Mike Luckovich

By getalife

November 16, 2005 08:46 PM | Link to this

RW, That is not the Clinton cartoon.How about that link.

By RW-(the original)

November 16, 2005 08:55 PM | Link to this

getalife,

ml must have chickened out.

By getalife

November 16, 2005 08:57 PM | Link to this

Don’t make me call Scooter. Scooter?

By Scooter

November 16, 2005 09:04 PM | Link to this

Thank you Woodward.

By Andy

November 16, 2005 09:05 PM | Link to this

Alito isn’t the only one who opposes Roe V Wade…..

Now who could possibly think that the Constitution does not protect a right to abortion? Well, Harry Reid for one. He is supposedly “pro-life,” and in 2003 he was one of only five Democrats to dissent from a Senate resolution supporting Roe v. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court decision that brought the “right to abortion” into existence.- The Truth 11/16/05

That would be Senator Harry Reid, Democrat, Nevada.

By Andy

November 16, 2005 09:06 PM | Link to this

Scooter! You’re back!

By buff

November 16, 2005 09:48 PM | Link to this

I wonder if Looney-Tooney-Lucko, aka LTL is running out of material. This offering is weak both from a humrous and intellectual perspective; very disappointing, lame. Come on, LTL, do just one piece ridiculing a lib, just one. I know you can do it, I think…. How about one of Chucky-Sucky Schumer running over a pedistrian to get to on air with the caption: “The most dangerous place to be in America is between Senator Schumer and a camera.”

By RW-(the original)

November 16, 2005 09:56 PM | Link to this

buff,

MAybe we should wait until ml gets over this nudity kick before we ask him to draw a lib.

By Dr R

November 16, 2005 09:58 PM | Link to this

Just a guess, but I’m thinking Alito will leave his shirt on during the hearings.

I’m so tired of abortion. How many people who defend it, or their loved ones, will actually get one? How many of those who oppose it will adopt an unwanted baby? Can’t we just agree that it sucks but it’s legal and leave it at that? Guess not …

By buff

November 16, 2005 10:03 PM | Link to this

RW, you know, I don’t mind LTL poking ridicule at cons, but, sheesh, look at all the fodder the libs have. Pelosi’s mouth, Dean’s head, Kerry’s medals and flip flops, Schumer and his obsession with TV, Hillary going right and Billy going left (trying to capture both), Turbin Durbin, Fitzgerald and his rapidly deterioting investigation. LTL is a wimpy (yes, I have met him) little guy who thinks he is striking back at those he sees as more manly, which, of course, they are. But, he sure fits this rag well.

By getalife

November 16, 2005 10:04 PM | Link to this

Yes, do a pinko lib cartoon.

By buff

November 16, 2005 10:08 PM | Link to this

LTL has done some good stuff; very creative. The John Rocker cartoon with JR sitting on the bench and “tick, tick, tick” with Rocker as a bomb. He had a couple of great Bill and Hill toons during Monica-gate. But, now he is sacrificing quality and humor for a partisan political agenda. I have enjoyed LTL for years, but, he is just not as good as he used to be. Oh well, I guess blind hatred and partisanship can cause this

By buff

November 16, 2005 10:14 PM | Link to this

Dr. R. a few years ago I asked a bunch of abortion protestors if they would take a pregnant teen in their house, provide care, love and understanding, then, adopt the baby and they were speechless. Some of the pro life loons are as nutty as the rabid “must have an abortion” crowd. Like you, I am sich of the topic: rarely does anyone change their mind.

By anti death

November 17, 2005 12:25 AM | Link to this

The Republicans are not prolife. They are ProBirth. They are anti choice, anti birth control, anti sex ed, anti family planning, and at the same time they oppose appeals in death penaltiy cases, oppose social services, health coverage, and they cringe at the thought of sacrificing to fight disease and starvation in other countries. These policies leed to more births, and an increasingly shorter average life expectancy. Let us not misuse the term prolife any longer.
The GOP is the probirth party. This is in drastic conflict with the majority of Americans who do not want to see Roe v. Wade chipped away.

By mikefan

November 17, 2005 12:48 AM | Link to this

The Republicans are not only pro-birth. They are anti-women. By forcing a woman to bear a child she does not want, the Republicans are punishing her for having sex. Never mind that a man was involved in the creation of that child. According to the Republican Taliban, the woman should have said no. The child therefore becomes the penalty for her failure. Since an unwanted child is a bill that comes due in about twenty-one years with interest, the Republicans are anti-child as well.

By Andy

November 17, 2005 04:56 AM | Link to this

Listen to all the men speaking out about women’s “health issues” and their “right to privacy.” What a joke, if woman become more responsible these pinkos might have to show how really pro gay marriage they are.

So why did Harry Reid, Democrat, Nevada, dissent from the 2003 Roe V Wade affirmation resolution? Is he exercising his “right to privacy” on the issue? Will he give Alito the same consideration or will we see more liberal hypocrisy?

By candide

November 17, 2005 06:33 AM | Link to this

You can buy Alito a drink at the Badda Bing.

By Ricky

November 17, 2005 06:51 AM | Link to this

I was waiting for this cartoon to come, knew it was only a matter of time. Lets see, Alito has been unanimoulsy confirmed by the Senate twice. He is highly respected by lawyers from both parties. We all know the same 22 Dems that voted against Roberts are going to vote against Alito. He won’t past their litmus test. But remember this, Ruth Bader Ginsberg was avidly pro-choice, was the general council of the ACLU, and is one of the most liberal members of the court. She was confirmed 96-3. Why? Because Republicans vote on qualifications not ideology. While they obviously didn’t agree with her views, they saw she was qualified and dealt with the fact a Dem was president and was going to pick a liberal nominee. The Dems won’t do the same. That is why they lose the arguement in public opinion on Supreme Court nominess. They are more interested in listening to Ralph Neas and Nan Aaron, both of whom within 10 minutes of Alito being nominated issued press releases trashing him.

By Ricky

November 17, 2005 06:56 AM | Link to this

What is really going to be amusing during the hearings is when Dick Durbin, who when he first came to Congress was pro-life starts harrassing Judge Alito about how could he change his views from 1985. When Dick Durbin has changed his since then. A judges personal views don’t matter. It is how they will rule as a judge that matters.

By Andy

November 17, 2005 07:05 AM | Link to this

You can almost hear the anti lifers rustling around out there. This is the democrat’s only coherent issue; the pinkos believe Armageddon is upon us. You will see all kinds lib tactics employed in this fight. They will tell you that abortion is no big deal; that we need to come together and find a common ground. When you blink, they will fall on you with the long knives.

You will hear all kinds of stories about Conservatives being barbarians who would return us to the days of the witch hunts. It doesn’t matter that libs are the ones ripping unborn babies from their mother’s womb and sucking their brains out, the Cons will be portrayed as monsters.

Be strong in the coming days fellow Conservatives. The Supreme Court is the last vestige of pinko power left in government. When this is gone from their grasp, then we can start fixing all of the harm that it has done to this great country.

By Andy

November 17, 2005 07:08 AM | Link to this

You can almost hear the anti lifers rustling around out there. This is the democrat’s only coherent issue; the pinkos believe Armageddon is upon us. You will see all kinds lib tactics employed in this fight. They will tell you that abortion is no big deal; that we need to come together and find a common ground. When you blink, they will fall on you with the long knives.

*You will hear all kinds of stories about Conservatives being barbarians who would return us to the days of the witch hunts. It doesn’t matter that libs are the ones ripping unborn babies f-rom their m-o-t-h-e-r’s w-o-m-b s-u-c-k-i-n-g their brains out, the Cons will be portrayed as monsters.

Be strong in the coming days fellow Conservatives. The Supreme Court is the last vestige of pinko power left in government. When this is gone from their grasp, then we can start fixing all of the harm that it has done to this great country.

By Bill

November 17, 2005 07:26 AM | Link to this

Seriously Andy, do you work at your ignorance or does it come naturally?

By Elsie

November 17, 2005 07:47 AM | Link to this

The congress that confirmed RBG is dead and gone, replaced with pols who forgot they were sent to govern, not to rule. We really need more Methodists in Congress, the kind that think public evangelism is a sin. What we currently have are the best politicians money can buy. No wonder so many thoughtful people stay away from the polls in droves.

By Andy

November 17, 2005 07:49 AM | Link to this

Look at page A11 of Thursdays “news” paper. You’re going to tell me that the pinkos at the AJC are the only ones in the world who didn’t know about Nixon “secretly” bombing Cambodia? Has anyone told them about Laos yet? About John Kerry being in Cambodia for Christmas, er, the Winter Holidays, with the memory being seared in his mind?

By Rich

November 17, 2005 08:02 AM | Link to this

It’s all about religion and the religious right forcing their beliefs on society.

By Ricky

November 17, 2005 08:04 AM | Link to this

So Rich when Clinton was nominating liberal judges was that all about secularism and the secular left forcing their beliefs on society?

By Andy

November 17, 2005 08:21 AM | Link to this

Does anyone know what time the news conference is for Fitzgerald dismissing his charges against Scooter Libby and ending his investigation?

By Voice of Reason

November 17, 2005 08:26 AM | Link to this

Andy - The fact that Woodward finally spoke has nothing to do with Libby lying. Whether or not someone else outed Plame doesn’t negate the fact that he lied and obstructed justice.

By gttim

November 17, 2005 08:46 AM | Link to this

Perfect cartoon! Funny how lies now last almost as long as tattoos with internet research. 20 Years ago most of this would have never been brought to the public’s attention.

I would certainly believe Alito is lying now, since he has been caught in a flat out lie to the Senate before. He previously told the Senate he would recuse himself from certain cases to avoid potential conflicts of interest. One of the companies he cited was Vanguard. Then later, in 2002, he ruled on a case in favor of Vanguard, when at the time he owned between $375,000 and $900,000 mutual shares from them. He later withdrew from the case only because a complaint was filed. He still argued he did not feel he should disqualify himself.

This is who we want on the highest court in the land? Surely we can do better.

BTW, Roe vs. Wade is a smoke screen. What we should be arguing about is how he will strip the rights of the citizens and enlarge rights for corporations, how he will destroy any and all environmental protections he can, and how he will rule to undo the sepeartion of church and state.

By Andy

November 17, 2005 08:58 AM | Link to this

You’re right, gttim, for once! Ruth Bader Ginsburg thinks the age of consent should be 12. Ruth Bader Ginsburg thinks that separate restrooms for men and women is a form of discrimination. Ruth Bader Ginsburg wants to put men and women together in prison.

The Republicans viciously attacked Ginsburg on these ideologue issues, er, wait a minute, no they didn’t. They confirmed her 96-3 based on…. her judicial qualifications. I take that back, gttim, you’re wrong as usual.

By This Justin

November 17, 2005 09:09 AM | Link to this

Lets get rid of the baby killing doctors, they kill and its against the bible.

Next, if you know of an ex-soldier in your church, have your pastor kick them out. Jesus hates soldiers just as much as abortion doctors. Soldiers are killers. Stand up for the sanctity of life!

By Chief

November 17, 2005 09:15 AM | Link to this

Mike Luckovich leans so far left he could plow mules on a mountain.

By Voice of Reason

November 17, 2005 09:17 AM | Link to this

This Justin - I was about to call you a bunch of dirty names and all of that good stuff, but then I realized something!

Better you are here showing your ignorance instead of blowing up clinics. But I do have a suggestion for you. I think instead of your pastor kicking out the soldiers, I think God wants you to do it. It’s your mission. Find a soldier and tell him to leave the church, and for effect, call him a baby killer. That should do it.

