Fred's Right

2

202typical

Long Time Member
Messages
3,123
Prophets of doom are wrong--we can't cut-and-run

In every war, the prophets of doom reach for the same old phrase book: Every significant battle facing the US has been "another Vietnam." But just as these voices were wrong in 1991, wrong in 2001, wrong in 2003, so too are they wrong again today.

Let's not minimize the challenges. Our nation faces a formidable enemy, in Iraq & elsewhere. Angry Baathists, fanatical Islamists and opportunistic terrorists from across the Mideast have perpetrated attacks against US soldiers, US allies, & against the Iraqi people themselves. Our resolve as a nation is being tested.

It's obvious we can't afford to cut and run. Even the most partisan critics admit as much. However, by invoking Vietnam, they are in effect predicting a US defeat & pullout. Even as they give lip service to winning, they foment a sense of despair, instead of offering a strategy for victory.

Let's be blunt here: For many of President's critics there is a domestic constituency to be won from failure abroad. They are campaigning on defeat ]

Fred D. Thompson
 
I sure wish Fred would hurry and officially declare he is running for President. He can only make the Republican side stronger. He is the anti-Hillbilliary.

PRO
 
Too late, the republicans are jumping ship like rats. seems they'ld like a shot at re election for some reason. if Thompson stays with a pro war position he's dead in the water, his chances are dying with the war. one thing about it , his holding back shows he's not dumb enough to start a run he can't win.

Giulianni looks as if he'll get the nomination anyway, Thompson can't pick his nose until the last second and then have enough time to explain all the dirt his republican rivals will throw at him. I'm not crazy about Giulianni and I don't think he can win in the general, but he's better than Hillary and her probable running mate Obama.
 
Let's be blunt here: For many of the President's supporters there is a domestic constituency to be won from continuing our war abroad regardless of failure. They are campaigning on fear in hopes of removing the spotlight from this deceitful administration.

In every war? I guess we won't include the Revolutionary War, Spanish-American War, WWI, or WWII. Nobody mobilized or supported any of those pointless disasters.

Angry Baathist? Wow, how did that happen? Fanatical Islamist? So when a person is an Islamist and bombs something they are fanatical. But when a self-pronounced christian bombs an abortion clinic they are simply pro-life...interesting.

Opportunistic terrorists? Who do you blame for allowing them the opportunity in the first place in a country that cannot secure it's own borders or airports? If only we had some form of government responsible to protect our citizenry and borders, thus denying any opportunity for terrorists.

So let's review: We cannot tolerate these opportunistic terrorists attacking the Iraqi people. Which people the Sunni's that are attacking us or the Shiite that are attacking us? Maybe it's the Sunni's attacking the Shiite, no wait, maybe it's the Shiite attacking the Shiite? Nevermind it must be the Sunni's that are attacking Al Queda.

It appears we are the only ones allowed to dictate the proper attacks on the Iraqi people based on such things as current wind speed, mortar, or bullet direction.

It's obvious we can't afford to cut and run. After this fiasco that's just 2 of many things this country will no longer be able to afford. Who needs infra-structure, jobs programs, protected borders, strong levies, or health benefits for our National Guard veterans?

Fred seems to know alot about lip service as he demonstrates nothing but lip service while offering Zero strategy for victory.

Even the most partisan of critics admit as much...Name one Fred.

This is a crying shame because I have always had alot of admiration for Fred, but this load of dung he's slinging along with that nasty skank wife has left me somewhat saddened and
disappointed.

Just once I would like to hear the official number in terms of american bodies and tax-payer booty that will be enough to convince the war drummers it ain't working. I'm a big boy, just tell me, is it 10,000 american dead and 2 Trillion or 20,000 american dead and 3 Trillion? I would love to know just so I can continue to properly support this war inaccordance with proper GOP guidelines.

How many will be enough in dollars, injuries, and deaths until the blind followers will pull their hands out of George and Dich's pants?
 
Fred's more suited for the D.A of law & Order than president, following the stay the course policy will not even win the Republican nomination.
 
Looking at some of the quotes he's made I'm liking him better. in a 1994 interview he said " The ultiimate decision on abortion should be left up to the woman and not the government" I agree 100%. though he's also said he's against abortion. sure he's a flip flopper but at least there's a chance he'll flop your way if the polls tell him too.
 
Total looser and he would push back our nation another 100 farther back than GWB has. The republican party that I was once a member of is a has been, the neocons are in control an lucky for our country, they wont win in 2008. . . .
 
LAST EDITED ON Jul-16-07 AT 03:58PM (MST)[p]"in a 1994 interview he said " The ultiimate decision on abortion should be left up to the woman and not the government" I agree 100%."

You know, I've always kind of felt that way too. But there should be some kind of time frame involved. An aquaintances loser of a daughter just had her womb scraped clean to get rid of this pesky 4 1/2 month old fetus.

