This thread is specially for all you Bush lovin', gay bashin', civil rights crushin', Word-of-God distortin', Constitution bashin' sons (and daughters) of guns.
This place is for you to post all the great reasons you are among the 30% of people that will lick the jackboots of the GOP forever, no matter what!
Git 'er Done...
Posted by retiredat49 on :
Well Gordo...
I don't care for Bush at all...hetero or homo, it's none of my business...UAW member for over 30 years (definatly pro civil rights)...Believe in God but don't push it on others...However...I guess that you can label me a Conservative because I don't believe that killing unborn babies should be a CHOICE...I do believe in the constitution and the right to bear arms, and, I don't ever want to be associated with any party that thinks like you!!! Nuff said...
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
Thanks for your input, retiredat49! A couple questions:
1. You have problems with a party that thinks the way I think? I'm unclear on this; can you please be any more specific?
2. How do you feel about capital punishment?
Posted by retiredat49 on :
1. I've read your ramblings...they are getting old. Specifics...All Christians are kool aid drinking right wing extremists...It's okay to kill babies, but killing animals for food is inhumane...etc.
2. As I do believe in accountability (probably my biggest issue with liberals), I don't get a warm and fuzzy feeling about killing someone for their crimes...I believe hard criminals deserve hard time (not a comfy prison cell and a college education).
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
You clearly don't understand how I think at all.
First, I don't believe that "all Christians are kool aid drinking right wing extremists," some of my best friends are Christians.
I don't believe that "it's okay to kill babies." I also don't believe that the government has a place in our bedrooms and family planning decisions. Do you?
"Killing animals for food is inhumane?" Tell that to the chicken I had for dinner.
I'm still unclear on your capital punishment stance. Are you saying you are strongly against it on ethical grounds? (No one who is not mentally ill gets "warm and fuzzy" over it.)
Posted by retiredat49 on :
No...I do not understand how you think...that is for sure.
You state that you don't believe that it is OK to kill babies...yet the party that you belong to ENDORSES it, and then hides behind it with statements like (we don't want the government to have a place in our bedrooms and family planning). The planning should start before conception...NOT after. Lets say that I have a 1 year old that just doesn't work with my family plan any longer...should I legally be allowed to murder that child?...should the government have a place in that decision? It all goes back to the accountability issue...
As far as the capital punishment issue...I have wrestled with that for many years now and am still rather torn on the issue...here's why. If someone ATTEMPTED to injure or kill one of my children, friends, or family members I would have no qualms about killing that person in an instant and, I would have no regrets about doing so...therefore if someone DID kill one of my children, family members or friends I would probably feel the same way. How about you?
Posted by jordanreed on :
a life is not a life until it can breathe on its own...look it up..
Posted by urnso77 on :
hmmm so an infant on a breathing machine is what exactly? Free to be disposed of?
Posted by jordanreed on :
try using your brain power to figure out the meaning of what i said..then , maybe, you wouldn,t ask such an ignorant question
Posted by urnso77 on :
get r done! yee haw! woo hoo! gotta go fix my tractor now. bye bye try not to kill any babies while I'm gone
Posted by bdgee on :
When you declare, as I see being done here, what the thoughts of others are and what you choose to believe them to be, you have written a lot about yourself and your way of thinking.
For the last 30 years, anyone that uses the label "liberal" and declares what "liberals" think or want starts out with a crippling bias where honesty is concerned. I doubt that you know what you are talking about, since you are simply hopping onto the far rightwing hate-speach bandwagon. The ride of the simple minded....of the sound-bite, in a way.
It is absolutely false that whatever you don't like is "liberal" and whatever you do like is concervative (and it is extremely insulting.....intentionally?), however, that is the bent insisted on by the far rightwing religious nut faction of our society (and for that matter, of Moslems too and any other fanatic religious group), which constantly is demanding governmental control of the most basic "intimacies" of human life, with no regard for the religious (or other) concerns of others. (If you can't respect, how can you expect to be respected?)
Open mindedness IS NOT LIBERAL, whatever you may believe, religiously, politically, or personally, yet that is the obvious and consistant claim you present. Get off the uncompromising "my way or the highway mentality of the far right. That is NOT rational and you are demanding that those without your religious limitation be equally limited.
Quoting Harry Truman, "GO CLEAN YOUR OWN BACK YARD FIRST!".
Quoting me, "STAY THE HELL OUT OF MY LIFE WITH YOUR MAGIC AND WITCHCRAFT AND BIGOTRY!".
Why can't you mind your own business and respect the one universal standard of this Nation, its Constitution?
Posted by urnso77 on :
now that was funny. im sure it was unintentional though.
Posted by bdgee on :
I don't doubt that you think it is funny.
Instead of weighing critism, like the shrubbery, you sneer and trash rather than consider and think.
Perhaps you have pointed out, even to yourself,why you get no respect.
Posted by urnso77 on :
im not gonna sit here and argue with you guys. There is no persuading a liberal. I'd much rather just laugh at you.
Posted by bdgee on :
Yeah, being rational and thoughtful undermines your entire method of assault.
Posted by Upside on :
quote:Originally posted by Gordon Bennett: ...." some of my best friends are Christians.
Best friends? Gordon, chat room buddies don't really count when you're tallying up your list of "best friends", unless they're the only friends you..........oops, nevermind. Silly me.
Posted by bdgee on :
quote:Originally posted by Upside:
quote:Originally posted by Gordon Bennett: ...." some of my best friends are Christians.
Best friends? Gordon, chat room buddies don't really count when you're tallying up your list of "best friends", unless they're the only friends you..........oops, nevermind. Silly me.
I don't mean this to be taken negatively, but......
I really think that deriding another for his religious feeling or the religions of his friends is a bit out of line.
If you are unable to accept debate on religious matters, attacking the person or personality is not a suitable contribution, if it is any sort of a contrabution to debate.
And I really believe that demeaning a person with accusations of whether or not he has friends is a cheap shot.
Posted by Lockman on :
quote:Originally posted by jordanreed: a life is not a life until it can breathe on its own...look it up..
Look it up where?
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
Cheap shots, abound.
I understand where Upside is coming from, though.
He's not really angry with me, he's angry that I present so many facts and ideas that cause him discomfort.
Posted by bdgee on :
Well, here's one you can look up.
In order to be a citizen, one must either be born a citizen or be "naturalized", making it clear that a fetus short of being born is not.
"Look it up where?" In the Constitution.
Posted by retiredat49 on :
So...are you saying that it is OK to murder anyone that is NOT a citizen?
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
I think you just closed the case, bdgee!
Have you noticed that no one has presented a valid argument for being a conservative yet?
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
I saw that one coming a mile away. Yes, retiredat49, that's EXACTLY what bdgee is saying. LOL
Have you noticed that no one has presented a valid argument for being a conservative yet?
quote:Originally posted by retiredat49: So...are you saying that it is OK to murder anyone that is NOT a citizen?
Posted by bdgee on :
Why must you far right-wingers insist on misinterpret things to be something that was simply never even inferred?
Are you really so deficient in logic and reason?
It is the same mistake you make when you claim that the Bill of Rights is limited to those with citizenship. The Constitution never mentions citizenship in the rights granted in the Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights provide a list of limits and responsibilities of the government,instead of listing freedoms.
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
If they didn't feign misunderstanding, they would have to actually present reasonable arguments for their particular views -- reasonable arguments which, in most cases, simply do not exist.
quote:Originally posted by bdgee: Why must you far right-wingers insist on misinterpret things to be something that was simply never even inferred?
Posted by retiredat49 on :
quote:Originally posted by bdgee: Are you really so deficient in logic and reason?
No...logic and reason tells me that citizenship was never part of this topic until you referenced it...life and when it starts was the debate...again the question was...where do we look it up?
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
You'll find everything you need at: www.google.com Posted by bdgee on :
quote:Originally posted by retiredat49:
quote:Originally posted by bdgee: Are you really so deficient in logic and reason?
No...logic and reason tells me that citizenship was never part of this topic until you referenced it...life and when it starts was the debate...again the question was...where do we look it up?
Man, can you screw things around!
This was NOT a thread on " life and when it starts was the debate", as you claim.
I quote:
"This thread is specially for all you Bush lovin', gay bashin', civil rights crushin', Word-of-God distortin', Constitution bashin' sons (and daughters) of guns.
This place is for you to post all the great reasons you are among the 30% of people that will lick the jackboots of the GOP forever, no matter what!
Git 'er Done..."
You have used no reason or logic to completely misdirect facts. It is amazing you can think of being totally wrong as having used logic and reason.
Get real.
Posted by retiredat49 on :
bdgee...you have got to be the dumbest self proclaimed intellectual that I have ever come across...maybe you should have actually read what was written in this thread before bringing up citizenship...which, by the way, has nothing to do with the title of this thread either!
Posted by urnso77 on :
amen to retiredat49!
Posted by NaturalResources on :
quote:"When you declare, as I see being done here, what the thoughts of others are and what you choose to believe them to be, you have written a lot about yourself and your way of thinking."
Kinda funny that anyone posting in here would say that, especially considering the first post of this thread. Gordo, I suggest you listen to the enlightening words of wisdom put forth by your posting buddy.
Posted by bdgee on :
quote:Originally posted by retiredat49: bdgee...you have got to be the dumbest self proclaimed intellectual that I have ever come across...maybe you should have actually read what was written in this thread before bringing up citizenship...which, by the way, has nothing to do with the title of this thread either!
