Republicans, I beg you! Please, please, please STOP

1. 0

   PrettyPantherposted 12 years ago

   Please stop voting for these ignorant crackpots!  I, a life-long liberal who used to occasionally vote Republican, long for two parties that are at least grounded in reality.  Is that too much to ask?  Stop voting for these mis-educated nitwits.  We are tired of enduring the likes of Rick Perry, Michele Bachmann, Sarah Palin, Rick Santorum, and now, Todd Akin.  PLEASE STOP VOTING FOR THESE PEOPLE!
   
   There, I said it.  I feel better now.
   
   Republican Senate Nominee Todd Akin: Victims of "Legitimate Rape" Don't Get Pregnant

   replyreport
   1. 83

      peoplepower73posted 12 years agoin reply to this

      I read the article. Todd Akin needs to be raped.  And they want to keep big government out of our business!

      replyreport
   2. 68

      AJReissigposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Unfortuneately, the Democrat option is far worse that the Republican one.  Both parties are broken, but I would rather take my chances with the Republicans.  People like Obama and Pelosi would have us a Communist country if they thought they could sell it to the American people.

      replyreport
      1. 62

         bgamallposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         You have no idea what you are talking about, because communists don't give profits to the banksters. Read this treatment of libertarianism and tell me what you think, Reissig:
         
         http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/102169

         replyreport
         1. 67

            innersmiffposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Communism doesn't give profits to banksters? Sure, it profits the government, and in communist countries the banksters have been absorbed into the government. Socialism and communism are simply controlled oppositions to state-capitalism (fascism) that benefits the people in control of the banks as much as the latter does, and benefits the people just as much, i.e. very little.
            
            Statists across the political spectrum all want the same thing: other people's property. And to get it they all have to take away the individual rights of that person. The cure for this is Libertarianism: the undying and strict protection of civil liberties, and the only political position that argues for non-aggression.

            replyreport
      2. 67

         Ralph Deedsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         You need to widen your sources of information, to put it politely.

         replyreport
   3. 81

      Credence2posted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Well, Pretty Panther, we do have to get the word out about the Philistines that would take us back to the 'time before time' and dare to pawn themselves off as a rational choice.

      replyreport
   4. 67

      innersmiffposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      I think lefty obsession with Republican stupidity distracts them from criticising far more important bi-partisan violations of civil liberties.

      replyreport
      1. 0

         PrettyPantherposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         THIS I agree with!  However, and it's a big however, somebody keeps voting for the crazies, otherwise they would not be of interest to anyone.  Why?
         
         I am asking Republicans why they do it.  I am married to a Republican and he is disgusted with the GOP.

         replyreport
         1. 73

            Reality Bytesposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            
            
            Has he listened to the message from Gary Johnson?  Jus sayin, the guy makes sense.
            
            
            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4x9bkXVccAs

            replyreport
            1. 0

               PrettyPantherposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               My husband just checked out Gary Johnson's website.  One of the first things he read is that when Johnson was governor of New Mexico he privatized half of the prisons.  My husband is looking for a fiscal conservative who understands that there is an important role for government and certain things should not be done for profit, including imprisoning human beings.

               replyreport
               1. 73

                  Reality Bytesposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  His state had a serious issue with their prison system, with no help from the legislature, he did what he could to solve the problem.  It seems the corporate prison industry supported Gary's opponent.
                  
                  
                  http://garyjohnsongrassrootsblog.blogsp … sons.html.
                  
                  
                  By eliminating prohibition, he would be decimating the prison industry!

                  replyreport
   5. 60

      American Viewposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      PP,
      
      When I saw the title of this thread I could not imagine what you could be complaining about with all the gaffes the left have been putting out.Your link did not work so I googled it.
      
