jump to last post 1-10 of 10 discussions (84 posts)

Republican National Coalition for life PAC views on Abortion

  1. Stacie L profile image90
    Stacie Lposted 7 years ago

    on a more serious note, it's is alleged by the writer that
    "the Republican National Coalition for Life PAC, where they rate GOP candidates on their anti-abortion purity, and my jaw is on the floor at how many of these candidates support the cruelest and most extreme anti-abortion positions forcing a woman to give birth to a rapist's baby, even if the rapist is her father."
    What do you think?
    Read on...
    http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article … sts_Babies

    1. Jim Hunter profile image60
      Jim Hunterposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Your surprised that the Republican National Coalition for life is against abortion?

      That is called being consistent.

      Democrats might get further if they ever tried it.

      I don't mean being consistently wrong,

      That hasn't helped them at all.

      1. Ralph Deeds profile image64
        Ralph Deedsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        Democrats are also against abortion, and they back much more effective measures to reduce the number of abortions by providing other alternatives--comprehensive sex education, more effective contraception and support for women who choose to have their babies and put them up for adoption.

      2. Ron Montgomery profile image59
        Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        So in this case you think that in the name of consistency, the child raped by her father should be forced to complete the birth?

        ...well, you are showing consistency

        1. weholdthesetruths profile image60
          weholdthesetruthsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

          Is the taking of a human life justified by a bad act happening to someone else?

        2. Jim Hunter profile image60
          Jim Hunterposted 7 years agoin reply to this

          "So in this case you think that in the name of consistency, the child raped by her father should be forced to complete the birth?"



          No Ron, I think I was pretty clear with what I said.

          This group is showing consistency in its stance against abortion.

          Any hysterical thing you add to what I said is on you.

    2. weholdthesetruths profile image60
      weholdthesetruthsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      As a father of five, I can't imagine anyone being in favor of killing babies as being anything BUT "radical".   

      The right to LIVE is our most fundamental right, the right to NOT HAVE OUR LIFE TAKEN FROM US is the most sacred thing on earth.   How defending it is "radical" or "extreme" or ...  CRUEL?????    It's CRUEL to defend someone from being killed?   Or to make it law that life is to be defended, no taken lightly?   

      You have one truly hideous view of life and "kindness".

      1. Ralph Deeds profile image64
        Ralph Deedsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        What about teaching kids how to avoid pregnancies and more support for pre-natal care and adoptions?

        1. weholdthesetruths profile image60
          weholdthesetruthsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

          What about it?   Do you think it's the federal government's job to do that?   If so, you're just another statist without a mind.

          1. Ralph Deeds profile image64
            Ralph Deedsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

            I didn't say whose job it is. Actually, I'm not a big believer in federal government involvement in education. From what I've read "No Child Left Behind," a bipartisan approach, hasn't worked out very well. However, the social conservatives are the ones in many school districts who are opposing comprehensive sex education and promoting "abstinence only" training which research shows doesn't work.

            1. weholdthesetruths profile image60
              weholdthesetruthsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

              No Child Left Behind is the brainchild of one late Ted Kennedy.   Basically, all federal influence should be abandoned in education.   Let the locals deal with it, and ban all unions in education.

        2. psycheskinner profile image84
          psycheskinnerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

          Quite.  The US approach has lead to over 40 preganancies per 1000 teens.  Not very effective.

      2. Stump Parrish profile image60
        Stump Parrishposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        It's not killing babies, it's aborting a fetus that can't survive on it's own. If it is a life it would be able to live without machines. It amazes me that the very people who fight so hard to make abortions illegal also fight the number one way to reduce the number of abortions. Comprehensive sex education and condoms. If it were the men who had to suffer thru an unwanted pregnancy and birth, it wouldn't even be up for discusion. The fact that most men still retain the belief that women are on this earth to serve and obey all men is a large part of the problem. What gives you the right to dictate what another human does with their body. Why not solve the problem by steralizing all men at birth? This would reduce the number of abortions and save a fortune on birth control. You seem to be ready to force a decision that doesn't affect you onto another at a moments notice. If it was your body being treated this way, I am sure you would be at the front of the line demanding that your rights be maintained. You don't seem to have the same concerns for other's right do you.

