So, Would YOU Make This Trade?

I was reading a piece by Larry O’Connor this morning. All across the country, there is a move by Democrats hoping to make abortion the most talked about and most important issue this midterm election cycle. So far, the kitchen table items like inflation, the economy, and crime are winning out, and probably will. But O’Connor had an interesting take on all of it.

He would gladly trade a ban on abortions for losing the Senate this time around.

And it got me to thinking…how important IS abortion to the GOP? It’s been a half century or so that abortion was legal and relatively easy to obtain in this country. We are one of 70 countries in the world that had that ease. But, when the Supreme Court struck down Roe v. Wade with the Dobbs v. Jackson decision, stating instead of being a federal law, it needs to be sent to the states to decide (NOT making it illegal as Democrats claim), it gave the Dems a campaign issue.

So, the question is, would YOU make the trade of losing a chance to take over the Senate in 2022 if it means a ban on abortions (or at least a federal ban!)

I’m certainly pro-life and have a very difficult time understanding how a woman can decide to have an abortion and kill a life that’s growing inside of her. To me, it’s more of a religious thing, a moral and ethical thing than a “legal choice” that women make as far as what to do with their bodies. We’re not talking about getting a tattoo here. We’re talking about ending a life before it gets started. But would I end the Republicans’ chances to take over the Senate?

I don’t think I have to choose. I think both could very well still happen. But if forced to choose, I’m still not sure. I think of the damage a deranged idiot like Joe Biden can do by nominating justices to federal benches, only if he has the US Senate to confirm and they are on his side. God forbid we start losing people like Clarance Thomas on the Supreme Court! On the other side, and this is the point I can’t understand about Democrats who’s religion is politics…we are going to allow a lot of those fetuses that otherwise would have been aborted to live. Why Democrats wanted to chop their numbers down in the first place is beyond me. If there was no abortion, if we never aborted 63 million babies over the past 49 years, I think it’s safe to say the Democrats would never lose another election!

But still, if I HAD to choose, what would I do? I have wrangled this one around for a while. I think the sanctity of life is far more important than a two year possibility of Joe Biden using his mental deficiencies to nominate people. After all, what value to YOU put on human life? I guess to even have to wrangle it, I should be ashamed. But it is a difficult decision if you get right down to it.

Carry on world…you’re dismissed!

So, Why Continue?

I don’t know what the advertising for the midterms is like where you live. Here in the AZ, we’re getting besieged by ads and most of them at this early stage are Democrat ads and liberal PAC’s.

There is something funny going on though. Rather than watching ads dealing with the issues that concern Arizonans, and Americans the most, things like inflation, the economy and the recession, and border issues, we’re seeing a totally different type of ad.

The two big ads that are being pumped right now showcase abortion, and privatizing Social Security. Neither of those two things are in touch with what America feels are really strong campaign issues. We also are seeing stuff about the January 6th committee’s hearings. Who the hell cares?

Andy Barr (R-KY) was on Meet The Press this past weekend, and here’s what he said regarding the 2020 election and the January 6th Committee hearings:

“These congressional seats do not belong to politicians in Washington,” Barr said. “These seats belong to the American people, and there is a massive, massive disconnect between the priorities of politicians in Washington and the concerns of the American people.”

“Not once have any of my constituents–Republican or Democrat–talked about the 2020 election, January 6th, the committee in Washington, or any of these issues. They’re talking about not being able to afford putting food on the table, putting gas in their trucks, and not being able to see their grandson again because he died of a fentanyl overdose.”

I think Representative Barr is on to something here. In Arizona, there is a fight for the Senate seat currently being held by Mark Kelly. His ads against Republican challenger, Blake Masters focus on Masters’ stance on abortion (he’s against it), and for privatizing Social Security. The abortion ads are going to appeal to about 9% of the Democrat base and few others. As for privatizing Social Security, isn’t it about time?

Think about this. How do people usually get rich in this country? They invest in the stock market, right? So, what in heck is bad about that? Most every American that’s working these days invests in the stock market through their 401k at work. What do you think mutual funds are? The stock market actually IS a better way to save Social Security! If you make Social Security private and individualized accounts, the government can’t raid it like they’ve done to get us into this mess.

