H E A D L I N E S : 2 0 2 2 & 2 0 2 3

Status
Not open for further replies.
Politics

Voters in Ohio reject GOP-backed proposal that would have made it tougher to protect abortion rights​

By JULIE CARR SMYTH and SAMANTHA HENDRICKSON / Updated 8:26 AM GMT-5, August 9, 2023

COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) — Ohio voters resoundingly rejected a Republican-backed measure that would have made it more difficult to change the state’s constitution, setting up a fall campaign that will become the nation’s latest referendum on abortion rights since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned nationwide protections last year.
The defeat of Issue 1 on Tuesday keeps in place a simple majority threshold for passing future constitutional amendments, rather than the 60% supermajority that was proposed. Its supporters said the higher bar would protect the state’s foundational document from outside interest groups.

apnews.com

Voters in Ohio reject GOP-backed proposal that would have made it tougher to protect abortion rights

While abortion was not directly on the special election ballot, the result marks the latest setback for Republicans in a conservative-leaning state who favor imposing tough restrictions on the procedure.
apnews.com apnews.com

Roe was decided 7:2
Roe was reversed a half-century later 5:4, apparently by an agenda driven activist court. Citizens assessing this based upon high school civics might believe the supreme court of the United States has the last word on such matters. BUT !!

Is this Ohio vote outcome an indication the activist Republicans on SCOTUS cannot act with absolute impunity? Time will tell.
 
Re #321 - the fight isn't over

y8aKXkL.jpeg



Ohio did the right thing and roundly rejected Issue.

Now the state's overgrown man-baby of a Lt Gov is throwing a tantrum about it and flat out spitting in the face of Ohio voters while blatantly violating the Hatch Act (not that anyone will do anything about it).
 
S2 #322 / LaRose

Orwell would feel out-done.
double talk
n.
1. Meaningless speech that consists of nonsense syllables mixed with intelligible words; gibberish.
2. Deliberately ambiguous or evasive language. Also called doublespeak.
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fifth Edition copyright ©2022 by HarperCollins Publishers. All rights reserved.
Click to expand...
ref #322:
The Hatch Act of 1939, An Act to Prevent Pernicious Political Activities, is a United States federal law. Its main provision prohibits civil-service employees in the executive branch of the federal government, except the president and vice president, from engaging in some forms of political activity. It became law on August 2, 1939. The law was named for Senator Carl Hatch of New Mexico. It was most recently amended in 2012.
More from Wikipedia / Wikipedia text under CC-BY-SA license

PS
What interests me about this style of Republican socio-political subterfuge is it presents its own liberty-usurping anti-choice position in terms characteristic of a noble cause. [the opposition is planning to] "shut parents out of a child's life-altering medical procedure". Seems deplorable. What has that to do with anti-choice?
 
The Bergen Record

Chris Christie is the most interesting person in the GOP right now. This is why | Kelly​

Mike Kelly, NorthJersey.com / Fri, August 11, 2023 at 10:58 AM EDT

news.yahoo.com

Chris Christie is the most interesting person in the GOP right now. This is why | Kelly

Chris Christie has embraced the style of a prosecutor, breaking down Trump’s indictments in ways that are not just insightful but helpful to voters.
news.yahoo.com news.yahoo.com

The Bergen Record is a newspaper from Northern New Jersey.
Even if the linked story is substantially realistic, it bears the appearance of self-promotion. None the less, Christie is "interesting". A mensch?
 
Russia has wreckage beyond Ukraine, beyond Earth.

The craft [Luna-25] launched from the Vostochny Cosmodrome in Russia’s Far East on Aug. 10. The spaceport is a pet project of Russian President Vladimir Putin and key to his efforts to make Russia a space superpower.

Roscosmos said it wanted to show Russia “is a state capable of delivering a payload to the moon,” and “ensure Russia’s guaranteed access to the moon’s surface.”

The Luna-25 was in a race with an Indian spacecraft launched on July 14 to be the first to reach the south pole. Both were expected to reach the moon between Aug. 21 and 23.

“The apparatus moved into an unpredictable orbit and ceased to exist as a result of a collision with the surface of the moon,” read a statement from the agency.

The lunar mission was Russia’s first since 1976, when it was part of the Soviet Union. Only three governments have managed successful moon landings: the Soviet Union, the United States and China.

A previous Indian attempt to land at the south pole in 2019 ended when the spacecraft crashed into the moon’s surface.

apnews.com

Russia's Luna-25 spacecraft crashes into the moon, ending its bid to reach the lunar south pole

Russia's Roscosmos space agency says the Luna-25 spacecraft has crashed into the moon after it spun into an uncontrolled orbit, bringing a premature end to the country's first lunar mission since 1976.
apnews.com apnews.com

:)
"Roscosmos said it wanted to show Russia “is a state capable of delivering a payload to the moon,” and “ensure Russia’s guaranteed access to the moon’s surface.”"
Click to expand...
Mission accomplished.
Vlad,
think you can deliver the next payload in recognizable condition? Not just a debris field strewn across the surface?
 