      I am appalled by such stupidity no mater who says it. I hope his opponent defeats him, he does not deserve to become Senator, he does not even deserve to get elected dog catcher. What a piece of garbage

      replyreport
   6. 61

      umbertoobrianposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Could be worse:
      http://jezebel.com/5369395/whoopi-on-ro … -rape+rape
      
      Could be intentionally inflamatory:
      http://jezebel.com/5369395/whoopi-on-ro … -rape+rape
      
      ror exploited just for politics
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dX46sbLhjQI
      
      and then not supported by Democrats in the Senate, despite no filibuster and a Democrat majority
      http://swampland.time.com/2011/10/11/wi … sfunction/
      
      
      
      But it could be so very much worse
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juanita_Broaddrick

      replyreport
      1. 60

         Cody Hodgeposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Lol....
         
         Whoopi Goldberg and a made up story?
         
         That's all you have?

         replyreport
         1. 0

            PrettyPantherposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            I know, I didn't even think it was worth responding to.

            replyreport
   7. 85

      NateB11posted 12 years agoin reply to this

      The only real issue is that people continue to participate in divisive, partisan, and single issue politics and keep expecting a different result, from a system built on conflict and disorder. The real issue is that people are too blind to see they are doing it, and willing allow themselves to be exploited by it. Funny stuff.

      replyreport
      1. 0

         PrettyPantherposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         And your solution is....?
         
         My post is not about single-issue politics.  It is about imploring voters to stop electing ill-educated morons. 
         
         Here is the thing.  You can tell me it's both sides.  Yeah, I get that maybe that's how you see it.  But right now, in this current political climate, the Republicans are ahead on the voting-for-stupid-people measuring scale.  Think about who ran for the GOP presidential nomination:  Rick Perry, Michelle Bachmann, Donald Trump, Rick Santorum, Herman Cain.  And each of them was on top of the polls at one time or another.
         
         I'm tired of always having to qualify everything with "well, it's both sides."  In this case, it is not both sides.  More and more rational conservatives are seeing it and admitting it. 
         
         STOP elevating these people to the top of the party!  STOP acting like they are legitimate, heavyweight thinkers!  Just STOP!
         
         No, I'm not yelling, I'm speaking with emphasis.  LOL

         replyreport
         1. 85

            NateB11posted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Fortunately for me, I don't identify with anything and particularly not with any political party. I never said it was both sides, someone else here said that; I'm pointing to the overall problem; and it's not how I feel, it is a fact. This is what has always and still does happen in politics: War. I'm better than you: BOMB! Still funny, still sad. And I'm afraid you might not understand what is the meaning of the term -single issue politics- . It's all over on this thread. And it is always incomplete and divisive. It might dawn on you one day what the WHOLE problem is, what happens to everyone and not just some of us or your favorite kinds of people or with whom you identify. Please don't chastise me for supposedly not having a solution: People with solutions have caused babies to be blown to bits in Pakistan and for people to perpetually fight over their solutions encased in their ideology, their political party, their candidate, their prejudices, their religion, their country, their family, even their dumb little sports team. If you are at all aware you would see I've been offering the solution all along.

            replyreport
            1. 0

               PrettyPantherposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               I wasn't chastising you, so sorry if it came across that way.  I re-read what you wrote and I actually agree with pretty much everything you've said.  Yes, I know what one-issue politics is; I see it all the time down here in the Bible Belt where I live. 
               
               While I cannot agree with your premise that one-issue politics is the WHOLE (your emphasis) problem, I can certainly go with it being a major part of the problem.  However, your response is often one given to admonish those who would question the qualifications of a candidate based upon that candidate's own stated ideas and positions.  Now, if I had jumped all over Akin and his kindred spirits for "gaffes" (you know, something like when Romney said he enjoyed firing people--that was just a gaffe, not a policy position), your point would apply to what I'm doing here.  I think you'd be hard pressed to find any post of mine anywhere on this forum where I piled on a candidate for an awkwardly phrased statement, or because they wore an expensive fish shirt, or because they said 57 instead of 50. 
               
               A candidate can be pro-life and I will respect their beliefs.  I will not respect a candidate who would use pseudo-science to force women to cater to his religious beliefs.

               replyreport
   8. 60

      phionposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      He’s a friggin Nominee for crying out loud! And this is who you want to place as the face of the republican party? Good luck, I guess you got a slight rise out of me, but overall FAIL.
      
