Noooo….you still don’t like Biden. You still think self serving narcissistic Trump was a leader, but a lifelong frugal public servant isn’t. Nooooo! (I know there’s no breaking through your fantasy, bob. You are a lost cause, totally divorced from reality and totally uninterested in honesty).

No bob, I mean the Union…as in the United States of America. As in the Union vs the Confederacy. Trump nearly dissolved the Union, so much that Republican platforms now include secession as their goal. Derp. Another “L” for your column. Another dunce cap for your collection.
Republicans want to erase America out of infantile spite, but have no idea what to do afterwards. Better learn Chinese or Russian, red states can’t afford to defend themselves, you are all welfare queen states with the highest murder and crime rates.

Side note: But, this means you are anti union, so 100% anti worker? Really? What favors has Biden handed unions? Most unions (all you oppose) lobby for workers, blue collar employees. You would limit lobbiests to to those lobbying for billionaires and huge corporations (including religious corporations) that actively lobby against workers rights, pay, safety, ecological responsibility, hours, etc. Think about that.

You fucking moron, it went from 3.08% (higher than Trump ever reached) in 2015 under Obama to -3.5% in 2020 (the lowest ever in history). Who the fuck told you .2%? Who told you Trump left it at 2.5%? Overall Obama’s growth rate was actually 50% higher than Trump’s, and Obama inherited a deep recession, Trump inherited a boom. They outright lied to you, and you just lapped it up without ever looking. They’re feeding you poo pie bob, not chocolate. I really wish I didn’t have to spend so much time correcting your obviously fabricated statistics, especially since you only spout them to force a correction, getting you attention, not because you believe or even understand them. So you understand, printing 50% more money while your economy is in the worst contraction ever causes inflation, and that’s what Trump did in 2020 while focusing on the election he lost in a landslide and ignoring the pandemic and economy.

Jobs?!? Obama job growth was near 8% adding 12.5 million jobs, Trump was the only president ever to lose jobs, losing 3.2 million. Another 100% break from reality, buddy. I’m telling you, you need professional help.

Yes, Trump did turn us around, from a massive recovery and booming economy to massive economic losses, job losses, absolutely insane deficits and trying to double the debt, huge money printing in 2020 (magic wand waiving) that creates massive inflation (that he now blames Biden for), undreamed of losses of life, and teetering on the brink of depression and pandemic. He made us madder. For libs that means angry, for cons that means totally bat shit crazy with no ties to reality at all.

Far from it, lots of positive, but so much negative left from the previous one we are still in the red.

They have made policies that help the American pocketbook, Trump robbed it blind to hand to billionaires (and fake billionaires).

Who told you that lie. The Democrats have done everything they legally can to force oil companies to increase production and stop price gouging, Republicans all voted against doing anything, then claim “Biden’s fault”. No fossil fuel production has been cut. You’ve been lied to, and you aren’t intellectually honest enough to investigate for yourself…you don’t want to hear the truth.

Republicans are to blame for high fuel prices, Democrats are responsible for the recent lowering. Democrats are making efforts to lower them further, Republicans are 100% opposed to any actions.

Trump benefited on fuel costs thanks to the economic collapse he caused by denying and ignoring Covid for months, dropping the demand for fuel to nothing…not a good policy overall, or do you suggest killing another million and shutting down another year to lower gas prices?


Lol. You are claiming reports say the average American spends $500 more on fuel and goods per month than under Trump? What reports? Glen Beck, AON, or Rush Limbaugh’s ghost? Only if you are a trucker using hundreds of gallons of gas a month. Even in California, fuel cost has gone up less than 1/5 of what you say.

Trump cost you SO much more than $6k per year, over $60k per taxpayer on the official debt alone…and these extra expenses (probably $100-$200 per month tops) are thanks to Trump printing 1/3 of every dollar in circulation (inflation) and fuel supply and demand being out of hand intentionally because oil companies make more money by producing less, and aren’t nationalized so the government can’t force them to stop gouging.

Such nonsense bob. Your facts are all wrong, and since you won’t investigate you are just going to continue to believe the lies you were fed. The people you listen to are making money off your beliefs, bob, and they see you as a huge sucker they can convince of anything and get your money or support for their America destroying “get me richer quick” schemes.