As for the January 6th Committee, I think there would be more acceptance from them if they were actually bi-partisan, and if they were investigating ALL of the riots that were occurring over the past two or three years. Why not include the BLM riots? That caused billions more in damage to federal property in places like Seattle, Portland, Chicago and New York! But it appears to about 73% of Americans that this is nothing more than a political witch hunt…and the people sitting on that committee know it.

If you want to run for reelection, as Mark Kelly is trying to do, I get it that you need something to talk about. His ads are basically lies about how he is trying to bring down the cost of gasoline, while he’s actually voting to raise it. There needs to be a truth in politics law somewhere. Not sure how it would work, but smart minds can craft this and get it together quickly. The problem is passing it with Democrats in power.

Carry on world…you’re dismissed!

The Difference Between The Right And The Left

I have sat quietly watching the Supreme Court decisions unfold in June. Oh, don’t get me wrong. I was happy to see the fact that the state of New York, which quite frankly I’ve always viewed as not just liberal but run by a bunch of narcissistic idiots that would never be allowed to even run for office in another state, get their anti-gun carry law banned. And I was happy that a “right” that was never granted by the Constitution (abortion) was overturned and given it’s rightful place back to the states, as should have happened some 50 years ago.

But what all of this has taught me is the overriding difference between the left and the right.

When the right has something passed that they don’t like, they go along with it until it can be changed. Oh, they may hold peaceful (that should have been underlined, in bold and in Italics!) rallies, as the pro-life group had done with abortion for decades. But they don’t riot in the streets. They don’t threaten bodily harm to the members of the high court. They don’t cry and weep incessantly like we’ve seen over the past few weeks. They go with the flow, gather up their members and when the time is right they change it.

What the left does is hold riots. They threaten. They go to violence almost immediately. If you don’t go along with what the left wants on an issue, you’re “cancelled” or banned. You’re the pariah. You’re the problem. It doesn’t matter that what they want makes no sense. It doesn’t matter that what they want is wrong. That doesn’t have anything to do with it. They want some crazy idea to be thrust, and they are going to spin it as “saving the children” (well, not in abortion’s case), or taking medicine or food out of grandma’s mouth. But they never give you both sides of the equation. Just because in the New York case, people can carry guns now without going through an arduous process, they think it’s going to lead to more crime. And the liberal media is going to highlight any time there is a shooting anywhere in the state, just wait.

As far as abortion is concerned, the left has always been more about protecting a non-existing “right” of women’s ability to choose what to do with her own body, rather than protecting the life of the unborn within that body. They knew they could never win an argument if killing a baby was a part of it, so they made it about “women’s health”. It’s not about women’s health. It’s about eliminating a pregnancy without regard to what they are actually doing so the women who are doing it don’t feel ashamed or guilty for killing a baby.

Of course, there are other differences as well. There’s the whole large government vs. small government argument. And you’ve got the states rights vs. federal government argument (which I thought the 10th Amendment answered quite clearly). And they don’t accept any argument that runs counter to their addle-minded way of thinking.

One of the best arguments I heard over the few weeks was, “Guns are in the Constitution. Abortion is not. Period.” Tough to argue with that one.

And until we get the youth of America educated properly, and not indoctrinated in our public schools, this fallacy of whatever I believe is right and what you prove to me that it isn’t right is dead wrong and you don’t deserve to live! has to be eliminated from our society.

Carry on world…you’re dismissed!

Is The GOP Going Too Far?

The Supreme Court’s ruling on Dobbs v. Jackson did away with a couple of earlier, and incorrect Supreme Court rulings, most notably Roe v. Wade. Handing the abortion question back to the states and denying the whole “privacy” question that actually was the lynchpin in Roe passing muster in the first place was a smart move by the court. In essence, they did not deny someone’s ability to get an abortion. They just denied that the federal government had any jurisdiction in the matter and that the states should decide for themselves. And that was the correct decision.

But there have been rumblings ever since the ruling was made public at the end of last month that the GOP is considering a nationwide ban on abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy. Soon to be Speaker of the House, Kevin McCarthy has told CNN that he would support such a move. And while I would be the first to say that my religious beliefs do not allow me to accept abortion because it is the taking of a life, and violates the Sixth Commandment, I also think that this isn’t a fight the GOP needs to take on.

The Supreme Court showed it’s intelligence by not wading into the middle of the “Is it right or wrong” fight. As they had previously done with the whole Obamacare issue, the court looked at it from a Constitutional vein. And they concluded (rightly so) that the Constitution does not give the federal government jurisdiction in this manner. Therefore it needs to be returned to the states.

I would suggest that if McCarthy goes ahead with a nationwide ban after 15 weeks, he’s making the same mistake that the Justices made back in 1973. There are somethings that need to be left to the discretion of the states, and abortion is one of them. It’s not a right or wrong issue, it’s an issue of federal rights versus states rights, and it’s always been that.

The abortion battle, as far as the federal government is concerned is over. Now all we have to do is convince lawmakers of that!

Carry on world…you’re dismissed!

You Know It’s Getting Bad When…

I do have to say that I really don’t want Joe Biden to fail as president of the United States. I mean, I don’t like his politics. I don’t like his demeanor, and I don’t like his policies at all. He’s going down the wrong path to success for this country, and I wonder whether or not he believes that America is the greatest country in the world. God knows, he’s not helping things out. But I do feel sorry for him for a second or two most days when I hear of the latest gaffe this guy is foisting on the public, thinking all the time that he’s in charge.

And then I see the reality of the situation and come back to earth.

Joe Biden is a buffoon. There is no other way to put it. I always made fun of Obama and call him “Bobo” to this day because he is the world’s second most famous clown (with Larry Harmon, the guy that created Bozo the most famous!). But Joe Biden is just sad. He’s not a clown. He’s a doddering old man that needs help remembering where he is and what he’s supposed to do.

And you know it’s getting bad when people in his own party don’t want anything to do with him. I’ve seen several clips of people running for Congress that have been asked if they would tap Joe Biden to come and campaign for them. Not one of them have said yes. In fact, most have said they would love for Biden to stay in DC and not open his mouth until after Election Day. And those are people in his own party.

David Axelrod, who became famous as Bobo Obama’s hatchetman during Obama’s administration is now a highly paid contributor on CNN. He was on with Jake Tapper recently, and was bemoaning the fact that Joe was trying to get Congress to give a one-time exception to the filibuster rule so they could “codify” the Roe v. Wade decision of the 1970’s in to law. And Axelrod looks at high inflation, historically high gas prices, rampant crime in the streets, a worsening situation of illegals crashing through our southern border, and an economy that is teetering on the brink of recession. He really doesn’t have a lot of good to say about his former Vice President.

“This is the lot that Biden finds himself in. There is this sense that things are kind of out of control and he’s not in command and this, this lends, you know lends to that. You know inflation is…no one president can control inflation, but, it is a, it’s a gale force wind right now, it’s affecting politics, very hard to come… you know, you, you heard him on gas prices today, talks about the gas tax holiday.” referring to Biden’s remarks at the G7 conference where he blamed it all on Vladimir Putin and again called for a gas tax holiday, which would do virtually nothing.

Now, when a former chief advisor to the president when Joe was VP says that, you know it’s out of whack. Even he doesn’t understand who’s in charge at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Add to that misery, the fact that only 9% of the Democrats surveyed recently in New Hampshire want to see Biden run for president, and 27% nationally fall into that category, you know you’re not doing the job America elected you to do.

I could understand this if it were a bad week or two for the administration. Every administration has its screwups and slipups. They all have bad stretches they have to get through. But Biden has had basically one thing in over a year and a half that he can point to as a “victory” of sorts, and that’s the Infrastructure Bill he got passed. But if you knew where the money was really going for that program, you probably wouldn’t be calling it a victory. It’s another boondoggle that makes you wonder why we send any money at all to Washington, DC.

If Biden does get a win between now and November, it’s going to be a miracle. But with Congress stymied by the January 6th Committee, who admits nobody cares about their findings with inflation and recession, and gas prices on everyone’s mind, and trying to figure out how to fight a Supreme Court ruling that basically takes the power out of the hands of the federal government when it comes to the abortion question, it’s a wonder anything gets done. Of course, you can add to that the fact that the latest SCOTUS ruling before their hiatus was to tell all of the agencies that they don’t have the power to make regulations that aren’t included in the laws. So, HHS with Obamacare, the EPA with pretty much everything they do, Education, all of the various agencies out there can’t do squat unless there’s a law telling it to do something. No wonder Congress has a low rating!

The only thing we can hope for is that something surfaces against K-baby Harris so she can resign, then Biden can step down and whomever the Republicans tab to be the Speaker of the House in January can fill in as President until 2024. That’s our only chance to survive the next two and a half years!

Carry on world…you’re dismissed!

