Roe V. Wade to be Overturned - Page 61 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Talk about what you've seen in the news today.

Moderator: PoFo Today's News Mods

#15235810
late wrote:Did you ever notice how different a gun looks, when it's pointed at you?


20 years in the army? Yea. I think so.
#15235812
So, I brought up the fact that the social safety net will have to be expanded now because poor women will be forced to have kids they can't afford to pay for (even with child support laws, a lot of deadbeat fathers don't hold down jobs to help pay for those kids). Are Republicans willing to chip in and pay for the increase of this social safety net since they are the ones that eliminated abortion as a constitutional right?

*crickets*

That's what I thought.

We can expect child poverty to increase now, public health services will be strained, and social resources will be stretched to the limit. Especially since Republicans are not willing to increase taxes and help chip in and pay for the expansion of social services for women forcing them to bear children they cannot afford to pay for. Having kids has a major economic impact negatively on the poor when they cannot afford to pay for them. But it doesn't seem the Republicans really care or worry about that since they don't plan on chipping in and helping to pay for those kids. But they will be sure that the women in their lives have an abortion if those women want one.
#15235814
Politics_Observer wrote:So, I brought up the fact that the social safety net will have to be expanded now because poor women will be forced to have kids they can't afford to pay for (even with child support laws, a lot of deadbeat fathers don't hold down jobs to help pay for those kids). Are Republicans willing to chip in and pay for the increase of this social safety net since they are the ones that eliminated abortion as a constitutional right?

*crickets*

That's what I thought.

We can expect child poverty to increase now, public health services will be strained, and social resources will be stretched to the limit. Especially since Republicans are not willing to increase taxes and help chip in and pay for the expansion of social services for women forcing them to bear children they cannot afford to pay for. Having kids has a major economic impact negatively on the poor when they cannot afford to pay for them. But it doesn't seem the Republicans really care or worry about that since they don't plan on chipping in and helping to pay for those kids. But they will be sure that the women in their lives have an abortion if those women want one.


Far from trying to prevent this terrible situation from occurring, they are betting on it. They will pass laws that will take babies away from poor, young mothers and put into the hands of "Good, White, and Christian" families, wherein the adopted children will be exploited for labor and sex.
#15235815
Politics_Observer wrote:So, I brought up the fact that the social safety net will have to be expanded now because poor women will be forced to have kids they can't afford to pay for (even with child support laws, a lot of deadbeat fathers don't hold down jobs to help pay for those kids). Are Republicans willing to chip in and pay for the increase of this social safety net since they are the ones that eliminated abortion as a constitutional right?

*crickets*

That's what I thought.

We can expect child poverty to increase now, public health services will be strained, and social resources will be stretched to the limit. Especially since Republicans are not willing to increase taxes and help chip in and pay for the expansion of social services for women forcing them to bear children they cannot afford to pay for. Having kids has a major economic impact negatively on the poor when they cannot afford to pay for them. But it doesn't seem the Republicans really care or worry about that since they don't plan on chipping in and helping to pay for those kids. But they will be sure that the women in their lives have an abortion if those women want one.


My bet is that they'll try to get more federal funding.

Isn't this what they do to get e.g. Medicaid? Instead of raising their own taxes, the whole country pays.
#15235817
wat0n wrote:This reminds me of the MAGA people who claimed that most people at the Capitol back in January 6 last year didn't riot either so their protest was legitimate.
It reminds you of something that you foolishly haven't thought about to any length. Your comparison is simply not valid, as the whole point of the Jan 6 thing was to fight against the results of a Democratic election. The rhetoric was NOT simply to protest, but to do something about it. Fuck off with your dumbass comparisons.

Point of Jan 6 protest:
Called to action by Trump, thousands of his supporters gathered in Washington, D.C., on January 5 and 6 to support his false claim that the 2020 election had been "stolen by emboldened radical-left Democrats" and to demand that Vice President Mike Pence and Congress reject Biden's victory.

Point of BLM protest:
Black Lives Matter (BLM) is a decentralized political and social movement that seeks to highlight racism, discrimination, and inequality experienced by black people. When its supporters come together, they do so primarily to protest incidents of police brutality and racially motivated violence against black people.

Not even close. Are you capable of seeing the difference? I have neither the time nor the crayons to explain it further.
#15235820
Godstud wrote:It reminds you of something that you foolishly haven't thought about to any length. Your comparison is simply not valid, as the whole point of the Jan 6 thing was to fight against the results of a Democratic election. The rhetoric was NOT simply to protest, but to do something about it. Fuck off with your dumbass comparisons.

Point of Jan 6 protest:
Called to action by Trump, thousands of his supporters gathered in Washington, D.C., on January 5 and 6 to support his false claim that the 2020 election had been "stolen by emboldened radical-left Democrats" and to demand that Vice President Mike Pence and Congress reject Biden's victory.

