As Trump continues to reshape the SCOTUS for this and the next generation to come, the democrats are taking the gloves off on this one, even telling senators in red states Trump dominated in the election to "take one for the team". If they didn't already know, the citizens of this great county are about to see just how ugly the left is.

---

I'm not sure why Dems would freak out about this. Of all of Trump's choices, Kavanaugh seems closest to the mold of Kennedy. I understand it's not ideal, but it's definitely not the worst case scenario. Barrett would have been a killing blow to liberal challenges in the court. With Kavanaugh, I think he'll end up being a swing vote on a lot of issues, just like Kennedy. The thing about Trump (I'm speculating here), is that I think he wants things to be traditional as possible. Not historically traditional, but as he's known it. He tried to get a justice that was like Scalia, now he picked a justice that is like Kennedy. I think Dems only need to worry if a liberal Justice passes or retires. Then you'd see a real swing. As it stands now, the court is basically the same it has been for years.

---

I'm not sure why Dems would freak out about this. Of all of Trump's choices, Kavanaugh seems closest to the mold of Kennedy. I understand it's not ideal, but it's definitely not the worst case scenario. Barrett would have been a killing blow to liberal challenges in the court. With Kavanaugh, I think he'll end up being a swing vote on a lot of issues, just like Kennedy. The thing about Trump (I'm speculating here), is that I think he wants things to be traditional as possible. Not historically traditional, but as he's known it. He tried to get a justice that was like Scalia, now he picked a justice that is like Kennedy. I think Dems only need to worry if a liberal Justice passes or retires. Then you'd see a real swing. As it stands now, the court is basically the same it has been for years.

I think Trump will nominate Barrett when Ginsburg finally retires in a few years. The woman is 85 years old for crying out loud. How long can she go? The democrats hate when the constitution is interpreted as it was written.

---

This is why the left is freaked out about it:

https://twitter.com/AlexPappas/status/10...3657844736

It's who they are.

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."

Good day for us Pro-Life Catholics.

---

Kavanaugh has written that the state has a compelling interest to protect the life of a fetus and a compelling interest to make sure that contraceptives are available and affordable for women who want them.
He cuts down the middle on that issue in a way that I appreciate.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

Kavanaugh has written that the state has a compelling interest to protect the life of a fetus and a compelling interest to make sure that contraceptives are available and affordable for women who want them.  
He cuts down the middle on that issue in a way that I appreciate.

I agree.  Time to seriously entertain an alternate solution to the current situation.  Personally, I never thought I'd even come close to seeing Roe v Wade being overturned in my lifetime so that issue had never been a factor in my Presidential vote.

---

I always baffled by those who believe "access" and affordable/free contraceptives aren't readily available.

They already are. And have been. For a long, long time.

Yet we pretend somehow "access" is blocked and are financially beyond reach.

Makes zero sense. Do we just regurgitate the talking points as if they have any meaning any longer? For most, it's absolutely free and has been (for a long, long time.)

There's no secret handshake, back alley black market, or second mortgage to leverage to obtain.

It's all readily available and easy to access.

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."

I always baffled by those who believe "access" and affordable/free contraceptives aren't readily available.

They already are.  And have been.  For a long, long time.

Yet we pretend somehow "access" is blocked and are financially beyond reach.

Makes zero sense.  Do we just regurgitate the talking points as if they have any meaning any longer?  For most, it's absolutely free and has been (for a long, long time.)

There's no secret handshake, back alley black market, or second mortgage to leverage to obtain.

It's all readily available and easy to access.

Question:  Where does a 16 year old 11th grader currently going to Sandalwood HS get her free contraceptives on a routine basis so she doesn't miss taking it for a day?

I honestly don't know so I picked out a random school and a scenario in which it would apply.  I understand this example is below the age of consent but I think they should be readily available (and free) to anyone that is sexually active (to prevent subsequent abortions).

---

They already are.

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."

They already are.

Where?  Where can teen girls get contraceptives at no charge, without getting questioned?  

IMO this is what the US really needs .... a free and open market for a girl to walk into a Walgreens or CVS and get contraceptives (for free) while keeping her info private (if there needs to be a tracking system similar to obtaining allergy medication).

---

There's a free clinic within walking distance.

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."

There's a free clinic within walking distance.

Free clinics may require an appointment and they typically screen clients by income level - a girl may need detailed accounts of her parents' income level to be seen.

