Regarding Roe v Wade. What if...?

[Duer 157099]

What if the real deep Republican strategists, understanding the same thing we do, which is that they depend on the Roe v Wade debate as a staple platform issue -- what if they really are trying to throw this election? First by nominating McCain, and then by getting McCain to pick the craziest VP possible.

What if they realize that the next President will almost certainly be nominating the next SCOTUS member(s), the one(s) who will shift the balance?

What if they, in their heart of hearts (euphamism - we know they don't have an actual heart) just DO NOT want that to happen?

It would explain some of the crazy choices lately wouldn't it?

[still_one]

1. Don't kid yourself, they want it overturned /nt

[Duer 157099]

3. I know a lot of fundies, and I have to tell you

they are hypocrites if nothing else. Push comes to shove and their 16 year old daughter is pregant, well, it *is* legal afterall... God will forgive...

Yes, they DO think this way when it really comes to THEIR family.

That's what I'm thinking. They want to sound all sanctimonious about it, but we pretty much already know that most of them don't practice what they preach. we KNOW this.

A much smaller percentage might actually want it overturned, yes.

[crimsonblue]

2. no

they want control. Period.

[Crunchy Frog]

4. They will ALWAYS be able to use abortion as a wedge issue.

Even if Roe is overturned, somewhere in America, some woman will be having an abortion. If it returns to the states, that will become the new battleground. If it becomes completely illegal, then illegal abortions will become the battleground. The battle will eventually move onto the Pill and EC. There will always be some new frontier for them to exploit.

The people trying to talk themselves into believing Roe is not in danger are decieving themselves.

[PBS Poll-435]

7. Yep. An Excerpt from Levi's 2030 RNC Acceptance Speech...

"And there are still SLUTS killing babies in Rhode Island. We need Federal control over dream-born, pre-born, and unborn rights. The states are not equipped to handle an issue such as this.

I call on our Senate Majority Leader, the honorable Ms Spears-Federline, from the great state of Louississippi to call to a vote the legislation passed in the House of Representatives. Speaker of the House Candice Cameron did not work her sweet caboose off just to see this tabled in a body where we have 89 seats. Can she call an end to her concert schedule and get back to the peoples business?

[Crunchy Frog]

5. Dupe.

[opihimoimoi]

6. Women will be reminded if McSame wins: Women will lose their Choice

You wanna lose YOUR CHOICE? If they reverse Wade...there will be NO CHOICE....

Our Women who value CHOICE better wake up....

[Dammit Ann]

8. In your dreams.

That is why this election is crucial.

[Thothmes]

9. Consider this.

Assume Obama is President and we controll congress. The two most likeley retirees from the Supreme Court are Justice Ginsberg and and Justice Stevens.
They are the most liberal justices on the court. You can bet that Obama will nominate liberal jurists to replace them on the bench. They should have no problem being confirmed by a Democratically controlled Senate. However, that does not change the conservative bent of this court. Now if McCain gets elected, Ginsberg and Stevens go. He will try to nominate conservative like Alito or Thomas. If the Democratically controlled congress does its job, these types will not be confirmed. McCain will then have to nominate at least middle of the roaders. These noms will have a chance to be confirmed by a Democratic Congress. This may or may not alter the leanings of the court. The conservatives will still be in control. The only think that will change the tenor of this court is for a third justice to step down while Obama is President. Then he gets to nom a liberal, and control of the court should shift to a 5/4 liberal outlook. Just my opinion.