🤦‍♂️

Summary, since I don’t think you can read that much.
Union = United States Union, not unions
Gdp- Obama 1.59% rising consistently during his presidency Trump 1% falling precipitously to the worst ever in history. Also never beat Obama’s high.
Jobs- Obama added 12.5 million, Trump lost 3.2 million
Debt- Obama added $9 trillion, ending a recession and creating a boom over 8 years. Trump added $8 trillion on the books (and trillions more off the books) in 4 years ending a boom and creating a recession
Deficit- 2020 was the biggest budget deficit ever by >200% at $3.13 trillion and added well over $4.2 trillion to the debt that year, way more than 2021 at a still horrific $2.7 budget deficit but ending adding only $1.5 to the debt.

https://www.thebalance.com/us-deficit-by-year-3306306

Oil/gas price - all cost cutting measures opposed by Cons.

After reading all your material, and after reading your rants on the other thread, my belief is reinforced that the best path is still the suggestion I noted above:

"If abortion should be considered to be a "right", then so amend the Constitution".

Bye Felicia.

You don’t need to be a lawyer to know that if you lie or intentionally mislead under oath, even to congress, it’s perjury.
You also don’t need to be a lawyer to know that 99.9% of undeniably proven perjury isn’t prosecuted.
I’m not a lawyer, but I grew up surrounded by lawyers and judges in the immediate family. Grandfather, uncle, and 3 cousins were lawyers, 2 of them judges….all Republicans btw. I’m no stranger to the law, thanks.
Trump lied on every question he answered under oath and nothing….but justices are SUPPOSED to be above reproach, no longer true.


(Edit; it bears noting, the petitioners claimed “ The legislature (not scientists or doctors) then found that at five or six weeks’ gestational age an unborn human beings heart begins beating“. But reality and science say “ the heart has four clearly defined chambers in the eighth week of pregnancy, but does not have fully organized muscle tissue until the 20th week” meaning it’s not a heart until 20 weeks in, so can’t possibly be a heart beating 14 weeks before there’s a heart…it’s a muscle cluster pulse, not a heartbeat anymore than a spark plug test firing is a running car.)

Did every justice in that 1954 Supreme Court say in their confirmation hearings under oath that Plessy was settled, reaffirmed precedent they respected? Was Plessy repeatedly challenged and upheld by multiple supreme courts? If not, I call red herring.

Your intentional pedantry is tiresome and uninteresting. Enjoy your beliefs. Bye Felicia.

Hey Bob, do you know….who is “Trucker” Randy Bishop?
I’ll tell you since he’s playing make believe, he’s a far right wing radio host and Trump lover who’s running for the senate in Michigan (as a far right wing Trump loving racist anti gay fake Democrat…wtf is that!?) who complains that all families aren’t all white anymore, and race mixing should be outlawed, he shouldn’t have to see it on tv, and whines that black Americans own the nation, the media, the politicians, and the public schools.

Bishop was ranting about the media indoctrinating children through TV commercials, just like racist Trumpist often do (but never Democrats)….

“You will not believe what this country looks like in 20, 30, 40 years from now,” he said during the show, “If we continue down this path with public indoctrination of our kids and their socialist and communist agenda. What is it? Destroy the nuclear family.”

A few seconds later he clarified how the nuclear family is being destroyed.

“Now every single commercial has a biracial mom and dad,” Bishop said in the show.

“I can’t even watch a college basketball tournament without commercials telling me that I have to feel guilty,” Bishop said, “Because I think a family should be a white mom a white dad and white kids.”

Let me guess, 1) you think this proves Democrats are racists (he’s about as much a Democrat as Regan or Dick Cheney or Manchin) and 2)you would vote for him.

Btw, Michigan Democratic Party has denounced him, said they will not support his candidacy, and are deeply insulted this far right wing racist would pretend to align himself with them.