Kind of makes me sick thinking that the kid was half way there. The useless ##### could've had the thing and put it up for adoption.

Oh well. When the democrats own the whitehouse, the congress and the senate, the world will be a better place.

Now, tell me again the strides made by Pelosi and ilk inre "the first 100 days?" I tried to find something but all I see is the game "Lets put sticks in the current admins spokes." Golly I wish that they would do something positive. Can't they like lower the price of oil, get health care for illegals and drug addicts.

What'dya think dude, T, FTW? Obama/Hillary or Hillary/Obama?Personally I don't think Edwards has a shot. Too off the charts. S'ok though. As long as I can pay more taxes and have diversity crammed down my gullet, I'll be a happy camper.

Which Democrat you guys gonna vote for that will save us all? Richardson sounds like the only pro-gun guy. Hopefully you will waste your vote on someone that at least has your second amend rights in mind.
 
The question is which democrat will get elected more than which one will we vote for. I was thinking Hagel in the primary if he ran ( yes I'm republican ) even though I knew he didn't have a shot. it will probably be Giulliani in the primary, he's probably the least stupid of whats to choose from. even if Thompson gets off his butt his opposition is has enough scoop on him to keep him busy explaining until the primary.

For the dems, I kind of like Richardson but he doesn't have a chance, Edwards isn't a bad guy but he's done for too. like the republicans the dems will support their most radical idiots since moderation isn't acceptable to anyone, my money is on a Clinton/Obama ticket when all is said and done.


As weak as the dem team is Bush has handed them a big club to thump the even weaker republican players. which puke bag stinks the least will be our choice again it seems, what ever happened to candidates you actually felt good about? this nation needs a TR worse today than it has in a long long time.
 
Well JimNV looks like I will be the first one at the plate. Without all the info it's a little hard to comment on "The Thing" but at 4.5 months seems a little long in the process, as well there may have been issues with the fetus i.e. downs syn etc. Each state is different, I am unfamiliar w/Nevada law.

O.K. here are the strides in both (R) & (D) ilks:

H.Res. 6, Title II, "Adopting the Rules of the House of Representatives for the One Hundred Tenth Congress." passed 430-1, Jan. 4th, 2007

H.Res. 6, Title IV, "Adopting the Rules of the House of Representatives for the One Hundred Tenth Congress." passed 280-152, Jan. 5th, 2007

H.R. 1, "Implementing the 9/11 Commission Recommendations Act of 2007." passed 299-128, Jan. 9th, 2007

H.R. 2, "Fair Minimum Wage Act of 2007." passed 315-116, Jan. 10th, 2007

H.R. 3, "Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act." passed 253-174, Jan. 11th, 2007

H.R. 4, "Medicare Prescription Drug Price Negotiation Act." passed 255-170, Jan. 12th, 2007

H.R. 5, "College Student Relief Act of 2007." passed 356-71, Jan. 17th, 2007

H.R. 6, "Creating Long-Term Energy Alternatives for the Nation Act." passed 264-163, Jan. 18th, 2007

They certainly did accomplish many things in a mere 100 hours of session. I do not wish to embarrass you over the 1994 Contract for America, so I will leave you to check into that.

I miss Newt, any guy that can divorce his wife while she is in the hospital with cancer is a moral icon. To think of all the nasty stuff he said about old Bill, while at the same time he was fooling around himself...for shame, for shame, for shame.


I have already stated that it would not be good for the country if Hillary wins the nomination. I like Obama, I like his message, but his downfall is a lack of experience. I think his time will come in 2012 if he's re-elected for a 2nd term. I think we have all learned what happens when you put a guy in that has Zero experience in Int'l relations and politics.

Since I am an Independant I am not a part of either party's nomination process. I like Kucinich's stance, I like Paul's extreme candor, Richardson is no pretty-boy but he has a great deal of experience, open-minded, and excellent track record.
I really like Edwards but Hillary and Obama may just have too much star power, leaving money scarce, which is too bad.

It's too early to tell, anything could happen, plus there maybe a few new faces that might announce a run.

I detect a slight sarcasm in your post JimNv. So how much money are you going to contribute to John McCain and GOP this year? There are so many great GOP nominees this year it must difficult to pick a good one when they are all so awesome.

So who are you wasting your vote on in 2008 JimNV.

If Hillary does win................she'll have my vote, even if I have to cringe while doing it. I would prefer Edwards gets it.
 
Do that. And while you are at it, hand over all your guns. THey are sooo much smarter than us that I'm sure its just a matter of time before they tell us why they will implement draconian gun control in our best interests.

Vote the issue. Look deep and you will see Hillary is not the choice.

Republicans - Fred

Democrats - Richardson

These are the only two candidates with even an outside chance that will not try to limit your right to have a gun (or your childrens).
 
Well good luck with that HoC! Now if Fred will throw his hat in and both he and Bill win the nominations we're in business. I said it before, I'll say it again, Hillary winning does nothing to unify this nation.