Oh, my. A fool that can't (or won't) read.
I have read all of this thread. Obviously you have not.
Once again, you do not have the privilege of declaring what can and can't be considered or broached in the various threads here.
As to the topic of this one in particular, the only poster in this thread that assumed the thread topic is abortion is you.
Cleartly, you don't have anything else that you feel competent in talking about. Let me assure you you don't handle that well either.
Contrary to your approach, debate and discussion do not depend on shouting, name calling, insulting, and changing the subject when you can't handle the facts.
No one here has ever said killing babies or anyting similar is a good thing. BUT YOU KEEP CLAIMING THEY HAVE.
ENOUGH OF THAT INSULTING TRASH! Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
The "conservative" motto: Baffle 'em with b.s. until they give up.
Have you noticed that no one has presented a valid argument for being a conservative yet?
Posted by Lockman on :
Gordon- since it's pretty clear you don't consider yourself a conservative, what would you label yourself?
Posted by bond006 on :
being a conservative gives you the chance to wear a I am stupid badge with pride
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
A progressive.
quote:Originally posted by Lockman: Gordon- since it's pretty clear you don't consider yourself a conservative, what would you label yourself?
Posted by Lockman on :
Would you consider John F. Kennedy a conservative ?
Posted by retiredat49 on :
quote:Originally posted by bdgee:
quote:Originally posted by retiredat49: bdgee...you have got to be the dumbest self proclaimed intellectual that I have ever come across...maybe you should have actually read what was written in this thread before bringing up citizenship...which, by the way, has nothing to do with the title of this thread either!
Oh, my. A fool that can't (or won't) read.
ENOUGH OF THAT INSULTING TRASH!
Imagine that...a moron calling me a fool...and then complaining about insults...
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
Do you mean "conservative" as in "resistant to change?" If so, then yes; on some important issues, he was indeeed.
Looking at the big picture, however, he presented a fairly progressive outlook in my view.
quote:Originally posted by Lockman: Would you consider John F. Kennedy a conservative ?
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
What has this got to do with being a Conservative?
quote:Originally posted by retiredat49: Imagine that...a moron calling me a fool...and then complaining about insults...
Posted by Lockman on :
So you would say he was a moderate conservative?
Posted by retiredat49 on :
About as much as Citizenship...
quote:Originally posted by Gordon Bennett: What has this got to do with being a Conservative?
quote:Originally posted by retiredat49: Imagine that...a moron calling me a fool...and then complaining about insults...
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
He leaned left on some issues; right on others.
By today's standards, you could make the argument that he was a Libertarian.
Overall, he came across as a reasonable, free-thinking person.
quote:Originally posted by Lockman: So you would say he was a moderate conservative?
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
Reasonable arguments just aren't that important to you, are they...
quote:Originally posted by retiredat49: About as much as Citizenship...
Posted by retiredat49 on :
Sure they are...answer the questions that I posed to you earlier in the thread...then I can respond.
quote:Originally posted by Gordon Bennett: Reasonable arguments just aren't that important to you, are they...
quote:Originally posted by retiredat49: About as much as Citizenship...
Posted by bdgee on :
quote:Originally posted by retiredat49:
quote:Originally posted by bdgee:
quote:Originally posted by retiredat49: bdgee...you have got to be the dumbest self proclaimed intellectual that I have ever come across...maybe you should have actually read what was written in this thread before bringing up citizenship...which, by the way, has nothing to do with the title of this thread either!
Oh, my. A fool that can't (or won't) read.
ENOUGH OF THAT INSULTING TRASH!
Imagine that...a moron calling me a fool...and then complaining about insults...
IT'S TIME YOU STOPPED THIS TRASH!
There is no excuse for your inclination to insult and name calling.
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
I must have overlooked your questions directed to me. What are they?
quote:Originally posted by retiredat49: ...answer the questions that I posed to you earlier in the thread...
Posted by bdgee on :
If he knows?????
Posted by retiredat49 on :
No...I do not understand how you think...that is for sure.
You state that you don't believe that it is OK to kill babies...yet the party that you belong to ENDORSES it, and then hides behind it with statements like (we don't want the government to have a place in our bedrooms and family planning). The planning should start before conception...NOT after. Lets say that I have a 1 year old that just doesn't work with my family plan any longer...should I legally be allowed to murder that child?...should the government have a place in that decision? It all goes back to the accountability issue...
As far as the capital punishment issue...I have wrestled with that for many years now and am still rather torn on the issue...here's why. If someone ATTEMPTED to injure or kill one of my children, friends, or family members I would have no qualms about killing that person in an instant and, I would have no regrets about doing so...therefore if someone DID kill one of my children, family members or friends I would probably feel the same way. How about you?
quote:Originally posted by Gordon Bennett: I must have overlooked your questions directed to me. What are they?
quote:Originally posted by retiredat49: ...answer the questions that I posed to you earlier in the thread...
Posted by bdgee on :
First of all, that is a lie!
To my knowledge (which I will match with yours with one hand tied behind it to get a more nearly fair fight), no political party of any nation has stated that "it is alright to kill babies" and you claiming such is the case is disgusting and insulting..
That is a cheap disgusting assault on the integrity and morals of those you don't bother to listen to. They quite rightfully resent your ignorance and self serving arrogance.
Who gave you the childish notion it was necessary to "belong" to a political party in order to have ideas and make statements?
When you, by contorting some impossible moral situation, accuse, intend to accuse, or allow to be accused (which is one of your most common tactics to avoid actual consideration of a topic), others of that imorallity, you are insulting and you are intending it as an insult.
Again, no one, that is sane, is advocating killing babies. If you can't get over that purely auto-generated falacy you keep ranting, maybe you belong with those restricted, by clause, from inclusion with those referred to in the previous sentence.
When you equate killing in order to protect yours or another persons life to calculated killing of someone, however mean or evil, while they cannot harm another, you have intentionally defied reason and admitted you are not restricted by morals.
You need to stop declaring what your hate targets (that is anyone not getting their ideas from the RNC directly or from one of their organs, like the New York Post or Fox News or Fat Rush, the Doper and Hypocrit) think, as you are mostly wrong and always out of line.
It just ain't polite and mannerly, you see.
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
Hi retiredat49,
I have weeded the only three questions you asked me out of your longer post. The answers are below...
quote:Lets say that I have a 1 year old that just doesn't work with my family plan any longer...should I legally be allowed to murder that child?
No.
quote:...should the government have a place in that decision?
I doubt you would even tell the government you had decided to kill your one-year old in the first place. So... no.
quote:If someone ATTEMPTED to injure or kill one of my children, friends, or family members I would have no qualms about killing that person in an instant and, I would have no regrets about doing so...therefore if someone DID kill one of my children, family members or friends I would probably feel the same way. How about you?
If someone killed my family would I want to murder the person that did it? Absolutely! In fact, that would be probably be my first thought. Then I would come to terms with the fact that the lengthy prison time I would have to serve for premeditated murder wouldn't bring my family back. (It's called logic and reason.)
I wouldn't want the State to kill them for me either. "A murder for a murder" doesn't work.
On the other hand, if I was at the scene of the crime and had to kill the perpetrator in self-defense, I would not hesitate to do so. But that wouldn't be murder.
Posted by retiredat49 on :
Gordon
Well I guess that we agree for the most part...but abortion to me is still nothing short of murder and I for one will never vote for a candidate that is pro-abortion. As far as capital punishment goes, I'm not sure what I would do if someone murdered one of my children or family members and I hope and pray that I never do. My reaction would probably be the same as yours, but I would hope that the perpetrator would at the very least serve HARD time...not receive a college education, comfy prison cell, full medical benefits, a gym to work out in, and the freedom of civil rights. IMO the prison system is way too lenient on hardened criminals and the judicial system is not consistent enough...life in prison should mean...life in prison!
bdgee...I live near Detroit and I would rather walk through the east side of downtown, alone at night, unarmed, than to listen to your self serving blithering bullsh*t...it would be far more educational, and much less dangerous... You are on ignore from now on, because I can no longer tolerate your ignorance and your hatred towards anyone here who disagrees with you...
Posted by bdgee on :
quote:Originally posted by retiredat49: bdgee...I live near Detroit and I would rather walk through the east side of downtown, alone at night, unarmed, than to listen to your self serving blithering bullsh*t...it would be far more educational, and much less dangerous... You are on ignore from now on, because I can no longer tolerate your ignorance and your hatred towards anyone here who disagrees with you...
Many thanks Mr. insensate and obtuse....
You can only imagine how much I'll appreciate that, not having to put up with your hatred and immature obsenaties and name calling and rudeness.
If ever there comes the day when you gain enough sophistication, intellect, and decent manners to talk meaningfully and respectfully to a high school drop-out, come again (though I can't imagine you will ever reach such lofty goals).
'Til then (and only then), cest la vie.
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
If every person who was against a woman's right to choose was required to adopt twenty of the resulting children, would you sign up, RA49?
No candidate is pro-abortion. However, some thankfully respect women as human beings with the same exclusive right to govern their own bodies as men have in a so-called "free country."
quote:Originally posted by retiredat49: Well I guess that we agree for the most part...but abortion to me is still nothing short of murder and I for one will never vote for a candidate that is pro-abortion.
Posted by bdgee on :
Gord....,
He isn't able to think or speak rationally on the subject. You are wasting your time. Feeding pearls to swine, as they say.
Pose too many serious and difficult quandries and he breaks down and starts name calling and cussin.