        1. weholdthesetruths profile image60
          weholdthesetruthsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

          Wow, what a load of garbage.   It is required of ALL people that they learn to live responsibly.   You know, not borrow too much, not break the law, not steal, not assault their neighbor, wife, or kids, not urinate in the grocery store freezer... the list goes on an on.   So, why do you think we should EXEMPT sexual behavior from the list of things people actually have to learn to do with responsibility?    Explain, please.

          1. kerryg profile image89
            kerrygposted 7 years agoin reply to this

            Um, I don't know what post you read, but the OP I read was specifically talking about abortion in cases of incestuous rape. Do you seriously think it's "irresponsible" of a girl to get raped by her own father?

            1. Ron Montgomery profile image59
              Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years agoin reply to this

              She probably led him on by dressing in skimpy clothes...

            2. weholdthesetruths profile image60
              weholdthesetruthsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

              So, you're implying no guilt on the part of the one who committed the act?   Just arguing (insanely) that I am somehow blaming victims of violence for being victims?

          2. Stump Parrish profile image60
            Stump Parrishposted 7 years agoin reply to this

            Where did I state that I felt sexual behavior should be exempt from the list of things people have to learn to handle responsibly? How do you expect kids to learn about responsibility in regards to sexual activity when every church out there is fighting comprehensive sex education?

            What I was talking about is the mind set that prefers to keep kids in the dark and feed them religious crap instead of useful information that could save their life.
            To your comment below about saving a life by outlawing abortion...Go to your local fertility clinic, pick up an egg, drop a load of spem into a bowl with the egg and try to claim it on your taxes. Life doesn't begin with conception, it begins at birth.

            I have another question for you...If the fetus whose life you save is born gay, will you still fight for it's rights?

            1. weholdthesetruths profile image60
              weholdthesetruthsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

              The answer is beyond your intellectual capacity.   That's the only reason you could possibly make this argument.   Your "public education" version of "comprehensive sex education" is "here's how to be irresponsible and not suffer the consequences" which, of course, is a lie with consequences that are destroying our society.   

              Your simple-minded nonsense is neither accurate, nor useful in any way in solving any problems anywhere.

              1. Stump Parrish profile image60
                Stump Parrishposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                I thought this was a discussion, I didn't realize you planned on preaching to the masses. Your insults don't affect me in the least as I simply consider the source, A narrow minded holier than thou know it all who appearantly knows nothing.

                You may claim to hold some truth but I doubt you would recognize the truth if it slapped you in your ignorant face. In the future simply state you can't answer the question rather than make an assumption about another's intelect based upon one or two statements.  Your little tirade is however amusing to watch.

                1. weholdthesetruths profile image60
                  weholdthesetruthsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                  You said: What I was talking about is the mind set that prefers to keep kids in the dark and feed them religious crap instead of useful information that could save their life.

                  And then you had the nerve to call me "narrow minded" and "holier than thou".   

                  All the incivility is on your part.    My determination that you can't engage in a useful conversation on the topic is derived from your inability to be civil in the first place.   It's too bad if you suddenly grow sensitive and whine and cry about the consequences of you failing at even the most basic  forms of civility.

    3. dutchman1951 profile image60
      dutchman1951posted 7 years agoin reply to this

      I think the choice is personal, the Womans, and her partners if he is involved. It is not the Goverment's choice at all. never should be.

  2. Cagsil profile image61
    Cagsilposted 7 years ago

    It would be nice if people, in certain aspects learned how to not step on the rights of others. Abortion is a private and personal matter. It should never be in the hands of any government official.

    1. Ralph Deeds profile image64
      Ralph Deedsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Amen. Spoken like a true libertarian.

    2. weholdthesetruths profile image60
      weholdthesetruthsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      What about the one who is being killed?   Who defends that life?   It is not a "personal and private" matter to kill another human.   That kind of thinking is beyond all bounds of any worthy civilization.

      1. Ralph Deeds profile image64
        Ralph Deedsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        In many if not most cases the "one being killed" is a microscopic zygote or early embryo. I could support limitations on late term abortions, but I object to fanatics equating abortions of zygotes or early embryos to baby killing or child murder.

        1. weholdthesetruths profile image60
          weholdthesetruthsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

          You did not in any way address the question.

      2. Stump Parrish profile image60
        Stump Parrishposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        wehold, How personal is the Army of God's continued campaign of killing of abortion doctors? This is a very public preacher who recruits mental rejects to kill in god's name and glorifies those who carry out that which he is too much of a coward to do himself. These recruits are no different that those who blow themselvews up in search of virgins and their god's praise.