Point of BLM protest:
Black Lives Matter (BLM) is a decentralized political and social movement that seeks to highlight racism, discrimination, and inequality experienced by black people. When its supporters come together, they do so primarily to protest incidents of police brutality and racially motivated violence against black people.

Not even close. Are you capable of seeing the difference? I have neither the time nor the crayons to explain it further.


Yes, the difference is that you like the latter and not the former. Got it.
#15235821
@wat0n

wat0n wrote:My bet is that they'll try to get more federal funding.

Isn't this what they do to get e.g. Medicaid? Instead of raising their own taxes, the whole country pays.


Republicans wanted the overturning of Roe vs Wade and now they got it. This isn't what Democrats wanted. Blue states pay more in federal taxes already than red states as it is. Why should they have to pay even more since they are not the ones who wanted to take away abortion as a constitutional right? Why the hell should blue states pay for the choices of red states since Republicans have stated this is a "states' rights" issue and should only be legislated at the state level? Red states or any state that outlaws abortion should not get not one additional cent in federal money to subsidize their welfare for children that would otherwise not be there if abortion was still a federal constitutional right.

Red states wanted this and they wanted this at the state level so they should pay for it at the state level too. It's fair. They will probably have to raise their taxes to pay for kids that poor mothers can't afford to have in regards to state taxation and not one federal cent should go to help them pay for those kids poor mothers can't afford to have since they chose to eliminate abortion as woman's right to have in their state.

Blue states that support the right of a woman to get an abortion should not pay not one dime to red states in regards to this issue. Red states wanted this so they and they alone pay for it. There is no reason for blue states to pay for the state-level decisions for red states via federal taxation and dollars. Red states need to take responsibility for the laws they pass at the state level and be prepared to pay for them. It's not the responsibility of blue states to pay for the choices of red states in regard to their state-level decisions.
#15235822
Politics_Observer wrote:@wat0n



Republicans wanted the overturning of Roe vs Wade and now they got it. This isn't what Democrats wanted. Blue states pay more in federal taxes already than red states as it is. Why the hell should Blue states pay for the choices of Red states since Republicans have stated this is a "states' rights" issue and should only be legislated at the state level. Red states or any state that outlaws abortion should not get not one additional cent in federal money to subsidize their welfare for children that would otherwise not be there if abortion was still a federal constitutional right.

Red states wanted this and they wanted this at the state level so they should pay for it at the state level too. It's fair. They will probably have to raise their taxes to pay for kids that poor mothers can't afford to have. Blue states that support the right of a woman to get an abortion should not pay not one dime to red states in regards to this issue. Red states wanted this so they and they alone pay for it. There is no reason for blue states to pay for the state level decisions fo red states.


I agree, but believe me that's what they'll do.

Now, it was actually the GOP that set the following precedent: It is perfectly constitutional for Congress to cut federal funding to twist the states' arms as long as it doesn't go too far. It did so in the 1980s when it passed the National Minimum Drinking Age Act to encourage states to set the minimum age for purchase of alcohol at 21 because some studies showed that lowering it to 18-20 had been associated with more accidents in highways (and because some conservatives don't like drunkards), so states in non-compliance would lose 10% of their federal funding for highways. This was subsequently upheld by the SCOTUS, despite the 21st amendment's clear support for state rights when it comes to regulating the alcohol industry.

If the Democrats are serious, they'll have to pass federal law cutting education, healthcare and/or foster care federal funding by 10% to those states banning abortion. If the SCOTUS intervenes, then it will be declaring the National Minimum Drinking Age Act unconstitutional, which will mean conservatives will have to decide if they like state rights when it comes to both abortion and drinking or not.
#15235823
@wat0n

wat0n wrote:I agree, but believe me that's what they'll do.


And blue states need to tell them to go fuck off and not give them a dime. They are already paying more than their fair share in federal taxes as it is. Blue states just need to simply refuse outright to do it. Just tell the red states to piss off. Pay for their shit and practice what they preach by actually taking responsibility themselves and putting their own money where their mouth is.
Last edited by Politics_Observer on 28 Jun 2022 05:18, edited 1 time in total.
#15235824
Politics_Observer wrote:@wat0n



And blue states need to tell them to go fuck off and not give them a dime. Blue states just need to simply refuse outright to do it. Just tell the red states to piss off. Pay for their shit and practice what they preach by actually taking responsibility themselves and putting their own money where their mouth is.


Then do it like the Reagan administration did in 1984. It would be perfectly constitutional:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Dakota_v._Dole
#15235825
@wat0n

I will tell you another thing the red states will have to pay for: the jailing of deadbeat fathers who don't pay child support. Jailing people is expensive too. They will have to jail deadbeat fathers while also helping to pay for kids that poor women can't afford to pay for.
#15235828
wat0n wrote:Yes, the difference is that you like the latter and not the former. Got it.
:roll: No. You are being disingenuous and mischaracterizing what I say. The difference is that you liken a riot perpetrated by criminals to a series of protests what were, for the most part, peaceful.