And there is no reason for her to be seen by anyone.  The Academy of Obstetrics and Gynocology has a position paper saying that there is no reason to require a girl to be examined if all she wants is contraceptive pills, and no risk of problems due to taking the wrong amount.  There is no medical reason contraceptive pills should not be available over the counter.  Literally the only reason they are not is that none of the manufacturers have applied to the FDA.  They all feel like they can make more money when it's Rx only and most people get it with their insurance.

---

I always baffled by those who believe "access" and affordable/free contraceptives aren't readily available.

They already are.  And have been.  For a long, long time.

Yet we pretend somehow "access" is blocked and are financially beyond reach.

Makes zero sense.  Do we just regurgitate the talking points as if they have any meaning any longer?  For most, it's absolutely free and has been (for a long, long time.)

There's no secret handshake, back alley black market, or second mortgage to leverage to obtain.

It's all readily available and easy to access.

A woman without medical insurance currently has to be examined ($150/year) and then fill a prescription ($30/month min).  That is affordable for most but not everyone. And the annual part of the deal isn't even necessary.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

There's a free clinic within walking distance.

Free clinics may require an appointment and they typically screen clients by income level - a girl may need detailed accounts of her parents' income level to be seen.

And there is no reason for her to be seen by anyone.  The Academy of Obstetrics and Gynocology has a position paper saying that there is no reason to require a girl to be examined if all she wants is contraceptive pills, and no risk of problems due to taking the wrong amount.  There is no medical reason contraceptive pills should not be available over the counter.  Literally the only reason they are not is that none of the manufacturers have applied to the FDA.  They all feel like they can make more money when it's Rx only and most people get it with their insurance.

---

I always baffled by those who believe "access" and affordable/free contraceptives aren't readily available.

They already are.  And have been.  For a long, long time.

Yet we pretend somehow "access" is blocked and are financially beyond reach.

Makes zero sense.  Do we just regurgitate the talking points as if they have any meaning any longer?  For most, it's absolutely free and has been (for a long, long time.)

There's no secret handshake, back alley black market, or second mortgage to leverage to obtain.

It's all readily available and easy to access.

A woman without medical insurance currently has to be examined ($150/year) and then fill a prescription ($30/month min).  That is affordable for most but not everyone. And the annual part of the deal isn't even necessary.

Thanks all for your input.  I'm beyond thinking kids & adults are going to abstain so I've moved on with the thought that there needs to be confidential access to the pill at no charge.  Hopefully, it gets tweaked in this manner so there's an offset to any supreme court decisions --- sounds like a win-win situation (although I know this topic of discussion could be debated over the next 5,000 pages so i'll end it here).

---

I think Trump will nominate Barrett when Ginsburg finally retires in a few years. The woman is 85 years old for crying out loud. How long can she go? The democrats hate when the constitution is interpreted as it was written.

I assume this is a joke.  The chick is as fresh as a daisy !!!  On a very interesting note, Poland has just made a change to push retirement to Age 65 with the direct thought of purging 27 of the 72 judges off of their Supreme Court --- very controversial right now.

---

Yes, that's just one more reason why routine care shouldn't be part of insurance coverage.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

Yes, that's just one more reason why routine care shouldn't be part of insurance coverage.

Maybe you're right.  But if birth control was available OTC your point would be moot.  Insurance wouldn't pay for it anyhow. Perhaps it would become so affordable that there'd be practically no need for Medicaid to pay for it either.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

Like I said, leftist have a problem for every real solution.

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."

Like I said, leftist have a problem for every real solution.

Huh?

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

Condoms are readily available and free in high schools. Just have to hope that today's brain dead youth would utilize them.

---

Looking to troll? Don't bother, we supply our own.

 

 

There's a free clinic within walking distance.

Free clinics may require an appointment and they typically screen clients by income level - a girl may need detailed accounts of her parents' income level to be seen.

And there is no reason for her to be seen by anyone.  The Academy of Obstetrics and Gynocology has a position paper saying that there is no reason to require a girl to be examined if all she wants is contraceptive pills, and no risk of problems due to taking the wrong amount.  There is no medical reason contraceptive pills should not be available over the counter.  Literally the only reason they are not is that none of the manufacturers have applied to the FDA.  They all feel like they can make more money when it's Rx only and most people get it with their insurance.

A woman without medical insurance currently has to be examined ($150/year) and then fill a prescription ($30/month min).  That is affordable for most but not everyone. And the annual part of the deal isn't even necessary.

I agree with this. Contraceptive pills should be available over the counter. That's true of lots of other meds that require a prescription too. This is one reason why medical insurance in the US is so high; every 6 months you need to pay a doctor to renew the same prescription you've had for the last 10 years.

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"