Posted by Lockman on :
Is suicide against the law? If a person wants to take their own life should they be allowed to do so?
Posted by Lockman on :
Gorden I'll direct this to you because you started this thread.
Is your definition of conservate biased by a dislike of George Bush, much the same as the group that disliked Clinton?
I myself distrust government. It's a necessary evil though. I agree that the less government in my life the better, the sooner people realize that all politicans are about being re-elected the sooner we can change our political landscape and make people realize they are responsible for themselves and not rely on some government lacky.
Posted by bdgee on :
Do you "want" suicide to be against the law?
In either case, why?
Is your stance based on practicality, religion, what?
If it is a matter of religion, then maybe you should be minding your own business, unless the religion of the person wanting or contemplating suicide is the exact same as yours.
It could be quite financially benificial to a family for a person to choose suicide and is not at all out of line with natural social practices (check out E.O.Wilson's Sociobiology and learn about aunts and uncles and gene protection).
I don't, personally, think that I can know the particulars of any particular case to make a decision about suicide for some other person. I certainly don't think some agency of the Government can do that reasonably or fairly.
Dreaming up scenarios where suicide may be horrible or wonderful won't answer the question. It is simply best to ignore some questions, because there is no possible definitive answer.
Posted by Lockman on :
quote:Originally posted by Lockman: Is suicide against the law? If a person wants to take their own life should they be allowed to do so?
I believe at the present time attempting suicide is against the laws of the USA.
I didn't quite understand your answer to the second part of the question. Did you answer yes or no?
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
My definition of "conservative" today is anyone that supports the radical warmongering agendas of "The Project for a New American Century."
These "evildoers" are the "conservatives" that are setting the fearful tone and policy of this country (and beyond).
Thus, they are the true enemies of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness; a greater long-term threat to this country and the world than any foreign "terrorist" will ever be:
Elliott Abrams Gary Bauer William J. Bennett Jeb Bush Dick Cheney Eliot A. Cohen Midge Decter Paula Dobriansky Steve Forbes Aaron Friedberg Francis Fukuyama Frank Gaffney Fred C. Ikle Donald Kagan Zalmay Khalilzad I. Lewis Libby Norman Podhoretz Dan Quayle Peter W. Rodman Stephen P. Rosen Henry S. Rowen Donald Rumsfeld Vin Weber George Weigel Paul Wolfowitz
quote:Originally posted by Lockman: Gorden I'll direct this to you because you started this thread.
Is your definition of conservate biased by a dislike of George Bush, much the same as the group that disliked Clinton?
I myself distrust government. It's a necessary evil though. I agree that the less government in my life the better, the sooner people realize that all politicans are about being re-elected the sooner we can change our political landscape and make people realize they are responsible for themselves and not rely on some government lacky.
Posted by Lockman on :
I didn't see Sen. Liebermans name on that list?
Any reason he's not there?
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
Lieberman's not a signer (go to the page and see for yourself).
You'll also notice George W. Bush isn't one either. (Jeb is, however.)
I DID however forget to include William Kristol, the PNAC Chairman.
Posted by Lockman on :
Oh I'm sorry the list is from the website New American Century.
Why isn't Lieberman a member?
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
There are many strong supporters that aren't stated "members," probably in order to appear neutral for political reasons. (GWB and Rove are good examples of that.)
Did you notice Scooter Libby is still on the list? Perhaps he can vote from prison. LOL
Posted by bdgee on :
I think you are wrong about suicide being illegal in the U.S. I think there is no Federal lw on the subject and only a few states have considered the possibility of making suicide a crime.
I didn't answer your question, but presented the possibility that it doesn't need to be considered and probably shouldn't.
It is always possible to pose questions like. "Should suicide be illegal?", but that doesn't mean they need an answer.
How about the question, "Should it be against the law to have sexual relations with a person of a different race?" Isn't that a request to dictate social and racial norms by using the law?
All too often, people want the law to make criminal anything they disapproave of and they disapprove because of religion or habit or whatever and not because it would be a benifit to the Country or the society.
Who would benifit from a law making suicide illegal?
Anyway, exactly what would be the punishment you would met out to the perpetrators who break your law against suicide?
There is an old "rule" about criminal statutes that usually holds true. It isn't the statute that declares a thing an offense that matters, it is the description in the statutes that lays out the punishments for the offense that is the actual instrument of law. Make it a crime to commit suicide and, even with detailed descriptions for the punishment, there is no one to punish.
It's like f-rting in the wind or p-ssing in the ocean......it doesn't amount to much.
Posted by Hannibull on :
yeah you wouldn't want the cops to come and arrest your dead body lol
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
Welcome to America, where there are so many laws, everyone's a criminal!
Posted by retiredat49 on :
quote:Originally posted by Gordon Bennett: If every person who was against a woman's right to choose was required to adopt twenty of the resulting children, would you sign up, RA49?
"Here's a new concept...hold people accountable for their own decisions and teach them to raise their own children...or give them up for adoption...the last time I checked, the waiting list to adopt a child from this country was 5 years".
No candidate is pro-abortion. However, some thankfully respect women as human beings with the same exclusive right to govern their own bodies as men have in a so-called "free country."
"Do those same candidates respect babies as human beings with the same exclusive right to govern their own bodies"?
quote:Originally posted by retiredat49: Well I guess that we agree for the most part...but abortion to me is still nothing short of murder and I for one will never vote for a candidate that is pro-abortion.
Posted by ruthie on :
I agree with retiredat49 and others, The phrase "a woman's right to choose" sounds like such a simple thing, but it is no such thing. No one is against a woman's right to choose when it comes to things that doesn't harm another human being. But, when a woman's right to choose ends with an innocent life being taken, then there is a whole new element involved here. If more people understood the whole concept of abortion and all that is involved with this (supposed) simple procedure, I think fewer would condone it. So many women who make that decision out of fear or poverty or a number of reasons (and my heart hurts for them), then later in life have children, and wish they could go back and undo that choice, will suffer undue pain from that earlier decision. Most who dissagree with abortion do not do so because of an arrogant attitude against women but bacause they realize the amazing value of prescious innocent lives.
Posted by retiredat49 on :
Well said ruthie...
Posted by bdgee on :
So?
Didn't we know already that you rightwingers started out "knowing" everything you are going to consider?
What about the innocent life of the Mother to be?
The rightwing likes to parade the notion that a woman that has chosen abortion will live to regret it later and is in no condition to make that decision while she is pregnant. BULL!!!
How can you say that when, in such a peronal and possibly damaging situation, most women would be careful not to publicize the fact? Maybe it is true that MOST women that choose an abortion later on live happy and fruitful lives.
It is nothing more than a scenerio that you want to believe when you claim that later regret will ensue.
In fact, almost all the rightwing propaganda about abortion is little more than wishful thinking and religious zeel. There is no data to support those positions. Moreover, they are primarilly religious conviction, which our Constitution guarantees us will not be respected in the making of law.
Now, I won't ever have the opportunity to exercise a choice about having or not having an abortion, as I am not physically in the game. However, were that not the case, I feel certain that I would choose to have a baby rather than an abortion, unless that was impossible. But I feel even more certain that I would rather have that choice than have you or the government decide for me.
Personally, I'm sick of "The Decider" and all his cadre nand his tribe.
Posted by Hannibull on :
quote:Originally posted by Gordon Bennett: Welcome to America, where there are so many laws, everyone's a criminal!
it's not that different here really Posted by ruthie on :
I'm sorry bdgee. I forgot you are so superior. Forgive me!! No one is talking about when a woman's life is at stake. That is a completely seperate matter completely..., and as far as it being BULL!, why don't you go along with the next woman you know that is going to have an abortion and sit and hold her hand and watch what she goes through and make sure you look at the jar of blood and tissue that is being taken away and and while you are at it, stay a part of that woman's life and see how she may feel about it a few years down the road.....and as far as it being a rightwing attitude, you are so wrong, it is all about concern and compassion, with no political affiliation whatsoever. Not everything is about right versus left.
Posted by bdgee on :
"....why don't you go along with the next woman you know that is going to have an abortion and sit and hold her hand and watch what she goes through ..."
You make a false assumption in making that statement. You need to learn not to say that people have or haven't done things so you won't make that mistake again.
So, let me ask you, how many times have you been present during an abortion? At least once, so that you can assure me that the conditions you describe are correct. I think the situation, as you describe it, is a description of an abortion performed secretely and illegally, during a time that your kind made them illegal so that young girls were forced to go to hacks to get them.
Is it as I suspect, you have never been there during an abortion? In other words you don't know what you speak of at all.
"...and sit and hold her hand and watch what she goes through and make sure you look at the jar of blood and tissue that is being taken away ..."
Ever seen an apendectomy. A tonsilectomy. An amputation? All the things you say are true for an abortion are doubly true for them. Following your argument, then we let the guy die of gangreen rather than cut off the toe, because it is sickening to watch. Ever seen the results of failing to remove an apendix and what that does to the person, physically and mentally? If they are lucky there will be years later for them.
I have been there years later, both with women that had abortions and women that had the baby and, over all, I find the ones who choose abortion generally are much better off psychologically, though there is CERTAINLY not general rule, whatever you like to claim.
No, you are wrong. IT IS A RIGHTWING OBSESSION, not at all about concern and compassion, directed at controlling others lives for the sake of controlling and so that the madness of religious ferver can be satiated, inspite of the Constitution.
You are the know-it-all, with such self assurance that you had the answers to what I may not have witnessed.....and so terribly wrong you were.