        Ralph, perhaps all we need to do is find a goat herder to write the next chapter in the bible. You know how much stock christians place in the intelligence of primitive goat herders. Shucks, goat herders 2000 years ago had more smarts that the present day scientists do today. (according to the religious people of this country.

        1. weholdthesetruths profile image60
          weholdthesetruthsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

          I know precisely nothing about "army of god", and if whoever it is believes they have a right to kill someone, they're daft.   

          And, lastly,  there's nothing about my position that has ANYTHING to do with religion.    It is not doctrinal and I don't quote Biblical injuction or anything else.   It is purely an intellectual argument, based upon science and reason.

          1. Stump Parrish profile image60
            Stump Parrishposted 7 years agoin reply to this

            I find it to be rather interesting that your arguement has nothing to do with religion when it is almost word for word what I hear on a daily basis in the bible belt. I will admit to making an assumption about the basis for your arguement being religion. Perhaps in the future you could mention that an opinion is your own when it ,s a mirror image of the religious crap most apponents to abortion mutter. This might reduce the number of assumption people make about your non sense.

            Provide me with the link that proves life begins at conception and don't quote the bible you claim not to be using.

            1. weholdthesetruths profile image60
              weholdthesetruthsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

              Perhaps in the future, you could gain a brain?   How DARE you demand that someone say "my opinion is my own"?   Of course it's my own.  The arrogance and outright vile bigotry that brings you to assume that one's opinion is not his own is completely unacceptable to a civil society.    I'll even bet you think you're superior because of your own prejudices. 

              And no, I have no need of "providing you a link".   For pity's sakes, what kind of arrogant and stupid hypocrite are you?   You asked me for MY opinion ,and the demanded I cite someone else for my opinion.   I am more than fully capable of forming, holding and defending a fully valid opinion without falling back to some "source".    I am highly offended at your nonsense ,as should be anyone who has the misfortune of reading it.

              1. Stump Parrish profile image60
                Stump Parrishposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                Had I known you were a tea bagger I wouldn't have bothered responding to you in the first place. I have no interest in anymore of your opinions as I prefer to deal with reality and appearanlty you are unfamiliar with the concept.
                My apologies to Stacie for helping take this post off subject.

                1. weholdthesetruths profile image60
                  weholdthesetruthsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                  So, without any knowledge at all, you decide to publicly broadcast my supposed sexual fetishes (just your imagination), and then on that basis, declare me unfit for conversation. 

                  Actually, the problem is that you can no way win any debate with me, as you have neither intellectual consistency nor clarity of mind equal to the task.   

                  You can TRY, but I suspect it would be the largest challenge of your entire life, and one you'd lose instantly, but just not be aware of having lost for quite some time.    Which is to say little of my own abilities, as being rather slow of wit and of course, heavily burdened with my overwhelming ignorance, blah, blah blah, of which you will certainly do your best to convince the audience. 

                  I don't debate or argue with people who hold the same opinions I do.  I have no need of "affirmation" of what I believe.   I have come to it honestly, and as such, you cannot defeat it.

                  1. Stump Parrish profile image60
                    Stump Parrishposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                    All the incivility is on your part.  My determination that you can't engage in a useful conversation on the topic is derived from your inability to be civil in the first place. 


                    Definition of CIVILITY
                    1archaic : training in the humanities
                    2a : civilized conduct; especially : courtesy, politeness b : a polite act or expression

                    Here are some examples of civility on your part.

                    You have one truly hideous view of life and "kindness".

                    If so, you're just another statist without a mind.

                    Wow, what a load of garbage

                    Just arguing (insanely) that I am somehow blaming victims of violence for being victims?

                    The answer is beyond your intellectual capacity.

                    Your simple-minded nonsense is neither accurate, nor useful in any way in solving any problems anywhere.

                    Perhaps in the future, you could gain a brain?

                    For pity's sakes, what kind of arrogant and stupid hypocrite are you?

                    Actually, the problem is that you can no way win any debate with me, as you have neither intellectual consistency nor clarity of mind equal to the task.

                    If you are unwilling to task your intellect to decide that question, then how DARE you have to gall to demand that your opinion, derived without thought, be considered above debate or above question.

                    You have a truly warped view.

