ChuckNorrisActionJeans

Ok but don't shoot the messenger https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/3579355-those-who-see-roes-fall-as-loss-less-likely-to-vote-than-those-who-dont-poll/ Washington Post- Schar School poll

People who don't like the Dobbs decision (striking down Roe) are less likely to vote than those who like it.... that's the takeaway

Not going to search for it, but a recent poll summarized in an article said that those who believe SCOTUS striking down Roe is a "loss" are less likely to vote than those who don't believe that. (Or maybe, it should have just been summarized as "evangelicals vote more consistently than other groups.") Womp womp

this thread being bumped almost makes me wish it was for shootings rather than this endless masturbatory gun stroking bro talk...almost

You know this but the broader point is this: one could reasonably hold a view that there should be a balancing of rights, and by that I mean that at some stage there should be a consideration of society's interest in fetal life vs. the mother's rights. But that is gone because SCOTUS said the mother has NO rights in this area. None. No right to privacy, or medical care, or bodily autonomy -- only what the state deigns to confer. So now, there is no balancing in red states. So it's not only that that the rights of a fetus are equal to those of the mother. Which is outrageous enough. These extreme laws dictate that the fetus's rights, whether its life is even viable or not, are SUPERIOR to the human who is independently breathing, walking, thinking, whose body is used to sustain said fetus, and who is a citizen or resident who presumably is allowed legal protections against unreasonable search and seizure, and all that other good constitutional stuff. But if a fetus or embryo exists, the carrier is excluded from making any decisions impacting her very life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness based on the arbitrary state borders in which she lives. Anyone who isn't screaming against this insanity is complicit.

Fetus ain't got no perspective. It fetus. No think. No breathe. No care. No talk. No walk. If you like your fetus, you can keep your fetus.

Think y'all got it but just to clarify, my post was not assigning blame to docs/hospitals, or saying the onus should be on them but in cases like the above the R's have brought it to that absurd point -- despite Ana's mischaracterization to the contrary

Alison Moyet -- surprises me she hasn't had more of a career K.D. Lang Bjork Joni

It's absurd that it's come to this, but doctors and hospitals need to have some courage to push back against delaying proper, life-saving care regarding UNVIABLE embryos. FFS. Save the patient's life and dare the asshole DA to prosecute. Make this shit come to a head.

This shit is just sadistic and insane. How do these extreme laws benefit anyone, including even the vaunted fetus? How?? It's just an exercise in monstrousness with no redeeming feature, an abomination before God, if you will. A woman in this situation needs to video the whole ordeal and publish it to multiple platforms, I think that's the only way to get through to the shitheads who can't imagine not pulling the R lever.

Next up on Tucker Incel: Should Women be Allowed to Have Bodies?

Raping animals. So funny...

Question.... is there an ongoing duty to cooperate? Or does his conviction effectively nullify the subpoenas? If they still want his cooperation do they just reissue the subpoenas to avoid potential double jeopardy? No idea in this area of law.

HAULY. Lol

hmmm who is big sexy to the right behind Pottinger

Kinzinger looks pissed.

heh McCarthy was "scared"

I'm dumb but is that pretzel on his belt intentional?

and I'm still waiting for the Gaetz indictment that was "imminent" a year ago. Every time I see that freak's name, it occurs to me how impossibly high a standard probable cause must be. I'd better get some continuing ed. on that point '

still blows my mind that, in nationally televised hearings, he publicly vowed vengeance against those he perceived as political detractors/opponents... and also specifically mentioned the Clintons. That shit was barely even talked about 2 days later.

https://twitter.com/Maxxie11G/status/1547301280028262400?s=20&t=C0X3o4WhMMhARXmB68OPOQ

Austin is set to give away $846 million in recapture this next go-round. And can't remotely meet the needs of its own students, at least half of whom qualify for reduced or free lunch. Once that recapture is distributed to the state level of piss-poor per-student funding of other districts, they take the money leftover for their general budget and do whatever they want with it... including operation Lone Star border grandstanding. In direct contradiction of the state constitutional duty to use those funds to support a free and safe education. Which is codified in the Education Code. Not sure why there aren't lots of lawsuits over that....what they're doing directly contravenes the state constitution. But.... Dems? I don't know but it's infuriating.

I get it but you're presupposing the charter school is better in some way than the "failing" public school ... and there seems to be no evidence of that if macro data comes from aggregating micro data. Unless you're talking about "school safety" which tends to be code for the level of minority enrollment. (and I don't mean you, I mean public perception generally).

The tantrum surrounding not being taken to the capitol / secret service confrontation in the vehicle seems like essentially a collateral story to me. Doesn't add that much to his knowledge and culpability...unless I'm missing something. So of course that's what everyone is focusing on in the media and twittersphere.

Charter schools don't have the same accountability/performance standards as regular public schools, and they can reject students they don't want. Data shows they don't perform any better than the public schools either. As Mrs. Wiggins said, it's just a grift with the added benefit of taking badly needed funds away from public education.