LumRaiderFan

Here's another story of "distasteful" behavior. [Hidden Content]

Wow, that article highlights some real sickos.

[Hidden Content] She is spewing enough hatred for the US to earn her own thread.

mental illness

Wow, I wonder if any lobbyists stayed there before? If this continues, Trump could get rich while he’s President. Baddog is right, I bet you never uttered a peep over the criminal clinton foundation. smh

How is he “profiting directly “ from being President?

Democrats getting busy.

I don’t remember playing the Maddow card but if I did, I could back up her and her network spewing lots of fake news. I have asked you to do the same for Rush and haven’t gotten an answer.

It is true, it’s your group that wants to kill healthy full term babies. The Rush card...lol. That just tells me you have nothing to defend your party.

Pedophila, child abuse...both apply to that situation better than “distasteful “.

Hopefully they will, but this once again shows the immoral perverted ideology that is firmly imbedded in your Democrat party. This is why I say no compromise.

Stop being a victim...people disagree. If you want to debate, you need to make your point and quit getting your feelings hurt.

[Hidden Content] No compromise with Democrats...they have to be defeated.

Nope...speak your mind...it only helps our case. I guess if that were your 11 year old kid you would tell those perverts their behavior was only distasteful.

Very distasteful??? Really, that’s it? SMH!!!

No difference between a dead child and a child separated from parents because they broke the law??? Really?? Stop preaching to us, Kounzer, because your doctine is flawed.

Why in hell is Planned Parenthood allowed to make political donations, since they are receiving taxpayer money? That sounds kinda illegal.

I certainly wouldn't, and that's where I would hope our individual rights would trump all and, if necessary bring the feds in to preserve them, as they did when some southern states were trampling the rights of minorities.

[Hidden Content]

My understanding is that the SC will decide a case based on the Constitution. They have no power to legislate from the bench and decide themselves how much power will be given to the states on a particular case. A case could be brought before them that stipulates this split between state and federal authority, but I don't think the SC can simply make that decision on their own. Maybe we're saying the same thing two different ways and I'm no lawyer and may have this all wrong. I would be interested to hear a lawyer's perspective on this. TXHoops, your thoughts?

Sometimes that’s all we got...but it’s enough. Good, and accurate, post.

Agree on all points...Republicans are cowards on this issue and there are very few that make it a priority. Some say, we as Republicans don't want to dictate social issues to others. This is not a simply a social issue to me, it is an attack on the sanctity of life...the most innocent of life. Everyone is up in arms over the latest legislation from Kathy Tran, as they should be, but what is hypocritical about the "pro-life" Republican lawmakers to me is, why haven't you been up in arms about this issue all along? Tran's bill simply put a more graphic face on abortion, the result is still the same. It's sad that so-called pro-life Republicans are more concerned with losing moderate votes than they are about meeting this issue head on.

No, I disagreed because it is incorrect.

No, that’s not what you said which is why I disagreed.

Well said, I never even imagined we would be considering something like this. I agree that it won’t get enough support NOW, but it will be effective to move that line a little further in the sand. It’s a shame all Democrats don’t have your mindset, Hoops...or Republicans mine, of course.