Shiftless2 said:
"Drive Sober. No Regrets" #328
Click to expand...
Regret is a function of memory.
If avoiding regret is the objective, blackout drunkenness may do as well or better.

E C-B3
Palming a hat is easy. But if there's a kid under that captain's hat, and if the kids feet are not touching the ground, good trick.
 
I did consider putting this in the LGBTQ+ thread but since it goes far beyond same-sex marriages figured I'd put it here

The Tennessee House Just Passed a Bill Completely Gutting Marriage Equality​

The bill could allow county clerks to deny marriage licenses to same-sex, interfaith, or interracial couples in Tennessee.​


newrepublic.com

The Tennessee House Just Passed a Bill Completely Gutting Marriage Equality

The bill could allow county clerks to deny marriage licenses to same-sex, interfaith, or interracial couples in Tennessee.
newrepublic.com newrepublic.com
 
Shiftless2 said:
"The Tennessee House Just Passed a Bill Completely Gutting Marriage Equality

The bill could allow county clerks to deny marriage licenses to same-sex, interfaith, or interracial couples in Tennessee." #330​

Click to expand...
Here we go again !

We might have believed such authoritarian anal-retentalism was history, gone if not forgotten. Wrong again sear.

Loving v. Virginia​

1967 U.S. Supreme Court case abolishing restrictions on interracial marriage​


Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967), was a landmark civil rights decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in which the Court ruled that laws banning interracial marriage violate the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The case involved Mildred Loving, a woman of color, and her white husband Richard Loving, who in 1958 were sentenced to a year in prison for marrying each other. Their marriage violated Virginia's Racial Integrity Act of 1924, which criminalized marriage between people classified as "white" and people classified as "colored". The Lovings appealed their conviction to the Supreme Court of Virginia, which upheld it. They then appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which agreed to hear their case.
In June 1967, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in the Lovings' favor and overturned their convictions. Its decision struck down Virginia's anti-miscegenation law and ended all race-based legal restrictions on marriage in the United States. Virginia had argued before the Court that its law was not a violation of the Equal Protection Clause because the punishment was the same regardless of the offender's race, and thus it "equally burdened" both caucasians and non-caucasians. The Court found that the law nonetheless violated the Equal Protection Clause because it was based solely on "distinctions drawn according to race" and outlawed conduct—namely, that of getting married—that was otherwise generally accepted and which citizens were free to do. Beginning in 2013, the decision was cited as precedent in U.S. federal court decisions holding restrictions on same-sex marriage in the United States unconstitutional, including in the Supreme Court decision Obergefell v. Hodges (2015).
More from Wikipedia / Wikipedia text under CC-BY-SA license

On the bright side, those promoting this new Tennessee injustice probably know about this Supreme Court precedent from their neighbor Virginia.
Perhaps we can hope the Tennessee legislators know their new lunge toward marriage injustice won't stand, even if it survives long enough to curry favor in the next election.
 
Agreed - and if you remember when Thomas addressed Roe he mentioned a number of other things that weren't in the Constitution but didn't mention mixed race marriages (couldn't have anything to do with his own marriage could it).

That said, during their confirmation hearings four of the judges made it very clear that Roe v Wade was settled law and was not to be challenged. So all it would take would be the "right case" to have them overturn Loving. [They have made it clear that they are coming for Obergefell.]

But I expect that Tennessee will split hairs on this one by claiming that the bill does not ban interracial marriages - all it does is allow individuals (clerical staff, JP's, etc) to refuse to issue marriage licenses in cases where they don't agree with the marriage. After all, the Supreme Court has recently ruled that discrimination is legal.
 
Shiftless2 said:
" [They have made it clear that they are coming for Obergefell.]" #332
Click to expand...
Not sure your intended meaning is clear, including, what's "Obergefell"?
Shiftless2 said:
"But I expect that Tennessee will split hairs on this one by claiming that the bill does not ban interracial marriages - all it does is allow individuals (clerical staff, JP's, etc) to refuse to issue marriage licenses in cases where they don't agree with the marriage. After all, the Supreme Court has recently ruled that discrimination is legal." #332
Click to expand...
That's a well established way to toss the political hot-potato. ... It's not government that's discriminating. It's government that's empowering petty bureaucrats to do our dirty-work for us.
"First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out - because I was not a communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out - because I was not a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out - because I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for me - and there was no one left to speak out for me." pastor Martin Niemöller
Click to expand...
I'm no fan of martial oppression. But I might object a little less if it's these oppressors that are hoist by their own petard.
 
