Lifted from Wikipedia (Margaret Sanger);

(for distribution of contraceptives) Sanger and Byrne went to trial in January 1917. Byrne was convicted and sentenced to 30 days in a workhouse but went on a hunger strike. She was force-fed, the first woman hunger striker in the US to be so treated. Only when Sanger pledged that Byrne would never break the law was she pardoned after ten days. Sanger was convicted; the trial judge held that women did not have

"the right to copulate with a feeling of security that there will be no resulting conception."

Sanger was offered a more lenient sentence if she promised to not break the law again, but she replied: "I cannot respect the law as it exists today."For this, she was sentenced to 30 days in a workhouse.

Of course the right is screaming who leaked and not Fuck yea we finally won because the right don't want leftest nut jobs circling this houses , business, etc and harass the shit out of them. The left are un civil.

The democrat party has known this day would come. They had 50 years to codify abortion into law and didn't.

To make it worse Democrats saw this day of reckoning when the last SCOUS was appointed. Democrats won 2020 and had full control and did not push any law at the national level to make abortion legal . Major error of the Democrat party.



You lost the argument fair and square..
But at the state level you can keep on killing . and some even up until birth.


Democrats : The party of Death, Destruction, Debauchery,

Interesting N Carolina doesn’t disqualify candidates convicted of such things, isn’t it? Some places do, like liberal California. Liberals ACTUALLY care about crime enough to disqualify based on convictions, not “conservatives”.
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/11-12/bill/asm/ab_2401-2450/ab_2410_cfa_20120430_105724_asm_comm.html

Have you written your state legislature to demand they make a law so criminals can’t be elected officials? Thought not.

Then, again I ask you, why would you have ever supported repeatedly convicted con man (school cons, charity cons, repeated business cons) and racist (payed millions for redlining) Trump?

You SAY wrong is wrong, then you vote for convicted criminals constantly. I am certain you voted for the guy whose campaign harvested and filled out ballots in YOUR county, knowing beforehand that he had done that, he won despite blatantly defrauding the election, and would have again if he had run again. You absolutely didn’t say any Republican on the same ballot should be disqualified despite knowing his campaign also filled out fraudulent votes for any Republican they could. You lied and said he had suffered consequences, but you know full well he did not. None. Not only did he take office, and never was charged, he was allowed to run again in the special election required because of his admitted fraud.

The point here is Republicans (like you) SAY they believe in law and order and criminals shouldn’t be elected officials, then you go ahead and vote for people who admit to brutally murdering their wives and tossing the body in a creek and are awaiting trial and then, idiotically, go on to call Democrats the “party of debauchery”. It’s asinine and transparent.

You SAY you care about law and order, then directly encourage perjury (only from your “team”) elect child rapists, sex traffickers, people who protect child rapists, thieves, cheats, deadbeats, blatant racists, and insurectionists. (In one case, Trump, someone who is all of the above).

I can only find wrong worth mentioning on one side because only one side displays this level of wrongness. Why can you only find wrong on Democrats parts, and not see the 95% of horrific wrongness coming from your choices for representatives?

Democrats abuse their travel funds (but only about 10% as much as Republicans), Democrats commit insider trading (but not 1/2 as much as republicans).
Democrats don’t traffic little girls for sex.
Democrats don’t have cocaine fueled lemon party orgies (ugh, just the thought).
Democrats don’t try to commit a coup then blame republicans when it fails.
Democrats don’t run fraudulent charities for veterans which they steal from.
Democrats don’t have private parties with Epstein and little girls.
Democrats don’t repeatedly try to take guns onto planes (Cawthorn).
Democrats don’t harass young school shooting victims with death threats and claims that they’re not real people.
Democrats don’t put hurting republicans above the good of the nation either….they should start, turnabout is fair play, and hurting actual abusive criminals (not just fantasy crimes) is in the national interest.

Yes, I’m biased. It’s insane you aren’t, knowing what we know about current republicans, and what little we have of Democratic crimes. I find you a new disgusting Republican representative committing felonies daily, and you don’t flinch in your unbridled support of them, you toss out red herrings and whataboutisms without ever turning on the majority of pedophiles, hebephiles, rapists, insurrectionists, etc that keep coming from your chosen party.