“Views such as the ones Trucker Randy Bishop espouses have no place in the Democratic Party. Candidates who say or believe these things are not welcome. Randy Bishop is not a Democrat, he is a dishonest minor social media personality that enjoys getting attention from making outrageous statements. He shows nothing but disrespect to our system of government by using a run for elected office to promote his personal agenda, entirely based on lies, hate and fear.
Disgusting racist belief systems are not welcome in the Democratic Party and frankly should not be welcome in any political party or community. We will not support his efforts to run for Senate and find it deeply insulting that he would dare to put a D next to his name.“
“With dangerous views such as this, this individual masquerading as a Dem has no business anywhere near any branch or level of government or in policymaking. Calling for the erasure of entire families/groups of people, is another example of & in line with the backwards, heinous views & actions clinging to white supremacy that we’ve been seeing in anti-history & anti-LGBTQ bills & it’ll only get worse w/someone like this in office.”

Republicans, on the other hand, have been supporting him for years, with Republican senators, representatives, and others often going on his show, including supporting his failed campaign as a Republican for the same seat.

More blatant Republican dishonesty, racism, intolerance, vitriol, and more dishonesty. Par for the course if you’re a Republican. You guys REALLY need to stop huffing the keyboard duster.

@newtboy,

A company cancelling a multi-billion dollar project means multi-billion dollars not spent on the work of the project, that many jobs out of the economy. Exactly the same as a car manufacturer shutting down for a week, by your logic nothing was lost, the company just stopped spending money for a couple days...

I only support the groups right to protest, and not to illegally block roads or borders. I stand by my wish is for their prompt arrest when illegal blocking roads, borders or places of business.

That said, I believe it also wrong of me to fail to point out that our federal government has continually refused to act as I would wish in promptly shutting down illegal blockades. This is the very first instance were they've shown any interest in a prompt police enforced end, and they've in fact jump much further to invoking a declaration of national emergency so they can also target protesters bank accounts directly and without court orders.

An analogy would be someone that supports arresting people for possession of marijuana. The government then proceeds to only selectively enforce that law, say only acting to make arrests when people are a particular creed or color. It's perfectly consistent to believe the government arrests are wrong and unfair, and to NOT support them, while at the same time still believing the idea of the rule applied fairly being a good idea.

One side is about what I think the line for protest should be:
-I believe the right to protest should be independent of creed or belief, and should only be restricted when actions taken are illegal.(Ideally illegal being defined as impeding on freedoms of others)

By that, the convoy blockade of border or streets should have led to immediate arrests.

In the eye of fairness though, the last two years have already seen at a minimum 3 major protests, that included illegal blockades of work sites and railways and those were ALL allowed to run for weeks and in 2 cases months. The government of the day even tripped over themselves to message their support for the overall causes of the protestors.

In that light, it's wrong to simply ignore the fact that the first protest that is likely to vote conservative is the ONLY one where the government immediately condemns everything about them and feels compelled to intervene urgently.

Churches were literally burning last summer, and our PM's public statements spent most of their time sympathizing with the anger before pleading that burning churches isn't helpful. Where'd all that compassion for folks that you disagree with go when it meant a small number of downtown Ottawa business shutdown and horns honking go. Now our PM invokes terrorizing of the populace.

Trudeau's actions have been distressingly similar to Trump's as the division in our country grows, he's using his words to reach out to the extreme end of his side of the aisle, while tossing gasoline and vitriol onto his opposition. It's making things worse in the worst possible way when we need leaders uniting instead of stoking further division.

I read it, nowhere did it give an estimate of what those protests cost, and it indicated there were multiple other routes for the oil to travel so didn’t even disrupt oil transportation completely, much less ALL commerce.
And it was about pipelines crossing their (or protected) land it seems, a far cry from the truckers. Yes, the validity and severity of your cause matters, just like the damage you do and to whom.

Billions worth of goods stuck temporarily…but no actual estimated cost for their delay, this cost billions in lost production and salaries that won’t be recovered.

That protest was targeted against the offending entity, not the populace. I have no issue with natives blockading their own land and preserves that feed those reservations against permanent destruction for some private profits. That’s a far cry from the truckers blockading the main border crossing for industry and tourism because they’re afraid to get a poke.

The numbers I saw were special. Hundreds of millions-billions lost (your billions in goods delayed doesn’t have a price tag). That was before the bridge was reopened. These protesters weren’t satisfied with that damage and continued to close your capitol with ever shifting demands. Since regular measures had failed, I support emergency measures, seizure, even forfeiture after trial, of any funds or tools used.

