Left targets justices' homes

[BlueEyesInLevis]

When it's protecting the bodily autonomy of women's rights

Along with the right to safe contraceptions for unmarried people

Along with the right to do sodomy and not be jailed

Along with the right to have gay marriage

Along with the right to have interracial marriage

A lot of issues were built in the right to privacy doctrine. Of course they're going to do a little bit of intimidation they're very livelihood would be at risk if they don't

Not ONE of these was ruled illegal. And only one of them was addressed by the court which makes the rest of them pure scare mongering. As to the first, it merely lets Americans decide this issue for themselves through the elected representatives.

Furthermore your partisan rationalization justifies any kind of protest that any aggrieved party wishes to commit, including storming the capital.

 

[BlueEyesInLevis]

Since when precisely?

Since laws were passed against them.

 

[ll74]

No rebuttal, no denial, no clarification.
Just an ad hominem attack. (Another rhetorical white flag of surrender)

It's a duplicate post, dip.

 

[BlueEyesInLevis]

The black ghetto riots that happened from 1964 to 1968 enabled Richard Nixon to be elected president in 1968, even though the War in Vietnam was becoming unpopular. Because there were no black ghetto riots of any significance from 1969 to 1972 whites rewarded President Nixon with a landslide re election victory in 1972.

More enduring increases in black social pathology discredited the civil rights legislation and the War on Poverty. They indicated that segregationists had been right about Negroes, and turned the United States into a Republican country.

The tax revolt, which elected Ronald Reagan in 1980 and re elected him by a landslide in 1984, was largely a draft riot against the War on Poverty. By 1980 most whites did not want their tax money spent in ways that benefited blacks. They still don't.

I wrote "they" because I vote Democrat. Nevertheless, I really like the Democrat Party that existed from the inauguration of Franklin Roosevelt in 1933 to the assassination of President Kennedy in 1963. Roosevelt had the sense to keep equal rights for Negroes out of his New Deal. I think the civil rights movement was a well intended failure.

The New Deal was popular among Southern whites. Millions of the same people who voted enthusiastically for Roosevelt during the 1930's and early 1940's voted with equal enthusiasm for George Wallace three decades later.

I dont at all believe that whites opposed welfare because some of it went to Blacks. We opposed it because it had become a dismal failure for everyone but was especially damaging to Black families.

 

[ll74]

And I've made my comment on other posts.....prosecute anyone who protests or does anything else outside of someone's residence. Doesn't matter who or why

 

[Chobham]

I dont at all believe that whites opposed welfare because some of it went to Blacks. We opposed it because it had become a dismal failure for everyone but was especially damaging to Black families.

Spot on. By far the largest group receiving welfare are whites. Number two is Hispanic's. The black population is third.

"The steady expansion of welfare programs can be taken as a measure of the steady disintegration of the Negro family structure over the past generation in the United States." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Moynihan was very much the Liberal in the classical sense his entire life.

 

[pecksniff]

I dont at all believe that whites opposed welfare because some of it went to Blacks.

In fact that has been a persistent attitude for decades, even though at all times more welfare went to whites than blacks. It has always been perceived as a tax hard-working whites pay lazy useless blacks to bribe them not to commit crimes.

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

Spot on. By far the largest group receiving welfare are whites. Number two is Hispanic's. The black population is third.

"The steady expansion of welfare programs can be taken as a measure of the steady disintegration of the Negro family structure over the past generation in the United States." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Moynihan was very much the Liberal in the classical sense his entire life.

I have no problem with a social safety net for the truly needy, and don’t think race should be a factor in evaluating the merits of any given program, but since you mentioned it, I’m curious about proportionality. Are these rankings adjusted for each group’s proportional percentage of the total population?

 

[Chobham]

I have no problem with a social safety net for the truly needy, and don’t think race should be a factor in evaluating the merits of any given program, but since you mentioned it, I’m curious about proportionality. Are these rankings adjusted for each group’s proportional percentage of the total population?

No, those are the raw numbers. 43% white, 28% Hispanic, 23% Black, ~8% other.

 

[Sean Renaud]

Since laws were passed against them.

So that is the standard for morality? If it happened prior it was good because no ink and paper existed but after it was bad? Just trying to get some level of sanity on the subject.

 

[ll74]

"I have no problem with the truly needy...as long as it fits my standard of needy"

Riiight

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

No, those are the raw numbers. 43% white, 28% Hispanic, 23% Black, ~8% other.

thanks. looks like whites are underrepresented on the welfare rolls while Hispanic and blacks are over represented proportionality to the population at large.

 

[Chobham]

Back to the subject.

As has already been posted those "protestor's" are in violation of Federal law and the laws of the state of Virginia. Perhaps Maryland as well but I have no firm knowledge of that. They need to be dealt with in the harshest possible terms.

