Comments by "Winsome Martinez" (@winsomemartinez) on "Protesters expected to blockade Supreme Court ahead of Roe v Wade ruling" video.

  1.  @Qingeaton  I can think of further fuckery they can think up...
    2
  2. And she said FAR left. The most recent polls have said that 63% of ALL Americans support leaving the laws the same. So much for "the will of the people"...
    1
  3.  @halas7388  SCOTUS has really ruled that picketing and protesting may indeed happen on the sidewalks in front of SCOTUS.
    1
  4.  @halas7388  Read SCOTUS ruling of Grace, 1983. Their words, not mine.
    1
  5.  @halas7388  The video is about a protest at SCOTUS today. Did you not watch the video? A protest which has not yet occurred, by the way, so projecting that the signs will be intimidating is just that: projection.
    1
  6.  @halas7388  Again, you are projecting that meer signage and verbiage are "threats and intimidation". SCOTUS also ruled, somewhat, on what is and isn't considered to be threatening in VA v Black, 2003. I will bet that none of the protests today will exceed the act of burning a cross...
    1
  7.  @halas7388  You are clumping all protesters into one basket. Pro-choice folks are not antifa or blm. Please don't generalize and I will do the same...
    1
  8.  @halas7388  Demonic? That's a bit hyperbolic, don't you think?
    1
  9.  @halas7388  I guess then, one can apply the same to a Jim Jordan or to Rand Paul. I have witnessed each of them wipe froth from around their mouths while pontificating from the podium. I guess it's all about how you'd like to view and describe things. I just call it being vociferous. Not all congressmen do it, but there certainly are quite a few. Probably more than I meet in my day to day life. It's more about theatrics than reality.
    1
  10. I recommend that you don't stand behind Trump....it can get messy.
    1
  11. What is strange to me is that if the SCOTUS decision is indeed the same as what has been leaked, SCOTUS will have determined that the constitution does not confer a right to privacy. While some may laud this as a "victory" because of abortion, this has far-reaching implications for the future.... Think harder about this.
    1
  12.  @Qingeaton  This can/will open the door to things like an actual vaccine mandate. Not just one by private businesses, but one compelled by a state government.
    1
  13. SCOTUS has already ruled that the sidewalks in front of SCOTUS are a legal and open venue for picketing and protesting.
    1
  14.  @alanakafang6143  Are you incapable??? 1983 Grace decision. Can you manage to look that up, or need someone to do that as well?
    1
  15.  @alanakafang6143  First, learn to spell before jabbering about your capabilities. And second, SCOTUS has also ruled on what is and isn't intimidation. Signage and verbiage which simply state opposition is NOT intimidation. Before you ask: it was Kelner, 1976...
    1
  16.  @MacIntoshPrime  What are you jibbering on about today?
    1
  17.  @alanakafang6143  How in the world do you know what will be on the signs and what people will say in advance? That is called psychological projection in common parlance. I didn't speak to your intelligence, my comment was about your capabilities. If you are incapable of using what is likely your one and only language, please go learn it.
    1
  18.  @alanakafang6143  Just because I can and will debate you on your incorrect comment does NOT equate to trolling. Please learn the difference.
    1
  19.  @MacIntoshPrime  Excuse me if you find my intelligence intimidating. Don't just post your violence-inferring posts and run, son. It's quite obvious that you are out-manned here...
    1