Posted by jordanreed on :
lets make abortion illegal..
we need thousands more unwanted kids roaming the streets,looking for ways to prey on actual innocents...
how many thugs are in prison that should of been aborted?..
ever lived in the ghetto?.. i have for 25 years..
sooooo many unwanted,unloved,uncared for.. future criminals, and active criminals, ...
it will always be that way..but it would be much worse were abortion illegal..
i have sat with a woman while she waited to save a life...4- times.. they were relieved.
course, they received less welfare..but, other than that, they were fine.
Posted by Hannibull on :
i love it when "pro-lifers" are also for the death penalty apparently choosing between life or death is negotiable depending on the situation! But then don't be so pretentious calling yourself "pro-life"
also, it's not that black and white, just because you're not anti-abortion doesn't mean you think abortion is ok. I don't call myself 100% anti-abortion even though I'm very much against it. I believe abortion should ONLY be legal after a thorough medical and psychological evaluation procedure, like (to give an example) when there's a complication and the mother's health and life is in danger during the pregnancy and the child is going to die anyway. I do NOT condone abortion as a method of birth control.
I don't know however what the "right" thing to do is in the case of a rape and a child is conceived... I don't call myself pro-choice, nor pro-life, it's a case by case evaluation, and that's why making it illegal for every situation is simply wrong
Posted by Hannibull on :
Posted by Lockman on :
quote:Originally posted by Gordon Bennett: Did you notice Scooter Libby is still on the list? Perhaps he can vote from prison. LOL
Scooter will never go to prison at least not very long. I smell a pardon in 08. lol
Posted by The Bigfoot on :
First off some statistics:
In 1973 when abortion first became legal the total female population of the United States was 108,402,337
The very first year that abortions became legal there were 741,000 abortions. This is roughly 3/4ths of 1% of the total female population at that time. Abortion Stat source
(I am using the higher AGI stats)
In 1990 the abortion records reached their highest level of 1,608,600 abortions in that calendar year.
At that time the total US female population was 127,838,000.
This gives us our highest ratio of approximately 1.4% of the female population of the United States having an abortion.
Since that time statistics show that the abortion rate has steadily been decreasing over the last 15 years.
In 2000 (the last year in which I could get an educated estimate of both population and abortion rate from the sources above) the abortion rate dropped down to approximately 1,312,990 while the total female population of the United States grew to 143,713,000.
This drops the abortion ratio down to just above 9/10ths of 1% of the female population.
While I do not have numbers strong enough to relate, the general consensus is that the abortion rate is continuing a measured drop while the female population continues to grow.
All the above is to give some context to this conversation regarding abortion. It is a difficult issue to broach. The term 'dead babies' goes against pretty much ever moral and natural instinct we have as a human species so I very much understand the vehement desire to quash any program or law that would seem to support such an end result.
However, taking the human emotional and instinctual element out of the conversation, you have to confront some very harsh realities.
In 1973, the very first year that abortion was legalized, there were over 700,000 abortions. This was at a time when the family nuclei was generally much stronger and the racial and cultural diversity of our nation much more limited. This suggests that abortion rates can not be directly tied to cultural or racial factors though they may certainly contribute in some cases.
Further, these 700 thousand women did not just all of a sudden decide it was OK because it was now legal. These numbers point to the conclusion that hundreds of thousands of women were having back alley abortions every year prior to this law. Putting themselves in hazardous situations medically/environmentally/ and emotionally to have this "illegal" procedure done. Where there is a back alley beyond the law malpractice, abuse, and compromising situations abound because there are NO LEGAL SAFEGUARDS and those who are preyed upon have already broken the law to be there and hence have NO LEGAL RECOURSE to combat the wrongs done to them.
The truth of the matter is Abortion is not the problem. Rather it is another symptom of other overarching problems such as abuse, broken homes, poverty, strict cultural or religious expectations of youth, lack of sexual education, etc., coupled along with the foolishness of youth.
So yes, I am a pro-choice liberal. Not because I desire the right for children to be killed, but because I recognize that abortion is an indicator of other ills within our society. Passing a law to ban abortion will only drive it back into the shadows to breed a whole new system of corruption and degradation that will prey upon our children and their friends and allow us to turn a blind eye to the causal factors by not having to face their effects in the open.
Discuss with me and I will happily discuss with you.
To he who calls me a Baby Killer I will call him a blind hypocritical buffoon .
Blind because he can not see the larger forces involved.
Hypocritical because he marches to the drum of protecting children while actively undermining the current protections given to our young women.
And Buffoon because he is so quick to judgment and action and loud vociferous attacks he does not even realize that he is blind and hypocritical.
The Bigfoot
Posted by T e x on :
solid post, big...
ya know what gets me? Who has time/money/energy to go around telling other folk what to with their private lives?
Posted by Highwaychild on :
Rudy Giuliani is a conservative, but he still likes abortion...
Posted by retiredat49 on :
Hannibul...comparing abortion to the death penalty is absurd. Abortion is the killing of an INNOCENT life for convenience, and the death penalty is a form of punishment for a GUILTY criminal...no comparison.
The rest of your statement I completely agree with...but the sad fact is, that in America abortion IS primarily a form of birth control...
quote:Originally posted by Hannibull: i love it when "pro-lifers" are also for the death penalty apparently choosing between life or death is negotiable depending on the situation! But then don't be so pretentious calling yourself "pro-life"
also, it's not that black and white, just because you're not anti-abortion doesn't mean you think abortion is ok. I don't call myself 100% anti-abortion even though I'm very much against it. I believe abortion should ONLY be legal after a thorough medical and psychological evaluation procedure, like (to give an example) when there's a complication and the mother's health and life is in danger during the pregnancy and the child is going to die anyway. I do NOT condone abortion as a method of birth control.
I don't know however what the "right" thing to do is in the case of a rape and a child is conceived... I don't call myself pro-choice, nor pro-life, it's a case by case evaluation, and that's why making it illegal for every situation is simply wrong
Posted by bdgee on :
Big, you dun it agen. A great bit of work.
Long ago, before Roe vs. Wade, I saw the "educated" estimates of illegal abortions, for that day and time" and was appaled and sickend, particularly by the high rate of death and terribly serious damage done to the young women when things went wrong.
Even with abortion legal now, with all the threats and attacks and danger of going to a "legal" clinic for an abortion, many thousands pay the higher cost of illegal abortion. The rates of bad results is as bad for them now as it was then.
The greatest danger seems to be from the fear that is generated by unyielding narrow minded groups more interested in subjecting and supressing the population than they are in th population or what is best for it.
Posted by Lockman on :
quote:Originally posted by jordanreed: lets make abortion illegal..
we need thousands more unwanted kids roaming the streets,looking for ways to prey on actual innocents...
how many thugs are in prison that should of been aborted?..
ever lived in the ghetto?.. i have for 25 years..
sooooo many unwanted,unloved,uncared for.. future criminals, and active criminals, ...
it will always be that way..but it would be much worse were abortion illegal..
i have sat with a woman while she waited to save a life...4- times.. they were relieved.
course, they received less welfare..but, other than that, they were fine.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding your point but are you suggesting Abortion as a crime fighting technique?
Interesting, maybe we could advocate sterilizing some of these women that produce these monsters.
Posted by bdgee on :
One bit, jordanreed, set the hook...
.....LOL.......
Posted by jordanreed on :
is it worth it?..
i thought i made my point. but now that i think of it?.. sterilizing some of these welfare grabbing,crackheaded,unwanted baby,machines, may not be a bad idea.
Posted by retiredat49 on :
The 2 posters immediatly precedeing this one remind me of the main characters in the movie "Dumb And Dumber".
Posted by Lockman on :
quote:Originally posted by jordanreed: is it worth it?..
i thought i made my point. but now that i think of it?.. sterilizing some of these welfare grabbing,crackheaded,unwanted baby,machines, may not be a bad idea.
Yes I believe you did make your point.
Posted by bond006 on :
Hiel mine Fuher
Posted by jordanreed on :
quote:Originally posted by retiredat49: The 2 posters immediatly precedeing this one remind me of the main characters in the movie "Dumb And Dumber".
golly.gee whiz...you sure are a nice guy.
Posted by bdgee on :
And he has the perception and sense of humor to compete with a cedar post.
Posted by unclerudy on :
So here is the real reason why a lot of intelligent people have a problem with Roe V Wade. That was the beginnings of the movement of judges to interpet things that are in the Constitution that are not, such as a woman's right to have an abortion. Roe V. Wade comes down to a simple issue of State's rights, and should not have been a Federal mandate of judges to make new laws from the bench. If everyone remembers their high school government class, there are three branches of the government, and each branch is there to serve a specific purpose. The Legislative branch comes up with laws. The Executive branch signs laws into effect. The Judicial branch judges the Constitutionality of the laws passed. Each branch has a specific job to do, and should not do the job of another branch. There is a system of checks and balances, and all three branches need to do their jobs correctly for the system to work.
So back to the topic of Roe V. Wade. Where in the Constitution does it explictly say that a woman has the right to have an abortion? It doesn't. But because of the overstepping in boundries cause by Roe V. Wade, it has been a wellspring for other "rights" to be found in the Constitution, that have not been written there.
I am an Originalist. I feel that the founding fathers gave us a set of laws that our country is based on, detailing all of our rights and obligations. It also gave us a way to change the Constitution through amendments, which has happened 17 times throughout the history of our country. The majority of the seventeen amendments stem from continued efforts to expand individual civil or political liberties, while a few are concerned with modifying the basic governmental structure drafted in Philadelphia in 1787. No where in the Constitution does it say that judges should be able to say what is and what is not in the document.