30 years between 2 families for a country of 300+ million is too much. If Hillary is a 2 termer, then Jeb could run and he could get 2 terms, then Chelsea could run and get 2 terms and so on and so on. (reminds me of a commericial jingle). No what I mean HoC?
 
Clinton was president for 8 years and I had more guns when he left office than before he took it. the NRA told us if he was elected the first time we were screwed, the second time no question our guns would be gone. yeah right.

Point is while I share your concern a if a president could take your guns at will they'ld already be gone.if you want to keep your guns protect the constitution to it's fullest and don't tamper with it. Bush has made more runs on the constitution than any past president, that should scare you more than what the dems " want " to do. as Bush says of the constitution " it's just a god damn peice of paper ", that peice of paper is why you have your guns and don't forget it.
 
I just love it when people kick and screem about the War and our young brave men and women being killed.But with the same breath say some knocked up chick has the right to kill her baby because she aint ready for kids yet!!!

Kyle

"If it moves shoot it again"
 
"So who are you wasting your vote on in 2008 JimNV."

I've totally capitulated, FTW. McCain will receive nary a dime from moi. I am going to embrace socialism all the way. Its kind of a political "Stockholm Syndrome" for lack of a better term. My fellow Americans want it so, and so it shall be.

I'm having difficulty with the Edwards thing. I mean while the cat was suing the crap out of the medical industry and channeling dead children, he was accruing the largess to build a 28,000 sq. ft. home that probably leaves a carbon footprint that would make the inventors of the Hiroshima bomb blush with envy. I am trying to be "greener" as well, you see.

Nope, I'm thinking along the lines of Obama/Hillary or vice-versa. Anti-gun/pro-socialists with a better "green" record than the Breck girl. I think they can tell us how to raise our kids as well...Bonus!

Oh, and BTW, the kid that was scraped out of that useless pig was perfectly healthy (I used the word "thing" as I am trying to buy into the democrat-think that it isn't human till the doctor slaps its ass). Anyway, she is a welfare case as well so I am sure that the tax payers payed for it. Just think when our democrat heroes give us universal health care. I really think Marx would be proud, don't you?
 
I love it when some people svivel when a lump of goo is aborted from a girl or woman who doesn't wish to reproduce. but in the same breath defends a failed policy in Iraq where good kids are blown to bits or crippled for life for what we're not sure.

The point of the post was maybe Thompson's not as far right of lunitic as first thought, that's a good thing. if abortion gets your panties in a wad start the 507th thread whining about it.
 
>
> I love it when some
>people svivel when a lump
>of goo is aborted from
>a girl or woman who
>doesn't wish to reproduce. but
>in the same breath defends
>a failed policy in Iraq
>where good kids are blown
>to bits or crippled for
>life for what we're not
>sure.


A lump of goo ?? A 4-1/2 month old fetus is a lump of goo ?? It's a really good thing you are impotent dude, you will be the last of "you".

JB
 
LAST EDITED ON Jul-17-07 AT 00:19AM (MST)[p]Well JimNV,

Look at it through the eyes of a fiscal conservative. She just saved us tax-payers approxiamately $ 8,600.00 to $ 85,000.00.

Abortion: $400.00
Delivery: $ 9,000.00
Raising a kid on welfare: $ 86,000.00
(No punchline w/priceless in it)

Honestly JimNv I feel sorry for the mother, something must have gone terribly wrong for her. After all at one time she, like my own daughter was somebody's darling babe girl. Until recently she was pregnant and apparently could not afford or had chose to terminate the pregnancy. It is really sad for all involved.

I'm glad she or as you so compassionately put it "the useless pig" was able to go to a safe place, if she had tried to self-abort she could have ran up one helluva a bill to us tax-payers while in the hospital.

As for universal healthcare we already have it for our veterans. Yet nobody seems to cry socialism over that, I guess that's different.

It's just a matter of perspective JimNv and who is looking through the glass.
 
FTW,

There are couples waiting in line to find young girls like that to pay their doctors bills and take custody of new borns after birth for adoption. That would have taken some effort for the young girl to behave for 4-1/2 more months but I guess that wasn't worth the effort.

JB
 
469cb585681fe3fb.jpg


A lump of goo? At 4.5 mo.s old, you are pretty much formed and at the point of living outside the womb with assistance if the need arose. Heres a pic of a 4 mo. old.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not a rabid pro-lifer by any stretch, but anyone who would D&C a fetus at that late stage is morally bereft. Doctors who do this should carve ovaries out of these women, as well. Take them out of the gene pool. Unless of course repeat business in re abortions is their forte.

But as FTW mentioned, thank god that she got that taken care of in a clean, caring environment. I'm sure that she will become a a contributing member of society someday.