Perhaps they became only as localized (but certainly not as targeted, and localized in a city not the unpopulated country), but they had already done exponentially more damage and showed no sign of end or even demands.

Let’s ignore someone personally supporting a grass roots movement outside their country and control, please. I find it a red herring totally unconnected to how he governs.

Yes, some Floyd protests were more violent than the truckers, some weren’t, remember how they were all violently smashed, tear gassed, rubber bullets galore, run through with police trucks, unmarked vans pulling up and grabbing people crossing the streets, unmarked vans driving through towns full of police shooting tear gas at any moving body, etc? Don’t pretend the response is similar.
Also, the Floyd protests lasted a weekend in most cases (occupy Portland really wasn’t about Floyd) and went elsewhere the next march. They weren’t closing down one area for weeks intent on staying. Most lasted hours and were peaceful until police became violent, despite right wing media’s fear-mongering.

I think you’re stretching, putting on blinders, and doing insane mental gymnastics to pretend you believe that. From the actual damage caused, the idiotic reasoning behind it (quickly abandoned), the extremely uncanadianness of the self centered far right rally masquerading as protest, the international damage, the foreign involvement from planning to funding, these are unique “protests” in numerous ways.

Their idiotic beliefs are only one of many distinctions I’ve pointed out, and as I mentioned only color public opinion and the amount of patience they’re given by the public, not how the government treats them. It’s not at all honest for you to pretend that’s the entirety of my position…it’s very Bob of you, and has lost some of my respect.

Pipelines crossing sovereign territory or preserves = bad so blockading those areas to force pipeline movement = good….oil companies didn’t truck the oil out, they increased shipments from other areas by rail. Read the article you linked.

Native cultures and governments are different. Pretending an elected board for a reservation works for the people is naive in the extreme. Read about politics on reservations, who funds the people that get elected in most cases, what happens to opposing candidates…saying the board signed off while so many showed up to fight against it seems a bit at odds, no? Like maybe the board members were bribed, had ties with the oil industry, or other conflicts….just maybe?

And again, those protests didn’t cost a fraction what the truckers did from my research. Delaying delivery of a billion in goods isn’t the same as costing a billion in losses. Neither is delaying or cancelling a billion dollar project. Be adult please….don’t make such specious arguments ….please. They don’t slip by, and they make me think you are being disingenuous.

Economic disruption of the blockades was similar to the Mohawk blockade of railways about 2 years ago:
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-ottawa-rejects-police-intervention-to-put-an-end-to-blockades/

Similarly, mass lay offs and multi-billions of dollars of goods stuck sitting around waiting to get to the industries needing them.

Since at least 2012 the attempted expansion of an existing pipeline(Trans Mountain) was targeted continuously by blockades. Opposition and resulting delays leading to cost overruns so large that company ultimately halted the multi-billion dollar project.

In terms of dollars being lost, the convoy protest wasn't special. More over, the blockade of the border in Ontario that was causing the real economic damage was dismantled and removed before the 'emergency measures' were enacted. Which is to state, the emergency measures were primarily intended to clear out downtown Ottawa. In downtown Ottawa though, the damages were at minimum as localized as any of the lumber or pipeline blockades mentioned.


Prime Minister Trudeau couldn't be more unequivocal when he was expressing his support for the farmer protests in India and the Floyd protests in the US. Clip if you'd like: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9EaSF6Y0eE

The protests in India absolutely did immensely more harm to India's economy than the convoy here did in Canada. The protests in support of Floyd were again unequivocally more violent than the convoy in Canada.

There really is no basis by which to point to the convoy's actions and find them in any way unique or distinct from multiple other protests within Canada, or ones abroad that have been either given more latitude, or outright embraced and supported.

The distinction as even you can't resist going after, is that their beliefs they are protesting for are stupid and wrong, so no right to protest for them. That isn't how the right to protest within a democracy should be allowed to work.