I agree with your last sentence, but you do not.
You constantly vote for criminals like this and simply turn a blind eye to their convictions for crimes of moral turpitude. Democrats got rid of Al Frankenstein for a photo of him pointing at a sleeping woman, Republicans are still trying to elect judge Roy Moore despite his pedophilic history, and re-elect Cawthorn, and Boebert, Gaetz, Jordan, even Epstein’s bestie Trump. All directly tied to pedophilia, and you don’t care one bit. Not to mention the seditious coup attempt so many are complicit in, or the coverups afterwards, or the insider trading, etc.

You don’t care about criminal behavior if it’s a Republican, and you just can’t admit it, but you and all here KNOW it’s true.

sounds like you did not get his point. its not about it being overturned or not. its about what they ARE talking about now (which is the leak) and is in the face of a potential massive victory for them.

Shit. Clearly I did not do this right. I will rectify this.

I do not know what went wrong when @ant viewed this video, however when I view it with my blockers and in private browsing the video works just fine.

@ant are you still stuck in 2010 and using Opera ?

FROM THE AP: McMorrow, who said she thought of most of the speech while giving her daughter a bath, said a conservative Christian woman from Texas and a gay man who grew up in rural Indiana were among those who contacted her office to thank her.

Asked why the speech resonated, McMorrow said: “There is a difference between politics and outright hate. I think people are frustrated that elected officials haven’t done enough to call that out, that maybe Democrats are afraid of talking about religion and faith openly and honestly and calling hate what it is. I think we have to.”

Theis, who declined to speak after the session, released a statement in which she did not apologize. (snowflakes melt under heat - only to run away)

Republicans’ use of “grooming” rhetoric comes as one of their own, former state House Speaker Lee Chatfield, is under investigation for allegedly sexually assaulting his future sister-in-law starting when she was a minor. (support for Newt's 'projection' theory)

...and damn it bob you had to get this stuck in me head;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0igtzMQDpnk

Rich people do pay their fair share. Its called tax code. They did not write the code our Leaders did.
So don't bitch at rich people, bitch at our leaders

According to the latest IRS data for 2018— the top 1 percent of taxpayers paid $616 billion in income taxes. That amounts to 40 percent of all income taxes paid, the highest share since 1980..

Just proves republicans also have stupid people who do not think .

Worse yet is that there are leaders who believe this false narrative also. They are themselves rich.. If they are so moved into paying their fair share why don't they just write a check to the IRS.

Better yet is to quit spending money on shit we don't need with money we don't have.

And…. Mark Meadows, Trump’s chief of staff, committed voter fraud.
He rented a shack in N Carolina and claimed it was his home. He registered to vote from that shack. He never visited the home, and no one stayed the night there while he rented it.

https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/why-did-mark-meadows-register-to-vote-at-an-address-where-he-did-not-reside

He lied about it being his residence, and voted illegally in N Carolina. Voter Fraud…by your guys.
Lock them up for years, and it’s definitely time to require any registered Republican to verify both their residence and identity by random physical checks and DNA testing at their expense. Voter ID is needed for your party, and a fake driver’s license is too easy to get to count.

You want secure elections, don’t you? Then you obviously want special requirements for the group that tried to commit massive election frauds….that’s Republicans.

Or can you admit you’re completely hypocritical and don’t care about all the voter fraud now that you know it was all Republicans perpetrating them?

I expect no answer, because there isn’t a good answer for you.

BTW, strong leader Biden just announced a ban on Russian energy products. Good for Tesla. Yes, it will hurt, gas prices will rise. Freedom isn’t free, and if you don’t chip in your buck 0 five, who will?

So easy to make baseless, fact free opinion only statements, isn’t it?

You might try adult conversation wherein you are expected to back up opinion with facts. Try something new.

It’s true, the withdrawal plan is on Biden, because Trump did not have one at all.


The withdrawal, and the issues with the Taliban taking the billions in weapons we had given the Afghans are 100% on Trump, however. He negotiated the withdrawal with the Taliban after releasing them from prison. They instantly started attacking Afghan targets and Trump gave the Afghans, our allies, zero assistance….then blamed Biden for his mess and losses.
Can you explain why Trump apparently gave up and surrendered unconditionally to the Taliban in 2020? Can you explain not involving the Afghans or our military in his negotiations? Can you even explain setting the enemy free from prison, no strings attached?