As far as comparing a Veteran receiving health care for "services rendered" in the service of the nation vice health care being given freely to illegals, addicts, the lazy and career welfare cases, thats quit a stretch.

If our current crop of hopefuls are so hep on providing health care for everyone, then they should at least make it so that you, me and the guy working at the convenience store who pay the bulk of the taxes get to go to the head of the line in front of one of 'dudes field hands or the POS with the 4.5 year old "lump of goo" waiting for the knife.

Sorry, but my taxes are way too high as it is. We are going the way of socialism, friends. Whether you want to believe it or not.

I'm ten years at least from retiring and don't plan on seeing the social security benefits I've been paying into for the last 35 years or so. The people have spoken and they want Uncle Sugar to provide for them. Thats going to take money, lots of it.
 
Ok all you doctors out there, since I'm not a doctor I checked it out. 56% of abortions are done in the first 8 weeks, 9 out of 10 are done in the first 12 weeks. most done after that are for health reasons, though many of you would rather the mother go to her grave trying than to violate YOUR principles. it's the woman's right,it's the law, mind your own business, END of story.
 
dude, by you referring to an unborn baby as a lump of goo, you have put yourself in a class all by yourself. You have said some STUPID things before, but that is the STUPIDEST thing ever posted on this forum.

PRO
 
OK I should have guessed some of you would cry about that. at 8 weeks that's a pretty accurate discription, maybe not very sensitive but true. I don't need to defend myself or promote your vision of an 8 week old fetus as wearing a suit and tie while sipping a martini. it's a legal procedure, get over it.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jul-17-07 AT 12:35PM (MST)[p]"You're stupid dude" coming from PRO that carries alot of weight. Pro is a perfect example of wasted sperm.

JimNV, you tying things together that I never put out there. You mentioned socialized healthcare, I only pointed out that it already exists for our Vets.

As for this abortion deal, well, without personal knowledge how am I or anyone able to discuss this matter. I think everyone can agree it is a shame, women don't get knocked up because having an abortion is so much fun. Not to mention, obviously some guy was irresponsible as well.

As far as having a safe place for the abortion, try to remember why the fed. gov. decided to fund these clinics in the first place.

Yes, it is a travesty that late in the process. But you seem to be preoccupied with it being paid for on your dime. Outside of adoption her decision places the least amount of burden on tax payers. That's all

I know you pissed, but I would rather work and pay into the system than to switch with somebody on welfare living in Section 8 housing anyday.

I'm starting to think you're running blocker trying to deflect this post away from issues of extraordinary power in the Office of the V.P.

Jim you are so upset over this gal, yet we are borrowing 2 Billion a week with interest from China on a 200 year note. Break out the amortization calculator and figure that one out.

As a self-admitted Republican I wish you were as upset over the absence of accountability in Iraq.

It doesn't bother you that a recently revised total of
$12,000,000,000.00 or 12,000 million has simply vanished, completely unaccounted for in Iraq? Our tax-dollars Jim!

For the same amount of money we have spent in Iraq we could easily have a Universal healthcare system twice over.

I thought Republicans are supposed to be the party of fiscal conservatives and accountability?
 
Forthewall wrote:

""You're stupid dude" coming from PRO that carries alot of weight. Pro is a perfect example of wasted sperm."

Atta boy, you are sounding like dude more and more. Your mom/sister must be so proud.

Last I checked, wars are costly, duh! I am glad WWII wasn't fought based on polls and the $ spent, or we would be speaking German/Japanese.

As for the KILLING of innocent lives, if you are alright with killing unborn babies, that is between you and your God. Me, I am NOT okay with killing babies because they are inconvient at the moment. What does that say about a society, that it is okay to kill the defenseless, but we are willing to spend thousands per year to keep murders, child molestors, rapists, in prison because to kill them is inhumane?

Universal healthcare would be the worst thing we could do for the health of Americans. That's just what I want, a 6 month wait to have a same-day surgery.

Forthewall also wrote:

" For the same amount of money we have spent in Iraq we could easily have a Universal healthcare system twice over.

I thought Republicans are supposed to be the party of fiscal conservatives and accountability"

Apples and oranges smart guy. War is not waged just for the hell of it, even if that is the garbage being spewed by left-wing radicals. If anyone truly believes the Bush Admin. just went after Iraq for fun or money, you need to put the kool-aid down.

As for universal healthcare, that would NOT be fiscally conservative nor have much accountability. Government is the model for waste and unaccountability, why would we want them running the health care system? Talk about STUPID!

PRO
 
I have two lumps of goo that have grown into the coolest kids I could ever imagine. They are the best part of my life.

I am pro-choice. The woman ought to have the choice whether to have sex or not. After that the whole argument is about personal responsibility.
 
"Jim you are so upset over this gal, yet we are borrowing 2 Billion a week with interest from China on a 200 year note. Break out the amortization calculator and figure that one out."

