[wagglebee]

"I think the Supreme Court ruling will become the law of the land, and however much I may agree or disagree with it, I wouldn’t support an amendment to reverse it," explained Fiorina.

Good thing she never had a chance at winning.

[Ray76]

She just ended her campaign.

[John O]

So Carly’s a democrat

[tumblindice]

This is what happens when you have a “big tent”—midgets, pachyderm KP and clowns sneak in, and then think they can play ringmaster. Put Carly back to work on elephant clean-up.
Conservative Party!

[Jack Hammer]

Homosexuals are in the process of pulling off the biggest anti-American scam in history.

[headstamp 2]

Feel the nuance.

Another so-called “moderate” Republican attempting to take both sides of an issue.

[yefragetuwrabrumuy]

Here are some of the worst SCOTUS decisions, ever. Justices do make some really stinker decisions, that need to be overturned.

Dred Scott v. Sandford
(Slaves are property)

United States v. E.C. Knight Company
(Monopolies are good, the more the merrier)

Lochner v. New York
(We don’t need no stinking food health and safety laws)

Plessy v. Ferguson
(Separate but sort of equal)

Hammer v. Dagenhart
(Child labor is cool)

Korematsu v. United States
(Japanese can be imprisoned for being Japanese)

Kelo v. City of New London
(What government wants, government can take)

Marbury v. Madison
(Government decides what powers it has)

Wickard v. Filburn
(Government can control what you own and produce for your own use)

National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius
(Government can tax any event or non-event it wants to. Tax anything and everything. Tax tax tax.)

Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency
(Government can regulate all of the air)

United States v. Riverside Bayview Homes
(Government can regulate all of the water)

Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad
(Corporations are people, too. Not an actual decision, but based on the opinion of the court reporter and the chief justice of the time. Now totally dominating business law.)

Bennis v. Michigan
(If your property is used in a crime, by an unauthorized user, government can still confiscate it.)

Home Building & Loan v. Blaisdell
(Government can interfere with legal contracts, retroactively, if it wants to.)

Grutter v. Bolinger
(Schools can give preferential treatment to minorities only.)

[trisham]

Good thing she never had a chance at winning.

*******************************

No kidding. She'd be a disaster.

[annalex]

the Supreme Court ruling will become the law of the land, and however much I may agree or disagree with it, I wouldn’t support an amendment to reverse it

Slave mentality. Someone wants to replace Obama with THAT?

[Buckeye McFrog]

uhhhhh.......no

[xzins]

She doesn’t have a clue what the issues are. I hear equity brought up, and instantly I know I’m dealing with a know nothing

[Timber Rattler]

So much for the “I like Carly” crew around here.

[IronJack]

Drop out now, Carly. You just lost any chance you had at the nomination.

[manc]

The reason why I would never vote for her just like others who have no problem with this sham marriage.

[Jim Robinson]

Goodbye, Carly, we hardly knew ye.

[Impy]

Speak of the devil.

[Neoliberalnot]

So, Carly, whatever the decision might be, should be supported. This thinking is why so many corrupt judges get away with their rulings.

[JoeFromSidney]

That does it. She definitely will not get my vote.

[Constitutionalist Conservative]

The Jon Huntsman of this election cycle?

[cycjec]

thanks for the heads up, not that I was ever a fan
of hers

[prairiebreeze]

I still don’t support their “decision” on Roe. Why in the hell would I support this blasphemy?