United States Constitution's #9 Article of Amendment: Ratified December 15, 1791
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Click to expand...
I understand the indispensable role stare decisis plays in civilized society.
None the less, if there was no legal impediment to non-straight marriage in 1791, how sad that we need a precedent like Obergefell to formalize, enshrine our legal right to exercise this specific form of Liberty. BUT:

We do.
 

Pence-Founded Organization Spreads Lie Linking Abortion to Breast Cancer​

Advancing American Freedom posted a video promoting the debunked theory that abortion increases the risk of breast cancer
BY TESSA STUART

A FEW MONTHS after a Trumpist mob marched through the halls of the U.S. Capitol calling for the summary execution of Mike Pence, the former vice president founded a political advocacy group dedicated to building on the “success of the last four years.”

Since its creation, Pence’s group, Advancing American Freedom, has defended the “junk fees” — hidden fees on everything from airfare to concert tickets — that the Biden administration has sought to eliminate. It’s promoted, in service of an argument against an EPA rule to lower greenhouse gas emissions, the dubious argument that “car seat laws function as unintentional ‘contraception.’” And, earlier this month, it revived the widely-discredited theory that abortion causes breast cancer.

On YouTube, Advancing American Freedom posted an hour-long Zoom presentation delivered to the group Anglicans for Life by the surgeon and anti-abortion activist Angela Lanfranchi, a staunch defender of the debunked claim that having an abortion increases one’s risk of developing breast cancer.

In her presentation, Lanfranchi focused on what she saw as a consequential moment in this debate. In 2003 — after dozens of ...

www.rollingstone.com

Pence-Founded Organization Spreads Lie Linking Abortion to Breast Cancer

Advancing American Freedom posted a video promoting the debunked theory that abortion increases the risk of breast cancer
www.rollingstone.com www.rollingstone.com
 
Shiftless2 said:
"It happened a second time" #337
Click to expand...
I don't even know what that's called. Is there a name more medical / doctoral than "deer in the headlights"?

I may not agree w/ McConnell very often. But I acknowledge his capacity to phrase persuasively.
"We don't have this [budget deficit / federal debt] problem because we tax too little in this country. We have it because we spend too much." Sen. McConnell (R-KY) CBS-TV Face The Nation 13/10/20

“The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY)
http://www.mediaite.com/online/white-house-appears-to-want-to-shame-the-shameless-mitch-mcconnell-and-company/
Click to expand...
In the minimum wage debate McConnell said:
Is it any wonder that if we make employment more expensive, there'll be less of it?

No matter which side of that debate you're on, can that point be persuasively refuted?
Shiftless2 said:
"he really does need to retire"
Click to expand...
Watch what you wish for. Senile incompetence in the Republican leadership is a valuable gift to the Democrats.
 

Ex-Proud Boys leader sentenced to 15 years in prison in Jan. 6 Capitol attack case​

WASHINGTON (AP) — A former leader of the far-right Proud Boys extremist group was sentenced on Thursday to 15 years in prison for spearheading an attack on the U.S. Capitol to try to prevent the peaceful transfer of power from Donald Trump to Joe Biden after the 2020 presidential election.
By Michael Kunzelman The Associated Press

A former leader of the far-right Proud Boys extremist group was sentenced on Thursday to 15 years in prison for spearheading an attack on the U.S. Capitol to try to prevent the peaceful transfer of power from Donald Trump to Joe Biden after the 2020 presidential election.

Zachary Rehl was seen on video spraying a chemical irritant at law enforcement officers outside the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, but he repeatedly lied about that assault while he testified at his trial, federal prosecutors said.

Prosecutors had recommended a 30-year prison sentence for Rehl, who helped lead dozens of Proud Boys members and associates in marching to the Capitol on Jan. 6. Rehl and other Proud Boys joined the mob that broke through police lines and forced lawmakers to flee, disrupting the joint session of Congress for certifying the electoral victory by Biden, a Democrat.

The judge who sentenced Rehl also on Thursday sentenced Proud Boys organizer Joseph Biggs to 17 years in prison. U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly will separately sentence three other Proud Boys who were convicted by a jury in May after a four-month trial in Washington that laid bare far-right extremists’ embrace of lies by Trump, a Republican, that the 2020 election was stolen from him.

Enrique Tarrio, a Miami resident who was the Proud Boys’ national chairman and top leader, is scheduled to be sentenced on Tuesday. His sentencing was moved from Wednesday to next week because U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly was sick.

Tarrio wasn’t in Washington on Jan. 6. He had been arrested two days before the Capitol riot on charges that he defaced a Black Lives Matter banner during an earlier rally in the nation’s capital, and he complied with ...

www.thestar.com

Ex-Proud Boys leader sentenced to 15 years in prison in Jan. 6 Capitol attack case

WASHINGTON (AP) — A former leader of the far-right Proud Boys extremist group was sentenced on Thursday to 15 years in prison for spearheading an attack on the U.S. Capitol
www.thestar.com www.thestar.com
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top