EXTRA! Supreme Court Kills Roe v. Wade

It has to be probably the least surprising, and most talked about Supreme Court decision in my lifetime. Friday, the Supreme Court announced that they had found for Dobbs in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. The decision sparked nationwide protests and violence among the pro-abortion folks, while pro-lifers celebrated.

In the 6-3 finding, the Supreme Court found and pointed to as one of the establishing norms the error that many had cited previously when talking about Roe v. Wade…that the mere fact that the high court back in the 1970’s decided in favor of a nationwide abortion law, that they had erred. It wasn’t about a woman’s “right to choose”. It was about the fact that the Supreme Court doesn’t give rights to anyone. They interpret the Constitution and decide whether the issues that we are experiencing today fall in line with the Constitution as the Founding Fathers saw it.

Obviously, back in the 1700’s, there was no abortion, so there could be no “right to abortion” granted. This was clearly pointed out in the court’s opinion. Now add to the fact that anything that isn’t specified as giving the federal government the power to rule on a topic, goes to the states. The 10th Amendment isn’t what was argued (rather the 9th and 14th Amendments were the key arguments for the pro-abortion crowd).

Just so we’re all on the same page, the 9th Amendment states, “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the People.” The 14th Amendment, better known as the Equal Protection Clause, states “All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States, and the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of the law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

So, the argument originally made was that the 9th Amendment states that we all have more rights than are stated in the Constitution (hence, the right to an abortion), and that under the 14th Amendment no state should make or enforce a law which takes away those rights.

What the original finding in Roe missed however was the 10th Amendment, which is basically the whole separation of federal government from the states. It reads, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.”

And therein lies the rub with Roe. Even Ruth Bader Ginsburg argued that Roe v. Wade was a terrible decision. Oh, she was pro-abortion, no doubt…and had she been alive today, probably would have joined the minority. But, she was correct that it was a bad decision, regardless when it was given.

So, to listen to idiots like Nancy Pelosi talk about the fact “the Supreme Court has taken away a Constitutional right” is just wrong. The Supreme Court does not give rights, and they cannot take away rights. That is reserved, as the Founding Fathers so aptly pointed out, by God Almighty.

The whole basis here is pretty much an over-reaction by the left. If you read the finding (even just the Syllabus on the case), you’ll see that overturning Roe v. Wade does not outlaw abortion. It only sends that decision back to the states to decide for themselves whether or not they will allow abortions, and to what extent. So, if you happen to live in New York, or California, or Washington, or Oregon, I’m sure you’re still going to be able to get an abortion any time you want.

The other point that I have made several times is that you can’t have it both ways. If you are going to say that the federal government shouldn’t stand “between a doctor and a woman when it comes to a decision of getting an abortion”, then how do you justify standing in the way between a doctor an any American citizen when it comes to a decision of getting a vaccine for something like COVID? You have to be consistent here, and this administration was very boisterous at declaring they could give mandates for the American people to have to get a vaccine.

Regardless of which side of the fence you’re on, you have to realize all this court did was correct an error that was made some fifty years ago. Abortion will still be legal, just not everywhere. It will depend on where you live, the same as whether casino gambling is legal in your state. And for once, I applaud Chief Justice John Roberts, who somehow found the ability to “grow a pair” and make a big boy decision.

Carry on world…you’re dismissed!

K-Baby’s Mindless Word Salad Strikes Again!

You have to hand it to Vice President, K-baby Harris…when it comes to speaking, she is giving Dan Quayle a run for his money when it comes to making no sense. Quayle, if you’re old enough to remember, was George HW Bush’s veep, and was roundly criticized for his, well, let’s just call it a lack of intelligence. Actually, Quayle was a pretty smart guy, he just couldn’t communicate all that well.

So, this past weekend, K-baby Harris, who’s been known to come up with some of the worst word-salad cases in recorded history, did it again. She was discussing religion (never a good idea when talking to reporters), and comparing religious beliefs to the abortion issue, which will rear it’s ugly head this week in the Supreme Court’s final week of decisions. Here’s what she sad:

“For those of us of faith, I think that we agree, many of us, that there’s nothing about this issue that will require anyone to abandon their faith, or change their faith, it’s simply saying that the government should not have the ability to decide what an individual does with her own body — let her make that decision with her pastor or her rabbi, or whoever she consults.” 

Now, I would agree with her actually on the point that it’s not the government’s job to tell people what they can and cannot do with their own body. But she misses the point entirely, and she is contradicting herself in the process.

First and foremost, no, government should not tell people what they can and cannot do with their bodies. But that is not the issue here. The issue is the other person involved that doesn’t vote (yet). She is forgetting that there is actually an ending of a life. That to me does indeed fly in the face of religion if you are to believe the Ten Commandments or at the very least, the Sixth Commandment, “Thou Shall Not Kill”. I don’t know how you can get around that one!

Secondly, IF you are going to utter the phrase that “government should not have the ability to decide what an individual does with her own body”, then how is it that you were in favor of government mandates for vaccines during COVID? Isn’t that exactly the government telling you what you have to do with your own body? You cannot have it both ways. Either you state that the government needs to stay out of the whole abortion issue, and therefore will never tell you what you can and cannot do with your own body (which I guess also means if you take heroin or LSD in the privacy of your own home, it’s OK?) how do you rectify that with telling Americans they MUST take a vaccine? It’s totally inconsistent.

K-baby Harris needs to stay in the Naval Observatory and redecorate. I’m sure she’ll add an incredible touch to the place. We don’t need her telling us anything. Just like we didn’t need Dan Quayle telling us how to spell P-O-T-A-T-O-E.

Carry on world…you’re dismissed!

And Damn It! We Mean Business!

Both the Republicans and the Democrats are guilty parties on this one, and I don’t mind calling them out in the least. That’s not to say I’m on one side or the other on the issues they are currently dealing with. But I find it really upsetting to say that if you as a sitting member of the House of Representatives don’t fall in line with party doctrine over one issue, you can be axed as far as your career goes. Especially when the Democrats have people like Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema sitting in the Senate and people like Lynn Cheyney and Adam Kinzinger sitting in the House.

Chris Jacobs (R-NY) had to find that out the hard way.

Jacobs was running for reelection, but he made a fatal mistake. He backed banning AK-47’s. Now, I don’t agree with his position on this.The Second Amendment says we have the right to bear arms, and they don’t differentiate between muskets and RPG’s. Arms is arms. But Jacobs had voted in favor of the ban, and all of a sudden, everyone that had endorsed him, pulled that endorsement. He was basically a man without a party. The same thing happens on the left when a Democrat running for reelection comes out as pro-life. Those are the two issues that you had better fall in line with if you want to be a member of either of those parties.

Jacobs has since decided to stop his campaign for reelection, and pull out of the race. He represents the Buffalo, NY area in the 27th district.

So, I guess the question is, should the party have litmus tests like gun control or abortion when it comes to their members? To me, I view things a little differently. I don’t agree with the Republican party pulling support of one of it’s members, especially a sitting member of Congress that voted the wrong way on one issue. But I’m more of a Constitutionalist. If there is going to be a litmus test, let the Constitution be the deciding factor. And while yes, I believe Jacobs vote was wrong, because the Second Amendment, backed by the US Supreme Court says we can, as individuals own guns, and doesn’t specify in the Second Amendment which guns we can and cannot own, the GOP was wrong in killing one of their own. I agree with their position, I disagree with the way they handled it.

Likewise, I guess, because of the Democrats’ view that you can’t be a Democrat and be pro-life, I’ll never be a member of that party. Not that I’m all upset over that one, and I doubt I’ll lose sleep over it tonight. But to have any litmus test that isn’t the Constitution is just plain wrong. In Jacob’s case, he was wrong in his position. There are other things that need to be tackled befoe you start banning guns. First of all, look at the shooters. They have all shown to be wack-jobs. There is something mentally wrong with them. They need to be better screened for their mental capacity and their abilities to correctly reason what is and is not acceptable human behavior. That is the starting point here. I doubt Democrats would have a problem if they attacked “gun control” from a mental health standpoint.

But, just like not wanting to blame the poor ghetto kid that only had a crack Mom as a parent, and not wanting to send him to prison for the rest of his life for shooting some cop because of his upbringing, the blame doesn’t lie with the gun that killed the cop. The blame lies with the person holding the gun. Had that kid, like any of the mass shooters we’ve heard of lately been forced to undergo a psychiatric evaluation to check for mental stability, and have it regularly monitored once approved, it would stem the tide of shootings much better than banning guns that they are going to get their hands on anyway.

Carry on world…you’re dismissed!

If Nancy Pelosi Went Up Against God…Who Do You Think Would Win?