I also have to point out the 'ethical' argument isn't as cut and dry as you want to make it out either.
-Pipelines bad so blockading is good ignores the fact the same oil gets pumped regardless, it just gets loaded into trucks that burn even more oil to haul it and have a fair greater risk of accidents and spills.
-Defending the rights and lands of Aboriginal peoples(like at Coastal Gas Link site violently attacked with millions in damages while the convoy was being vilified for 'incitement') is anything but obvious. The Wet'suwet'en hereditary leaders made claim to parts of the pipeline route and demanded it be shut down. However, the same Wet'suwet'en people's multiple elected Band Councils signed on with their wishes to proceed with the project. In fact, ALL elected representatives of ALL the Bands with land along the route had ALL signed onto the project and wanting it to proceed. It is in no way obvious that ignoring the will of those other bands to favour the conflicting claims of the hereditary leaders is clearly the most respectful of the people's wishes.

Duly noted.

Sift animosity aside, given and taken. I truly desire all to succeed.

Your statements about the economy as a whole applies to all, whether they diversify or solely own just 3 stocks or less.


I don't fear a crash of 87 or 2008. But your are right the ground beneath us is shaking. Having belief in our leaders and FED to do the the right thing is a is half harted. Even if they choose a proper corrective path it will be a bumpy ride.



You are right I am forward thinking and willing to take a few hard bumps over the next 10 years. I believe the upside is worth this risk.


I don't want a japan crash that took 25+ years to recover, or a 1929 crash which took 10 years and war to recover.

Every hard crash recovers, eventually.

If things go bad I will exit. Granted no one has perfect timing and neither do I. Will I loose 20 30% probably.

I do watch markets daily.


I'm 60 with 2 years left on the house mortgage. I will have a GE pension and hopefully some SS. Granted inflation can eat that 4K/month away but it will still help. Also I would continue to work.

And if that's not enough at least the house will be paid for and I will eat PB and J. or rice and beans.

The issue is the wrong guy, a dishonest blowhard trying to cover his own failures, claimed this early on with absolutely zero evidence. It was a clear dodge, his normal MO. Refusing any responsibility for ending the international pandemic response team that would have been able to actually say when and where the outbreak started, and likely be able to keep it relegated to one small area in China. By blaming it on a Chinese lab, actually saying it was intentional, he deflects from his abject failure to protect America from a clear, obvious, incontrovertibly deadly threat on the horizon….or any time after it’s discovery.
Were the Chinese studying Covid, yes, so were we. That’s not an indication of where it came from. There’s no evidence it came from any lab, only supposition at best.

Edit:Even if the guess that it came from a Chinese lab is correct, it doesn’t excuse one second of Trump’s (lack of) response and outright denials for months-years. The origin has nothing to do with the danger level, in fact, if it WERE enhanced/created in a lab as he claimed, that’s more reason to consider it MORE dangerous, not reason to claim it’s just a cold or mild flu and will disappear like magic in a few weeks. Granted, it was fun to see him (only after his trade deal fell apart) blame this deadly virus on the Chinese as an unforgivable deliberate act of germ warfare and accuse them of minimizing the danger and hiding the size and severity of the outbreak and in the same breath claim it’s nothing to worry about, not dangerous, probably not deadly, not worth any action to protect against, and just a minimal annoyance soon to disappear….but also disappointing to see how easily so many Americans glossed over the two faced hypocritical responsibility shirking stance he took.

This guy claims most, nearly all viruses can’t both infect people and be transmitted….what utter nonsense. If that were true, there would have never been epidemics, pandemics, not even outbreaks. Credibility destroyed.

I guess he didn’t hear about swine flu, or bird flu, or flu, or colds, or any transmittable virus. 🤦‍♂️
I guess they haven’t heard new mutations are far less deadly (but more transmittable) than earlier versions, so they are getting less dangerous, contrary to his claim.

Not transmitting well outdoors means it’s not natural?! Bullshit, animals nest together. Many natural viruses require close contact to transmit.

DNA testing proved early on that this is not a man made virus. Is it possible a Chinese lab made a natural virus more dangerous, then a lab mistake released it? Yes, but there’s no evidence that’s the case, even these people who’s livelihood relies on people accepting “the lab hypothesis” (hypothesis=guess) admit it’s all conjecture, there’s no evidence, certainly no proof. It’s not the lab theory because it’s unproven.

Duh.