The last 4 + months of his presidency, Trump forgot about policies because every waking moment was spent fomenting and perpetrating the big lie, knowing he would lose the election and a coup was his only shot at retaining the power to hide his crimes and debts.

Biden won. Trump isn’t president. No one expected him to be able to put out every dumpster fire Trump left him, he only had to get Trump out. Success. Winner.

Such a sad little man, bob. Defending a failed anti American wannabe dictator for a plan he never had for the withdrawal he negotiated. Why? Dictator Don failed….over and over and over and over and over…….thank goodness. Failure. Loser.

Pence cannot overturn the election . He just oversees the House according to the Electoral Count Act. If there are objections it also needs a Senate member joining in. Then a challenge can occur and the electoral vote could be changed.

In 2016 there were Democrat house members objections but had no senators support.




In 2020 House members and Senate members had objected. Pence at that point would be obligated to follow the rules set in the Electoral Count Act and allowed the debate, which he did not do.
https://www.vox.com/2021/1/6/22218058/republicans-objections-election-results

"six Republicans in the Senate and 121 in the House backed objections to certifying Arizona’s electoral outcome, while seven Senate Republicans and 138 House Republicans supported an objection to certifying Pennsylvania’s electoral outcome."

Unless they have intent to use them, or have knowledge that that’s what they’re made for, no? That’s what it says in the law, isn’t it?

“ Every person having upon him or her in his or her possession a picklock, crow, keybit, crowbar, screwdriver, vise grip pliers, water-pump pliers, slidehammer, slim jim, tension bar, lock pick gun, tubular lock pick, bump key, floor-safe door puller, master key, ceramic or porcelain spark plug chips or pieces, or other instrument or tool with intent feloniously to break or enter into any building, railroad car, aircraft, or vessel, trailer coach, or vehicle as defined in the Vehicle Code, or who shall knowingly make or alter, or shall attempt to make or alter, any key or other instrument named above so that the same will fit or open the lock of a building, railroad car, aircraft, vessel, trailer coach, or vehicle as defined in the Vehicle Code, without being requested to do so by some person having the right to open the same, or who shall make, alter, or repair any instrument or thing, knowing or having reason to believe that it is intended to be used in committing a misdemeanor or felony, is guilty of a misdemeanor. ”

I have this opinion, (that police (and some prosecutors) will ascribe intent to anyone in possession of any tools, even those with other uses, so they wouldn’t hesitate to do the same for tools that are clearly purpose built breaking and entering tools having been advertised as such and with no other use,) because I watched a friend be arrested in the 80’s for having a screwdriver and pliers in their backpack that the police called “burglary tools”. He did not have a history of burglary. The case was dropped when they instead charged him with <.5 grams of marijuana for some crumbs found loose in the bottom in his backpack and sent him juvie for 6 months. (I think he was on probation, I know the police wanted to charge him with anything….and did.). I was accused of having lockpicks once because I had picked up a few metal brush bits from a street sweeper in a parking lot and police saw me pick them up, arrested, then released me on site when the supervisor showed up and heard their story.

I think the last sentence of that paragraph puts him in danger, since he clearly has reason to believe at least some of the burglary tools he sells to the public are going to be used criminally.

I don’t want to see you give someone advice that could get them in serious trouble, I know you would feel terrible. You might be correct, technically without intent to commit a crime they’re legal to own, but in reality police and prosecutors decide your intent and I don’t trust them one whit.

Just relieved he did not kill anyone.

OMG! Republicans can’t argue successfully against reality, and have no platform or ideas to run on, so they’ve taken this joke of an idea and are claiming it’s true, Michelle is running for president, and SHE could win in a landslide, so send us money.
Here’s their fundraising letter….

“Yep. You are reading this right. Michelle Obama is running for president in 2024. left wing Democrats know they are going to lose their majority in Congress this November, so they want to bring out an Obama to save them in 2024. We did not believe it when we first heard, rumors are spreading like wildfire that a certain someone, someone who already spent eight years in the White House, is thinking of running for president in 2024.”

Of course, there’s absolutely zero truth to this, and Michelle has consistently said she has no interest whatsoever in holding ANY public office, but it’s easy to scare idiot Republicans into being terrified by a strong intelligent black woman and out of their money.

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]