By This Justin

November 17, 2005 09:25 AM | Link to this

I’ll leave it to the pastor VOR, you never know when a soldier might try to shoot you for trying to keep evil out of the church. Heck they may even try to hurt you in a church, the house of GOD, they are trained to kill, just like abortion doctors. I pray for them.

By Voice of Reason

November 17, 2005 09:28 AM | Link to this

Not only stupid, but a coward too. It figures.

By Andy

November 17, 2005 09:36 AM | Link to this

This Justin: If our soldiers didn’t kill the terrorists then the terrorists would kill you. Any questions?

By EP

November 17, 2005 09:39 AM | Link to this

It must not be easy to create a funny, thought provoking, current political cartoon every single day, but somehow Mike magages it. I think he does a great job and he deserves every accolade he gets. And that Andy is so totally full of crap, he must weigh 600 pounds. I’ve haven’t seen so much garbage all in one place since I saw that garbage barge from New York City.

By ic

November 17, 2005 09:48 AM | Link to this

Listen I believe a woman has a choice. When it comes to sex she can say no, choose a birth control method, or take a risk. If you get pregnant be resposible. I’m not a Christian Right Conservative or a Liberal and I strongly oppose Bush, but I believe in taking responsiblity for your actions. As a younger man I was reckless. I never got anyone pregnant but there were a couple of times that I thought I had. I never once said let’s kill the baby and I never thought of leaving the young woman alone to fend for herself. I planned on halting college for a while to take care of my responsibilities to the child and the mother. I think abortion is attractive to so many people because unfortunately in this society, if a man and a woman behave irresponsibly, the woman normally is the one to shoulder the burden. Men should step up and do what’s right. But the bottom line is that once pregnant you are no longer responsible for your life, you are responsible for two lives. If the mother’s life is in danger of course you should abort the child. I am torn on the issue of incest and rape. Clearly no one wants a reminder of a violation, but that is not the child’s fault. Adoption I think would be the best method but I’m not 100% sure on that.

By Andy

November 17, 2005 09:50 AM | Link to this

So why did Harry Reid, Democrat, Nevada, dissent from the 2003 Roe V Wade affirmation resolution? Is he exercising his “right to privacy� on the issue? Will he give Alito the same consideration or will we see more liberal hypocrisy?

By Scared

November 17, 2005 09:54 AM | Link to this

After reading the comments about Mike Luckovich from the right wing crazies, I am nervous to live in the same commuity with these wackos much less the same state.

By Ricky

November 17, 2005 09:57 AM | Link to this

This Justin, your hateful rants are amazing. Obviously you have never been a soldier since you probably don’t have the intestinal fortitude to do it. Soldiers don’t murder people, they kill in defense of this country and their comrades. Nothing wrong with that, just look at the Bible. David killed Goliath didn’t he? You are an ignorant human being.

By This Justin

November 17, 2005 09:58 AM | Link to this

Andy, there is this book called the Bible, you may want to try and read it some time.

“Blessed are the peacmakers”

By Andy

November 17, 2005 10:06 AM | Link to this

Thank you, ic, your comments are most welcome. To put a face on the issue of responsibility that you have brought up consider that there has been 40,000,000 abortions performed since Roe V Wade was shoved down our throat. 40,000,000 children dead is not a responsible act that anyone should be promoting.

What does the Bible say about innocents, This Justin?

By Ricky

November 17, 2005 10:06 AM | Link to this

This Justin, why don’t you read the Bible yourself and live your life according to it instead of advising other people.

By This Justin

November 17, 2005 10:10 AM | Link to this

Ricky, isn’t the whole argue against abortion Bible based?

To put a face on the issue of responsibility that you have brought up consider that there has been 40,000 Iraqi’s killed since Bush’s war was shoved down our throat. 40,000 women and children dead is not a responsible act that anyone should be promoting.

By Ricky

November 17, 2005 10:15 AM | Link to this

This Justin, the arguement against abortion is both Bible and morality based. Women choosing to have an abortion are making a decision to kill a baby. American soldiers are not killing Iraqi’s just for fun. Yes there have been some individual cases of that, but that is the exception not the norm. Soldiers kill because someone is trying to kill them. There are many examples of war and killing in the name of war in the Bible. That is why your point is incorrect. All you are trying to do is justify abortion

By Andy

November 17, 2005 10:19 AM | Link to this

I think it is a very patriotic thing to have killed 40,000 terrorists and my only regrets with our country’s actions is that I personally did not get to send a few of them on to their 72 virgins.

By This Justin

November 17, 2005 10:24 AM | Link to this

Ricky said “Soldiers kill because someone is trying to kill them”

Was “shock and awe” just a fireworks display at Disneyland? How about the torture.

Its funny how some like to throw the Bible around to prove a point but when it doesn’t match their ideology they want it to stop.

All you are trying to do is justify war

By Ricky

November 17, 2005 10:31 AM | Link to this

What targets do you think the military was bombing? Were they bombing legititmate military targets? Yes. Were they bombing civilians? No. Again, I am sure that some civilians were killed, but on accident, not on purpose. The American military goes out of its way to avoid civilian casualties. That is the difference you refuse to see. Abortions are the conscious choice to kill, in most cases for conveince. In war, killing is necessary both to win and to perserve the lifes of our soldiers

By Mrs. Godzilla

November 17, 2005 10:34 AM | Link to this

After Jon Stewarts book “America”, I thought I’d never have to see a naked judge again. ICK! Besides, I suspect this guy even showers with his clothes on.

By Matt

November 17, 2005 10:37 AM | Link to this

Mrs Godzilla, thanks for bringing alot to the discussion. Why not just go ahead and say you don’t like him becuase he was nominated by a Repulican or whatever.

By Rich

November 17, 2005 10:37 AM | Link to this

It’s all about religion, and the religious right forcing their beliefs on society.

By This Justin

November 17, 2005 10:38 AM | Link to this

Ricky, that was the biggest crock of hypocrisy I have ever read.

By Ricky

November 17, 2005 10:40 AM | Link to this

Explain this Justin. Or did you just realize you lost the arguement so now you are just going to try and insult people.

By Andy

November 17, 2005 10:49 AM | Link to this

Vice President Richard Cheney: Welcome back, Scooter.

Vice Presidential Chief of Staff Scooter Libby: Thank you, Sir. I’m glad to be back in your service.

Vice President Richard Cheney: Karl Rove is holding for you on line 1.

By SCOOP

November 17, 2005 10:51 AM | Link to this

HUGE DEVELOPEMENT, CONSERVATIVE DEMOCRATIC CONGRESSMAN JOHN MURTHA A HAWK AND 37 YEAR CAREER MARINE VET AND SOMEONE VERY CLOSE WITH THE PENTAGON HAS JUST BECOME THE HIGHEST RANKING GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL TO CALL FOR AN IMMEDIATE WITHDRAWAL OF AMERICAN FORCES FROM IRAQ. HIGH RANKING MILITARY OFFICIALS NO LONGER FEEL A MILITARY VICTORY IS POSSIBLE IN IRAQ.

By Ricky

November 17, 2005 10:53 AM | Link to this

Scoop, what is your source?

By This Justin

November 17, 2005 10:58 AM | Link to this

This just in…….

BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) — Iraq has launched an investigation into allegations — denied by the Pentagon — that U.S. soldiers aimed artillery rounds of flammable white phosphorus at civilians.

Doctors and teams from Iraq’s Health Ministry have been dispatched to Falluja “so we can get a real answer,” acting Human Rights Minister Nermin Othman Hassan told a news conference on Thursday.

“In some cases (the injuries) can look like phosphorus, but it can be something else.”

Now regardless of how this turns out what makes you think this type of injury is more Godly than abortion Ricky? Shock and Awesome! God loves bombs! (Hates abortion)

By Ricky

November 17, 2005 11:03 AM | Link to this

This Justin, once again we are talking about war. Obviously you have never been involved in a shooting war, so I don’t expect you to understand. The fired artillery rounds at enemy positions. Nothing wrong with that. This is where you lose the arguement. Abortion is a choice to kill someone. In war you are killing people to prevent you and your buddies from being killed. Do you not see the differnce? Its sad that people like you live in the greatest country in the world.

By Voice of Reason

November 17, 2005 11:03 AM | Link to this

Read the rest of the story FOOL!

By Mara

November 17, 2005 11:03 AM | Link to this

How droll. All these men, arguing about whether my body is mine to care for, or property of the government, to be used as an incubator. Maybe when you guys have to worry about gestational diabetes, psychosis, depression, hormonal imbalance, fistula, a torn or ruptured uterus, and the disfigurement of your person…then you can decide about reproductive healthcare. Until then, your opinion doesn’t mean squat. I fail to see how anyone could be required by law to endanger their own life and health to benefit another person. And that pre-supposes that everyone agrees on whether the fetus is or is not a living person.

By Ricky

November 17, 2005 11:06 AM | Link to this

Mara, so the father of the baby should have no say?

By Mrs. Godzilla

November 17, 2005 11:10 AM | Link to this

Matt I reviewed the posts previous to mine today and am impressed by all YOU have brought to the discussion today.

Why not say I don’t like Alito because he was nominated by a republican - I can’t because that would be a lie. I don’t like Alito because of Alito. I sure did like Sandra Day O’Conner, nominated by a Republican. I respected Rehnquist - nominated by a Republican.

I actually like Republicans. My Mr. Godzilla is a good one. I haven’t thrown him out of bed for eating crackers or voting for Bush in 2000.

So instead of putting words in others people mouths, say what YOU think.

By RW-(the original)

November 17, 2005 11:10 AM | Link to this

Scoop,

Quit shouting, people are trying to sleep in here.

and, by the way, who cares? Remember ml says he is a conservative Democrat.

By This Justin

November 17, 2005 11:10 AM | Link to this

Hey Ricky, did The US Soldier have to get the permission of the young Iraqi girl’s father before he bombed her to death?

By hewhoasks

November 17, 2005 11:10 AM | Link to this

Mike Luckovich:

Keep doing the cartoons exactly as you are (with whatever improvements, etc. arise from your creativity, of course.) Maybe you should drop this blog, though.

By Daniel

November 17, 2005 11:11 AM | Link to this

Thanks Mara. The ship of state has sprung a leak. The government should leave us alone. I am certain a number of the bloggers here are “guv-ment” guys filling cyberspace with nonsense on computers paid for by you and me. The government should trust American women. Otherwise, you’ll have Andy running around with a club; telling everyone what to do. I’ve got to get to work, Bye, bye.

By Mattt

November 17, 2005 11:13 AM | Link to this

Mrs Godzilla, most of the opposition to Alito is because he is viewed as pro life. And now all the leading lefties(Schumer, Clinton, Reid, Kennedy, Durbin) are freaking out over 20 yr old memos. The problem with that is that Ruth Bader Ginsburg was openly pro choice and that didn’t matter to them. And she was confirmed 96-3. It should be based on judicial competence. He has plenty. Lawyers and judges on both sides have said he is extremely qualified. That is all that should matter. Why do you oppose him?

By sickoftheneocons

November 17, 2005 11:14 AM | Link to this

Doesn’t the Commandment say “Thou shalt not kill?” It doesn’t say anything about an objective or a justification, it just says “Thou shalt not kill.” Period.

By Voice of Reason

November 17, 2005 11:14 AM | Link to this

Daniel, Hey genius. Government employees pay taxes too! Just thought you should know.