BTW, this couple are married, anti vaxers, Ivermectin proponents, and were thrown out of Evergreen College, and are now both now discredited and disgraced. Their main source of income is now their anti vax, pro Ivermectin, Covid isn’t dangerous podcasts loved by morons like Joe Rogan, and a source of much of his misinformation that’s getting him removed from his platform.
“Bret Weinstein is one of the foremost purveyors of COVID-19 disinformation out there,” says Dr. David Gorski, a surgical oncologist and professor at Wayne State University who also debunks quack remedies as managing editor at a website called Science-Based Medicine. “Weinstein can be ‘credited’ with playing a large role in popularizing the belief that ivermectin is a miracle cure or preventative for COVID-19, that the vaccines are dangerous, and that the disease itself is not. Why are Rogan and Maher attracted to his messages? Contrarians and conspiracy theorists tend to be attracted to each other.”
https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2021/09/16/bret-weinstein-and-heather-heying-go-unvaccinated-take-ivermectin/

Downvote discredited shills who profit from misinformation. No surprise at all, considering who posted this dishonest propaganda from discredited propagandists.

Just incase you're afraid of- you know- facing reality

========================================


IQ testing and the eugenics movement in the United States

Eugenics, a set of beliefs and practices aimed at improving the genetic quality of the human population by excluding people and groups judged to be inferior and promoting those judged to be superior,[39][40][41] played a significant role in the history and culture of the United States during the Progressive Era, from the late 19th century until US involvement in World War II.[42][43]

The American eugenics movement was rooted in the biological determinist ideas of the British Scientist Sir Francis Galton. In 1883, Galton first used the word eugenics to describe the biological improvement of human genes and the concept of being "well-born".[44][45] He believed that differences in a person's ability were acquired primarily through genetics and that eugenics could be implemented through selective breeding in order for the human race to improve in its overall quality, therefore allowing for humans to direct their own evolution.[46]

Goddard was a eugenicist. In 1908, he published his own version, The Binet and Simon Test of Intellectual Capacity, and cordially promoted the test. He quickly extended the use of the scale to the public schools (1913), to immigration (Ellis Island, 1914) and to a court of law (1914).[47]

Unlike Galton, who promoted eugenics through selective breeding for positive traits, Goddard went with the US eugenics movement to eliminate "undesirable" traits.[48] Goddard used the term "feeble-minded" to refer to people who did not perform well on the test. He argued that "feeble-mindedness" was caused by heredity, and thus feeble-minded people should be prevented from giving birth, either by institutional isolation or sterilization surgeries.[47] At first, sterilization targeted the disabled, but was later extended to poor people. Goddard's intelligence test was endorsed by the eugenicists to push for laws for forced sterilization. Different states adopted the sterilization laws at different paces. These laws, whose constitutionality was upheld by the Supreme Court in their 1927 ruling Buck v. Bell, forced over 60,000 people to go through sterilization in the United States.[49]

California's sterilization program was so effective that the Nazis turned to the government for advice on how to prevent the birth of the "unfit".[50] While the US eugenics movement lost much of its momentum in the 1940s in view of the horrors of Nazi Germany, advocates of eugenics (including Nazi geneticist Otmar Freiherr von Verschuer) continued to work and promote their ideas in the United States.[50] In later decades, some eugenic principles have made a resurgence as a voluntary means of selective reproduction, with some calling them "new eugenics".[51] As it becomes possible to test for and correlate genes with IQ (and its proxies),[52] ethicists and embryonic genetic testing companies are attempting to understand the ways in which the technology can be ethically deployed.[53]

Have to agree with newt here. He puts out a lot of fires set by bob who still likes to recklessly play with matches without realizing the consequences it could have on him.

I have to admit that I've been impressed with newt's ability and dedication to bring the facts into play and douse the flames early before they spread. bob never seems to be able to accept he's been boondoggled because he also carries the same beliefs of those around him.

Anyway, without newt I'm not sure this site would be the kind of place I'd like to be a part of.

If people who see it daily call it a heart beat, then clearly reading a book is better, because you can't get a heart beat without a heart, and a valveless, chamberless tube that doesn't pump isn't a heart. If you look at a straw day in and day out and you start to see it as a heart, actually seeing it is worse. If you go to school and say you see the heart at 6 weeks, you fail.

Jebus. Double negative and heart best? Are you drunk?

I do think +-90% of them know, 10% believe they hear a heart beat because they can now detect a faint nerve signal, but no heart. That 10% are fooling themselves to avoid contradicting their beliefs with medical fact.