Upset over the gal certainly. Politics aside, its loathsome. I'm not a christian, buddhist, atheist, mormon, whatever. But damn, that pic up there isn't a lumb of goo. Should the feds put their arm on this? Maybe not, but you would think state would step up and do something.

"As a self-admitted Republican I wish you were as upset over the absence of accountability in Iraq."

Oh yes. I am upset. I've said from the get go that it is folly to invade countries such as Iraq in this day and age. We simply do not have the stones anymore to make it the hell on earth it needs to be to bring the civilian populace crawling to the invaders for protection. I knew and posted from the beginning that it wasn't a smart idea. THAT SAID, I also stated that should we go, let the dogs loose. Complete and total domination. Not this piece meal crap that Rumsfeld wanted.

"It doesn't bother you that a recently revised total of
$12,000,000,000.00 or 12,000 million has simply vanished, completely unaccounted for in Iraq? Our tax-dollars Jim!

Doesn't surprise me in the least. There are pay-offs being made I am sure. We've got a tiger by the tail. My fear is if we let go, Iran steps in with their thugs and take Iraq. We would be right back in there protecting our interests and allies. Its folly to leave. Throw another 100,000 troops in there and lets get these factions quashed.

"For the same amount of money we have spent in Iraq we could easily have a Universal healthcare system twice over." True enough.

"I thought Republicans are supposed to be the party of fiscal conservatives and accountability?" I thought so as well and am hoping they can be again. But I think most people want socialism. They want Government to care for them. Socialized medicine would make us, a socialist country. This scares me.
 
We all were at one time, what's the point? if this were a perfect world we wouldn't need funerals, wars, hospitals,insurance, airbags, seatbelts or even abortion. guess what it's not . stuff happens and until your Shangri La world comes to be all of this and even more bad things are needed.

You seem to have a healthy child and we all hope you provide a good home for her, that's great for your whole family, congatulations. however, that doesn't give you the right to force your values or will on others who for what ever reason must do things differently.

Even Mexico City , 99.99% Cathloic ,made abortion legal ( like it didn't happen anyway) . so you can see it's not just for heathens anymore.

Mind your own business and obey the law, this debate will be over, is that so hard?
 
LAST EDITED ON Jul-18-07 AT 01:11PM (MST)[p]"Mind your own business and obey the law, this debate will be over, is that so hard?"

Dude,

Sometimes your logic doesn't make sense to me. If the debate were over then there wouldn't be opposing views. I thought open minded people liked vigorous debate? I guess you mean you don't like vigorous debate if you feel you already know what is best for everybody and don't want to be questioned.

Imagine if those debating slavery used the same logic. Slavery was the law of land, the debate was over for many years and the south though the north should just mind it's own business.

Lets take it a step further,

"Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002
The authorization was sought by President George W. Bush. Introduced as H.J.Res. 114 (Public Law 107?243), it passed the House on October 10, 2002 by a vote of 296-133, and the Senate on October 11 by a vote of 77-23. It was signed into law by President Bush on October 16."

Why can't you just obey the law as passed by congress and signed by GWB? It is the law of the land, just mind your own business.

How would you like to actually live in a country like that. You only want to debate the things you disagree with but have no wish to have things you agree with debated. That doesn't make any sense.

Nemont
 
OK you have a point, the law can be changed even though I agree with it as is.

The mind your own business part of what goes on in the bedroom or hospital room should be enough to end the debate on it's own. I'll stand by that.
 
I should also add that as I understand it congress gave Bush the ability to take Saddam down and install a new government. an occupation without end wasn't part of that bill, in fact some say he exceeded his authorization long ago. Roe V.Wade gave us the basis for our law on this issue. if we're going to question the constitution and all Supreme court decisions the anti gun fanatics will probably like in on that also. don't get your hopes up even though the court is stacked a little in your favor today. they're always reluctant to reverse past court's rulings, if that ever changes we're all in for trouble.
 
Dude, are you saying we should have just taken Saddam out and installed a new government, and then left them to twist in the sand? Freakin brilliant, that would have turned out well.

Roe v Wade should be overturned because it is bad law. Let the states rule on it, which will be determined by the poeple of each state. That way, all you lovers of killing "goo" can do so, and those of us living in states with a conscience don't have to fund your babykillings. You say the debate is over, it was never decided thru debate, the libs circumvented the normal process and used activists judges to 'create' law, instead of interpetating the law they just wrote their own, a direct violation of the role of the Judicial Branch. Judges are not supposed to legislate, that is what the Founders made the Legislative Branch for, something libs conviently ignore when it suits them. Pro-choice my arse. Call it what it is, pro-baby killing.

PRO
 
dude,


"some say he exceeded his authorization long ago"

Well some say Roe V Wade makes a mockery out of the constitution by creating law through a "right to privacy". Whether a law is good or bad it is still the law until it either changed, upheld, repealed or otherwised altered through the democratic process.