By Ricky

November 17, 2005 11:16 AM | Link to this

This Justin, you are out there man. Obviously abortion is more important to you than the success of our soldiers in Iraq. Thats your choice though. Innocent people die in war, it happens. It sucks, but it happens. It is not a deliberate choice. Abortion is.

By SherryVL

November 17, 2005 11:18 AM | Link to this

And all the conservatives who talk about keeping government out of their personal lives — where does that fit in with whose choice it should be when a personal decision like abortion needs to be decided upon? Is it the government’s decision to make for a woman and her family? Oh, OK —Now I understand what the real agenda is! It’s not about “saving babies” — it’s about controlling women’s reproductive decisions, including birth control, right? RIGHT? And BTW, where does it say in the Bible that “life begins at conception”? Please inform us of the passage that speaks to that. Like a book written thousands of years ago about mythology — with talking snakes even! — might be a good basis for our government policies… puh-leez!

By Ricky

November 17, 2005 11:19 AM | Link to this

Sick, look at the Bible. There are plenty of examples of war. David and Goliath is one. Do you think our soldiers in Iraq are going to hell because they killed in war?

By Daniel

November 17, 2005 11:20 AM | Link to this

Ricky: Should men have to ask their wives if a vasectomy is ok? Trust American women. It’s not that hard. “Government for the people…” Remember? Keep your religion to yourself. Trust the American people to do the right thing.

By Matt

November 17, 2005 11:22 AM | Link to this

SherryVL, how does life not begin at conception? It is a living being as soon as the egg is fertilized. I don’t care about womens reproductive rights, I just don’t want to see innocent babies killed

By buff

November 17, 2005 11:22 AM | Link to this

Sandra Day O’Connor was a hideous justice becasue she wanted to do what “felt good” and was “morally right.” Her job was to IMTERPRET THE CONSTITUTION. She probably would have been great on the PTA. I think that abortion is murder, but, I do not think that the govt. should have the authority to tell someone what to do with their internal situations, except in partial birth murders.

By Chairman eDog

November 17, 2005 11:22 AM | Link to this

There is a simple answer for abortion: keep it legal, but only for liberals. Everyone wins. Liberals get to see abortion stay legal, and conservatives get to see fewer liberals over time.

By sickoftheneocons

November 17, 2005 11:23 AM | Link to this

I’m not saying either way Ricky, quite honestly I don’t know what to think because the Bible is MAN’S interpretation of GOD’S will. Who’s to say if we got it right?

By Ricky

November 17, 2005 11:23 AM | Link to this

Daniel, are you really comparing a vasectomy and an abortion

By Ricky

November 17, 2005 11:27 AM | Link to this

This issue is not trust of the woman. The issue is taking a life from a child that doesn’t have a choice.

By Daniel

November 17, 2005 11:28 AM | Link to this

No, I want government to leave us alone! I don’t want more laws telling us how to live our lives. I trust American women and men to decide for themselves. If they want to ask one another, that’s their business. I don’t want incompetent, overweight government telling us how to live our lives. Why is that hard for you?

By buff

November 17, 2005 11:29 AM | Link to this

Hey, Sick, I think you are one of my students here at KSU

By sickoftheneocons

November 17, 2005 11:36 AM | Link to this

Why do you say that Buff?

By Neo Reo

November 17, 2005 11:37 AM | Link to this

I too support the right of all liberals to have abortions, and, maybe we could make them retroactice and then have decent country to live in. I am so sick of you anti-American wimpy, whiny, ne’er do well losers. you undermine the military and hate our great President so much you are willing to damage our nation for political power. I despise you.

By gadem

November 17, 2005 11:38 AM | Link to this

I am not understanding why the White House is not cooperating with the leak probe? If no one did nothing wrong, why did Libby lie? What are they trying to cover up? Even Clinton eventually came clean….these people are really wasting my tax dollars on this BS. Tell the truth and resign!!

By buff

November 17, 2005 11:39 AM | Link to this

Sick, I saw your post yesterday about being a student here, and in class we have had some great political discusion lately. I love this school!

By This Justin

November 17, 2005 11:41 AM | Link to this

Matt said…” It is a living being as soon as the egg is fertilized.”

Does this apply to Iraqi’s? The whole sanctity of life thingy? Little breathing Iraqi children?

Maybe if I read David and Goliath it will all make sense. (I’ll skip the Jesus part though so I can justify war, pre-emptive at that.)

By sickoftheneocons

November 17, 2005 11:44 AM | Link to this

Buff, it’s too bad we can’t say the same for this Blog. Aside from a select few, no one really wants to “discuss” anything.

By buff

November 17, 2005 11:45 AM | Link to this

This Justin: if your argument is on a moral basis of civilians being killed in Iraq you lose because even the UN and Amnesty International stated that Saddam Hussein murderred between 40,000 and 60,000 Iraqis per year. So, the Iraqis are better off based on that factor. Plus, no military in history has gone to such lengths, putting its own forces in jeopardy, to try and shelter civilians. Sure, there are errors, errant bombs, etc, but we are not carpet bombing

By buff

November 17, 2005 11:46 AM | Link to this

Sick, you are right on

By SherryVL

November 17, 2005 11:53 AM | Link to this

Neo Reo says “I despise you.” Yes, we know that! Neos despise all patriots who disagree with their very small view of the world… and you claim we have a “great” president. That right there tells it all! We’ve never had a worster prez in our lifetime! And 35% still clinging to their broken man…

By sickoftheneocons

November 17, 2005 11:54 AM | Link to this

I’d like to put a question to the blog. Given what we think we know about what is going on over in Iraq and if you had a somewhat murky crystal ball, what do you see for the future of Iraq? I’m talking long term here, say 10 years? Stable, democratic, united Iraq? No more Iraq at all, instead, a democratic, secular Kurdistan, a theocratic Sunnistan and a mixed bag Shiastan? What do you think?

By buff

November 17, 2005 12:00 PM | Link to this

Sick, let me be optimistic: 1. Iraq stabilizes. I believe that it is a natural human condition to want freedon 2. Al Qaedi and Zarquewi (sp?) misclaulated when they bombed Amman Jordan 3. There will be residual effects of a “free” Iraw, i.e. Saudi Arabia moves toward a Democratic form of govt.
4. The youth in Iran finally get their way and move toward democracy and the hard linters are pushed aside 5. Afghanistan is stabilized 6. The Braves make it past the first round of the playoffs

By Andy

November 17, 2005 12:00 PM | Link to this

Mara: Thanks for telling us that you consider life to be nothing other than a TV program straight from WB where strangers bump into each other and then copulate. We’re proud that you consider yourself too incompetent to insist that birth control be used. It’s good for us to hear that you can consider a life to be an inconvenience on your vain little existence. I’m pleased to know that you consider this life and this world to be here just for your every whim.

This is so bizarre. Does no one else see the Alice In Wonderland perversions that have been brought to this “debate.” Conservatives argue for life, decency and responsibility and, for our efforts, get labeled as “extreme.” Liberals counter by saying that we kill murdering suicidal terrorists. Is this just not so weird? Do you pinkos even realize what you have signed yourselves up for?

What price do we pay, as a society, as a country for 40,000,000 dead children? Or do you even care?

By Daniel

November 17, 2005 12:00 PM | Link to this

Thanks Sherry.

By sickoftheneocons

November 17, 2005 12:06 PM | Link to this

O.k. Buff, thanks for being optimistic but now be realistic and tell me what you think. By the way, No. 6 on your list is just wishful thinking. HA!

By NeoReo

November 17, 2005 12:06 PM | Link to this

SherryVL, yes, you are quite the patriot. Kill babies, class warfare, love terrorists by “feeling their pain.” You think 9/11 was our fault. How do I know these things? Because all you pinko, commie, homo-loving anti-Americnas all share some common traits: 1. you loathe America 2. you loathe yourselves 3 you loathe high-achievers 4. you loathe Christians, but love ragheads 5. lib women are ugly 6. you celebrate abortion 7. you are stupid 8. you hate GWB 9. you are a fraud because even though you claim to be a feminist you supported Bill Clinton.

By Andy

November 17, 2005 12:08 PM | Link to this

If you tell someone that they can catch AIDS from having sex the next day the sexual revolution comes to a screeching halt.

If you tell a gay that bath houses are places where AIDS is easily transmitted then the bath houses close within a week.

If you tell someone that oral sex causes cancer Bill Clinton is devastated.

If you tell someone that they can get an unwanted pregnancy from having sex, they tell you to mind your own business; that they will kill the baby.

By RW-(the original)

November 17, 2005 12:08 PM | Link to this

sickof…

I like your question, but I don’t really think the future of Iraq has as much to do with what is happening there as it does with what is happening here.

If we pull out any time soon, Iraq will probably cease to exist. We have to continue to build their security forces and take all the time it needs. During the January elections we had to do all the security, the election to ratify the constitution we were secondary security. So there is progress.

Within Iraq we need to concentrate more on the borders with Iran and Syria. I think that started in earnest, yesterday. Operation Steel Curtain.

By buff

November 17, 2005 12:09 PM | Link to this

Sick, I think the Middle-East could stabilize. We need for their economies to flourish and for people to do well in their personal lives. So, who knows. And, you are right about #6, but, hey, dreams are fun

By gadem

November 17, 2005 12:10 PM | Link to this

Andy if not for abortion, you would be complaining about some of those 40,000,000 being on government assistance, living in your neighborhood, sleeping with your daughter, or something else to cry about. I believe that God has a way of balancing things out. I would much rather for an embryo to be aborted, than to come into this world and be abused by parents that do not want them, or be abused by foster parents that do not really want them…but then again Andy I am sure that you would adopt atleast .00002%.

By buff

November 17, 2005 12:12 PM | Link to this

Whoa, gdem, are you saying abortion is justified for the purpose of population control?

By This Justin

November 17, 2005 12:12 PM | Link to this

Right on NeoReo! Christians love war!

Hey Neo, during the American civil war did the dead soldiers from the North or the South go to hell? Which ones went to heaven after they were killed?

By Andy

November 17, 2005 12:13 PM | Link to this

gadem: You made your world, live in it. Don’t speak for me. I’m not too lazy to make mine better.

By NeoReo

November 17, 2005 12:14 PM | Link to this

TJ: it depends on if they were born again or not. I did not say it, Jesus did

By Andy

November 17, 2005 12:16 PM | Link to this

I think liberals are just too stoned, drunk or stupid to take precautions. Their posts back me up.

By RW-(the original)

November 17, 2005 12:17 PM | Link to this

gadem,

Do you think you should endure the same abuse Bill Bennett got for that last idiotic rant of yours?

By NeoReo

November 17, 2005 12:18 PM | Link to this

Andy, liberalism is a mental disorder. I would pity them if they were not do dangerous

By sickoftheneocons

November 17, 2005 12:18 PM | Link to this

Hey Neo Reo, didn’t Jesus also say “Love thy neighbor as thyself?”

By gadem

November 17, 2005 12:20 PM | Link to this

Raggedy Andy: You keep crying about 40,000,000 aborted babies. Unless you have a viable solution don’t complain. You have no agenda except make abortion illegal, and that will cure all the ills of the world.

By NeoReo

November 17, 2005 12:22 PM | Link to this

Sick, was it Jesus, or Paul? You may be right, but do you think Jesus would say stand by and watch your wife raped and your children murdered? I do know Christians who believe this. Not me, I am an old man, 82, who spent too much time on Guadalcanal, Saipan, Tinnian, and Iwo Jima to not know that evil exists. But you asked a good question

By gadem

November 17, 2005 12:24 PM | Link to this

RW, my rant can be no more idiotic than the rants that some of you all had concerning Terri Schiavo.

