe at times.
Ruth Bader Ginsburg Wishes This Case Had Legalized Abortion Instead of 'Roe v. Wade'
When Ginsburg was confirmed to the Supreme Court 25 years ago, she explained why
I read somewhere wherein she stated that she thought Roe went to far to fast. Thought abortion law should be a progressive process.
Yep...and she felt it was vulnerable because of its structure (see constitutionality).
Which was a case about equal protection lol...we are saying the same thing, just in different words....and she disagreed with the structure of Roe and believed that it would be overturned.
She was candidly critical of Roe at times.
Ruth Bader Ginsburg Wishes This Case Had Legalized Abortion Instead of 'Roe v. Wade'
When Ginsburg was confirmed to the Supreme Court 25 years ago, she explained why
Their view (which I agree with) is that until the baby is viable outside of the womb, the choice is the mothers. They should also have full access to the day after bill (which is getting restricted in many states, as well, which has nothing to do with abortion, per se).
They view six weeks as ridiculous. Many mothers do not know they are pregnant until 8 - 10 weeks.
Once they are pregnant and have had 2-4 weeks to process the information, they want to be able to abortion. That put you at about 14-15 weeks. Tops of 20 unless their a health issue, which is a joint decision between the mother (not "birthing person") and physician.
If the baby is viable after 20 weeks and if there is no health issue, then the baby needs to be brought to term. They agree with that.
They view adoption as something that indeed some mothers may choose to do and fully support it.
They also try to practice "safe sex" (my wife is getting close to menupause so her chances of getting pregnant are very low, and I have a vasectomy) but my daughters are in college which is not the epicenter of reasoned decision making. Things happen.
So, their view is pretty mainstream. The far left of the Democratic party wants abortion on demand.
Why Ruth Bader Ginsburg Wasn’t All That Fond of Roe v. Wade (Published 2020)
The late Supreme Court justice believed the landmark ruling was too sweeping and vulnerable to attacks, explains Professor Mary Hartnett, co-author of Justice Ginsburg’s authorized biography