There have been some profound and nation change decisions that later courts have overturned.

Just this past month the Supreme Court Reversed a nearly 100 year history of Antitrust Precedent on Vertical Price Fixing.

In addition such decisions as Dred Scott, Plessy V Ferguson required amendments to the Constitution itself in order to correct. The court got both of those wrong.

Do yourself a favor and read the Roe V Wade decision including both the majority opinion and the dissenting opinions. There is ample room for a debate. Even in the majority opinion they make the case that as pregancy advances the state has a more compelling reseason for protecting the unborn.

It is not cut and dried as you make it sound. While it may be settled law that abortions are federally protected it is not settled law as to when exactly the States compelling interest in the unborn exceeds the mother's right to terminate.

Nemont
 
For someone who's only chance at banning abortion is the supreme court you don't talk very highly of them.

Ok let's look at the facts, 76% of Americans polled support abortion rights, partial birth abortion is much less popular and for good reason. this means abortion will not be taken away by polititians so what's left? a supreme court ruling from a stacked deck as we now have? it could happen. problem is in a few years with the right court we'll see that ruling overturned by a more liberal court because why? in the end the will of the people wins out, that's why it's called a democracy.

Once again we're playing wag the dog here on MM where the minority is the majority, enjoy your wins here because you don't out number us in the real world.

Remember this, there was a time when the world was ruled by religion, it was called the dark ages. that may work for you but for most of us, well, we'll pass.

How do we always end up back on this subject anyway? wasn't this thread about Fred Franken Berry?
 
Your numbers are off a bit there dude. Most polls show a 50/50 split on the abortion issue. I think your numbers are based on a poll asking about banning all abortions. I do NOT want to ban ALL abortions. I support abortions for health reasons, rape, and incest for example. Let the states decide!

PRO
 
LAST EDITED ON Jul-18-07 AT 04:55PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Jul-18-07 AT 04:50?PM (MST)

> For someone who's only chance
>at banning abortion is the
>supreme court you don't talk
>very highly of them.
>
> Ok let's look at the
>facts, 76% of Americans polled
>support abortion rights, partial birth
>abortion is much less popular
>and for good reason. this
>means abortion will not be
>taken away by polititians so
>what's left? a supreme court
>ruling from a stacked deck
>as we now have? it
>could happen. problem is in
>a few years with the
>right court we'll see that
>ruling overturned by a more
>liberal court because why? in
>the end the will of
>the people wins out, that's
>why it's called a democracy.
>
>
> Once again we're playing wag
>the dog here on MM
>where the minority is the
>majority, enjoy your wins here
>because you don't out number
>us in the real world.
>
>
> Remember this, there was a
>time when the world was
>ruled by religion, it was
>called the dark ages. that
>may work for you but
>for most of us, well,
>we'll pass.
>
> How do we always end
>up back on this subject
>anyway? wasn't this thread about
>Fred Franken Berry?


First off I never have said whether I support or not support the right to choose. Nor I have not said I want to ban anything. I said a vigorous debate is healthy regardless of the issue. I was pointing out your own bias. You like to debate things that you disagree with ie the Iraq war but have not interest in debating something you agree with and/or support. Again how is that any different then the people you loath?

I also have not mentioned religion nor the dark ages nor majority or minority positions on any of this, that is all your doing.

Also just remember we don't live in a democracy we live in a Representative Republic, a whole different ball game. It is designed specifically so that the majority cannot impose it's tyranny on the minority regardless which end of the political spectrum happens to occupy that status.

Don't put words into my mouth.

In addition please don't try to use statistics to prove a case. The old saying of "there are lies, damn Lies and then Statistic"


A January 2007 CBS News poll explored under what circumstances Americans believe abortion should be allowed, asking the question, "What is your personal feeling about abortion?" The results were as follows.

"Permitted in all cases" 31%
"Permitted,subject to greater restrictions than it is now" 16%
"Only in cases such as rape, incest, or to save the woman's life"
30%
"Only permitted to save the woman's life" 12%
"Never" 5%
and I can give you citations this poll. Can you show me the 76% poll you quoted?

So using those stats I could argue that 69% of Americans would be in favor of futher restricting a woman's right to an abortion. Are you sure you want to throw out incorrect stats still?

Nemont
 
Incorrect? May 2007 Wall Street Journal poll , favor all abortion-39%, favor abortion with restrictions ( partial birth ) 37%, oppose abortion 21%. should Roe V. Wade be overturned? no 53%, yes 37%. almost twice as many people prefer any abortion to no abortion. place some resrictions on abortion and 76% of Americans favor it. restricting something the supreme court already upheld a restiction on is hardly a ban on abortion wouldn't you say? most abortion rights advocates can live with partial birth bans, abortion for the vast majority of women will still be available.