Where is the US Marshall Service? It is their charter to protect the judiciary, so where are they? Have they been ordered to 'stand down' from arresting the 'protestors?' If so, by who? The Marshall's Service falls under the DOJ. If a Justice comes to harm due to lack of protection I suspect there will be hell to pay.

Polls indicate that this decision, if true, has had no effect on the mid-term election landscape (CNN Poll). As ole Willy said, "It's the economy stupid." And as a matter of fact if these 'protests' turn violent they are going to have the exact opposite reaction to their intended goals. The American public is pretty much over having over aged adolescents throwing violent and destructive temper tantrums.

 

[Sean Renaud]

thanks. looks like whites are underrepresented on the welfare rolls while Hispanic and blacks are over represented proportionality to the population at large.

Yeah and there are a number of reasons for that. When we talk of systemic racism we mean the entire damn system not just one aspect though it tends to get localized to a single thing.

 

[LukSkyFokker]

It's a duplicate post, dip.

I was cracking up when I read his reply. What a dupe.

 

[Rightguide]

Back to the subject.

As has already been posted those "protestor's" are in violation of Federal law and the laws of the state of Virginia. Perhaps Maryland as well but I have no firm knowledge of that. They need to be dealt with in the harshest possible terms.

Where is the US Marshall Service? It is their charter to protect the judiciary, so where are they? Have they been ordered to 'stand down' from arresting the 'protestors?' If so, by who? The Marshall's Service falls under the DOJ. If a Justice comes to harm due to lack of protection I suspect there will be hell to pay.

Polls indicate that this decision, if true, has had no effect on the mid-term election landscape (CNN Poll). As ole Willy said, "It's the economy stupid." And as a matter of fact if these 'protests' turn violent they are going to have the exact opposite reaction to their intended goals. The American public is pretty much over having over aged adolescents throwing violent and destructive temper tantrums.

The federal statute I posted prohibiting protesting in front of residences of Federal Judges, etc., could be enforced by the US Marshal service or possibly the DC Metropolitan Police Force if those residences are in DC, which is a federal zone.

 

[Rightguide]

Back to the subject.

As has already been posted those "protestor's" are in violation of Federal law and the laws of the state of Virginia. Perhaps Maryland as well but I have no firm knowledge of that. They need to be dealt with in the harshest possible terms.

Where is the US Marshall Service? It is their charter to protect the judiciary, so where are they? Have they been ordered to 'stand down' from arresting the 'protestors?' If so, by who? The Marshall's Service falls under the DOJ. If a Justice comes to harm due to lack of protection I suspect there will be hell to pay.

Polls indicate that this decision, if true, has had no effect on the mid-term election landscape (CNN Poll). As ole Willy said, "It's the economy stupid." And as a matter of fact if these 'protests' turn violent they are going to have the exact opposite reaction to their intended goals. The American public is pretty much over having over aged adolescents throwing violent and destructive temper tantrums.

The federal statute I posted prohibiting protesting in front of residences of Federal Judges, etc., could be enforced by the US Marshal service or possibly the DC Metropolitan Police Force if those residences are in DC, which is a federal zone.

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

Pathetic freaks.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1523095574156742657

 

[KeithD]

I certainly don't support picketing justice's homes and families personally but one of my first thoughts to raise with the SC justices was whether the Constitution specifically prohibits the picketing of justice's homes. If not, to be consistent, what's their beef?

 

[LukSkyFokker]

Pathetic freaks.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1523095574156742657

Shaddup. Just STFU.

View attachment 2146987

View attachment 2146988

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

Shaddup. Just STFU.

View attachment 2146987

View attachment 2146988

No, sorry. Not gonna shut up. The Capitol riot has nothing to do with the freaks in front of Kavanaugh‘s house.

 

[LukSkyFokker]

No, sorry. Not gonna shut up. The Capitol riot has nothing to do with the freaks in front of Kavanaugh‘s house.

You should or we'll just continue to point and laff at your follies. And you're right, the Capitol riot was much worse than a few people showing up for a kegger at Brett's.

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

You should or we'll just continue to point and laff at your follies. And you're right, the Capitol riot was much worse than a few people showing up for a kegger at Brett's.

Yes, Capitol riot was worse and it has absolutely nothing to do with the idiots in front of Kavanaugh’s house. You seem to be condoning their behavior.

 

[ll74]

No, sorry. Not gonna shut up. The Capitol riot has nothing to do with the freaks in front of Kavanaugh‘s house.

The. Sec of state demonstrators do

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

The. Sec of state demonstrators do

My post is about the freaks in front of Kavanaugh’s house. Interesting how you guys wanna change to subject