527
She added that, if GOP lawmakers are unwilling to respond to the reproductive health care needs of women, she hopes that voters will get a chance later this year. A push to enshrine the right to abortion in the state’s constitution is well on its way to qualifying for the November ballot.
The GOP is running on a platform of hate and misery. Sadly too many people are fully behind that.
Too many, but not a majority. Important to remember that.
Specifically, remember that coming up to the election.
And remind your friends to get off their asses and vote.
They're also quite loud, and violent too.
What a bullshit country. Absolutely embarrassing.
Their plan is working. We're too busy talking about basic rights while they fuck us over on shit like climate change and education.
Yes, but I'm not going to let them lynch, deport or force birth on any of my homies. If they want to burn the planet down they're in the same shit we are, but they aren't being effected by the changes to basic rights that they're proposing.
If they want to burn the planet down they're in the same shit we are.
They have considerably more wealth. If/when food and water get scarce they'll have a considerable advantage, if the current system continues as it is.
If/when food and water get scarce their money won't mean shit, and the people with nothing left to lose will start looking at the people with a whole to lose.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Hell, they are attacking from all sides. Fucked by bills, groceries, income, taxes, every-fucking-thing. I struggle to grasp if there is a side that isn't being attacked.
If there is, don't mention it out loud, or it will be next.
Divide and conquer. The only ones not under attack are the rich who instigate all of this.
We need to find them and introduce head removing machinery in their immediate vicinity. But everyone's like nooo, violence is not the answer, think of the property owners who have to pay for their interior redecorating.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Conservative voters clearly want some sort of change but aren't articulate enough to know what it is or eloquent enough to ask. They want someone to get into the government and fuck up the process as an act of protest. But they don't know how to ask for that. Instead they vote in the loud, viscous remains of a person with a fragile ego to be the damage they want done to those who they think wronged them.
Cruelty is the point.
The issue is that a lot of people have every good reason to be pissed at the state of the world and to be angry that it isn't changing for the better. The Republicans sure aren't ever going to make things better, but their entire marketing technique is based on harnessing that anger. Democrats, on the other hand, seem to mostly be afraid of even acknowledging that the anger and its causes even exist, and that's one of their biggest weaknesses.
"We're the Democrats we can't possibly be responsible for any of this frustration and anger. Also have you heard those young people talking about workers rights and not supporting genocide? Ah to be young and naive."
Why do we allow our politicians to refuse to do their job and just leave when they don't want to deal with something?
Fucking make them go, listen, debate or kick their ass out.
I was extremely angry when whatever dipshit was photographed playing angry birds or some shit from behind during a legislative session. My mother (a conservative apologist) tried to excuse the behavior. I told her that if I'd done the same at any number of menial-labor jobs that I'd had, I'd lose my job. Fuck these people.
Fuck the system that enables them. Those conservative cunts want a civil war. I say let's go, and finish them off properly this time, instead of letting them go back to their homes with their weapons and let them continue the last war behind the scenes for over a hundred years without anyone catching on again.
Look at Germany pre- and post 2nd World War.
Night and day.
Because we didn't fuck around that time around.
It's like when the government refuses to comment on something. Motherfucker you are a servant of the state, you are under our mandate. We tell you to speak, you fucking speak you dancing fucking monkey.
We need a new system. We can't be running shit the same way in the AI age and a global population of, what, 9 billion?
Our old systems of governance did NOT scale.
Consider the population of the US in the 1700's. We have about a hundred times that now, but the same amount of representatives.
That means that every representative today has power over a hundred times more people than originally when the constitution was written.
That changes everything.
A lot of time the government refuses to comment on something because doing so would conflict with law, undermine an active criminal or civil case, or they are still working on it.
Saying "the government" in one broad general statement shows some degree of ignorance as to how the very systems you say "do not scale" work.
Yeah big parts of it are fucked up. A lot of politicians are power hungry sociopaths. But there are a whole lot of civil servants that work their asses off every day for below market rate pay in spite of how fucked up it is trying to make it better in a tangible way.
Maybe saying "the political system" might be more accurate than "the government" because a lot of the government is working pretty well despite the political system being so fucked up.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Because it's what their constituents want them to do. The voters aren't holding them to a higher standard and will re-elect.
Their constituents are completely unaware because they're uneducated and struggling with keeping their homes and pay off astronomical medical debts due to that one ingrown toenail a decade ago.
All they know is that their eternal rulers since a hundred years blame someone else, and the power of the church cements their inclination not to rock the boat and "stick together".
Who can blame them in a two party state? We have one alternative party more than Russia, or China.
cant wait until someone proposes a gun ban, on the precedent of the abortion ban. Will be a funny day.
But that doesn't really make sense, there is no federal law about abortion, the constitution protects gun ownership.ax
yeah, that's my point.
There was a federal law about abortion. We dont have it anymore.
load more comments
(16 replies)
Technically, both gun ownership rights and abortion rights were based on supreme Court interpretation of the 2nd and 14th amendments (respectively). Given the reversal of the right to abortion under the 14th amendment, an argument could be made that a similar reversal is due for the 2nd amendment as well. The 2nd amendment could simply be interpreted to mean that gun ownership is only a right as part of a "well regulated militia.'. In my opinion, that is the plain meaning of the provision anyway, but I'm just a gun toting liberal that doesn't get sexually aroused or validated by the size of my firearm.
load more comments
(2 replies)
A single Republican even bothered to stay to listen to her. Kudos to Sen. Ken Bennett for that, albeit small, act.
urging GOP lawmakers to consider the harm caused by the restrictive laws they support.
The cruelty is the point. This just tells them it's working.
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 19 Mar 2024
527 points (97.5% liked)
News
30380 readers
3354 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS