Today's abortion ruling is just the tip of the iceberg. Say goodbye to Roe v. Wade after 2008

[Pushed To The Left]

unless Democrats and progressives wake the hell up, stop bashing each other, and learn to stick together! It seems like too few people think about the Supreme Court when they vote. We need to win the Presidency or get a supermajority in the Senate to prevent losing every civil rights gain that America has enjoyed for the last forty years. Even the most moderate/conservative of our Democratic candidates wouldn't dream of doing to the Courts what any of the Republican candidates will do if elected. McCain wants to overturn Roe v. Wade, and Rudy Guiliani has made his court-stacking intentions clear. In other words, Democrats and progressives who truly care about civil rights and civil liberties need to stick together and support the Democratic nominee in 2008, even if it isn't our 1st pick! We also need to get a supermajority in the Senate, which I believe is possible this time.

I live in California, and there are some pretty good laws involving health care and equal rights that will be vetoed by Arnold Schwarzenegger because too many Democrats refused to vote for Angelides. Same sex marriage and single-payer health coverage would have been the law of the land in the next year or so, but Democratic voters handed it over to the Republicans because Angelides wasn't their perfect candidate. I don't want to see Democrats do the same thing on a national scale, because the stakes are way too high. Maybe today's ruling will be the wake up call that some progressives and Democrats need to stop the circular firing squad and start sticking together against the right wing!

[Horse with no Name]

1. NOTHING short of impeaching these SCOTUS justices

will save Roe v. Wade.

[Greyhound]

2. Actually there is something that can be done, and it was FDR that

showed the way. The President has the power to expand the court and then to nominate the justices, so it becomes even more vital that we put a progressive patriot in the White House in '08.

[Alexander]

4. That is blatantly unconstitutional and a shameless power grab.

Justices appointed by FDR's own party (like Brandeis) vehemently objected to the move.

We simply have to elect a Democratic president (hopefully Gore), and hope Stevens lasts until 2009.

[tkmorris]

6. Shameless power grab? Sure

But it isn't unconstitutional. In fact the Constitution is strangely quiet about the makeup of the entire Judicial branch.

[Greyhound]

7. There is nothing in The Constitution specifying the number of justices

that serve on the court. IIRC, it started as three and was expanded by Hamilton. It should come as no surprise that the court itself wouldn't like the idea of its power being diluted, and I'm just guessing here, but you're not a woman are you?

What you would have us do is to gamble the entire future of this country for generations to come, on a rigged election process hoping that the vote will be so overwhelmingly favorable to the Democrats that the fraud cannot overcome the difference.

Stevens is ancient, Kennedy is a an old fool (tool?), and Ginsberg has cancer, I don't like those odds at all.

In case you haven't been paying attention, the Republiks threw out the last vestiges of fair-play and good-of-the-country in 1981. For the last 26 years we have pretended that if just change enough, they will stop beating on us, well guess what, they will never stop until we live in some bizarre corporate theocracy and we are all totally helpless and at their mercy, which they do not possess.

Wake up, this is a war and if we don't even try to fight it, we will lose in ways I'll bet you can't even imagine.

[ShortnFiery]

3. Well, at least we can find some comfort in the fact that our Democratic Senators filibustered

Alito when we called in requesting this action in large numbers. Remember that? I don't either. :eyes:

[BlooInBloo]

5. NARAL needs to be de-funded, and a GENUINE advocacy group put in its place....

http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/04/18/donating-to-naral-is-not-going-to-help-protect-a-womans-right-to-choice

http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/04/18/dont-reward-failure-by-giving-money-to-naral/


EDIT: Forgot: Fucking jackass fuckwipe Connecticut electorate.

[xchrom]

8. conservatives are having success state by state -- they

don't need roe to fail at the federal level.

however -- the late term abortion ruling does open the door wider for that to happen.

but i'm not sure there is fire in the belly for a fight on this -- look at what happened to both alito and roberts.

[greendog]

9. On "learning to stick together".

Just remember: The Democratic Party, in effect, tossed large numbers of people "out of the boat" with NAFTA and welfare reform.

Now the folks who are still "in the boat" have the nerve to bitch 'cause the the folks that were tossed out aren't paddling anymore.

"Stick together" indeed.