Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Donald Trump is older than Hillary. Ronald Reagan was older than Hillary when he took office. John McCain was older when he was nominated. Mitt Romney is the same age. This whole age thing is so unbelievably biased coming from Republicans who had no issue with any of the above candidates.
You are forgetting the appointment of justices to the Supreme Court.
BTW, if abortion isn't an issue, why do Republican candidates always make a point of declaring their opposition to it? If it isn't an issue, why are Republican legislators constantly introducing legislation to subvert the intent of Roe v Wade?
I get it........you don't like to bring it up because it shows that Republicans are indeed trying to walk back women's rights.
Sorry, you don't get to pretend they aren't.
BTW, I'll "get over it" when Republicans stop attacking Roe v Wade.
Go back and read what I said: if there was ever going to be an attempt at Wade it would have happened when Bush was President. He had the right supreme court balance then. Never will be see the overthrow of the law. The declaring their opposition is simply showing how the feel about social issues, they are not all saying they would attempt to change the law. There are a lot of issues each of hold personally that we would not expect to be see changed. Who introduced legislation to overturn R verses W? That is what you are trying to convince people has happened in some way or another? And how far did it get?
Though overturning Roe v wade might be difficult - are you aware how Republican run states are chipping away at it?
Just making it more and more difficult to even obtain an abortion in some states. Closing down all but one (or maybe all) clinics so that women have to travel to different states.
Oh, yes they are quite devious - hiding these mandates in other bills, etc. I put nothing past any r/wing/extremist President.
Nothing.
some of what you say is true, but these are states, not the federal constitutions; many of these bills have been overturned; some by the way, I agree with and I am not a true "right to lifer" I am on the fence. I have yet to see a candidate, regardless of party come out and say they would overturn Roe verses Wade and get very far.
Donald Trump is older than Hillary. Ronald Reagan was older than Hillary when he took office. John McCain was older when he was nominated. Mitt Romney is the same age. This whole age thing is so unbelievably biased coming from Republicans who had no issue with any of the above candidates.
OMG, where have you been all your life? All 3 were attacked big time, much more than she has been attacked. Actually Reagan just made a joke out of it and as for who was the oldest; they were all within about a year or so of each other. Let me also tell you, there are many Republicans that are not defending him in any way.
You are forgetting the appointment of justices to the Supreme Court.
BTW, if abortion isn't an issue, why do Republican candidates always make a point of declaring their opposition to it? If it isn't an issue, why are Republican legislators constantly introducing legislation to subvert the intent of Roe v Wade?
I get it........you don't like to bring it up because it shows that Republicans are indeed trying to walk back women's rights.
Sorry, you don't get to pretend they aren't.
BTW, I'll "get over it" when Republicans stop attacking Roe v Wade.
Your party claims you don't want anyone telling you what to do with your body except apparently, when it comes to large drinks, salt, fat, etc. Then you're okay with it. So to sum up, you are good to go when it comes to murder but when it comes to eating and drinking, women can't be allowed to make decisions about their body.
Go back and read what I said: if there was ever going to be an attempt at Wade it would have happened when Bush was President. He had the right supreme court balance then. Never will be see the overthrow of the law. The declaring their opposition is simply showing how the feel about social issues, they are not all saying they would attempt to change the law. There are a lot of issues each of hold personally that we would not expect to be see changed. Who introduced legislation to overturn R verses W? That is what you are trying to convince people has happened in some way or another? And how far did it get?
They are running on it and making it part of their platform. While the chances of them doing what they have proposed, put forth and fighting for are basically zilch that doesn't mean a candidate shouldn't be viewed on what they are proposing and the ideas they are pushing.
I have yet to see a candidate, regardless of party come out and say they would overturn Roe verses Wade and get very far.
Because that's not possible (but, of course, that has never stopped a candidate from promising stuff). Assuming that our President is Republican, the best he can do is to nominate a pro-life SCOTUS justice -- provided that one of the liberal Justices dies or steps down during his tenure, maybe Ginsburg.
However, the Democrats can and will filibuster the confirmation (filibuster on SCOTUS nominations was not affected by the nuclear option). So nothing can happen unless GOP gets 60 seats in the Senate in November (not going to happen due to the 24(R) vs. 10(D) seats coming up for reelection), or the Republican Senators obliterate filibuster altogether.
That Bill is going out to campaign for her.
I'm guessing she had a stroke or brain tumor.
#1. Her assistant refers to her being confused all the time.
#2. She appears at most once a week to campaign.
I think the family are hiding major health issues.
Critical thinking not required, Laura. You know that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LauraC
Your party claims you don't want anyone telling you what to do with your body except apparently, when it comes to large drinks, salt, fat, etc. Then you're okay with it. So to sum up, you are good to go when it comes to murder but when it comes to eating and drinking, women can't be allowed to make decisions about their body.
this has little to do with her heart and the person I was questioning was referring to her heart more than anything else. There is more to being in good health than the condition of ones heart. Still you are right, there results were based on a doctor's evaluation.
nmnita, I am the person you questioned. If you go back and read my post again, you'll see I was merely responding to Miss Hepburn's post in which she expressed great concern about Clinton's heart health and specifically asked about her cholesterol count, diet, and exercise. Please don't try to read any more into my post than that.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