Now I am a Conservative because I feel that the USA is the best country in the world. We came from a group of rebel farmers and commoners who didn't want to pay tribute to a king, and came up with the best form of government ever created. The founding fathers wanted a small government, and they wanted it to interfere with their lives as little as possible. The whole purpose of the government is to provide services that cannot be had by private citizens alone, such as national defense, public safety, international trade. It should not be a presence in peoples everyday lives.
Smaller government means less taxes. Less taxes means less waste, and more in my pocket at the end of the day. Anyone who is truly a Conservative will tell you that.
Posted by unclerudy on :
And here is another reason why I am a Conservative.
I feel that everyone can succeed, if they work hard enough for what they want. They job of the government is to give a helping hand along the way, to allow people to better themselves so that they no longer need the help of the government.
Liberals feel the opposite way. They believe the worst in people, that they are doomed to fail, and that only the government can help them, and that they should feel endebted to the government. Liberals don't ever want people to stop relying on the government, because if they succeed, they will not see the need of the government help.
Liberals spread a message of fear, that the help will be taken away, if Liberals are not in power. That government payments will be stopped, and that people will have to EARN a living, instead of subsisting on welfare. Liberals also feel that they are better than everyone, and know what is best for others.
Conservatives spread the message of self reliance. They say that if you work hard, you will succeed. They say that you don't need the government to be successful. Conservatives also know what is best for others. It is just that they know that hard work and effort is best for a person, not being handed freebies and being told that they are worthless.
The real difference between Liberals and Conservatives is one of human value. Liberals don't value individuals much besides their vote and their taxes. Conservatives on the other hand value the individual, and what that person can accomplish on their own.
Posted by glassman on :
Roe V. Wade comes down to a simple issue of State's rights, and should not have been a Federal mandate of judges to make new laws from the bench.
. We came from a group of rebel farmers and commoners who didn't want to pay tribute to a king, and came up with the best form of government ever created. The founding fathers wanted a small government, and they wanted it to interfere with their lives as little as possible. The whole purpose of the government is to provide services that cannot be had by private citizens alone, such as national defense, public safety, international trade. It should not be a presence in peoples everyday lives.
unclerudy, you have misunderstood the principles behind Roe V Wade. the underlying principle is that the govt has no business telling a woman what she can do, or not do with her body. the sad fact is that abortion has been around for thousands of years, it is safer today than it ever was, but it is not new, and isn't it more apropriate that as real conservative? you should respect another persons right to privacy?
there were absolutely no drug laws written into the constitution either... you could buy opium and cocaine here in the US legally for many years, and yes the founding fathers grew marijuana on their plantations, or should i say? their slaves did...
why do you CALL yourself a conservative?
"liberals" and "conservative" platforms have BOTH set up double standards within their "planks"
Posted by unclerudy on :
I forgot to acknowledge that I believe in economic conservatism and strong private property rights, along with the rule of law. We have a system in which unjust laws can and should be abolished. And I feel that judicial activism is the worst potential outcome of our system, which has its roots in Roe V. Wade, which opened the floodgates for an ever increasing amount of the vile practice. If Roe V. Wade was to be overturned, and given back to the states to decide if abortion should be legal or not, it would set a great precedent to overturn other so called "rights" that have been interpreted into the Constitution. And it would hopefully turn the tide on judicial activism.
Again. I feel that abortion should be a states rights issue, and not a Constitutional one. Show me where in the Constitution where a woman has the right to an abortion, and I will agree with you. The right to privacy is also not anywhere in the Constitution, and I don't understand how having a medical procedure which terminates a pregnancy has anything to do with privacy. The government dictates what happens when any form of life is taken, at any stage of the life cycle. But is should not be a right given from the Constitution. It should an option to have a medical procedure.
Posted by glassman on :
States Rights were sorta settled with the Civil War. They don't have many.
Do you want to go back to the Civil War to redecide how States Rights work?
I am conservative, i believe in individual rights, and less govt interference too... the problem i have with todays "conservatives" is that they all seem to be telling everybody else what they can or can't do...
I am not pro-abortion, but i also know that each person has their own individual relationship with God (or not).
Posted by dinner42 on :
Is it still a free country?
anyone care to answer?
If you want an abortion, go to Mexico. If you want to have a child, then have a child. Its your life, you decide.
Live and let Live...
I have my personal beliefs, but that only matters and I only have control over it when I am in the voting booth and even then I only have a shot at getting what I want. So its a give and take a left and a right world here in the good old US of A. It isn't a perfect world, thats for sure, but we must keep up the fight and stand for whats right and back and forth and work that constitution and exercise our freedom and screem and yell at eachother and debate till we are blue in the face and on and on.. Thats the crux of the matter. It keeps us busy and busy from killing each other like in Iraq, where some simply can not figure out how to live with eachother without killing eachother. Killing is easy it requires very little thought and very little intellegence,(define intellegence) living together as humanity is the difficult part and most rewarding way to live. We have a long way to go..
Posted by bdgee on :
unclerudy,
Ok, I get your point. You are a conservative. Also, you are a very very verbose and wordy conservative.
But do you get that most of what you are claiming to be truth is the basest sort of wild speculation? I doubt it, to tell the truth.
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
No, it is not still a free country.
quote:Originally posted by dinner42: Is it still a free country?
anyone care to answer?
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
What about the men?
quote:Originally posted by Lockman: maybe we could advocate sterilizing some of these women that produce these monsters.
Posted by T e x on :
quote:Originally posted by Gordon Bennett: No, it is not still a free country.
quote:Originally posted by dinner42: Is it still a free country?
anyone care to answer?
You know...
a really good question is this:
What's your definition/criteria for a free country?
suggestions: 1) travel w/o passport 2) get paid for work 3-a) more or less, feel safe 3-b) more or less, feel children are safe 4) fish off a bridge 5) fish off a bridge w/o threat of mercury poisoning ?
OK...you go
Posted by glassman on :
suggestions: 1) travel w/o passport 2) get paid for work 3-a) more or less, feel safe 3-b) more or less, feel children are safe 4) fish off a bridge 5) fish off a bridge w/o threat of mercury poisoning ? isn't that China?
Long lines, short tempers at passport office
By Michelle S. Keller Tribune staff reporter Published March 20, 2007, 1:07 PM CDT
Prospective travelers attempting to get a passport at the Kluczynski Federal Building today responded to long lines with short tempers, as the rush of spring-break travelers coupled with a surge in passport applications resulting from new restrictions on travel have made for nightmarish conditions.
and? no! the Kluczynski Federal Building is not next door to the Kremlin Posted by glassman on :
Freedom: (it's disappearing fast)
The right to bear arms. The right to legal (and privileged, or confidential) counsel, and the right to not incriminate oneself. The right to confidential health care. The right to eat or drink or smoke anything you want. The right to privacy, including telephone and mail. yada yada... too many people are settling for the dregs of freedom.
Posted by T e x on :
quote:Originally posted by glassman: Freedom: (it's disappearing fast)
The right to bear arms. The right to legal (and privileged, or confidential) counsel, and the right to not incriminate oneself. The right to confidential health care. The right to eat or drink or smoke anything you want. The right to privacy, including telephone and mail. yada yada... too many people are settling for the dregs of freedom.
not a bad list...and, in fact, a hell of a good start...
However, I'm not looking so much for *bullet points* from the Constitution, but more descriptive, more anecdotal if you will...
Posted by glassman on :
i'm not sure i get your drift...
freedom to me means i can sit inside my own house and not get burned out by the ATF
no-knock warrants? sheesh... Thomas Jefferson is crying... or?
when i am arrested? i can apppear before a judge (habeus corpus) and get speedy trial..
d'oh.... that's gone now too....(Padilla)
and any people that are crying for this stuff call themselves conservative (shame on you) Posted by jordanreed on :
freedom...do what you want as long as no one else is hurt or bothered?
Posted by bdgee on :
jordanreed stole my idea.
Posted by bdgee on :
Oh, and I almost forgot.
Not being expected to meddle in or even know what others do (including religion).
Posted by T e x on :
quote:Originally posted by glassman: i'm not sure i get your drift...
freedom to me means i can sit inside my own house and not get burned out by the ATF
no-knock warrants? sheesh... Thomas Jefferson is crying... or?
when i am arrested? i can apppear before a judge (habeus corpus) and get speedy trial..
d'oh.... that's gone now too....(Padilla)
and any people that are crying for this stuff call themselves conservative (shame on you)
ya... more like this! Anybody can make curtains from flags (ie, flag-drape) ...
what you're saying is Waco bothers you... etc. etc.
to the point that whom the US Gumment calls terrorists down there in Cuba...need to be brought into open court?
don't get me wrong--*I* want the judge, too; at some point, though...I don't want my 14-year-old daughter runnin' off with branch ruffians...whose privacy is protected
Posted by glassman on :
I don't want my 14-year-old daughter runnin' off with branch ruffians...whose privacy is protected
i don't either, but there is a way to process the law that protects freedom, and there is a way that destroys it...
Koresh coulda been picked up in town..he wasn't hiding...
and? religious freedom isn't exclusive to "organised religion"... my understanding is that Koresh was a child molestor... and deserved to be prosecuted for it.
the ATF isn't about child molesting...