      Divide Divide Divide...The plan is working like clockwork…thanks for your contribution. Yet another issue that should be taken care of by local constituents brought into the light of the American conscience.  Just another distraction from what really matters. You must be a Obama supporter,
      
      No one cares about what some old fart said…lets worry about what matters to all of us….Please..please STOP! This mutmo isn’t making policy and isn’t voting for anything to do with rape or abortion, so can we stay focused please?

      replyreport
      1. 0

         PrettyPantherposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         No, I'm not trying to divide, regardless of how it appears to you.  I'm asking Republicans why they have elevated so many clearly ignorant, mis-educated, backward-thinking people to such visible levels in their party.  Again, it's not just Akin; it's Bachmann, Perry, Cain, Santorum, Trump, Palin, and yes, Paul Ryan, a guy who wants to bestow personhood upon a zygote, and is now the Republican nominee for VP.
         
         Don't you see a pattern here?  The GOP has been invaded by the crazies!  When will sane Republicans say "Enough!' and get rid of them instead of defending them and trying to make it sound like the other side does it, too?

         replyreport
         1. 0

            PrettyPantherposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            By the way, REPUBLICANS voted for that "friggin' nominee."  They own him.

            replyreport
   9. 0

      Chuck Foxposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      The problem is, the Republican party (and the Democrats as well) should actually be about 5 different parties. There really is no "Republican Base" because the spectrum has become so broad. The middle is shrinking as the right and left both move in to try and add to their numbers, and increase their donor base.

      replyreport
      1. 0

         HowardBThinameposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Good idea. I've thought before that we've outgrown the presidential system, which worked well for us when we were a budding nation, but not so much now. If we  could elect, say, five "heads of state," from different regions,we'd have more balanced representation in our leaders. It's too big a job for one man and that opens the door to corruption from advisers, etc.

         replyreport
         1. 0

            Chuck Foxposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            We do have leaders that are supposed to represent us, that's what congress is for; the problem is that a "hardcore, fundamentalist Christian conservative" and a moderate constructionist would both be members of the Republican Party. The "base" is too broad, it's impossible to have only two parties that appeal to 314 Million people.
            
            What we need is for the two parties to "splinter off" and have a resurgence of groups like the Whig Party, the Bull Moose Party, and the Independent Party.
            
            Unfortunately, politics is a multi-billion dollar a year business, and the GOP and the Dems are the "Coke" & "Pepsi" of the industry; no way they're going to cede market share.

            replyreport
2. 91

   habeeposted 12 years ago

   Sorry, but I think the extreme Dems are just as bad as the extreme Reps.

   replyreport
   1. 0

      PrettyPantherposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Really, Habee?  I know I see things through my own bias, but do you honestly believe there are as many Democratic politicians with just plain STUPID beliefs?  Really?

      replyreport
      1. 0

         SassySue1963posted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Here are some nice statements for you. I'll trust you on this, but see if you know who said them before you look it up.
         
         ""You got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy... I mean, that's a storybook, man.""
         
         ""In Delaware, the largest growth in population is Indian-Americans moving from India. You cannot go to a 7-Eleven or a Dunkin' Donuts unless you have a slight Indian accent. I'm not joking."
         
         ""I guarantee you Barack Obama ain't taking my shotguns, so don't buy that malarkey," he said, adding ""if he tries to fool with my Beretta, he's got a problem."
         
         ""When the stock market crashed, Franklin Roosevelt got on the television and didn't just talk about the princes of greed,"he said, ""He said, 'Look, here's what happened.'"
         
         Just a few to ponder.  Not supporting what this particular guy said, just saying there is stupid on both sides.

         replyreport
         1. 0

            PrettyPantherposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Which of those examples qualifies as ignorance about indisputable facts?  None, that I can see, but if you disagree I will hear your explanation with an open mind.  Todd Akin, on the other hand, apparently believes that women's ability to be impregnated is dependent upon whether rape is "legitimate."  Seriously, WTF?

            replyreport
         2. 76

            Mighty Momposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Franklin Roosevelt got on the TELEVISION?
            And said what?
            1. FDR was not president in 1929 when the stock market crashed.
            2. TV invented in 1929 or even 1932 when FDR was elected.
            