If you want to make it a state's choice then fine. what about RED RED states like South Dakota? they rejected a ban on abortion last November so good luck anywhere else. most states will allow it anyway, if a woman wants an abortion she'll just cross state lines to get it. big deal.

Like you I don't mind arguing but calling me for saying we live in a democracy? com'on.

For right or wrong the abortion issue along with many others are driven by religious organizations and their followers, you can't debate theses issues without religion pulled into it. the republican party caters to the religious right just as the dems cater to the pro choice crowd, it's common knowledge. don't act like I made up some fish story.
 
A few contributors to this subject are not smart enough to argue with. I'll let you pick them out!


TM
 
LAST EDITED ON Jul-18-07 AT 09:19PM (MST)[p]Do you really believe we live in a democracy? If that were true then there would not be only 100 Senators. Figure it out, our systems specifically states that the majority is not always right.

Democracy is defined as everybody get a say. That is not our system we are specifically defined as a representative Republic. I could care less what you were taught in first grade that is the the truth. Look at the history book and read at least one chapter of the what Jefferson had to write.

Yep it is only the Republicans that are playing the religion card.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0705050791may06,0,2217807.story

Do you notice none of your "friends" are chiming in to defend you? That is because they now know that you don't even have a clue about our system of government. You are a bigger idiot then I first thought. FYI THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE between democrats and Republicans in claiming god or religion as their authority.

In addition the democrat party platform specifically states that abortion cannot be a states right issue and must be federally protect because we the people are not smart enough to decide, state by state, what is the right thing for our state. You are not Republican nor have you ever been, stop the fraud and come out of the closet. You wouldn't know a conservative principle if it did you up the butt.

You are much weaker then I gave you credit for.

Nemont
 
Fair enough, I've always thought you were stupid. for all practical terms we live in a democracy, if you want to split hairs knock yourself, out it serves no purpose and proves nothing.

Why would I lie about being a republican? yeah that's something to be proud of. if I wasn't one and wished to be it takes a few seconds to become one. you think it's an exclusive club the gran pooba must knight you into? after a secret order of saints nominates you? or do you have to be born into it ? give me a break.

Abortion is a highly emotional and very much religious based debate in this country, the republicans have capitolized on it. I didn't say it's wrong that's just politics, if you deny this you're ignorant. just because the dems play the religion card also at times doesn't change anything about the issue we're on now, give me one instance where a dem used religion to justify abortion.

I made a post about Fred's comment on abortion, none of you were willing to talk about that you went right to bashing me for my opinion on abortion. I didn't mean for it to go this way but I won't back down either. I also know in this group of players I can't win and once again I don't care, it's a political bizarro world here on MM anyway. you chose to make it personal so I'll take that as your admission you can't win this debate on the merrits of your case. go ahead and nit pick and make insults, if that's the best you can do, I can take it. if there was no logic behind my argument then I wouldn't have the law and the majority on Americans behind me would I? you can whine some more now, this is all for fun anyway if it didn't amuse me I wouldn't come back.
 
dude, your are funny. You say we make it personal, and you don't? Come on now!

PRO
 
I made a post about an interview with Thompson, you guys turned it into an abortion thread and took personal. so why is it nobody will comment on what Thompson said? is it because he's your last hope ( if he runs ). those words along with the fact he did some pro abortion legal work will give his opponents ( fellow republcans ) grounds to trash him and they will. I think it makes him seem more moderate, and that's a good thing though many of you here won't be able to forgive him . radical right wing extremist or nothing, same goes for the dems, all a bunch of idiots. a moderate from either side would win the whitehouse in '08, both parties are too stupid to see it.
 
Though I have never been accused of being a moderate, I have no problem with Thompson representing a pro-abortion case in court. He was a lawyer for hell's sake. What, is he supposed to only represent clients with his exact values and ethics? That would make earning a living pretty tough.

I am a steward in my Union local, I represent members on a regular basis that have done things I don't agree with, but that is NOT the role I have. My job is to make sure he/she was treated by the contract and not singled out or held to a standard fellow employees are not held to. If the company can show the discipline is reasonable and justified, it will stand. If they can't, and I punch enough holes in their position, the employee will be removed from discipline. That does not mean that I support members doing stupid things, nor that I condone bad behavior. A lawyer has the same DUTY. It is not his place to dismiss a client based on that clients personal lifestyle. A lawyer that limits his clientile as such, will be working out of his Subaru.

RUS was a valued member of this same Local, and can verify this as once being a very solid Union member. Then he went to management and sold his soul.(j/k)

I would also add, what you deem to be moderate, another person would deem either a lib or a neo-con. I consider Rudi as a moderate, hell I consider GWB to be a moderate. Some consider anyone right of Nadar a conservative. I don't consider any of the upper tier Republican canidates to be conservatives. That would be someone like Huckabee.

PRO
 
I can agree with what you say about lawyers, they're like hookers.