                    These comments are from just one blog you honored with your presence. Perhaps in the future you might learn the definitions of the big words you like to use. But then again you are the only walking example of human perfection in America...according to your opinion. You might have a future in comedy if you could manage to be as funny as your ignorant.

      3. Cagsil profile image61
        Cagsilposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        Well, first off- It's NOT your life. You have no right to interfere in  what another person does with that regards. It's NONE of your business.

        Stick to your own life. Stay out of others.

        1. weholdthesetruths profile image60
          weholdthesetruthsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

          So, when I see thugs cornering someone to do violence, it is my job to look the other way, after all, it's not MY business to defend anyone's life.   Nor, apparently, the government's.    Whoa,  that means murder should be legal.

          1. Cagsil profile image61
            Cagsilposted 7 years agoin reply to this

            That is not the same thing. A person's rights are involved, a living and breathing full grown adult. It should be common sense to NOT have an abortion, if at all possible. I am not pro-abortion, I am pro-choice.

            I would rather a women get to carry full term, whenever possible, but not at the expense of their own life. I do have a higher ground to hold people to. Yes, make no mistake. But, up to the point of choice.


            Don't be dumb or act stupid please. That's ridiculous and you're extreme view invades right to choice.

            You over step your authority as a living human being, living an active life. No one is stopping you from not having one. It is a choice, an option.

            So give it a rest. I understand it's killing something. I also understand your view of conception is life, but choice remains with the living person of mature(hopefully- some are not) adult to make that decision. NOT have it made for them by someone else. That's an invasion of the mother's right to life and choice.

            And, Yes, I know right to life should apply to a baby, but it cannot, because it invades the right to life and right to choice of the mother....*1* right of life versus two rights of the mother's...remember, no one has a right to choose about being born. And, it never should.

            1. weholdthesetruths profile image60
              weholdthesetruthsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

              Your argument boils down to "how dare you disagree!".   Which, is, well, unconvincing.    You say that a "full grown adult" has the right to not have his life taken.   But how and when does he acquire that right?    Certainly not by government giving him a right to live.   If the right to live is merely a grant of privilege by government, then we have no right at all to live our life.   it's just granted to us at whim by a body granted the power of life and death over us.

              So, it cannot be that our right to life is a gift of governance, it must be inherent, or else it be no right at all.   To which I ask you to task your intellect and explain how there is ANY possible moment in the development of a human, whether it is the moment the umbilical cord is cut, or the moment the brain shows function, or the moment he can speak his name, or any other "moment" when a being goes from having no beingness, to being endowed with the right to live. 

              If you are unwilling to task your intellect to decide that question, then how DARE you have to gall to demand that your opinion, derived without thought, be considered above debate or above question.

              1. Cagsil profile image61
                Cagsilposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                You said something here, I did not say. Please re-read what I posted. I said, a full grown adult will make the decision on abortion or not. I did not say anything about a person has the right to not have his life taken.

                You are now talking about "Capital punishment", or the death penalty, and your argument is OFF topic of this forum.

                You want to talk about "Capital Punishment", then look for my solution to that topic within my hub about it.

                The Right to Life isn't portrayed as it should be. The Right to Life is about living life with regards to those who are born into this world. Please remember I said "born". That is a completion of the pregnancy. Not before then. Government is forcing accountability up to a point, for which, leaves the door open for abortions(btw which is the topic).

                Even government realizes that society/humanity isn't ready to make the step of never requiring or having a need for the service. It isn't civilized enough(which my death penalty hub addresses).

                Exposed your argument to this question above.
                The right to life is misperceived due to too many misconceptions. Government has legalized "capital punishment", however, it's not used properly.
                You make no sense, and I find your tone, lacking due your inability to not notice or read what was said.

                You overlooked to realize I said- NO ONE has the choice to be born. We are born. It's not a choice. I didn't make the choice to be born. Therefore, you cannot give the choice to the child to be soon growing inside a woman, and take her right to live her life how she wants?

                No. Abortion give her an option. If you don't like it too bad. Get on with your life.

                But, please...do try to stay on topic.

                1. weholdthesetruths profile image60
                  weholdthesetruthsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                  You understood nothing of what I said.  I never mentioned capital punishment.  I have no idea how you strayed that far from the topic.   

                  You are pretending that "born" is the exact moment you go from non-existence to "endowed human" status.   Such intellectual fiction is laughably absurd.   Is it the moment that the cord ceases pulsing?   Is it the first breath?   Is it the first cry?   I don't actually care which one you choose, the fact is there is no material difference between that moment and the moment preceeding it. 