By This Justin

November 17, 2005 12:26 PM | Link to this

Buff, aren’t we using innocent Iraqi’s killed by American soldiers as “population control”?

By RW-(the original)

November 17, 2005 12:26 PM | Link to this

gadem,

I don’t recall ever talking about Terri Schiavo.

You, on the other hand, just advocated abortion as a way to keep people off welfare.

By sickoftheneocons

November 17, 2005 12:26 PM | Link to this

All right guys, goin to lunch. I’ll be back to blog again in an hour or so. Don’t kill each other before I get back.

By buff

November 17, 2005 12:27 PM | Link to this

I have to agree with gadem. The cons blew it on Terry Schiavo. Less govt, but……

By Peggy Brodsky

November 17, 2005 12:29 PM | Link to this

My comment concerns Mike Luckovich. I have read the paper for more years than I care to remember and one of the reasons is Mike Luckovich. He hits us where we live and makes us use our minds. Isn’t that a political cartoonists job. I meant to write regarding the honoring of our dead in the Iraq war. How is what Mike did any different that the Viet Nam Memorial. I have a brother killed and listed on the wall, should I say no no it is private people can’t know he was killed. Keep up the good work Mike and if you ever want to get rid of any of your drawings, let me know I can’t think of one I would frame. A friend of mine who use to work for the paper before she died made me a fan and I know she’s up there smiling each day because of you. Thanks,

By The72John

November 17, 2005 12:29 PM | Link to this

It’s too bad you don’t understand what it was you were fighting for in World War II, Neo. Your rant from 12:06 would have made the most hard-core SS officer proud.

You can rant about the US and it’s values all you want, but it is patently obvious that the only person that TRULY hates what America stands for is YOU. If you would rather live in a society where everyone is the same and those who are different are ostracized, punished or even killed, then maybe it would have been better for you to join the other side during World War II.

Their ideals are much more closely aligned with yours.

By gadem

November 17, 2005 12:42 PM | Link to this

Well RW I know it sounds bad, but I would rather the kids not to suffer. I know most, not all, hypocritical conservatives would rather the kids be born and the whole entire family struggle and be in welfare, and then breaking news at 6 news story because the mother killed them. To me it is hypocritical to oppose abortion, but be in favor of war, the dealth penalty. That does not register with me. Killing is wrong whether it is abortion or war or the elctric chair.

By NeoReo

November 17, 2005 12:45 PM | Link to this

John, I never said I wanted everyone to be the same. I even want to keep a few libs around for museums and zoos. What I HATE is appeasers of tyranny: Bill Clinton, Carter, Chamberlain. You eihter fight or give up. And, you have no fricking idea what I went through or why I volunteered for WWII you abortion-should-have been

By gadem

November 17, 2005 12:47 PM | Link to this

TO clear up things, killing is wrong. I don’t necessarily agree with abortion, but what one chooses to do is up to them. I have no right to invade their privacy and tell them what to do. Everyone has demons that they have to face..

By The72John

November 17, 2005 12:49 PM | Link to this

Ah, and that is the kind of venom I’m talking about Neo. It’s really too bad you didn’t catch a bullet through your skull back in the good ole days.

By buff

November 17, 2005 12:49 PM | Link to this

gadem, it is never justified to kill a baby, but it may be justified to kill an enemy, so, it can be, but is not necessarily be a hypocritical position

By RW-(the original)

November 17, 2005 12:52 PM | Link to this

gadem,

At least you know it sounds bad, so did Bill Bennett and he even stated that in his next sentence.

I know you didn’t bring him up, but how do you feel about the way he was treated.

I kind of miss Old Sparky.

By The72John

November 17, 2005 12:53 PM | Link to this

You know, I really love how the “Christians” on this blog go so far out of their way to justify their desire to kill, discriminate against, eliminate, and otherwise villify any one they don’t agree with, but will whip out the Bible at a moments notice to attack someone who does the same to them.

Someone said it earlier - I don’t despise Christians, but I do despise people like you. Your hatred and venom is repulsive. You are trash and don’t deserve to live in a country based on freedom.

By NeoReo

November 17, 2005 12:54 PM | Link to this

John, John, John, thanks for showing me what you really are. I fight fascism, but you wish I was dead? I did get shot, by th eway, but not in the head.

By gadem

November 17, 2005 12:54 PM | Link to this

NeoReo I think dementia has set in on you buddy. So whatever you say…yeah OK

By NeoReo

November 17, 2005 12:56 PM | Link to this

Thank you, gadem

By Daniel

November 17, 2005 12:57 PM | Link to this

T72J: You have a point. Let’s try this: “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you” These “Christians” have lost their way. Christianity? It would be nice.

By The72John

November 17, 2005 12:57 PM | Link to this

Um, Neo, based on your comments, in case you didn’t notice, you ARE a facist.

You just don’t realize it.

By NeoReo

November 17, 2005 01:00 PM | Link to this

Which is worse, fascism or communism?

By gadem

November 17, 2005 01:02 PM | Link to this

NeoReo, I am going to assume that you have not taken your medication today. So yeah NeoReo, did you get a purple heart?

By The72John

November 17, 2005 01:05 PM | Link to this

Since I doubt you can define either adequately, any discussion on the topic is wasted on you.

By NeoReo

November 17, 2005 01:06 PM | Link to this

gaden, I got two, but one was for a scratch, I call it the Kerry Medal. Off to lunch w/ a bunch of other old geezers

By Andy

November 17, 2005 01:06 PM | Link to this

Gadem: You can’t separate the issues because you are a pinko. You watch a great deal of broadcast TV and think it’s real, don’t you?

American soldiers kill terrorist because terrorists have sworn to kill us. They have already killed more than 3000 of us. This is like a cure for a disease, killing terrorists; it prevents other innocents from dying from it. It’s a righteous killing also; even the terrorists want to die.

I actually oppose the death penalty. I think it is more fitting for a murderer (someone who takes an innocent life, gadem, pinko) to spend the rest of his miserable life in a 6 by 9 cell free to play with all of his little demons. Why put them to sleep now?

You anti lifers kill babies because you are lazy. You’re right, there’s no comparison.

By gadem

November 17, 2005 01:09 PM | Link to this

Buff a life is a life, but the life of a defensless baby is even more precious. But you can not put asterisk by murder. A baby is wrong, but an enemy is ok…that response is a bunch of garbage. That kind of talks sounds like racist preachers back in the old south that said killing is wrong, but it is ok to kill a black man because they are not human. It was BS then and it is BS now.

By buff

November 17, 2005 01:12 PM | Link to this

gadem, are you arguing that there is no moral difference b/t a baby’s death and a terrorists?

By gadem

November 17, 2005 01:13 PM | Link to this

Raggedy Andy…Actually you probably watch more Fox News than I watch TV. I am not home enough to watch TV. Please tell me the last thought provoking book you read besides something by a FOX News Talking head.

By RW-(the original)

November 17, 2005 01:14 PM | Link to this

gadem,

What movie script did you get that line about preachers in the old south from?

By buff

November 17, 2005 01:16 PM | Link to this

gaden, for me, “1776”

By gadem

November 17, 2005 01:21 PM | Link to this

Actually history books and historical film clips. But I know slavery never existed. All those black men and women climbed up the trees and hung themselves. Man I have missed so much.

ANd Buff, all I said is that all life is precious. If you think one life has more value than the other…please let me know who you are because I don’t want to depend on you to save me from anything. Seeing as I think different from you.

By SherryVL

November 17, 2005 01:22 PM | Link to this

Heil, Neo!

By buff

November 17, 2005 01:24 PM | Link to this

gaden, come on, just b/c you believe differently from me and analogizing that all life is the same, from a precious standpoint is illogical. You are smarter than that. And two of my best friends are far, and I mean far left wingers

By This Justin

November 17, 2005 01:30 PM | Link to this

Should the the Iraq war be considered a holy war?

Sounds more like population control to me. Sacrifice these for those. Do those that are sacrificed have a say in the matter? Like the unborn child, who is speaking for the unknown Iraqi dead?

By RW-(the original)

November 17, 2005 01:34 PM | Link to this

gadem,

Why do you feel the need to denigrate an entire group for the actions of a very few?

Many preachers in what you disparagingly call the “old south” were the very ones that were helping to shelter and transport slaves to freedom through things like the Underground Railroad.

I don’t make these over reaching generalizations that you are so fond of.

Stating that all preachers were not promoting genocide is not denying the existence of slavery.

I thought you liberals were supposed to be the nuanced ones.

By Neoreo

November 17, 2005 01:36 PM | Link to this

SherylVL: When you address me, it should be “hail” not “heil” And, I think it was gadem who said Ihave dementia, darn, maye you are right, my old geezer luncheon is next Friday.

By mit

November 17, 2005 01:39 PM | Link to this

why does the topic always turn to abortion?

What do you call someone who personally would not have an abortion but at the same time doesn’t want to tell someone else how to live their life? and hypocrite is not an answer.

If you are pro-life and do not have abortions, exactly what rights do you have to tell everyone else they should live by your example? Which goes into a subject I like to talk about b/c most pro-lifers are republican and love their bibles. exactly whose law do you hold more true? the bible’s or your human controllers?

By Ricky

November 17, 2005 01:42 PM | Link to this

This Justin, what is the point of your endless rants against US troops? What do you want to accomplish? And no the Iraq war is not a holy war.

Gadem, we all know slavery existed. There is a difference between killing a baby and killing someone that is trying to kill you. It is self-defense, just like if someone broke into your house and was trying to kill you and you managed to kill them first. Thats the difference.

By The72John

November 17, 2005 01:43 PM | Link to this

I’m going to step in on this one…

Why do you feel the need to denigrate an entire group for the actions of a very few?

gadem said: That kind of talks sounds like racist preachers back in the old south.

Now…he doesn’t say all preachers, he says racist preachers. That would eliminate the ones you’re talking about, yes? And surely you aren’t so deep in fundy denial that you would suggest that there were no racist preachers in the pre-emancipation South?

Perhaps YOU should try to develop reading comprehension skills before you accuse others of lacking nuance.

By NeoReo

November 17, 2005 01:43 PM | Link to this

mit, to your first ? a liberal DemocRAT

By Bel

November 17, 2005 01:45 PM | Link to this

As an incest survivor, I already know what it’s like to have a MAN in control of my body. I don’t need another man, court, nor governmental body making those kinds of choices for me again. When it comes to Roe vs. Wade MYOB.

By buff

November 17, 2005 01:49 PM | Link to this

I am sick of abortion, but Roe v. Wade is just bad law. It is not even about abortion, it is about privacy. I want the issue decided on the issue. And, by the way, if RvW is overturned that would not make abortion illegal; it would be left up to the individual states. Bel, I so sorry that happened to you, how tragic

By buff

November 17, 2005 01:52 PM | Link to this

Many Christians are misguiled zealots. I was in church one time and the pastor was very angry that people abbreviate Christmas to XNAS. He said that was removing Christ. Good grief, even for many Christians the day has become secular. I despise pious, over-bearing people

By mit

November 17, 2005 01:55 PM | Link to this

so neo,

I take it you are pro-life. So what would you do with all the newborn, unwanted babies?

With an end to abortion the country will need to find the money to care for all these childern in foster homes. As a republican, you are in favor of less money toward a social service and would like those tax dollars given back to the people. This would cause a dilemma in your cause. you want abortion illegal and no more money pumped into foster homes. So before I can agree with you and the illegalization of abortion the republicans must come up with the money and means to aid foster homes.