            Otherwise, I'm sure every other statement in this post is accurate.
            

            replyreport
            1. 0

               SassySue1963posted 12 years agoin reply to this

               Those two statements of yours are true Mighty Mom. Something VP Biden somehow must have missed in history class I suppose.
               
               The others are not necessarily misstatements of facts, just not really bright moments because PP was talking about "stupid" comments.

               replyreport
         3. 85

            NateB11posted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Well, we could argue partisan politics all day, but those statements by Biden (I googled it) are undeniably ignorant, false and unintelligent. It's astounding, explains what's actually wrong in this country; it either reflects a general undercurrent of ignorance or a typical political sham; either way, it indicates a deep, abiding problem in this country. The mind from which these statements came is not the mind you want involved in decisions that affect people's lives.

            replyreport
         4. 83

            peoplepower73posted 12 years agoin reply to this

            SassySue1963:  I think you are missing the point.  Forgive me for saying this, but none of those things that Biden said  have anything to do with your Vagina!  The republicans want big government out of your business...no pun intended!

            replyreport
            1. 0

               SassySue1963posted 12 years agoin reply to this

               @people Stupid is stupid. I'm not defending what this guy said in the least, let's make that clear. I am arguing that there is just as much stupid on the other side. No, Biden didn't say anything about anyone's vagina. He just said it equates to a storybook to have an African American who's articulate, bright and clean. Hmmm.....yet he's our VP, next in line for President.

               replyreport
      2. 91

         habeeposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Guam will tip over if too many people are on it. - Congressman Hank Johnson
         
         Support late-term abortion for reasons other than a threat to the mother's life. - numerous Dems
         
         We have to pass the bill to find out what's in it. - Pelosi
         
         Hate speech against Vietnamese. - Congressman Loretta Sanchez
         
         Wants the US to be socialist - for the government to run all businesses. - Congresswoman Maxine Waters
         
         Wife beating. - Congressman Charlie Wilson
         
         Physical violence, sometimes against other members of Congress. - Congressman Jim Moran
         
         Natural gas is better than fossil fuels. - Pelosi
         
         ''I remember landing under sniper fire. There was supposed to be some kind of a greeting ceremony at the airport, but instead we just ran with our heads down to get into the vehicles to get to our base.'' - Hillary
         
         Asked for a photo of Neil Armstrong planting the flag on Mars. - Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee
         
         Got physical with Capitol police. - Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney
         
         ''See, Barack's been talking down to black people on this faith-based...I want to cut his nuts off.''
         Jesse Jackson
         
         Putting Charlie Rangel in charge of Joint Committee on Taxation.
         
         Blamed the Jews for his daughter's election loss. - State Legislator Billy McKinney
         
         "There are no rules. We make 'em up as we go along." - Congressman Alcee Hastings
         
         "Every month that we do not have an economic recovery package, 500 million Americans lose their jobs."  - Pelosi
         
         Believes military service is not public service. - Congressman Jim Moran
         
         Wants to increase federal taxes on guns and ammo by 500%. - Barack Obama
         
         Wants to allow no citizen the right to carry a gun. - Barack Obama
         
         Most Dems believe big government is the answer to all our problems.
         
         
         Don't get me wrong - there are lots of stupid quotes and crazy ideas from Republicans, too.

         replyreport
         1. 0

            PrettyPantherposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            "Wants to increase federal taxes on guns and ammo by 500%. - Barack Obama"
            
            500 Percent Ammo Tax?
            Posted on June 23, 2009
            
            
            
            That's the only one I looked up, because it stood out like a sore thumb.  As for the rest, I will not defend them.  "Island tipping" is pretty bad.  lol

            replyreport
            1. 91

               habeeposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               From FactCheck - 500% tax increase:
               
               "This claim is based on an article that appeared in the Chicago Defender on Dec. 13, 1999, when Obama was in the Illinois state Senate. According to the Defender, at an anti-gun rally, Obama "outlined his anti-gun plan," which, among other things, sought  to "increase the federal taxes by 500 percent on the sale of firearm, ammunition [sic] — weapons he says are most commonly used in firearm deaths." As a U.S. senator, however, Obama has not pushed for any such tax on ammunition.
               
               We asked the Obama campaign about his position on an ammunition tax but have received no response."
               
               http://www.factcheck.org/2008/09/nra-targets-obama/
               
               Obama hasn't proposed this, and I didn't say he had. I said he "wants to increase" the federal tax, and according to his 1999 gun plan, it's true. Of course, he could have changed his mind. The NRA has played fast and loose with the facts about Obama and guns, but a couple of their claims have some merit, as you can read in the above link.

               replyreport
            2. 91

               habeeposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               Yeah, and the island-tipping guy is from GA. I'm sooooo proud!

               replyreport
   2. 81

      Credence2posted 12 years agoin reply to this

      How so and to what extent, can you give an example or two?

      replyreport
      1. 95

         wildernessposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         You won't agree of course, but -
         
         The belief that insuring all Americans will lower the health costs to America as a whole
         
         The belief that the country is getting more out of illegal aliens than it costs.  The belief that we somehow OWE them a life here, simply because they choose to ignore the laws of the land (just as the govt. does).

         replyreport
         1. 0

            PrettyPantherposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            So, you think that differences of opinion about the scope and solution of complex problems like health care or immigation is as nuts as believing that women can't be impregnated by rape unless it's legitimate?  Do you really think that?

            replyreport
            1. 95

               wildernessposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               People will believe what they want.  This nut apparently found a doctor that told him that and he jumped all over it in a heartbeat because if fits with what he wants to believe. 
               
               That I very much disagree (with all the points listed, from both sides) is immaterial - the opinions are based solely on what they want to believe and not on what just a few minutes effort towards finding facts and a little reason would show.

               replyreport
               1. 81

                  Credence2posted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  There is room to debate on the merits of health care provided under AHA, pro and con. But how does that compare with the GOP obsession with women's private parts?  Pardon the pun  but this is not just another  example of "tit for tat"
                  Next the GOP will say that the life of the mother is no longer an acceotable exception for abortion. Where do they stop, you got your probers, those that are determine to interfere with access to contraception. No such requirements are made of the men. This is puritanical, philistine, misogynistic.
                  
                  But I invite the rabid rightwing side of the party to keep this up and we will have no trouble defining who they are and what they represent to the enlightened members of our society.

                  replyreport
                  1. 95

                     wildernessposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                     I don't seem to be making myself clear.  My point is that there are nuts in both parties that have pre-decided what law they want and they will present any argument at all that "proves" their point.
                     
                     This nut has found some semi-authoritative voice (an unnamed doctor) that gives him an excuse to prevent what he views as murder.  Therefore that murder is wrong and should not be done.
                     
                     The nuts that think paying for an additional 20% of Americans health care will reduce the health care costs for the country are in the same boat.  They have found someone somewhere to make that claim with partial facts and figures, with skewed statistics and "forgotten" costs or results and therefore it must be true.  It supports their desire that everyone gets health care so it has to be true.  Obamacare has merits, yes, but that particular "fact" is just silly and without merit.  Just as the idea that women will somehow shut down their reproductive system when raped.

                     replyreport
                     1. 60

                        American Viewposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                        Wilderness
                        
                        you are making your point real clear, problem is both sides cannot see it and there are those who refuse to see

                        replyreport
   3. 67

      Ralph Deedsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Dems are like sex, they only go from good to excellent.

      replyreport
      1. 0

         PrettyPantherposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Ralph, I usually agree with you, but I have to say I don't agree with you on this one, with regard to Democrats or sex!  lol

         replyreport
      2. 91

         habeeposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         This is one of the problems with our system. Most members of one party think "their guys" are always right, always reasonable, always smart, always compassionate, and always have the best ideas and make the right decisions. IT JUST AIN'T SO!! There are rotten apples on BOTH sides.