Gitmo? i don't think is a constitutional issue..people picked up overseas and never brought here don't have US Constitutional Freedom/Rights. Padilla? He is a US citizen taken on US soil and was held in a South Carolina Navy Brig, and other US places, without trial... the charges have been changed numerous times...
Posted by T e x on :
quote:Originally posted by jordanreed: freedom...do what you want as long as no one else is hurt or bothered?
seems simple, to you and me and a few others...
but then defining "hurt" or "bothered" become problems/questions...
Posted by jordanreed on :
always will be...
Posted by T e x on :
quote:Originally posted by glassman: I don't want my 14-year-old daughter runnin' off with branch ruffians...whose privacy is protected
i don't either, but there is a way to process the law that protects freedom, and there is a way that destroys it...
Koresh coulda been picked up in town..he wasn't hiding...
and? religious freedom isn't exclusive to "organised religion"... my understanding is that Koresh was a child molestor... and deserved to be prosecuted for it.
the ATF isn't about child molesting...
Gitmo? i don't think is a constitutional issue..people picked up overseas and never brought here don't have US Constitutional Freedom/Rights. Padilla? He is a US citizen taken on US soil and was held in a South Carolina Navy Brig, and other US places, without trial... the charges have been changed numerous times...
quote:i don't either, but there is a way to process the law that protects freedom, and there is a way that destroys it...
agreed...
that *seems* to be the problem, does it not?
one thing I'm asking is, how is *that* being witnessed?
Posted by unclerudy on :
In order to have Constitutional rights, you have to be a US citizen. That is what the Constitution is, an enumeration of rights for citizens. Try going to another country, such as Germany, France, Poland, Saudi Arabia, Isreal, or any other country besides the US and try to vote, ask for due process if you sneek in illegally, try to own property, or some places, depending on your sex, to drive a car. See how they react when you ask for your "rights" over there. You have none, besides what has been agreed upon by treaties between the US and the country you are in. In Mexico, unless you are a citizen, you cannot own property. They SHOOT people who sneek in on their southern border.
Posted by bdgee on :
"In order to have Constitutional rights, you have to be a US citizen."
Thatis a bluntly false statement.
The constitution does not grant the Bill of Rights to cirtizens nor does it present rights to "the people". It specifies that the government may not deny them to "the people" not "the citizens".
Even an illegal alien, arrested for a crime, has the right to council and a fair trial, not because the Constitution states that he has those rights, but because it says the Government cannot deny them.
I am best protected by having a government that cannot absolve your rights (even though, no doubt, you deserve the worst.....lol}.
And Frenchman in Tulsa, Oklahoma can burn the flag, because Congress can make no law..... Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
Far too many people...
quote:Originally posted by T e x: ya know what gets me? Who has time/money/energy to go around telling other folk what to with their private lives?
Posted by The Bigfoot on :
As a liberal I believe that we as a nation should spend money to cover basic necessities for the people within our borders.
I think everyone should have a place to sleep, basic nutrition, basic health care, and as much education as they can handle.
I think that a good chunk of those on the streets are folks with mental/emotional problems that have no one to care for them and have fallen through the cracks of the system and do not have the personal faculties to "pull themselves up" or "work hard and succeed."
I agree welfare is mismanaged. Cigarettes, ice cream, tv diners, and Cheezit’s are amenities, they have nothing to do with basic nutrition and welfare money should not be used for such.
I believe it is not for our government to spend billions fighting the war on drugs in other countries. Secure our borders and don't let them in if they are such a problem but spend the dollars in house, not abroad.
I think we need a secure southern border. I also think that the current illegal alien situation is due to years of negligence and our government should be accountable for that.
You are right; the difference in my mind, between liberal and conservative is one of human value. I value all humans. The conservative party (from what I can see) only assigns value to those who have the capacity to be productive.
Posted by bdgee on :
"The conservative party (from what I can see) only assigns value to those who have the capacity to be productive."
Or those born to wealth, whether or not they have the capacity or willingness to be productive.
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
Great thoughts. It's sad that compassion and human values are now "liberal."
quote:Originally posted by The Bigfoot: As a liberal I believe that we as a nation should spend money to cover basic necessities for the people within our borders.
I think everyone should have a place to sleep, basic nutrition, basic health care, and as much education as they can handle.
I think that a good chunk of those on the streets are folks with mental/emotional problems that have no one to care for them and have fallen through the cracks of the system and do not have the personal faculties to "pull themselves up" or "work hard and succeed."
I agree welfare is mismanaged. Cigarettes, ice cream, tv diners, and Cheezit’s are amenities, they have nothing to do with basic nutrition and welfare money should not be used for such.
I believe it is not for our government to spend billions fighting the war on drugs in other countries. Secure our borders and don't let them in if they are such a problem but spend the dollars in house, not abroad.
I think we need a secure southern border. I also think that the current illegal alien situation is due to years of negligence and our government should be accountable for that.
You are right; the difference in my mind, between liberal and conservative is one of human value. I value all humans. The conservative party (from what I can see) only assigns value to those who have the capacity to be productive.
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
Now watch the thread sink like a stone...
Posted by IWISHIHAD on :
Quote: The Bigfoot,
"think that a good chunk of those on the streets are folks with mental/emotional problems that have no one to care for them and have fallen through the cracks of the system and do not have the personal faculties to "pull themselves up" or "work hard and succeed." _________________________________________________
Bottom line it is mostly lack of money caused from lack of jobs, although some do have major mental problems, we seem to want to feel that is the reason for being homeless. _________________________________________________ Article By Jocelyn Y Stewart
But in 1996, a comprehensive study on homelessness by the Census Bureau (news - web sites), co-sponsored by the VA and other federal agencies, offered a disturbing look at the men and women who once wore uniforms.
Although 47% of homeless veterans served during the Vietnam era, the study found, soldiers from as far back as World War II and as recent as the Persian Gulf War (news - web sites) also ended up homeless.
It is impossible to know exactly how many U.S. veterans are on the streets, but experts estimate that about 300,000 of them are homeless on any given night and that about half a million experience homelessness at some point during the year. _________________________________________________
This is just a small part of this article, but a very important part, that many forget about. _________________________________________________
Annual Homeless Assessment Report (AHAR)
HUD’s Annual Homeless Assessment Report to Congress measures homelessness over time, allowing researchers to expand their body of knowledge beyond more limited estimates in the past. HUD unveiled new data from Continuums of Care (CoC) that indicates 754,000 persons are living in emergency shelter, transitional housing, and on the streets on any given night. In addition, data from Homeless Management Information Systems (HMIS), available for the first time, indicated that 704,000 persons used emergency shelter and transitional housing during a three-month period (February-April) in 2005.
“This first-of-its kind study is a huge leap forward in our understanding of not only how many people are homeless, but also what their needs are,” said HUD Secretary Alphonso Jackson. “We’ve got to remember that behind these numbers are people – individuals and families who are struggling to survive. This first report and those that follow will help us gauge how well our efforts, as well as those of our partners at the state and local level and the nonprofit sector, are working to help the homeless. We all must work in concert together to help our nation’s most vulnerable.”
Posted by a surfer on :
UNBELIEVABLE!
Shocking Senatorial Votes
Never argue with an idiot; they'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.
The following senators voted against making English the official language of America :
Now, the following are the senators who voted to give illegal aliens Social Security benefits. They are grouped by home state. If a state is not listed, there was no voting representative.
Alaska : Stevens (R) Arizona : McCain (R) Arkansas : Lincoln (D) Pryor (D) California : Boxer (D) Feinstein (D) Colorado : Salazar (D) Connecticut : Dodd (D) Lieberman (D) Delaware : Biden (D) Carper (D) Florida : Martinez (R) Hawaii : Akaka (D) Inouye (D) Illinois : Durbin (D) Obama (D) Indiana : Bayh (D) Lugar (R) Iowa : Harkin (D) Kansas : Brownback (R) Louisiana : Landrieu (D) Maryland : Mikulski (D) Sarbanes (D) Massachusetts : Kennedy (D) Kerry (D) Montana : Baucus (D) Nebraska : Hagel (R) Nevada : Reid (D) New Jersey : Lautenberg (D) Menendez (D) New Mexico : Bingaman (D) New York : Clinton (D) Schumer (D) North Dakota : Dorgan (D) Ohio : DeWine (R) Voinovich(R) Oregon: Wyden (D) Pennsylvania: Specter (R) Rhode Island: Chafee (R) Reed (D) South Carolina: Graham (R) South Dakota: Johnson (D) Vermont: Jeffords (I) Leahy (D) Washington: Cantwell (D) Murray (D) West Virginia : Rockefeller (D), by Not Voting Wisconsin: Feingold (D) Kohl (D)
THE ENTIRE POPULATION OF THE UNITED STATES NEEDS TO KNOW THIS INFORMATION, UNLESS THEY DON'T MIND SHARING THEIR SOCIAL SECURITY WITH FOREIGN WORKERS WHO DIDN'T PAY IN A DIME.
Posted by IWISHIHAD on :
The part about illegal aliens and social security is rather interesting. I thought that you have to pay into the system to get a percentage of money out. I know in some cases, illegal aliens do put into the social security system, but i am not sure how medicare would work, which is part of that same system(That being a full benefit no matter how much is paid into the system, i think). I would love to see how the document is worded that they are voting on to see if there is a way that all illegals could possibly get social security and medicare or if it is just the one's that paid into the system.