By nEOrEO

November 17, 2005 01:58 PM | Link to this

mit, I am pro-life, but would spend any amount of money needed to take good care of babie, all kids for that matter

By Dr R

November 17, 2005 02:00 PM | Link to this

Many atheists are misguided zealots as well, offended by the fact that others choose to worship openly. Most protest of public displays of faith don’t come from the opposite religion but from those with no faith at all. When one side sees fit to tolerate the other, we might be on the right path. Don’t hold your breath.

By This Justin

November 17, 2005 02:00 PM | Link to this

Ricky said….” It is self-defense, just like if someone broke into your house and was trying to kill you and you managed to kill them first.”

Are you kidding me? We’re the ones breaking into their house, we have killed their children, where’s the sanctity of life when innocent Iraqi’s are concerned? In case you haven’t noticed there is a controversy going on as to why this war started in the first place. Certainly we can debate the moral and religious aspects of war, like we’ve done with abortion, right? How many times does Jesus talk out against war? There’s certainly a debate there.

Where did you get this moral authority from, To judge abortion as wrong but not war?

By mit

November 17, 2005 02:02 PM | Link to this

I have no problem with that neo.

As a male I don’t really put my two cents in over the abortion debate but I was just wondering.

By The72John

November 17, 2005 02:03 PM | Link to this

Many atheists are misguided zealots as well, offended by the fact that others choose to worship openly. Most protest of public displays of faith don’t come from the opposite religion but from those with no faith at all. When one side sees fit to tolerate the other, we might be on the right path.

Hogwash. Protests of public displays of faith have NOTHING to do with being offended and EVERYTHING to do with public funds not being used for private religion. I don’t care if you cover every square inch of your church and house lawns with tacky light-up manger scenes and dance through the streets singing “O Holy Night”. Just don’t do it in the bloody courthouse.

Tolerate the other. What BS. The day a fundy Christer tolerates ANYONE is the day the world ends.

By gadem

November 17, 2005 02:06 PM | Link to this

Thank you The72John. I never said all preachers, I said racist preachers. People always seem to read what they want to read.

By Dr R

November 17, 2005 02:08 PM | Link to this

I pose this somewhat rhetorically, but what exactly is an innocent civilian? When did we decided that only soldiers in uniform should serve their country? In World War II, we all felt a part of the conflict, whether we served in the armed forces or not. If your country’s leaders engage in policies that bring about conflict, do you not have a stake in it? I consider myself part of my country’s actions because I vote and accept the responsibilities of citizenship (yes, even when I didn’t vote for or agree with our leaders). Like it or not, when it comes to war, we all are at war, not just the troops.

By mit

November 17, 2005 02:10 PM | Link to this

so justin,

if (any country) decides to invade the USA and comes to take you away what would you do?

1)you are going to die by execution. 2)your wife is going to be taken for them.

anyone be it a liberal or conservative is going to defend his and his family’s life. But you are going to sit by and watch? I don’t buy that.

By NeoReo

November 17, 2005 02:11 PM | Link to this

mit, I heard a woman give a speech about abortion about fifteen years ago. She talked about her “rights,” said she had an abortion when seh was 16 because her dad would have “killer her,” but that she had regretted the abortion every day since. It changed my outlook. What I don’t like are the fems who celebrate abortions. I think it was Prez Clinton who said: “Abortions shoudl be safe, legal, and rare.” I wish all the libs had that attitude. Even though I disagree, I can at least show some respect for the belief.

By gadem

November 17, 2005 02:13 PM | Link to this

Mit you answered your own argument as to why Iraqi don’t want us there.

By Ricky

November 17, 2005 02:13 PM | Link to this

This Justin, I don’t claim to have a moral authority, obviously you do since you are telling me I am wrong. You have continually bad mouthed our troops and accussed them of murder. All I am doing is representing another point of view. According to you if someone is shooting at our soldiers, they should do nothing? Is that what you want? Of do you just want people to say abortion is okay? I have asked you repeatedly why you continue to bad mouth our soldiers but you never answer. Why is that?

By Dr R

November 17, 2005 02:14 PM | Link to this

So all fundamental Christians are intolerant? I see. I think you’ve made my point for me.

Funny how the left doesn’t mind spending tax money freely unless it involves religion or the military.

By kimberly

November 17, 2005 02:16 PM | Link to this

There will be NO money forthcoming to take care of the unwanted babies.

According to US Comptroller General David Walker, (USA Today 11-14-25) the United States can be likened to Rome before the fall of the empire. Its financial condition is “worse than advertised,” he says. It has a “broken business model.” It faces deficits in its budget, its balance of payments, its savings — and its leadership.

Without major spending cuts, tax increases or both, the national debt will grow more than $3 trillion through 2010, to $11.2 trillion — nearly $38,000 for every man, woman and child. The interest alone would cost $561 billion in 2010, the same as the Pentagon.

(Me again:) Who imagines that average citizens will fare better financially while our collective financial state goes irretrievably down the toilet? Who will be able to afford to properly care for the unwanted babies — their own or someone else’s? Oh, but more importantly, will we find the money to imprison them 15 years down the road?

By The72John

November 17, 2005 02:17 PM | Link to this

Who celebrates abortions? What nonsense. I don’t know ANYONE who thinks that abortion is some wonderful thing. MOST liberals believe basically what you have attributed to Clinton. In fact, I would say that maybe a 10th of one percent DON’T believe that.

You are obviously a gullible and easily-led person who has fallen for the silly and hysterical rhetoric of the Religious Right.

By Neal Boortz

November 17, 2005 02:17 PM | Link to this

Blah, blah, blah

By Andy

November 17, 2005 02:20 PM | Link to this

*If you tell someone that they can catch AIDS from having sex the next day the sexual revolution comes to a screeching halt.

If you tell a gay that bath houses are places where AIDS is easily transmitted then the bath houses close within a week.

If you tell someone that oral sex causes cancer Bill Clinton is devastated.

If you tell someone that they can get an unwanted pregnancy from having sex, they tell you to mind your own business; that they will kill the baby.

If you told a woman she would die if she got pregnant, there would be no need for abortions.

By Ricky

November 17, 2005 02:20 PM | Link to this

72John, here are some liberals who have advocated abortion on demand, Nan Aaron, Ralph Neas, Nancy Pelosi, Denis Kuchnish, and Barbara Boxer. All have said that abortions should be available to anyone, anytime they want them. To me that is a celebration of abortion.

By mit

November 17, 2005 02:21 PM | Link to this

I know women who have had abortions and not one of them likes to talk about it. Yeah, they still see at as neccessary at the time but they don’t like to think about it now. What gets me most is the assumption that their lives would be ruined if they had the baby but with all the women I saw that had babies when the time wasn’t right wouldn’t have it any other way. Those babies made their lives better rather than ruined it. Hindsight is tough on some. But I do understand that there are women out there that don’t want childern and the burden they think the baby will cause. I am not adopting babies so I think an abortion may be best in some cases. What I don’t currently understand with republicans today is this: They want abortion illegal for everyone, they want to people to adopt these childern instead. nice but at the same time they don’t want to properly fund the services and they want to discriminate against those who wish to adopt them.

By kimberly

November 17, 2005 02:22 PM | Link to this

NeoReo, please bear in mind that whle you’ve heard tales of woe from women who regret their choices, there are plenty of women who do NOT regret making that choice, who are grateful they had the option, and who don’t feel the need to share their private stories with you. Plenty.

By The72John

November 17, 2005 02:22 PM | Link to this

Oh Dr R you are SO witty. Yes, all fundamentalist Christians are intolerant, that’s why they’re called fundamentalists.

And what’s REALLY funny is that you Fundies (I’m just going to ASSUME that you are a gay-bashing, war-loving, science-loathing fundie) despise spending money on the poor but love spendning it to build bombs.

By Ricky

November 17, 2005 02:23 PM | Link to this

Here is where Dems lose on abortion. Partial-birth abortion. If more Dems would come out and say yes we are pro-choice but not for partial-birth abortion, where the baby is actually born and killed on the way out. They continue to vote to approve partial birth abortion which according to the Pew Research Center, 83% of Americans object too

By Dr R

November 17, 2005 02:24 PM | Link to this

In a perfect world, responsible people would consider the consequences before engaging in risky sexual behavior. Because such a world doesn’t exist and most folks’ brains are in their genitals, abortion is necessary. It is a barbaric, selfish act from someone who has acted irresponsibly and created a life she cannot support. But to force parenthood on such a weak-willed person would lead to yet another unhappy life that would benefit no one. Abortion must remain legal because we are flawed, self-absorbed, short-sighted beings.

OK, did I manage to tick everyone off with that one?

By The72John

November 17, 2005 02:25 PM | Link to this

I see, Ricky, so you think that believing unequivocally that the government does not have any business dictating what someone does with her body amounts to celebrating abortion?

No wonder you people are so stupid.

By Matt

November 17, 2005 02:25 PM | Link to this

I love how you people assume all Repbulicans don’t support funding for hand out programs. You have been so indoctrinated by the liberal leaders that you refuse to believe that anyone on the right has their own views. However, if someone on the right said that about the left you would accuse them of being intolerant fascists. Funny how that works.

By Andy

November 17, 2005 02:26 PM | Link to this

My all time favorite is Barbara Boxer, at an anti life rally, explaining that she was fighting for abortion rights because her mother didn’t have them.

By RW-(the original)

November 17, 2005 02:29 PM | Link to this

T72,

Maybe when you decide you have to step in, you should review the fact that this is an ongoing observation and not simply a response to one comment.

By mit

November 17, 2005 02:30 PM | Link to this

gadem

it wasn’t an argument, it was a theoritical question to Justin, who believes that soliders shouldn’t kill. it had nothing to do with iraq. 1) we don’t exterminate iraqis for being iraqi. 2) we don’t take their women and childern.

By Dr R

November 17, 2005 02:34 PM | Link to this

No, I’m not any of those things, proving how wrong assumptions are. I’m actually (to blow my cover here) playing the devil’s advocate to try to show another side to the conventional wisdom. Yes, many fundamentalists (like Pat Robertson, for example) are small-minded, intolerant gay-bashers, et al, who want to force their faith on others. Point taken. At the same time, many sincere people of faith who want to celebrate in a low-key, public way have been thwarted by overheated atheists who assume (as you seem to) that all church-going folks are wild-eyed fanatics. Again, my making such sweeping generalities, you guys keep making the point for me.

I’m all for helping the poor, by the way, but spending money through taxes hasn’t helped them much. Let’s grow the economy and get them jobs. Easily said, I know.

By The72John

November 17, 2005 02:35 PM | Link to this

Gee RW, how could I mistake your SPECIFIC reference for a broader issue. Again, maybe you should improve your writing skills.

Matt, whatever, dude. Lay down with dogs, you get fleas.

By kimberly

November 17, 2005 02:35 PM | Link to this

DR R, I appreciate your honesty, and am not ticked off. What you say about humans is undeniably true. Still, what you say does not apply to ALL humans. There are still women and girls affected by abuse, incest, rape, deception, illness, birth control failures, and extreme poverty. The legality of abortion simply means that those people do not have to go to court to PROVE their horrible plight to a bunch of people for whom, it’s really none of their business anyway.

By Buster Hymen

November 17, 2005 02:36 PM | Link to this

The 15th Amendment should be repealed

By gadem

November 17, 2005 02:39 PM | Link to this

Matt I don’t assume all Republicans are against public funding, but someone like you that classifies them as hand out speaks volumes about your true feelings.

By buff

November 17, 2005 02:41 PM | Link to this

Darn, I didn’t make the sexiest man list again

By Andy

November 17, 2005 02:43 PM | Link to this

Kimberly: Thanks for telling us that you consider life to be nothing other than a TV program straight from WB where strangers bump into each other and then copulate. We’re proud that you consider women too incompetent to insist that birth control be used. It’s good for us to hear that you can consider a life to be an inconvenience on your vain little existence. I’m pleased to know that you consider this life and this world to be here just for your every whim.

By RW-(the original)

November 17, 2005 02:43 PM | Link to this

T72,

Here is the answer to your 2:17 question

I’m not how you could have mistaken my comment, I’ll try to idiot proof my writing for you next time.

By Dr R

November 17, 2005 02:45 PM | Link to this

True, indeed, Kimberly, and those exceptions should be noted. I don’t want to make the same mistake as my other friends in here and assume generalities that are not true. Those cases indeed make it necessary to keep abortion available and legal, however repugnant the practice may be. And I didn’t mean to intimate that only the woman is irresponsible; men who engage in sexual behavior without regard for the consequences are equally to blame.

Intolerance is intolerance. When you assume stereotypes about anyone, you become the engine of prejudice. Why is it OK to lump all Christians together when we have rejected such notions for other ethic and religious models? Judge people as individuals, by their character and actions, not the group to which they belong. Two wrongs do not make a right.

By RW-(the original)

November 17, 2005 02:48 PM | Link to this

buff,

If you could have just figured out how to indict a Republican you could have made the list.

(t72-that was a reference to Patrick Fitzgerald and Scooter Libby)

By Voice of Reason

November 17, 2005 02:52 PM | Link to this

Dr. R - Men have nothing to do with it!

By The72John

November 17, 2005 02:54 PM | Link to this

I don’t think that all church-going folk are wide-eyed fanatics, far from it. However, the people who are in the newspaper or on the television news screaming about how the godless heathens are trying to destroy Christmas usually ARE.

The simple fact is that the genuine quiet people of faith you mention are quite content celebrating Christmas or any other religious holiday to the fullest extent - in their homes, in their churches, with their friends and family.

And really - my hometown still has a Christmas parade every year, right down Broad Street. I hardly think that anyone’s rights are being threatened.

By kimberly

November 17, 2005 02:55 PM | Link to this

Andy, WOW. You misquoted and misinterpreted me completely! What are you smoking, and are you willing to share?

By Dr R

November 17, 2005 02:55 PM | Link to this

Not sure where you learned reproductive science, Voice, but I believe, yes, that men are involved somehow. Been married too long to remember for sure; someone can brief me on that.

You know, if I can be considered an intolerant fundamentalist because I defend one point of view, can I then assume that everyone in here defending abortion is an unwed, poor, incest-ridden pregnant woman on welfare? Wait, that would include me, wouldn’t it?

By sickoftheneocons

November 17, 2005 02:56 PM | Link to this

Dr R your post that we should judge individuals on their merit is, unfortunately, a fantasy that will probably never be realized. Christians are lumped together, conservatives, liberals, Democrats, Republicans, homosexuals, feminists, abortionists, anti-abortionists, pro-life, pro-choice, etc., etc. ad nauseum. Every group has their hardcore, die-hard loonies and if you’ve ever identified yourself as a member of that particular group, you are almost always associated, by others, with those loonies. Unfortunately, because of the this intolerance and our inability to agree, we may never fix this country. Andy, who should we kill first to get this country on the right track again?

By The72John

November 17, 2005 02:57 PM | Link to this

Good one RW - you realize you’re wrong so you just go to mocking. Nice one. Really.

Gee Andy, where do you keep cutting and pasting that WB thing from? Maybe you could try to actually find an ORIGINAL thought.

By RW-(the original)

November 17, 2005 02:58 PM | Link to this

kimberly,

Maybe he got some of that herbal tea!

(t72-reference to an odd thing that happened yesterday afternoon)

By Voice of Reason

November 17, 2005 02:59 PM | Link to this

I’m talking about abortion good Dr. Most women, including a couple of loons here, have made it quite clear that men have no say in what they do with their bodies. It’s a woman’s body and a woman’s choice.

By Chairman eDog

November 17, 2005 03:00 PM | Link to this

Andy if not for abortion, you would be complaining about some of those 40,000,000 being on government assistance, living in your neighborhood, sleeping with your daughter, or something else to cry about.

My point, exaclty, gadem: 40,000,000 more reliable Democratic voters.

By buff

November 17, 2005 03:04 PM | Link to this

Dr. R. may I inquire as to what your doctorate is in? Thanks

By Dr R

November 17, 2005 03:06 PM | Link to this

Yeah, we’re all doomed to be linked to the loonies, ‘tis true. Which is why a few of us need to hold out and respect differences, not just of surface and background but of thought. Just as we don’t all need to look and pray alike, we also don’t need to think alike. My liberal friends in here, bless your hearts, need to acknowledge that there is intolerance on the left as well when it comes to judging folks who disagree with them. And don’t go off on the old “well they started it first” childish routine. Prejudice will only end when one side decides not to return fire. But you’re right, it’s folly to hope it will happen. Until then, we all have our herbal tea to help us mellow out …

By The72John

November 17, 2005 03:13 PM | Link to this

See, the thing is Dr R, there is a big difference to the intolerance of the left and that of the right.

MY personal intolerance for the right is caused by the fact that from a very young age they’ve been busy telling me how evil and sinful I am. Now, I am PERFECTLY happy to let them go on through their lives without bothering them a bit, but they seem bent on jumping out of alleys with bats and trying to criminalize my life.

See, Doc, when the Mossad goes after ex-Nazis, it’s not discrimination or intolerance, it’s justice. The abuser can’t claim victimhood because the people he’s abused fight back.

And don’t YOU give me that return fire crap. It’s easy to be on the sidelines when no ones attacking you, sir.

By This Justin

November 17, 2005 03:13 PM | Link to this

Chairman eDog, more like 33,000,000 “do as I say not as I do” republican voters and 7,000,000 democrat voters.

By Dr R

November 17, 2005 03:14 PM | Link to this

My Phd is in Reasoned Discourse on Salient Events of Our Time and Societal Rumination. It’s a little-known degree course.

Yeah, I made that up … I’m totally full of crap, if you haven’t figure that out yet. Is anybody besides me not getting any work done today? I’ve got a ton of patients waiting for me in various degrees of excruciating pain.

By RW-(the original)

November 17, 2005 03:19 PM | Link to this

[Why couldn’t this story have been around yesterday?]http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/columnists/orl-maxwell1705nov17,0,2971218.column?coll=orl-news-col)

t72-even you can probably figure this one out

By The72John

November 17, 2005 03:20 PM | Link to this

Oh I’m sorry…I didn’t realize this was the place for reasoned discourse. Based on what everyone else was posting, Andy and his friends in particular, I thought it was the place for hysterical ranting, name-calling, venting and general partisan mayhem.

By RW-(the original)

November 17, 2005 03:21 PM | Link to this

Why couldn’t this story have been around yesterday?

t72-even you can probably figure this one out

By Dr R

November 17, 2005 03:22 PM | Link to this

My friend, don’t you see how it has poisoned you as well? You lumped me in with gay-bashing, science-loathing “Fundies” with very little evidence to support that. Just as those who come after you have jumped to ill-thought conclusions, you did the same. Learn to separate your real enemies, which no doubt there are, from those who merely take a contrary position. You may find I’m actually on your side, no matter how evil and sinful you might be (well, we all are in the end.)

Really, I only loathed science when I had to take it in school. I was lousy at it.

By kimberly

November 17, 2005 03:33 PM | Link to this

DR. R: You said, “Prejudice will only end when one side decides not to return fire.” I have to disagree. Back in the 80’s, the right-wing punditry really took off. Limbaugh gained fame and fortune with daily attacks on anyone and everyone left of far right. The more venom he spewed, the higher his ratings. Soon millions were quoting this bile every day.

Many of us, and sadly, the Democratic party, did not return fire, as we literally did not want to dignify much of this toxic rubbish with a response. Look at the result. The Repubs now control all three branches of the government and most of the states — largely due to the exploitation of, and failure to respond to, people’s ignorant prejudices.

By Malachi

November 17, 2005 03:38 PM | Link to this

I’m glad that you could join the fray, John. I do not believe that Andy is a real person. No person could possibly feel the way that he does. I have never seen anybody with such disdain for a group of people in this country (liberals). He makes unnecessary jokes about pinkos, and then confronts you if you say something about conservatives.

As for Alito, so far he doesn’t seem like bad choice. I hate when people jump to conclusions for no reason. He might prove to vote moderate.

By RW-(the original)

November 17, 2005 03:38 PM | Link to this

Dr. R.,

You have really done something to have Kimberly and me on the same page.

Look what happened to President Bush’ poll numbers when the Democrats spent months spreading vicious lies about him without him fighting back.

By mit

November 17, 2005 03:38 PM | Link to this

RW,

what does that article have to do with anything discussed here?

but this is funny:

Wallace, a construction-company exec, was candid about the fact that his business life was a big part of his decision to change.

“It’s purely a business decision. Ninety percent of those I do business with are Republicans,” he said. “Opportunities that have come to my firm have been brought by Republicans.”

By Ricky

November 17, 2005 03:43 PM | Link to this

What I would love to see out of this blog is honest discussion. I understand that most of us are set in our views and someone on here is not going to change anyones mind. What I don’t like is when people resort to vast generalizations and insults on people they don’t agree with. That really doesn’t bring anything to the discussion and usually just makes the poster looked dumb, whether they be on the left or right.

By RW-(the original)

November 17, 2005 03:45 PM | Link to this

mit,

It has nothing to do with today, that’s why I said it would have been interesting yesterday. Have you been gets tips from t-72?

By gadem

November 17, 2005 03:47 PM | Link to this

So RW, because he made the party switch do to further business dealings, not political feelings should maybe strike you as unfortunate. If it does not, it does reinforce the notion that republicans are all for big business and not the common man. Wallace only motivation for doing this was to further deepen his pockets. Yeah why could this not have been printed yesterday.

By The72John

November 17, 2005 03:48 PM | Link to this

RW, sweetie, I’m not the one who seems to have a problem with the conversation. I realize that you were caught out and you’re trying to mask it by trying to belittle my intelligence, but really - it’s not working.

By Dr R

November 17, 2005 03:48 PM | Link to this

You guys are talking about politics, not prejudice based on assumptions. I think there’s a difference. Due respect, Kimberly, but I don’t think the Democrats lost elections because of a windbag like Limbaugh. They lost because they haven’t come up with ideas that a majority of voters can embrace. Rather than attack the attackers, come up with a positive agenda to fill the void. Reagan (your own personal Satan, no doubt) didn’t respond to critics; he just smiled and bobbed his head and went directly to the voters with ideas they endorsed. When you come up with a Democrat who can do that, you’ll be back in power.

RW, Bush’s poll numbers dropped because his guys can’t walk and chew gum at the same time right now. Nobody listens to the Democrats anyway. Real leaders can’t blame the other side for their problems. They take the bull by the (horns) and lead.

By Dr R

November 17, 2005 03:57 PM | Link to this

On the same vein, I assume Air America was meant as some sorta half-a**ed attempt to out-Rush Rush. That’s not the answer. Ideas, real ideas. If a Democrat can come along who can wed the best ideas of conservatism (fiscal responsibility, strong defense, free markets, individual responsibility) with the best from the left (social justice, freedom of expression and faith) and get that message to the voters, you’ll have a winner. And I’ll vote for him. Or her, provided it’s not you-know-who.