What bubble? Did I say they didn't? That doesn't make them doctors. Lab techs do the same...mri techs, even x-Ray techs in some places. Would you let a tech determine your treatment plan, or even diagnose you without a real doctor involved? They aren't even nurses, they know how to run the machine and spot certain results for further investigation/treatment. The doctors review and often edit the reports. If a report of a 6 week pregnancy talked about the heart, that tech would be let go for incompetence. There is no heart.

Dumb fuck, you asked me how many I've talked to. I answered, with an explanation of why I’ve met many. Now you act like I brought it up to say I know some, so I am one?! Are you on meth?

Mom worked at Texas Children's hospital and Methodist hospital in Houston, so yes, those specialists and many many many more, and being curious I asked them lots of questions.

Because my mom worked at a childrens hospital means I knew sonographers and ultrasound techs, there's a difference, which was your question. Jesus, you're like Ritalin kid from smoking aces....to yourself you're fighting this amazing fight with spinning kicks and flips so amazing it gets you hard, but to everyone else you're flailing wildly and are just annoying, not a dangerous opponent to be feared or respected.

Massachusetts VS Grendle's Den - 459 US 116- 1982
A case in Massachusetts where the state deferred to the church in issuing liquor licenses, allowing them to veto any licenses they wished for their own reasons.
The supreme court voted 8-1 in favor of Grendle, stating clearly that it's extremely unconstitutional to allow a non governing body to apply the law based on their personal beliefs...and a blatant violation of the separation between church and state. This case is from 1982.
This means precedent is set, and the Texas law will be tossed....unless the new court ignores precedent and the constitution, which thanks to Trumpists is a possibility.

Um, no. Leaving if you're unhappy you lost a political fight or election is absolutely not how democracies work. If it was, why aren't Republicans all moving right now?

No, they didn't. Being Christian doesn't equate to wanting to outlaw abortion. Most Americans are Christian, and a vast majority say they want abortion to be legal when asked. You're logic fails to recognize that some Christians don't believe in forcing their beliefs on others, and many only kind of believe, only when it's convenient, and limiting their options could feasibly hurt them.

No contraception is perfect, lack of sex ed in Texas means many don't even know how pregnancy works before being sexually active. Also I haven't heard of exceptions for rape or incest. These people have no option to use contraception, which fails far too often.
Also, I believe no person should be forced to be an unwilling biological life support system for another, certainly not for just a potential human, absolutely not children under any circumstances.


No, Shit Sherlock, it is not how it works in most of the world, certainly not in the developed world, are you under the impression that abortions only happen in America? Do you think people will accept sex only to procreate?
Access to multiple methods of terminating unwanted pregnancy are how it works across the world, because abstinence is insanely unrealistic and there's no even near perfect birth control without terminations when the main methods fail, which happens between .1% for the implant (the best, but with restrictions, and side effects and problems with having it implanted for 3 years) and >27% for the contraceptive sponge in women who've had a child ...typical methods like the pill fails 7%, condoms 13%, diaphragms 17%, many others in the >20% range. None of those numbers are acceptable when you're talking about an unwanted child without a secondary method with a 100% success rate.
https://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/contraception/index.htm

If women around the world didn't rely on secondary methods when primary ones fail, which they often do, they would only have sex for procreation and everyone would be exponentially more frustrated and angry. Not a reasonable or feasible solution.

Texas still has "blue laws" restricting the sale of not just alcohol but other non necessities on Sundays. Enacted in 1961 and largely repealed in the 80's, you still cannot buy liquor at a store on Sundays, and car dealerships must close one weekend day. This was their way of forcing the Southern Baptist religious beliefs of the ruling class on everyone.

Edit: I grew up there in the 70’s when you could only buy food or medicine on Sundays, and some groceries and pharmacies closed.

Texas has a LONG history of legislating religious "morality", from it's inception through today. They love to talk about their freedoms, but you really only have the freedom to follow their narrow definition of morality. These morality laws always effect the poor far more than the wealthy, often completely exempting the well off....for example, you can buy an expensive mixed drink to go from a bar, restaurant, or hotel...they even have drive through bars...on Sunday morning in Texas, but you cannot buy a cheap bottle in a liquor store to pour your own. This is typical.