I never said that the protest part of Jan 6 was illegal. The riot where they invaded the Capitol building WAS.
#15235831
Godstud wrote::roll: No. You are being disingenuous and mischaracterizing what I say. The difference is that you liken a riot perpetrated by criminals to a series of protests what were, for the most part, peaceful.

I never said that the protest part of Jan 6 was illegal. The riot where they invaded the Capitol building WAS.


And there were also hundreds "protesting" outside (effectively providing cover for the rioters). Not too different from BLM, the big differences lie in where they did it and the motivations. The tactics? They largely overlap.

And, it's because the Capitol rioters saw the response to the BLM protests, then would try and rehearse for what they'd do in Washington DC in places like the Oregon Capitol (they rioted and got in on late December 2021, which is way too much of a coincidence as far as I'm concerned).
#15235832
No, you are conflating two different things. Never have I supported any RIOTS, or criminals who have engaged in it.

The Jan 6 situation was a single protest turned riot. There was not multiple peaceful protests done over the course of a year, in multiple countries, that were protesting a legitimate thing. The Jan 6 riots were based on a false premise.

The MANY hundreds of BLM protests, done around the world, were not based on a single false premise.

Do you also support the attempted insurrection? Is that your end-goal?
#15235833
Godstud wrote:No, you are conflating two different things. Never have I supported any RIOTS, or criminals who have engaged in it.

The Jan 6 situation was a single protest turned riot. There was not multiple peaceful protests done over the course of a year, in multiple countries, that were protesting a legitimate thing. The Jan 6 riots were based on a false premise.

The MANY hundreds of BLM protests, done around the world, were not based on a single false premise.


Yes, I know that one is good because you like it and the other isn't because you don't. If course that includes deciding unilaterally what the truth is.

Godstud wrote:Do you also support the attempted insurrection? Is that your end-goal?


Which of all of them?
#15235834
wat0n wrote:Yes, I know that one is good because you like it and the other isn't because you don't. If course that includes deciding unilaterally what the truth is.
The two are not comparable but you're too stupid, and biased, to understand even basic comparisons. You and BlutoSays would make a lovely couple. Have a good day.
#15235835
Godstud wrote:The two are not comparable but you're too stupid, and biased, to understand even basic comparisons. You and BlutoSays would make a lovely couple. Have a good day.


Bias is to believe violence is justifiable when it suits your tastes.

Looting, taking over parts of a city (CHAZ) or taking over government buildings (Seattle City Hall, police precincts in a few cities by varied far-leftist groups and of course, most important of all, the attempts to do so at both the DC and some state Capitols by the MAGAtards) is unacceptable in a democracy because there are other ways to make your case.

And the fact is, both BLM/other far-left groups and MAGAtards justified (and some still justify) these tactics when they suited each. Both are on record doing so. It's that simple, @Godstud.
#15235838
Nowhere did I say violence was justified or warranted(in fact I called those who did so criminals), and so you are lying to suit your own agenda. :knife:

94% of all BLM protests had NO violence. There were hundreds, if not thousands of protests. You like to ignore that fact, because it invalidates your dumbass argument about BLM protests justifying violence. That clearly was not the case.
#15235840
Godstud wrote:Nowhere did I say violence was justified or warranted(in fact I called those who did so criminals), and so you are lying to suit your own agenda. :knife:


Good, but as I mentioned not everyone shares your view.

MAGA retards obviously don't... And, well, unfortunately many progressives don't either.

You said earlier we should keep in mind how Rome lost its republic and became a dictatorship (empire). I agree, but it didn't just "happen" - the disorder from factional fighting was a key element in the process. Of course, it was much, much worse than what we've seen thus far (last year we saw a breach in the Capitol, yet Rome saw the looting and burning of its Senate, which is obviously worse) - but it was key nonetheless.

That's why these tactics need to be called and stamped out immediately. It's why Biden's election was a good thing, as far as I'm aware, because that's his tune. Unfortunately the GOP still has too many MAGA elements around, and it seems their pull within the GOP is stronger than that of their progressive counterparts within the Dems - but I also think there's a much stronger opposition to the MAGAtards within the GOP than it used to be 2 years ago. They've lost primaries, especially in Georgia but also elsewhere, and that signals they are strong but not hegemonic at least for now. Of course they can all come crashing down should Trump be indicted next year, which I think would make sense.

And it's a fitting comparison you made because the US is actually modelled on Rome to a large extent, the Federalist Papers make explicit references to Rome and also Roman writers to justify their proposal for the American system of government, so it's indeed possible that it will eventually end like it did. We'll see, or hopefully, we won't and if it happens we'll all be dead.
  • 1
  • 59
  • 60
  • 61
  • 62
  • 63
  • 93
Russia-Ukraine War 2022

https://img-9gag-fun.9cache.com/photo[…]

ckaihatsu, I hope you will not be angry if I find […]

You are underestimating Russian paranoia. The […]

That's what Trump said. If you’re innocent, w[…]