By kimberly

November 17, 2005 03:57 PM | Link to this

RW, you and I are NOT on the same page! If anyone is misinterpreting the actions of the Bush administration, it is because they refuse to answer questions openly and honestly. As a matter of policy, they attack the character of those who ASK questions instead of simply answering. The arrogance of “You don’t NEED to know anything more than the sound bite I just told you!” inspires trust in no one. Some truth and humility about mistakes made just might.

By Dr R

November 17, 2005 04:01 PM | Link to this

Seriously, are we all at work here? I’m not getting anything done. Unless you count having liberals and neocons both on my butt. That’s a day well spent, actually.

By The72John

November 17, 2005 04:03 PM | Link to this

What’s wrong with “you know who” if you don’t mind my asking?

By kimberly

November 17, 2005 04:03 PM | Link to this

Good points, doctor. But I think the time has passed when just a good message is enough. The smear strategy has worked too well for too long for the Repubs to abandon it now. There must be rebuttal. BTW, for anyone who is interested, please research and read about the life and ambitions of Karl Rove — from whatever many varying sources you can. “Slander & smear” is not just my sullied perception, it is a clear tactic and actual intent this man has spent years perfecting. Please check it out for yourself when wondering why people can’t just try to get along.

By Ricky

November 17, 2005 04:05 PM | Link to this

Obviously, there has been alot of talk about abortion today. It is probably the biggest hot button issue out there today. As a conservative, here is my issues with it. It should be a state issue. Just like the right to die. Let states decided how they want to handle it. In my opinion laws like that should be decided by the law makers, not by judges who are supposed to interpret law. I am sure I will get flamed for this but oh well, that is my honest opinion

By SherryVL

November 17, 2005 04:06 PM | Link to this

Andy writes about women who “celebrate abortion” — obviously written by a man! A man who has NO IDEA what it might be like for a woman to have to choose the consequences of either having an abortion or not. No one I’ve ever met who had an abortion has “celebrated” when it had to be done. You should write about something that you have a clue about for a change…

By Ricky

November 17, 2005 04:08 PM | Link to this

Kimberly, politics has become a smear and gotcha game. Clinton had a guy that worked in his white house whose whole job was to smear Republicans. It happens on both sides. That is part of what is wrong with politics today. And most people on either side don’t want to admit it goes on for their side, only against their side.

By RW-(the original)

November 17, 2005 04:10 PM | Link to this

gadem,

Haven’t you been saying for three days that we need to save our business community to keep jobs here?

kimberly,

I know we’re not, but it was really funny typing it. Maybe I need some herbal tea!

t72,

You don’t need my help.

By The72John

November 17, 2005 04:14 PM | Link to this

More empty nonsense from an empty-headed, vacuous ninny, RW. Keep trying to convince us that you aren’t an idiot.

By Dr R

November 17, 2005 04:16 PM | Link to this

Kimberly, so cynical. I thought liberals were the wide-eyed dreamers? (have more herbal tea). You seem to be saying that you have to match crap with crap to succeed. Maybe you’re right, but it’s depressing to admit. The Repubs didn’t event the smear and slander approach, but they surely perfected it (Lee Atwater, passed on to his Jedi stooge Rove). I’d like to see someone break the cycle, from either side. How do you feel about McCain? He seems to be the genuine article and beholden to no particular group. Getting him nominated is gonna be a chore, though.

As for “you know who,” don’t you think eight years of assorted scandals and hubris were enough? I don’t want to get into the specifics of each; suffice to say that the Arkansas mafia wore out its welcome. Give me a fresh face and we’ll go from there.

By Ricky

November 17, 2005 04:16 PM | Link to this

72John, do you think people view you as smart and articulate? You shouldn’t.

By The72John

November 17, 2005 04:18 PM | Link to this

Trust me Ricky, when I’m not swimming with the troglodytes, I’m positively brilliant. I see little reason to waste my time on people unable to appreciate it, or people too busy screaming at others to appreciate debate.

Why don’t you go back to listening to the “legislating from the Bench” nonsense you were talking about earlier?

By dee

November 17, 2005 04:18 PM | Link to this

from Ricky — Sick, look at the Bible. There are plenty of examples of war. David and Goliath is one. Do you think our soldiers in Iraq are going to hell because they killed in war?

Why do people always pull pages, quotes from the OLD TESTAMENT when they want to make a point? What about what it says in the NEW TESTAMENT of Christ, (hence the word Christians), that says the “turn the other cheek” or the one that says “the greatest commandment of all is the commandment to love.”? When Jesus came he said HIS words were the ones to follow. He preached of peace and forgiveness and the lambs of God inheriting his kingdom; not the goats!!

Why not quote something that as CHRISTIANS is really CHRIST LIKE?

By Ricky

November 17, 2005 04:23 PM | Link to this

72John, you are amusing at least. Dee, my point is that war is talked about in the Bible. We had a poster earlier, this Justin, who was saying our soldiers in Iraq were murders. My point is that a soldier defending himself in battle and killing his enemy doesn’t make him a murder and mean he is going to hell. Do you think he is going to hell?

By Dr R

November 17, 2005 04:26 PM | Link to this

Swimming with the troglodytes? Sounds like a rock band. I’m still working to cast off my troglodytian status (which is about the only work I’m doing today …)

By kimberly

November 17, 2005 04:27 PM | Link to this

No, Dear. I didn’t say match crap for crap. I said fight back. I prefer to be armed with truth, because ultimately, it’s easier to defend, but admittedly, it’s NOT always easier to get ahold of! Yes, I WAS a wide-eyed dreamer. Anything wrong with that? I was told repeatedly (by right-wingers mostly) that I was naive and stupid, and that I should give up my ridiculous idealism. But if we ditch our ideals for the sake of convenience, what are we really left with? After much consideration, I decided to stick with them, even if it IS a lost cause, which it well may be. My choice.

By kimberly

November 17, 2005 04:30 PM | Link to this

Soldiers in battle are ALREADY in hell.

By Dr R

November 17, 2005 04:31 PM | Link to this

Well, truth can be relative in politics, but don’t give it up. You’re not stupid, and I’d bet against naive as well. Fight the good fight but don’t wallow in the mud with those you don’t want to emulate. I’d rather vote for an honest person with integrity than another sleazebag telling me what I want to hear. Which is why I remain blissfilly independent. Committed, sincere people founded this country and will save it from the teeming masses of … well, troglodytes.

By RW-(the original)

November 17, 2005 04:38 PM | Link to this

This place has swimming

and they claim to be affiliated with a troglodyte restaurant.

If you go be careful where you park.

By WhatLogic

November 17, 2005 04:41 PM | Link to this

To mikefan, SherryVL, and everyone else out there who believes a pro-life, anti-abortion stance is designed to punish women for having sex: get a clue! What about the child? Let’s see, two people who should know better engage in unprotected sex, resulting in a regrettable, and preventable consequence of pregnancy. Apparently they were asleep when they heard in class that when you HAVE SEX, you can get pregnant; shocker. They also choose to ignore the examples of people who make responsible decisions and protect themselves properly(none of this I forgot my pill or I don’t have a condom business) have been able to avoid pregnancy very effectively.

So now they’re saddled with this challenging situation. Now, she or they reason that the best thing to do is to kill the little zygote, because of course, it’s to blame, not them. I say kill because the instant his sperm joins her egg it becomes a unique set of 46 chromosomes, and heartbeats are detected as early as 4-6 weeks, which is curiously not long after the time most women find out about pregnancy. Also, to any of you who reason that it’s just a “her body, her choice” thing, speak to any of your friends who lose a baby to miscarriage, say maybe after the first sonogram. Those who support a woman’s right to “abort” a pregnancy may not like hearing these ugly truths, but they are no less true.

And please don’t try the response that you’re sparing the child of a life of pain and misery or that you’d make a better mother later if you could finish college without being saddled with a kid. Pleeeze. Maybe it could be looked at as an opportunity to improve upon the person that you are, and learn what it’s like to do something for someone other than yourself for a change.

The only dilemma I can sympathize with is that of the woman who is raped. I will say this, though, that just like the pregnancy is no fault of yours, neither is it that of the little child growing inside of you, and two wrongs don’t make a right. I personally know a young girl of 19 at the time, and a virgin, who was raped. Now, if there ever was a case to abort, here you have it. However, her family has rallied around her in the most beautiful display of love I have seen in many years, and she is doing a wonderful job of raising that beautiful child, who is no less beautful because of her inauspicious conception.

This is not meant to be harsh, but the truth is in life that actions have consequences, and we all agree on that. Many of the same people who support abortion also support extreme consequences for those who abuse children in any way. Remember, then, that abortion is the worst kind of child abuse, ending a life before it even begins, and with no one to defend his or her little voice.

Remember.

By buff

November 17, 2005 04:41 PM | Link to this

Kimberly, Limbaugh is so highly rated because HE IS GOOD

By Andy

November 17, 2005 04:45 PM | Link to this

By sickoftheneocons

November 17, 2005 04:45 PM | Link to this

Your right RW, he is good…at being bad (and hypocritical).

By gadem

November 17, 2005 04:46 PM | Link to this

Dee I agree 100%. It seems that people choose to pick and choose which testament of the Bible that they want to follow when it is convenient for them.

By buff

November 17, 2005 04:46 PM | Link to this

Sorry post got cut off. Kimberly, Limbaugh is highly rated because HE IS GOOD at what he does. He reads or plays what others have said or done, then gives his opinion and spin, and he tells us it is spin. A researcher and his graduate students at the University of Iowa analyzed Rush’ show and he was accurate in his reporting 98+% of the time, then he puts his spin ot things. Tlak radio and the internet gave conservatives what they did not have before: an open forum. Before the left wing big three news agencies and the left wing newspapers had great influence, now they do not. I tried listening to Air-America and it is just bad radio. I listen to talk radio because I want tobe entertained, and El Rushbo does that for me. Many of my colleagues in academe hate Rush, and what is funny is that they rarely, or have never, listen to him.

By sickoftheneocons

November 17, 2005 04:47 PM | Link to this

Andy, have you ever changed your mind about anyhting. Maybe it was as simple as that. Changing your mind about something doesn’t make you a hypocrite.

By The72John

November 17, 2005 04:49 PM | Link to this

Why Ricky, the feeling is mutual.

Let me take a stab at your question for Dee. The either-or choice you suggest is an oversimplification: one either acts in self-defense and is righteous or acts aggresively and is not. The “going to hell” argument is rather trite also - it’s better to think in terms of moral and ethical right and wrong rather than in the primitive punitive terms of many religious conservatives.

Remove Iraq from the equation. The battlefield is no longer the streets of Falujah, but is instead a dangerous neighborhood. There are two men - one a lost passer-by and the other a man looking for trouble. Both enter this dangerous neighborhood and both are attacked and forced to defend themselves. Both kill their attacker.

One man entered the neighborhood with the intent to kill, and the other was merely lost. Neither acts agressively, but their intent was clearly different. Which is more guilty? Are both innocent?

So, if a soldier becomes a soldier because he wants to kill, is he innocent? If a solider is personally innocent but part of an unjust incursion (claws in, Ricky-tiki-tavi, this is a hypothetical, not necessarily Iraq) is he guilty? If a man is defending his home and attacks and is killed, is the man who invaded and “defended” himself succesfully guilty?