                  None of those events, or moments, nor any of the ones preceeding it, made that child any less of a child, nor made a non-human into a human, and that can be proven both rationally and scientifically.   Ergo, the idea that humanness and rights magically spring into being at some arbitrarily chosen moment is intellectual sewage.   It is utterly without rational merit. 

                  If government imposes that moment, then government has been empowered to grant your right to life and to withhold it when it sees fit, based on arbitrary and irrational criteria.   Which, of course, violates not only the letter, but every rational intent of the Constitution and in fact, of the term "cvilization" itself.   

                  Sorry, your argument is vapor, is smoke in the wind.   You need to do exactly what I said and start applying some intellect to the political positions you've chosen emotionally.

              2. Stump Parrish profile image60
                Stump Parrishposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                Our constitution gaurantees us the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Now explain again how a government doesn't give us the right to life/ Try thinking prior to opening your mouth.

                1. weholdthesetruths profile image60
                  weholdthesetruthsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                  Nope, the Constitution does not gaurantee us anything.   It constrains the government FROM TAKING OUR RIGHTS AWAY.    Your comprehension of the Constitution and associated documents is apparently nil.   

                  Perhaps you'd be enlightened if you read my hubs on the Constitution,  and see where my pen name comes from.

    3. Stump Parrish profile image60
      Stump Parrishposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Or church group.

  3. Cagsil profile image61
    Cagsilposted 7 years ago

    And btw- Abortion is legal. If you didn't happen to know it. It is federally legal for a doctor to give a woman an abortion.

    It's a legal medical service provided to women who get pregnant.

    So, both ways, it's none of your business. You are not involved in the process and should not be. So, in other words, butt out.

    1. weholdthesetruths profile image60
      weholdthesetruthsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Slavery was once legal, too.   But I rather doubt that you accept "legal" as the definition of "moral and right and good".     Even though you're trying to argue exactly that.   

      "My vice is legal, but yours is too evil to be."

    2. weholdthesetruths profile image60
      weholdthesetruthsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      The taking of a human life none of my business.   Ergo, nobody is allowed to defend the life of another person.   Not even the government.   

      You have a truly warped view.

  4. Mighty Mom profile image87
    Mighty Momposted 7 years ago

    Why is it that so many of those who are most vociferous on this topic will never be in the position of having to have an abortion themselves? You talk about being pregnant and giving birth as if it were a piece of cake. Walk a mile in my shoes with my swollen belly and ankles, or puking daily for 3 months... then see what you say.

    BTW, why do the same people who denounce abortion favor capital punishment? Is that not killing also? And don't give me that bullshit that everyone who gets the death penalty is guilty and deserves to die.

  5. Diane Inside profile image81
    Diane Insideposted 7 years ago

    So you do no have a right to life until you  are 24 weeks old in the womb.

    1. weholdthesetruths profile image60
      weholdthesetruthsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      That's when the "LiberalFairy" comes by and sprinkles magic dust on you and you are then human and posses your "liberalfairy" given rights.

  6. Doug Hughes profile image60
    Doug Hughesposted 7 years ago

    Weholdthesetruths argues against any and all abortions and the sanctity of life from conception. I don't agree but I understand.
    But in a previous post he wrote...

    "The man is a tyrant, worthy of death...   
    If I were president, I would order his assassination."

    Birdbrain pronounced this about Hugo Chavez. The murder of a civilian head of state which we are not at war with is acceptable - but all life is sacred from the point of conception. Anyone want to reconcile these?

    1. Ron Montgomery profile image59
      Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      American zygotes are sanctified life forms.  Foreigners are alive but can be squashed like bugs if needed.

      Clear?

      1. Doug Hughes profile image60
        Doug Hughesposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        Ron - I'm having trouble with specific applications.

        Americans can decide what foreigners live and die - and can snuff them with impunity - even heads of state.  But if a 'baby' was planted against her will - maybe by a family memeber and is only  hours or days old - it's immoral for the woman (or underaged girl) to take a pill that will wash out  the bastard fetus that's only the size of a pinhead?

        1. weholdthesetruths profile image60
          weholdthesetruthsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

          Yeah, us arrogant Americans even decide when other nations have too many people and we bomb them into the stone age, wipe out their armies, and force them to surrender, for having picked their nose in the wrong way. 