Then what about his interview where he said " The ultimate decision on abortion is up to the woman, not the government." to awful libs like me that's what I want to hear, but you don't think his conservative opponents are going to burn him with that? he wasn't on a case or the clock so he can't use money as the reason he said something he didn't believe.

Giulianni is a bit of a moderate but it's a strech to call him one, Bush jr isn't even close. if Giulianni pulls his head out and gets on the right track with the other sane republicans in regaurds to Iraq, I'd vote for him over the other choices in the party.
 
Like I said, what you consider a moderate is different than what I consider a moderate. GWB has expanded the size of the government thru his education plan, his perscription drug plan, and is either moderate or flat liberal on his immigration stance. His stance on the enviroment is conservative, as his stance on the war on terror, and his view on tax cuts. So, I consider him a moderate conservative.

If Rudi gets nominated it will BECAUSE of his stance on the war, if he caves to the left and 'moderates', he can kiss the nomination good-bye. He is moderate on abortion, guns, gay-marriage, if he turns 'moderate' on the war, he will never get the nomination. The war is the number ONE issue for 2008, and true conservatives, not 'moderate' conservatives will decide who the Republican nominee will be.

I consider you a liberal republican, a term never used by the 'main-stream' media, and I am guessing you consider yourself a 'moderate' republican, proving me right on your/my definition of a moderate are different, so to say a moderate would win is not exactly factual. Would it be a moderate in your eyes, or mine? Because, I see Rudi, Mitt, and Fred to be moderates, and I will campaign for any of the three against Hilliary, Obama, or Edwards big time! A 'moderate' democrat like Richardson has ZERO chance of getting the nomination for the Democratic Party as well, so I am not sure where you come up with a 'moderate' would win 2008, unless you mean as an Independant, which has NO chance of happening.

PRO
 
We agree on a few things but I don't see a true moderate on either parties list. as you say it's like saying how high is up? it depends on your views. I say a moderate would win the general election, but niether party will nominate them in the primary, this is why moderate candidates don't do well, oddly enough moderate voters decide most elections.

You may or may not be right about a pro war republican being the only one who could win the primary. many other republicans I know are getting fed up with the war, and the republican party is distancing itself from it as we speak. if a pro war republican wins the primary, they won't win the general, no way. which election is more important? if you say the primary you're part of the problem with both parties and why we can't moderate and bring this country back together again. some thrive on the deep division we now have, I see no good in it at all.
 
Dude said:
"that doesn't give you the right to force your values or will on others who for what ever reason must do things differently."

Isn't that what abortion is?
 
The law says fetus up to a point is not a person, so no it's not. ever hear of the law? it's how a society defines right from wrong, what you can and can't do. it works for most of us, check it out.

Can't let this die can you? knock yourself out, my stand is much easier to defend than yours.
 
Dode,

Your position is up in the air here in ca. A women can kill her unborn baby anytime she wants but kill your prenant girlfriend and you'll be tried for 2 murders. Splain that one to me.

JB
 
Polital terminology is complete farse in today's world.

Our country has swung so far to the right that according to long held political definitions Democrats are Moderate Republicans and Republicans are Dixiecrats.

Lil Bush has a terrible environmental record so it comes as no shock that Pro would say he is a conservative on the environment.

You know who was a conservative on the environment Richard M Nixon, ya know the guy that gave us the E.P.A.

It goes without saying that Teddy Roosevelt made the Republican Party the party of the environment. What do you think he would have said about drilling in ANWAR.

I consider Richard Nixon to be last real Republican we have had in the last 37 years according to established political terminology.
 
Dude,

You seem to have alot of time on your hands.
Have you ever actually had a job ??

What did you do, this last week, work wise ????

Nothing. You'll make up some shet, but it's obvious.

Take up woodworking or something you big glob of goo.

Yuck,
lrv
 
Ive , good to see your just as cranky and stupid as ever. I don't have to work anymore if I don't want to, see I really am a republican. but I still have a good chunk of the ranch left so I do still work, not 9-5 but when there's work to do. the dew should come on around 11:00 PM on so I can bale hay, probably be dewed out around 2:30 3:30 AM I'd guess. I'll be working while you're dreaming of little boys in their under wear, sleep tight.
 

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

Sweet Bull
0217221300a.jpg
A1AE9FA4-A055-4877-9F14-6ADD6F9E56E8.jpeg
100_1460.JPG
Would you take the shot?
BB2A5D95-EC39-43FA-BFFF-81B77E3F756D.jpeg
30A8317E-5C2C-4CDF-801D-B4DBAFCCFEFB.jpeg
86EE608F-DFEC-4D23-A4AA-CDD51FD8034E.jpeg
IMG_20221229_101538577_HDR.jpg
2022 Jaydee Houston's Utah buck.jpg
E3A563E8-E56A-4482-8743-6B1E01982175.jpeg
Screenshot_20211111-171246_Instagram.jpg
Back
Top Bottom