         replyreport
         1. 62

            bgamallposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            That is correct, but there are more rotten Republicans. They are the ones who want another housing bubble with easy money toxic loans. Ryan even budgeted a housing bubble into his budget. They want to give the rich even more money. At some point this is just theft, and the top 10 percent control 70 percent of the wealth. That won't continue to work without putting society at risk for revolution or bad things happening. It is time that stopped. If that percentage gets much worse, we could have exactly what the wealthy do not want. I want peace, not a bunch of civil disturbance all so a rich guy can bet on the housing market again.

            replyreport
            1. 91

               habeeposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               Huh?? You're completely ignoring Dodd and Frank.

               replyreport
               1. 60

                  American Viewposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  Irskin Bowles

                  replyreport
         2. 0

            PrettyPantherposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            I disagree.  I don't think that most members of each party think that their guy is always right.  I think that most people recognize when someone they usually agree with says something really dumb, or exposes an incredibly backward or ignorant belief.  However, I think many people are reluctant to pile on those with whom they mostly agree because others are already doing it.

            replyreport
            1. 91

               habeeposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               PP, that's because you're a reasonable person. Hopefully, there are more like you than I realize. lol

               replyreport
         3. 67

            Ralph Deedsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            We aren't very far apart. My comment was an attempt at humor.

            replyreport
            1. 91

               habeeposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               Yeah, I know, Ralph. I was just making a point. I know too many people who are so entrenched in "their" political party that it seems they wear some super-duper blinders.

               replyreport
               1. 60

                  American Viewposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  Ralph had to bring 3sex into it. The Dem woman do not agree and so they cross the aisle. That's how partenship was born LOL

                  replyreport
      3. 61

         Hollie Thomasposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Oh come on Ralph, you know  that depends on who you've had sex with.

         replyreport
3. 61

   Jonathan Jancoposted 12 years ago

   I say this with love of my fellow Earthlings when I say that all politicians (of any major party) are bloodsucking fiends who summon diabolical entities in order to acheive their power. They lividly hate common folk, they murder without remorse both in legislation and war mongering, they frequently blackmail people, make shady deals with corrupt businesses and they very often coerce upper middle class folk looking to be in the elite into prostituting their own children.
   
   What most people don't realize is that when you get angry or hateful back at them, you become enslaved by them in a sense. So, its very important not to go down that road and instead pray or meditate for their spirits to be healed. These people are very sick and enslaved by diabolical entities. And the kicker is that they truly believe they are serving God in doing so and that they will be in Heaven after death for commiting such fiendish acts.
   
   It's time to stop voting and begin the spiritual revolution.
   
   I know this may sound absurd to many, but if all of us prayed or meditated for justice, peace, love and unity, instead of what we have now, we could overthrow not only our own national government, but possibly every single one in the world. And without bloodshed at that. Now that WOULD be Heaven!

   replyreport
   1. 67

      innersmiffposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      That's simply a more esoteric way of saying what I've been saying for months on here!

      replyreport
      1. 61

         Jonathan Jancoposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Well, what can I say? I have an undying affection for the esoteric. And we're not the only ones saying these things. But there could still be more of us.

         replyreport
4. 0

   PrettyPantherposted 12 years ago

   Republicans, you have to stop defending the stupidity.  The more you defend or ignore it, the harder it becomes to eradicate it.
   
   Admit it, you find it hard to stomach, don't you?

   replyreport
   1. 0

      HowardBThinameposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      It is hard to stomach, but we're talking about a single man (keyword "man") who got some nutty info from an equally-nutty doctor. Men have always viewed the female reproductive as mysterious.
      
      I remember hearing my Aunt telling my sister not to eat strawberries when she was pregnant or her infant could have strawberry birthmarks. I was young but I didn't question that statement until many years later.
      
      Dems have their own share of questionable candidates. I was especially upset when Al Gore palled around with that Kansas whacko - Fred Phelps - even partying and posing for photos with him. Phelps is also a democrat.
      