Well, it actually has kinda, sorta happened. Pelosi’s Archbishop, Salvatore Cordileone, the Archbishop of San Francisco, has sent Pelosi a letter…the second letter in a little over a month, in which he basically has said that she is no longer welcome in Communion. And it’s all due to her stance on abortion.

That would seemingly put Pelosi between a rock and a hard place.

I mean, who wants to go up against an Archbishop in the Catholic Church? Pelosi has long called herself “a devout Catholic”, but yet has steadfastly supported a woman’s right to choose abortion to end a pregnancy. In a letter to Pelosi dated April 7th, Archbishop Cordileone said to either repudiate advocacy for abortion rights or to refrain from referring to her Catholic faith in public or else he would have no choice but to bar her from being admitted communion.

This past Thursday, Cordileone sent a second letter that kind of dropped an atomic bomb on the Speaker of the House. “As you have not publically repudiated your position on abortion, and continue to refer to your Catholic faith in justifying your position and to receive Holy Communion, that time has now come. Therefore, in light of my responsibility as the Archbishop of San Francisco to be ‘concerned for all the Christian faithful entrusted to [my] care’ (Code of Canon Law, can. 383, §1), by means of this communication I am hereby notifying you that you are not to present yourself for Holy Communion and, should you do so, you are not to be admitted to Holy Communion, until such time as you publically repudiate your advocacy for the legitimacy of abortion and confess and receive absolution of this grave sin in the sacrament of Penance.”

So, Pelosi is no longer allowed to receive Communion unless and until she changes her position on abortion. She has long stood by her position stating, “I believe that God has given us a free will to honor our responsibilities.” 

Pelosi’s office was asked to comment on the Archbishop’s letter and they have refused to do so. It’s really the same problem Joe Biden is facing as well. He swears that he is personally against abortion, but the out for Catholics is that they don’t want to intercede in a difficult decision between a woman and her doctor. That has long been the pro-choice Catholic’s reasoning. And, it’s been pretty much what Pelosi has stood by in her tenure.

I frankly don’t think for a minute that this will bother Pelosi. I’m going to do something I don’t really like to do, but Democrats typically put politics ahead of religion. Not ALL Democrats mind you. I’ve known some that have been faithful to the church first, and to their party second. But it seems that there are a lot of liberal Catholics who fall under the same umbrella as Biden and Pelosi.

In the end, who am I to judge? I think there is someone much greater than I that already has that job coming up in the future. Oh, to be a fly on the wall during that meeting!

Carry on world, you’re dismissed!

EXTRA! Roe v Wade To Be Overturned!

I know…I couldn’t believe my eyes when I read it either. But Fox News is now reporting that a “unprecedented leaked draft” of the abortion case that will be made public in June was written by Justice Samuel Alito, and basically knocks down Roe v. Wade, giving the states the right to determine whether abortion is legal in their state. The leaked draft was obtained by Politico.

According to Politico and Fox News, the draft was written in February. It’s not clear whether the draft has been revised or rewritten since that time. “We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled,” Justice Samuel Alito writes in the document, labeled the “Opinion of the Court” for the case Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. “It is time to heed the Constitution and return the issue of abortion to the people’s elected representatives.”

So the whole case of abortion does not come down to whether or not it should be legal for a woman to actually HAVE an abortion, or whether the fetus is defined as a “viable mass” or a “living being”. It actually comes down to a 10th Amendment argument that the federal government isn’t given the right by the Constitution to make that decision, but that decision can be made, and should be made by the states on an individual basis.

What does this all mean? Well, basically it’s going to mean that blue states typically will pass laws that allow abortion, such as what Colorado has already done, and others are starting to do, fearing that this ruling was in the offing. Other states, like here in Arizona are passing laws that basically deny women the right to an abortion.

And IF this comes to pass (again, at this time, it’s not been confirmed nor denied by the Supreme Court), you can count on people wearing the funky looking hats to parade up and down for months on end at the Supreme Court. My hunch is, it will also renew Democrats’ pledge to pack the court, or make the Justices’ terms less than lifetime. That will be something that the Senate will have to decide, and Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema have both said they would vote against it. So even if there were a way to figure it as a “reconciliation bill”, they are still going to fall a couple votes short of passage at the current stage. And if the Republicans take over both houses of Congress, it’ll be a dead issue anyway.

Carry on world…you’re dismissed!