          I suspect satire like the above is lost on you, so just understand that while you're desperately seeking simplistic sound bytes in a personal attack mode, some people never think that small.   

          I would have had Hitler assassinated, had there been the opportunity, before the day I sent troops to England and before we had to engage in a bloody island hopping war in the Pacific and drop a nuclear bomb on Japan. 

          And, before you go prattling on about hindsight,  it isn't hindsight at all, but a very principled analysis of WHAT PEOPLE DO and certain behaviors that are easily recognizable.   Before Chavez gets the chance to spark a war in South America, I would have him shot, if it could be done.   Chavez displays every personality trait of a tyrant, being no better than a good number of well known murderous tyrants from the last century.   

          And before you go running around like Chicken Little squawking nonsense, assassination is one's 'last resort'.   But if you're not willing to do it, then you have no business being president.   Your job is to defend the interests of the nation and of the people.   Further, it is the job of the president to be that kind of responsible when it comes to international affairs.   There are many things which could have been done and could still be done, to topple Chavez from power, but we haven't had a president with any guts or principle in too long for any of them to have been done. 

          The current one fawns over Chavez like a star-struck groupie over a famous rock star, mostly because they're near indistinguishable in lust for power.

        2. Shadesbreath profile image84
          Shadesbreathposted 7 years agoin reply to this

          Yes, you  have it right.

        3. Ron Montgomery profile image59
          Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years agoin reply to this

          Watch FoxNews and learn sumpthin' why dontcha? mad

    2. weholdthesetruths profile image60
      weholdthesetruthsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      I'm sorry you're so small minded and unable to expand beyond kindergarten politics.

      1. Joe Badtoe profile image59
        Joe Badtoeposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        You'll run out of people to insult soon

        Then you'll have to invent lots of pen names, start your own topic and then you can really insult yourself and perhaps see how you feel.

        Having a strong opinion is fine but having a 'I know I'm right and those who disagree are stupid' isn't.

        I suspect if someone fired a similar insult back you would head for admin and get them banned. This is why I've bitten my tongue.

        Why is it always the right wng conservatives that behave this way?

        Way to go.....

        1. weholdthesetruths profile image60
          weholdthesetruthsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

          I don't report anyone.    I have used the "report" one time, and it was when someone posted not just profanity, but vile, ugly, truly hideous nonsense.   

          I note your effort to falsely accuse me.   Yet another dishonest person shouting I'm defective.    Sigh.   Are there actually ANY adult liberals left, or has it become the world of children?

          1. Joe Badtoe profile image59
            Joe Badtoeposted 7 years agoin reply to this

            and what exactly have I accussed you of?

            You seem to write at length about the importance of your own contribution and the accuse anybody who disagrees with you as being intellectualy deficient.

            Bit vain of you don't you think?

            1. weholdthesetruths profile image60
              weholdthesetruthsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

              Please point to any mention of "my contribution".

  7. lovemychris profile image77
    lovemychrisposted 7 years ago

    That's right. this current crop of so called religious moral people....repubs!.....are really really against "change". The "change" which President Obama champions; Race and Gender!!

    Obama is for women and people of color, and poor and struggling people.
    Repubs are for rich white people--preferably men, and keeping the old status quo of the past 30 deadly, immoral, horror-driven, greed-mongering, war-profiteering years.

    Out with the old, in with the new.

    These republibaggers are going to be handed such a defeat, they will be forced to acknowledge their insanity and warped view of the world. IMO

    Privacy is so important. The 4th amendment is the most important one in my opinion. What we do in our private lives is no one's business, unless we choose to make it so.

    Take that away, and what is the point of any other rights?

    These repubs want too much gvt intrusion into our private lives.
    They want to tell everyone what to do....except for the crooks and thieves of big business and banking....them they give free reign.

    I really can't stand them.
    They do not deserve another go at governing...they messed the last one up so much, it's lucky we are still here.

    Farewell repubs....don't let the door hit ya where the good lord split ya!!!!

    Guess you need another reminder that we don't want you anymore.

    well OK....you are going to get it!!!

    1. weholdthesetruths profile image60
      weholdthesetruthsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      LOL.   This is so funny...   Everyone in the whole nation knows Democrats are on the way out... in so many ways.   

      For a giggle on how absurd this person's posting is...   http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_ … san_trends

      1. Joe Badtoe profile image59
        Joe Badtoeposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        LOL????

        And you accuse others of being childish?