      So, live and let live. I try not to judge politicians based on their stupid statements but rather on their voting records.

      replyreport
      1. 0

         PrettyPantherposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         I hear what you're saying, but in this case, Todd Akin's voting record on abortion issues is a reflection of this backward, uneducated belief, apparently a belief that 200 Republicans were willing to support as recently as 2011.
         
         "The “redefinition” of rape was contained in a federal bill co-sponsored by Akin in 2011 that would have redefined the conditions under which federal funds may be used to pay for abortion.
         
         Currently, federal money may be used in cases of incest, rape or if the mother’s life is in danger. The “No Taxpayer Funding for Abortions Act” was co-sponsored by more than 200 Republicans, including Mitt Romney’s running mate, Rep. Paul D. Ryan. It would have changed the word “rape” to “forcible rape,” which abortion rights supporters feared would rule out paying for abortions in cases of statutory rape or when a victim is drugged or verbally coerced."
         
         http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la … 2566.story

         replyreport
5. 0

   SassySue1963posted 12 years ago

   PP one does not go with the other. To use the "forcible rape" issue and then try to infer that all the GOP, or those 200 who sponsored the Bill, believe that a woman cannot get pregnant from a rape is absurd. It is not just a leap, it is a bounding one.

   replyreport
   1. 0

      PrettyPantherposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      You're right.  I didn't express myself very well there.  For me, it is all part of the same issue:  men who subjugate women to such an extent that women can't be trusted to know whether or not they were raped or raped "forcibly."  It's all part of an outdated, religion-fueled view that women's bodies belong to men, unless it can be proved otherwise.
      
      I find it disheartening that 200 Republicans would back such thinking.

      replyreport
6. 0

   Tawadiposted 12 years ago

   "Please stop voting for these ignorant crackpots!"
   
   Granted, Todd Akin is an "ignorant crackpots", but you have no room to talk when liberals vote for an equally "ignorant crackpot" that's the sorry likes of Barack Hussein Obama.

   replyreport
7. 61

   KK Trainorposted 12 years ago

   So you keep saying that you get that it's both sides, but you only want conservatives to stop electing morons. That makes no sense. If it's both sides of the aisle, then both sides need to stop electing morons, right? Just agree because you've said it over and over anyway.
   
   I understand the frustration and the disgust. But seriously, how can you sit there and claim that the republicans/tea party are the problem? Really, I'm serious. The examples of Biden's ignorance should be a red flag. Obama put him on the ticket because he's such an idiot that he knew he'd never have to worry about a challenge to his own power. And who do we have to blame for Biden anyway? The brilliant voters of Deleware who kept re-electing him. 
   
   Come on, your argument that it's worse on the right is just silly, which is why everyone here keeps telling you so. Just because your husband is disgusted doesn't mean anything has changed, it just means he's growing wiser. Things have always been this bad.

   replyreport
   1. 0

      PrettyPantherposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Democrats have Joe Biden.  Yeah, you all keep saying that.  So?
      
      And no, I've never said I get it that it's both sides; I've acknowledged that others see it that way.
      
      And no, not everyone here is telling me so.  The usual suspects are telling me so. 
      
      And no, my husband is not just now growing wiser (can you say "patronizing"?).  He worked in the highest levels of government during his military career and beyond, for almost 30 years, so he has a unique perspective.
      
      And no, things have not always been this bad.  It just makes you all feel better to say so.

      replyreport
8. 76

   Mighty Momposted 12 years ago

   Practical gragmatism trumps blind ideology every time when it comes to making laws.

   replyreport
9. 0

   PrettyPantherposted 12 years ago

   Joe Scarborough, just this morning: 
   
   Scarborough said that he’s less interested in the question of whether or not the Republican Party should be a moderate or a conservative party, “I’m just tired of the Republican Party being the ‘Stupid Party!’” he said, “Stupid people saying stupid things and scaring off independent voters and swing voters!”
   
   Scarborough:  I'm tired of republicans being the stupid party

   replyreport
   1. 76

      Uninvited Writerposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Well, it's okay now. Kirk Cameron supports Akin
      
      http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/08/21/k … spect-him/

      replyreport
      1. 0

         PrettyPantherposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Birds of a feather....

         replyreport