It’s not cut-and-dry.

By Dr R

November 17, 2005 04:51 PM | Link to this

This blog is starting to remind me of Thanksgiving. You have the adult table, with folks who respect each other and show some manners, even in disagreement. Then there’s the ongoing food fight at the kiddie table, turkey legs flying, name-calling, chaos. I leave it to y’all to figure out who is sitting where (I’m trying to stick to my Troglo-Diet …)

By buff

November 17, 2005 04:54 PM | Link to this

Additionally, conservatism also gained political power because polling showed mch of American became disenchanted with failed social policy. We have spent 6.6 trillion dollars on assest redistribution and like the War on Drugs the War on Poverty has been a dismal failure. Simple economics: if you want more of something subsidize it, i fyou want less, tax it. Subsidizing long term poverty has wreaked havoc on millions.

By The72John

November 17, 2005 04:55 PM | Link to this

Dr R, it’s more of a treat-them-as-they-treat-you situation. Now, I’ve only started posting, but I’ve been reading for a while. There are people like RW and Andy who do nothing but belittle and name-call (moonbat, pinko, etc.) and then there are reasonable people interested in discussion.

I’m happily reasonable with those who are reasonable, and happily insulting to those incapable of civility. It’s a nice balance. I get to vent my frustrations on some and exercise my intellect with others.

By gadem

November 17, 2005 04:59 PM | Link to this

Buff why would someone knowingly listen to trash? So although you know that Rush puts his “spin” on things people blindly follow him….interesting concept of the blind leading the blind.

By Andy

November 17, 2005 05:04 PM | Link to this

SherryVL: I did not write anything about women celebrating abortions. Do not attribute things to me that I haven’t done. I thought you pinkos weren’t reading my posts?

By buff

November 17, 2005 05:04 PM | Link to this

gadem, why is Rush “trash?” He has a political opinion and he backs it up with logic. I do not always agree with him, i.e. abortion, Terry Schiavo, and some environmental issues, but I do get a lof of news coverage I would not otherwise. Now is you want “trash” listen to Air-America, not trash because of their ideas, but trash because they have little talent. Going to class now. Have a nice day

By dee

November 17, 2005 05:06 PM | Link to this

from By sickoftheneocons — I’d like to put a question to the blog. Given what we think we know about what is going on over in Iraq and if you had a somewhat murky crystal ball, what do you see for the future of Iraq? I’m talking long term here, say 10 years?

If this is a serious question, I feel that in 10 years Iran will conquer Iraq and make it a their terrority. Iraq will resort to a Theologic society, probably as extreme as Iran, with hundreds of profitable oil fields.

By RW-(the original)

November 17, 2005 05:06 PM | Link to this

sickof…

Did you mean Buff or did I miss something earlier?

and t72 you can let sickoftheneocons answer.

By RW-(the original)

November 17, 2005 05:10 PM | Link to this

Andy,

The links are done on the Clinton page.

By dee

November 17, 2005 05:11 PM | Link to this

from 72John — Dee, my point is that war is talked about in the Bible. We had a poster earlier, this Justin, who was saying our soldiers in Iraq were murders. My point is that a soldier defending himself in battle and killing his enemy doesn’t make him a murder and mean he is going to hell. Do you think he is going to hell?

Yes I read the other person’s posts and to answer your question with a little thought, I had to go back and remember as much as could about the wars of the Old Testament, — here goes my take on it:

Basically those wars war fought for GOD and were sanctioned by GOD. David slew Goliath with GOD’s help because Goliath was denigrating the children of Israel.

Now your question about the soldier…..quite honestly I can’t tell you! Only God knows who’s soul is cleaned and deserving of eternal life. Remember the sinner on the other side of Christ at the crucifiction? If I were there and had to judge him I probably would’ve said he was toast, but Christ said he’d see him in the end. I guess that didn’t answer your question; but basically I am not worthy to say who is going to hell.

By sickoftheneocons

November 17, 2005 05:14 PM | Link to this

Yeah RW, I meant Buff. I used to HATE Rush. Now I think some of the things he says are amusing and I consider him to be a HUGE hypocrite with that whole oxycontin issue.

By Dr R

November 17, 2005 05:15 PM | Link to this

I’d rather ignore them. I must admit, I was ready to throw you to the kiddie table earlier, but I trust we understand each other a bit better. I like the high road, myself. I’ll discuss anything with reasoned, intelligent people who put emotions aside to embrace facts and listen to the other side. How many in here admit to being swayed by the postings of another? It’s no sign of weakness.

By RW-(the original)

November 17, 2005 05:19 PM | Link to this

Words of wisdom from The72John who at 4:55 said he/she had just started posting and only goes to name calling as a last resort:

By The72John

October 21, 2005 01:23 PM | Link to this

Well Ricky, everytime Dusty or one of his cronies pipes in with a “you can’t criticize the president because it’s un-american� lines, then yes - I will continue to refer to him as a facist. Unquestioning support of one’s leaders and a belief that they are infallible, coupled with the belief that anyone who questions them is unpatriotic is a hallmark of facism, so I really don’t feel unjustified in calling a spade a spade.

As for Ronnie Earl - his record is not one of a partisan prosecutor, or of an uncritical or hasty one. His record shows that he is a highly moral and ethical prosecutor. It seems that the claims of partisanship stem entirely from the fact that he’s had the gall to go after a Republican. See my first paragraph…

Has it ever occured to anyone that the man simply abhors corruption of any sort in government? Are we so deeply fallen into partisanship that everyone’s motives are suspect? Personally, I would be happy to see corrupt Democrats prosecuted. It’s interesting to see that no conservative on this blog is EVER interested in entertaining the idea that their leaders might actually be corrupt.

By Ricky

November 17, 2005 05:20 PM | Link to this

72John, obviously if anyone has the desire to kill and acts on it, that is a sin. My point however, is that 99% of the American soldiers doesn’t have the desire to kill just to kill. They do it because that is their job and because they are engaged in battle.

By sickoftheneocons

November 17, 2005 05:23 PM | Link to this

Dr R, while I can honestly say my opinions have not been SWAYED by this blog and the posters on it, I can say that my thoughts have been provoked and I now research things much more thoroughly now as a result of the posters on this blog. Thanks to RW, Ricky and Buff. May we never cross the aisle but always agree to talk across it.

By RW-(the original)

November 17, 2005 05:23 PM | Link to this

sickof…

Back to the Iraq thing, I heard today (I don’t have any verification) that Iraq would be using a system like they use in Alaska where all citizens share in oil revenues.

If true, that could be a pretty good thing for Iraq and put a lot of heat on Saudi Arabia.

By The72John

November 17, 2005 05:25 PM | Link to this

OH yah got me. I did post a couple of times a month or so ago. Perhaps I should have said REGULARLY posting. I would LOVE to hear you attack the substance of my post, however.

By Ricky

November 17, 2005 05:31 PM | Link to this

72John, I personally don’t believe in everyhing Bush has done. You can critize him on the war, thats what makes democracy great. I personally don’t believe that Ronnie Earle or Tom DeLay for that matter is a very honest person. Those are the type of people we need to get out of politics.

By RW-(the original)

November 17, 2005 05:32 PM | Link to this

t72,

Do you mean you made a general statement that wasn’t artfully worded?

Gosh, I thought someone of your superior intellect would never do such a thing. Those kind of statements could only be made by someone that brings nothing but name calling to the table.

I’m sure your post was well discussed back in October.

By Andy

November 17, 2005 05:35 PM | Link to this

What did I tell everybody first thing this morning? That the anti life crowd couldn’t win with abortion so they would start with all of the “reaching out” nonsense. Like I said it is their way of throwing you off of their weak argument.

Why don’t they argue abortion without using the NARAL slogans and the lib rhetoric? Extract and dilate? Anyone of you anti lifers want to explain that procedure for us?

“Women’s health issues.” Does anybody really believe that 1.5 million women would have died last year if they had carried to term? Or that the Cons would let any woman threatened by her pregnancy die?

“Reproductive Rights.” Why can’t you just say birth control?

If abortion is such a wonderful thing for women! a euthanasia program for those we do not deem acceptable! population control! then why do you have to mask it with labels?

Because abortion is a sick, disgusting, pathetic procedure that flies in the face of our Creator. It takes a living soul and destroys it.

Like all liberal ideas they really can’t talk about it.

By sickoftheneocons

November 17, 2005 05:39 PM | Link to this

I just read Article 23 of the new Iraqi constitution that says that only an Iraqi is allowed to own land there. No foreigners. Article 28 says that low income people should be exempted from taxes in a way that guarantees maintaining the minimum level necessary for a living. This shall be regulated by law. I know in America, under $7,300 in income you don’t have to pay taxes (Single) and $14,600 (Married). Anyone want to venture a guess of the minimum income for no taxes for Iraqis?

By The72John

November 17, 2005 05:42 PM | Link to this

Oh RW. Remove that beam from your own eye before you criticize the mote in mine. A casual review of your own postings reveals a delightful pastiche of “idiots” “moonbats” “pinkos” “commies” and “loonies”.

I also find this rather humorous. RW said: It’s funny how people like Rich can never seam to come up with their sources.

Then TODAY we have this gem: I heard today (I don’t have any verification)

Ah, it must be nice to live in your world RW, able to do all the things you criticize others for doing…

By Andy

November 17, 2005 05:46 PM | Link to this

And for all of you whining about Conservatives being “mean” and “hateful,” what do you call a drawing of a respectable jurist depicted as shirtless man with a tattoo on his chest?

By RW-(the original)

November 17, 2005 05:49 PM | Link to this

t72,

When someone presents something as a true statement and can’t come up with a source, don’t you think that is a little different than being sure to state up front that you are not presenting fact?

I have had reasonable discussions with many people with opposing views that seldom go to name calling. Moonbat is my favorite and I seldom use it in the way you describe.

Who called all they disagree with “Limbaugh listening buffoons on their first post of the day on Oct,14th?

By Andy

November 17, 2005 05:58 PM | Link to this

RW: If libs had to disclose their sources they would never have anything to say. To make something true they repeat it over and over again until somebody else believes it and then it makes the “news.” Like Ronnie Earle being an upstanding fair Republican prosecutor. Anyone who is competent enough to do a basic google search knows that Earle is most likely insane with liberal rage. Google mystifies these pinkos, they thought their words just disappeared into thin air.

How do you make a URL linkable? I tried bracketing it like the legend says, it won’t do it.

By RW-(the original)

November 17, 2005 06:02 PM | Link to this

Andy,

Did you see post I left about linking for you on the Clinton page?

By Andy's first post

November 17, 2005 06:04 PM | Link to this

I’m sorry to get everybodies hopes up. I could only find 2 posts from Andy that didn’t make pinkos look silly. This is no fun. I’m going into retirement. So long and farewell.

By Andy

November 17, 2005 06:15 PM | Link to this

Here’s a quote from Barbara Boxer’s recently released novel:

“It had been a particularly intense day in [Senator Ellen Fischer’s] D.C. office, with a steady stream of meetings, e-mails, and phone calls from organizations and constituents, all urging her to step up her opposition to Professor Frida Hernandez’s nomination to the Supreme Court. There was little time left for any attempt to block the confirmation of the ultra-conservative professor… . Ellen, a member of the [Judiciary] committee, had sought to challenge the nominee’s strongly suspected bias against Roe v. Wade… . Ellen knew that, once on the Court, Hernandez would help turn back the clock on Court decisions that Ellen believed were vital to the people.”

I wonder how she’ll vote on the Alito Nomination…