Posted by T e x on :
quote:Originally posted by IWISHIHAD: The part about illegal aliens and social security is rather interesting. I thought that you have to pay into the system to get a percentage of money out. I know in some cases, illegal aliens do put into the social security system, but i am not sure how medicare would work, which is part of that same system(That being a full benefit no matter how much is paid into the system, i think). I would love to see how the document is worded that they are voting on to see if there is a way that all illegals could possibly get social security and medicare or if it is just the one's that paid into the system.
NOBODY from Texas?
lol...
Posted by IWISHIHAD on :
I don't see anyone from California... But we don't have any illegal people in our state. Posted by T e x on :
quote:California : Boxer (D) Feinstein (D)
Posted by IWISHIHAD on :
I must have missed them. Are they from California?
Posted by T e x on :
Hop-skotchin' jeosephat...I'm looking at the same list you are...a few posts up, yes?
Posted by IWISHIHAD on :
You mean that list that shows Boxer and Feinstein. I had a little run in with their offices a few years ago, i think they are from Arizona. Posted by T e x on :
you'd know better than I do ...
give 'em hell
*************
Hereabouts, we got a sayin':
"Fight 'em till Hell freezes over, then Fight 'Em on the Ice!"
Posted by bdgee on :
"Never argue with an idiot; they'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience."
Now, the following are the senators who voted to give illegal aliens Social Security benefits. They are grouped by home state. If a state is not listed, there was no voting representative.
Alaska : Stevens (R) Arizona : McCain (R) Arkansas : Lincoln (D) Pryor (D) California : Boxer (D) Feinstein (D) Colorado : Salazar (D) Connecticut : Dodd (D) Lieberman (D) Delaware : Biden (D) Carper (D) Florida : Martinez (R) Hawaii : Akaka (D) Inouye (D) Illinois : Durbin (D) Obama (D) Indiana : Bayh (D) Lugar (R) Iowa : Harkin (D) Kansas : Brownback (R) Louisiana : Landrieu (D) Maryland : Mikulski (D) Sarbanes (D) Massachusetts : Kennedy (D) Kerry (D) Montana : Baucus (D) Nebraska : Hagel (R) Nevada : Reid (D) New Jersey : Lautenberg (D) Menendez (D) New Mexico : Bingaman (D) New York : Clinton (D) Schumer (D) North Dakota : Dorgan (D) Ohio : DeWine (R) Voinovich(R) Oregon: Wyden (D) Pennsylvania: Specter (R) Rhode Island: Chafee (R) Reed (D) South Carolina: Graham (R) South Dakota: Johnson (D) Vermont: Jeffords (I) Leahy (D) Washington: Cantwell (D) Murray (D) West Virginia : Rockefeller (D), by Not Voting Wisconsin: Feingold (D) Kohl (D)
THE ENTIRE POPULATION OF THE UNITED STATES NEEDS TO KNOW THIS INFORMATION, UNLESS THEY DON'T MIND SHARING THEIR SOCIAL SECURITY WITH FOREIGN WORKERS WHO DIDN'T PAY IN A DIME.
Quite possibly the best post ever!
Posted by bdgee on :
So?
Are you proposing we collect the tax from them with the intention of never giving any of it back?
It's supposed to be a payrooll tax, supplied as an investment, not a gift to the treasury.
Posted by bond006 on :
Look they are paying in it is easy to say the hell with them and look smug.
But they are hear they work and most of them get the taxes and such deducted from there pay checks.
So they should get the return if they qualify.
Most employers are using them and it would not surprise me if the deductions are only a paper one and entry the taxs that are shown as a deduction go right in these filthy criminal employers pockect. Anyway I thought we were going to start to put these bozo scum employers in jail or deport the bums.
One can only hope and pray the law to be carried out . Until that day we will have to live with the smell of treason in the air
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
Has anyone else noticed that these "Limbaugh lovers" are dumber than a bag of hammers?
quote:Originally posted by urnso77: Quite possibly the best post ever!
Posted by urnso77 on :
Bite me Gordon. Rush is the man!
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
RUSH LIMBAUGH : A HISTORY
Political commentator, radio host, college drop-out, alleged closet homosexual, and, as recently revealed, synthetic heroin drug addict, Rush Hudson Limbaugh III is probably the best known neocon personality in American radio.
Born in Cape Girardeau, MO, in 1951, Limbaugh spent many of his formative years pursuing a career in radio.
After using his pilonidal cyst - a congenital birth defect - to avoid military service in the Vietnam War, Limbaugh briefly worked for radio stations in Pittsburgh, PA and Kansas City, MO. Fired from both jobs, he worked as a wiener salesman for the KC Royals baseball franchise, eventually slithering back into the radio business.
In 1971 Limbaugh attended Southeastern Missouri University, where, according to reports, he had a brief but heated affair with Elliot Sanders. So gay is Limbaugh, guarantees Sanders, that, "none of his marriages was ever consummated."
Many of Limbaugh's fans staunchly deny the man's alleged homosexuality, and Limbaugh himself says the rumors are politically motivated lies. However, one is forced to doubt Limbaugh, who has a history of denying and balking at rumors that are later revealed to be true. His pilonidal cyst, his pseudonymous career in Pittsburgh radio, and his addiction to Oxycontin are all facts which Limbaugh initially denied or concealed.
After more failed stints with Missouri radio stations Limbaugh moved to Sacramento, CA, where he met and became "friends" with Norm Woodruff, a flamboyant, openly gay man with a great deal of influence in the local radio scene. Woodruff, who mentored Limbaugh in the ways of affluence and elitism (traits Rush mocks today), would later died of AIDS.
Through his ties to Woodruff Limbaugh was given Morton Downey, Jr.'s spot on KFBK News Talk 1530 a.m. Within twelve months Limbaugh had become the most popular radio personality in Sacramento. In 1988 he signed on with EFM Media Management, working from New York City.
For a short while Limbaugh plateaued, until the success and enormous popularity of a Democratic president provided him with a reason to whine.
The popularity and charisma of President Clinton enabled Limbaugh's hate-filled show to appeal to millions of bitter American conservatives. Limbaugh's unique combination of prevarication and histrionics provided a sense of unity for otherwise incompatible demographics, such as Klansmen and Wall Street stock brokers.
By the mid-90's Limbaugh's promoters had co-opted his show to enough nationwide syndicates to claim Limbaugh was the "most popular radio personality" in the country. Technically this was false. However, the free handout out of Limbaugh's show to any station that wanted it resulted in Limbaugh being the most listened-to man on a.m. radio.
Inspired by Clinton-induced vitriol, Limbaugh paid a ghostwriter to author for him See, I Told You So (1992), Nanny Nanny, Boo Boo (1993), and I'm Rubber. You're Glue. Whatever You Say Bounces off Me and Sticks to You (1994).
After miserably failing on television, Limbaugh spiraled into depression, eventually becoming addicted to pain pills prescribed to him for his pilonidal cyst (a.k.a. "Butt Boil"). For nearly eight years Limbaugh abused Hydrocodone, a synthetic, stronger version of heroin.
In effect, Limbaugh spent nearly a decade stoned off his bleeding backside, and ultimately built up his tolerance to levels requiring dozens of pills per day in order to, as Limbaugh once confided in his maid, "get my buzz on."
A textbook example of the damning effects of drug abuse, Limbaugh's addiction precipitated a swift drop in weight, deafness in both ears, and a marked decline in mental faculties.
He also became increasingly paranoid - requiring his provider to meet him at night behind restaurants, next to dumpsters, where he'd hand over cigar boxes stuffed with "cabbage" (cash) in exchange for some "little baby blues" (pills). Limbaugh's desperation peaked in 2003, when he groped his provider in an attempt to check her for a wire tap.
By late 2003 the whole world knew of Limbaugh's drug addiction, though by virtue of their lack of character the majority of his fan base remained loyal listeners. Limbaugh's show remained popular, despite the rapid rise of Liberal Talk Show host Al Franken and the dogged attempts by the Bush administration to shut down long time talk show staple Howard Stern.
In May 2004 Rush's third wife, Marta, grew tired of never having sex with her allegedly closeted homosexual of a husband, and so asked for a divorce. Limbaugh complied after his desperate wife agreed to never reveal the true nature of Rush's sexual perversion.
you make me sick for posting such garbage. The pure hatred on the left for Rush Limbaugh is appauling. But I guess if I was a liberal I wouldn't like him much either. The best part of that post was the part about Al Franken.
" Limbaugh's show remained popular, despite the rapid rise of Liberal Talk Show host Al Franken"
Isn't that the show on the bankrupt Air America station that no one listens to?
Posted by glassman on :
rushie limbuggher is an embarassment to thinking conservatives..
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
This from a man who can't even correctly quote Phish lyrics.
quote:Originally posted by urnso77: Throw that pumpkin in the sea, unless you think that pumpkin holds your destiny
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
True. You can easily separate the true conservatives from the "conservatives" by simply asking their opinion of Rush.
quote:Originally posted by glassman: rushie limbuggher is an embarassment to thinking conservatives..
Posted by glassman on :
Our armed forces shouldn’t be over there - they’re good at killing people and blowing things up, not peace-keeping.
- Rush Limbaugh on Clinton’s deployment of troops to Bosnia.
LOL... a hypocrite to nth degree..
Feminism was established to allow unattractive women easier access to the mainstream. - Rush Limbaugh
Liberal Democrats are inexorably opposed to tax cuts, because tax cuts give people more power, and take away from the role of government. Rush Limbaugh
Posted by bdgee on :
quote:Originally posted by glassman: rushie limbuggher is an embarassment to thinking conservatives..