        Shouldn't you be out voting against a national health care program where the poorest get the same treatment as the wealthiest?

        1. weholdthesetruths profile image60
          weholdthesetruthsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

          I don't want "poor people's health care".

          1. Joe Badtoe profile image59
            Joe Badtoeposted 7 years agoin reply to this

            I know you don't

            your belligerence can't see anything except what YOU want.

            1. weholdthesetruths profile image60
              weholdthesetruthsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

              Yeah, that's it.  I must be one hell of an evil, monsterous, baby beating, wife abusing,  child molesting, poor person bashing, rich, evil, capitalist, redneck, racist, bigot, homophobic, nazi, warmonger, pile of human debris for thinking that I don't want a health care system based upon the lowest denominator to exist.   Just like I don't want a job that pays minimum wage, nor drive a car called a Trabant.   

              Or, you could be just a gratuitous flamer without any reason other than your own emotionally warped need to hurt others.   

              Looking back, I'd say the second alternative is probably dead on right.

              1. Joe Badtoe profile image59
                Joe Badtoeposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                I think you've kind of  described yourself and your attitude perfectly with that response

                My work here is done.

        2. Jim Hunter profile image60
          Jim Hunterposted 7 years agoin reply to this

          They already get the same treatment.

          That right was created in 1986 and signed into a law by a Republican.

          Just like the "Obama tax cuts for the middle class" were signed into a law by a Republican.

          What have the Democrats done for us, besides triple the deficit in 3 short years?

          Oh yeah, they gave us "Obama care" that no one wants.

    2. couturepopcafe profile image59
      couturepopcafeposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Question for lovemychris:

      Isn't the current congress the one who gave a big favor to banks?

  8. lovemychris profile image77
    lovemychrisposted 7 years ago

    Sorry--they just got there-they aren't going ANYWHERE.
    In fact, once people realize just how much they really don't want to go backwards, the Repub party will cease to exist.
    The far left Dem party will cease too.
    People do need to realize that this country exists for everyone.
    We can't be led by extremes.
    The gvt is a behemoth, not a little piece of everyone's pie.

    The left are angry, the right are angry.
    I am just grateful we have a sane, calm man in charge.
    He really does know that he governs for everybody.

    Take your special interests and forget it.

    Liberty and Justice for all is a BIG undertaking. But I think Obama has that in mind!!!

    NOT like the past 30 years, which was a complete gift to monied special interests.

    Go Obama!! Vote Democrat!!

    1. weholdthesetruths profile image60
      weholdthesetruthsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Yeah, yeah, the Party will save us.    may it rule forever!

      Sheesh.   

      Do you get paid for this?   I'd hate to think you actually waste your time dreaming up this ludicrous nonsense.

    2. couturepopcafe profile image59
      couturepopcafeposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      I think most presidents hold the ideal of taking care to include the rights of all peoples.  It's congress that's so messed up.  President Obama is no different (ok, maybe he travels a lot more, but I'm not really counting the $ he spends on himself personally).  He has his good side and his bad.  He's an excellent speaker and a learned man.  I'm not too sure about the whole Chicago thing, though.  Wasn't he groomed for office by George Soros?  Any thought on this?

  9. Mighty Mom profile image87
    Mighty Momposted 7 years ago

    Now, now Lovemychris,
    The use of so many exclamation marks in your post just proves WHTT's point that us liberals are all childish.
    I know you would have used heart-dotted "i's" if such an option was available. Coloring your post with unicorns and rainbows, too.
    Yes, I know how liberals like you think (correction, "think" implies an education and maturity level that you obviously have not reached. Let me rephrase that: how you liberals react).

    Do you know why I know these things, lovemychris?




    Because I'm one too!!!! lol wink lol

  10. lovemychris profile image77
    lovemychrisposted 7 years ago

    I'm excited!
    We are seeing the backlash that was to be expected from the ugly, mean hissy-fit the losers have been having since Obama won the election.

    Ahahaha! it's funny to watch!!
    While Obama and the Dems go on calmly governing, the Repub babies cry and stomp their feet. Or, as Bob Cesca at Huffpo put it: "You are sticking your fingers in your ears and going "Lalalalala".

    AHAHAHA. Apt description.

    Think the Tighty-Righty Rabid Brigade is gonna "sweep" the November elections do you?

    Think Again.

 
working