He is an embarrassment to thinking; mostly a lying and hypoticritical fool, demonstrating that a huge fat ugly retard can be a butt boil through and through.
He and any that champion the quasi-male garbage mouth of the far right turn the stomack of honest conservatives and liberals (and everyone in between) alike.
Posted by urnso77 on :
its not phish gordon its ween. time to go listen to rush.
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
It's Phish and Ween. They both did a version of it.
Go listen to Rush...
Posted by urnso77 on :
and ween was the original. trust me I'm the biggest ween fan of them all. Are you a ween fan? If so, we may actually have something in common
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
Have you heard Stephan Smith's: "The Bell" with Pete Seeger, Dean Ween and Mary Harris?
That's always the better mood.
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
Battle Hymn of the Republicans (to the tune of the Battle Hymn of the Republic)
Mine Eyes have seen the bungling of that stumbling moron Bush; He has blathered all the drivel that the neo-cons can push; He has lost sight of all reason 'cause his head is up his tush; The Doofus marches on.
I have heard him butcher syntax like a kindergarten fool; There is warranted suspicion that he never went to school; Should we fault him for the policies -- or is he just their tool? The lies keep piling on.
Glory! Glory! How he'll Screw Ya'! Glory! Glory! How he'll Screw Ya'! Glory! Glory! How he'll Screw Ya'! His wreckage will live on.
I have seen him cut the taxes of the billionaires' lone heir; As he spends another zillion on an aircraft carrier; Let the smokestacks keep polluting -- do we really need clean air? The surplus is now gone.
Glory! Glory! How he'll Screw Ya'! Glory! Glory! How he'll Screw Ya'! Glory! Glory! How he'll Screw Ya'! Your safety net is gone!
Now he's got a mighty hankerin' to bomb a prostrate state; Though the whole world knows its crazy -- and the U.N. says to wait; When he doesn't have the evidence, "We must prevaricate." Diplomacy is done!
Oh, a trumped-up war is excellent; we have no moral bounds; Should the reasons be disputed, we'll just make up other grounds; Enraging several billions -- to his brainlessness redounds; The Doofus marches on!
Glory! Glory! How he'll Screw Ya'! Glory! Glory! How he'll Screw Ya'! Glory! Glory! How he'll Screw Ya'! THIS...DOO...FUS...MAR...CHES...ON
Posted by bdgee on :
True, true, true, true, true, true, true, . . .
Posted by glassman on :
Bush impeachment on the table, Hagel says From the Associated Press March 26, 2007
WASHINGTON — Some lawmakers who complain that President Bush is flouting Congress and the public with his Iraq policies are considering impeachment an option, a Republican senator said Sunday.
Sen. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, a member of the Foreign Relations Committee and a frequent critic of the war, stopped short of calling for Bush's impeachment.
But he made clear that some lawmakers viewed that as an option should Bush choose to push ahead despite public sentiment against the war.
"Any president who says 'I don't care' or 'I will not respond to what the people of this country are saying about Iraq or anything else' or 'I don't care what the Congress does, I am going to proceed' — if a president really believes that, then there are … ways to deal with that," Hagel said on ABC's "This Week."
The White House had no immediate reaction to Hagel's comments.
Hagel, who is considering a presidential run, said he was bothered by Bush's apparent disregard of congressional sentiment on Iraq, such as his decision to send additional troops.
The senator said that lawmakers now were ready to stand up to the president when necessary. In the April edition of Esquire magazine, Hagel described Bush as someone who didn't believe he was accountable to anyone.
"You can impeach him, and before this is over, you might see calls for his impeachment," Hagel told the magazine.
BTW? Hagel is a Real Republican...
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
If you can be impeached for a hummer, surely you can be impeached for...
Oh, what's the use?
Posted by bdgee on :
I remind all right thinking Americans, impeachment of Bush by the House and conviction of Bush by the Senate, grants us Pres Dickie.
Posted by Upside on :
quote:Originally posted by bdgee: I remind all right thinking Americans, impeachment of Bush by the House and conviction of Bush by the Senate, grants us Pres Dickie.
Now there's something I agree with you on bdgee. Who's the lesser of two evils?
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
We already have president Dickie, so what's the problem?
Anyway, impeachment doesn't have to stop with Bush...
Posted by bdgee on :
I knew you would.
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
You knew I would what?
Posted by bdgee on :
Two post back, Gord....
Posted by bdgee on :
The only answer is simultaneous charges and convictions of the two, so that we get President Nancy.
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
Ah, I get it now. Sorry.
I guess I still have this futile dream of seeing Bush, Cheney and Rove being led away from the White House in cuffs...
quote:Originally posted by bdgee: Two post back, Gord....
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
Now you're talking!!! Yes!
quote:Originally posted by bdgee: The only answer is simultaneous charges and convictions of the two, so that we get President Nancy.
Posted by bdgee on :
Saw some female republican spokeswoman on TV tonight and said the House can't impeach dubya because the only reasons are high crimes and misdemeaners.
Are those fools really so ignoraant that they can believe that war crimes are not high crimes and comspiracy to violate the Constitution by usurping the independence of the Judiciary is not a high misdemeanor.
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
These were the same people that were screaming about Clinton. Yep, hypocrisy abounds.
One other thought...
Why on Earth would a woman be a Republican Spokesperson?
To me it doesn't seem that far removed from an African-American doing infomercials for the Klan.
Posted by bdgee on :
They have both black guys and black gals acting as spokes persons for th GOP.
I guess for money you can buy anyone or anything.
Posted by urnso77 on :
Kinda like pocket change to those guys......
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
"I have no views," Mickey Melchiondo, known as Dean Ween, said in a philosophical moment. "I am way too stupid. I have no strong feelings about anything. I'm really into television and the computer. I believe everything I see on TV and read on the Internet."
quote:Originally posted by urnso77: I'm the biggest ween fan of them all. Are you a ween fan?
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
This thread is now five pages long. Has anyone given a good reason why they are a conservative yet?
Posted by bdgee on :
There are GOOD reasons?
Posted by Highwaychild on :
as a mod. I'd say partial birth abortion sucks, oh, that's right, that's just the babys' BRAIN that gets sucked out...
I mean, now Madonna and Angelina just have go to go to so far and away away places to adopt a baby...
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
An average IQ requirement in order to vote would clearly bring about a swift end to the GOP.
Posted by T e x on :
off topic, I know, but in an off-topic thread, I'll take my chances:
This IQ thing reminds me that I believe peeps should go through a basic training course before being allowed to trade...
Posted by Munchkin Man on :
Greetings To All:
Indeed, there is a correlation between intelligence and political party affiliation.
The vast majority of the mathematicians in the United States vote Republican.
And so do most physicians.
Best Wishes,
Munchkin Man
Posted by urnso77 on :
Munchkin Man FTW!! Posted by glassman on :
quote:Originally posted by Munchkin Man: Greetings To All:
Indeed, there is a correlation between intelligence and political party affiliation.
The vast majority of the mathematicians in the United States vote Republican.
And so do most physicians.
Best Wishes,
Munchkin Man
LOL... munchie! i've missed ya man...
of course physicians vote GOP... they have the strongest labor union ever created on earth.. the AMA is the only big business that gets to bill you after the service and never posts the "menu" at the door.....
as for mathemeticians voting for the GOP? i would like to remind you that there are lies, damn lies, and then there's statitstics Posted by bdgee on :
quote:Originally posted by Munchkin Man: Greetings To All:
Indeed, there is a correlation between intelligence and political party affiliation.
The vast majority of the mathematicians in the United States vote Republican.
And so do most physicians.
Best Wishes,
Munchkin Man
Where did you come by that bit of bull, MM? Probably, as is your habit, you are blowing out things your system isn't able to fully digest.
I know you are a far righwinger and a bushie, with the inborn proclivity to fudge facts to make your limited views seem to be rational, but I doubt you would recognize a mathematician if you were in a room full of them. And I know that actual surveys of mathematicians disprove your claim about them.
The vast majority of mathematicians are solidly democratic (maybe more solidly anti-republican). On that subject, I know of what speak, having been one for a lifetime and knowing more mathematicians, personally as well as professionally, than most people have ever heard of. There are rare republicans in the ranks, but it is quite rare (I actually know a couple of those).
I cannot speak for physicians, generally, as I don't know that many, but, since they are way too often more concerned with collecting fees than curing ills, I can see that they might vote for republicans.
MM, you need to confine your pronouncements to areas where you have some experience or knowledge. I don't know what that might be, but it clearly doesn't include mathematics or mathematicians.
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
And so do the vast majority of those that refer to themselves in the third person.
quote:Originally posted by Munchkin Man: Greetings To All:
Indeed, there is a correlation between intelligence and political party affiliation.
The vast majority of the mathematicians in the United States vote Republican.
And so do most physicians.
Best Wishes,
Munchkin Man
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
"As people do better, they start voting like Republicans -- unless they have too much education and vote Democratic, which proves there can be too much of a good thing."
-Karl Rove
Posted by Lockman on :
quote:Originally posted by Gordon Bennett: "As people do better, they start voting like Republicans -- unless they have too much education and vote Democratic, which proves there can be too much of a good thing."
-Karl Rove
Geez who writes his stuff? John Kerry
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
Karl Rove actually writes his own...
Posted by Lockman on :
I wonder if he was refering to NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND?
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
He was talking about the voting decisions of rich people vs. those of smart people.
Posted by bdgee on :
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)