# My parents are scared



## DavidS (Oct 25, 2008)

They live in Florida and are both fed up with the negative attack ads from both sides. There's a lot of mis-information being spread around and they're nervous on who to vote for. 

Virtually on every issue, including the economy, they weren't sure who to vote for.

In the end, the ages of the Supreme Court justices is what, I think convinced them to vote for Obama.

I asked them, "Let's say our next President has to appoint two new justices to the Supreme Court. How can you get an idea of what justices they will appoint? Well, look at who he chose to be his running mate." They hate Sarah Palin. They're socially moderate and believe in gay marriage and abortion rights for first term mothers. While McCain said he will have no litmis test, we can get an idea of who he'll appoint to the Supreme Court via Sarah Palin. She doesn't believe in science, she hunts wolves from helicopters and she wants to turn this country into a Christian version of Iran.

I turned my parents, who've voted for Reagan, Bush HW, Clinton, Gore and Bush W into voters for Obama.

What's concerning is the amount of mis-information going around. Something should really be done to curb the bias in the media... both left and right.


----------



## elvis (Oct 25, 2008)

DavidS said:


> They live in Florida and are both fed up with the negative attack ads from both sides. There's a lot of mis-information being spread around and they're nervous on who to vote for.
> 
> Virtually on every issue, including the economy, they weren't sure who to vote for.
> 
> ...




congrats.  you're helping to slaughter more babies.  Obama will put people in there that allow babies to suffocate after they survive an abortion.  or at very least promote partial birth abortion.  you get pissed when people talk about the obama-ayers connection, and now you're comparing Sarah Palin to Ahmadinijad. hippocrite.


----------



## DavidS (Oct 25, 2008)

elvis3577 said:


> congrats. you're helping to slaughter more babies. Obama will put people in there that allow babies to suffocate after they survive an abortion. or at very least promote partial birth abortion. you get pissed when people talk about the obama-ayers connection, and now you're comparing Sarah Palin to Ahmadinijad. hippocrite.


 
She's an extreme right-wing fundamentalist whose views do not fall in line with main stream America's views. And no, I did not compare her to Ahmadinejad, I compared her to ayatollah khomeini. She won't even denounce abortion clinic bombings. She believes a woman who is brutally raped shouldn't have the right to have an abortion. She's old school, as in 100 years ago old school and is an extremely dangerous person.

Removing a fetus from your body is not slaughtering a baby. It's removing a fetus. Do you take anti-biotics, Elvis? You're killing a life form! Have you ever killed an insect? Murderer! And yes, I am indeed comparing a first trimester cluster of cells to bacteria and insects. 

I do not support partial birth abortion at all. I do not support any abortion in which the fetus can survive outside of the mother's womb.

Just for everyone's information, I was in a relationship two years ago where my girlfriend got pregnant. She was on anti-seizure medication for bi-polar disorder and it somehow counteracted the birth control she was on. She had been on the anti-seizure medication for about 8 weeks while she was pregnant and there was no way, yet, to know what kind of damage the medication had done to the fetus. It was assumed at the very least the baby would be born with severe birth defects. We absolutely had no choice in the matter, if we ever wanted to have a baby together this baby would've been too much of a challenge for us. I went to the clinic with her and it was a procedure in which I will never forget for the rest of my life. I don't think abortion is anything to take lightly, but I believe people need to have that chance there, that backup just in case. There are people who do use abortion as a form of birth control... women who have had 2... maybe 3 abortions in their lives. As horrible and horrifiyng as it sounds and as idiotic of decisions as people make... they need to be protected just as my girlfriend and I needed to be protected.

I do see the other side of the argument... "What about the baby? Who will protect it?" And in the end, I have to answer "God will."


----------



## AVG-JOE (Oct 25, 2008)

I'm in Florida now and I can confirm that they're right about the airwaves being flooded with ads.  The ones McCain approves are negative, the ones sponsored by various Republican groups are frightening; Obamas are about 50 / 50 positive / negative and I haven't seen any from Democratic side groups regarding the big race.

The hardest ones to stomach are the fear mongering ads from the Republican side groups - especially the ones aimed at Florida's seniors.

I can appreciate your parents trepidation.

-Joe


----------



## DavidS (Oct 25, 2008)

AVG-JOE said:


> I'm in Florida now and I can confirm that they're right about the airwaves being flooded with ads. The ones McCain approves are negative, the ones sponsored by various Republican groups are frightening; Obamas are about 50 / 50 positive / negative and I haven't seen any from Democratic side groups regarding the big race.
> 
> The hardest ones to stomach are the fear mongering ads from the Republican side groups - especially the ones aimed at Florida's seniors.
> 
> ...


 
I don't think it comes down to Florida this year.... sad to say. If New Hampshire, Colorado and New Mexico all go for Obama, this election is over. If Virginia comes on board as well, this will be a landslide.


----------



## elvis (Oct 25, 2008)

DavidS said:


> She's an extreme right-wing fundamentalist whose views do not fall in line with main stream America's views. And no, I did not compare her to Ahmadinejad, I compared her to ayatollah khomeini. She won't even denounce abortion clinic bombings. She believes a woman who is brutally raped shouldn't have the right to have an abortion. She's old school, as in 100 years ago old school and is an extremely dangerous person.
> 
> Removing a fetus from your body is not slaughtering a baby. It's removing a fetus. Do you take anti-biotics, Elvis? You're killing a life form! Have you ever killed an insect? Murderer! And yes, I am indeed comparing a first trimester cluster of cells to bacteria and insects.
> 
> ...


ayatollah. even better. you are a bigger hippocrite than I thought. you have no right to counter any attacks brought on here on obama when the repubs bring up ayers or wright. none. when palin recommends hanging non-christians, ill listen. until then, go hang out with the people who yelled "terrorist" and "kill him" because you are on the same level, probably lower. you say you are against partial birth abortion. well the Messiah is for it. so enjoy.


----------



## DavidS (Oct 25, 2008)

elvis3577 said:


> ayatollah. even better. you are a bigger hippocrite than I thought. you have no right to counter any attacks brought on here on obama when the repubs bring up ayers or wright. none. when palin recommends hanging non-christians, ill listen. until then, go hang out with the people who yelled "terrorist" and "kill him" because you are on the same level, probably lower. you say you are against partial birth abortion. well the Messiah is for it. so enjoy.


 
Palin wants to turn America into a Christian-fundamentalist country. This country was founded upon freedom of religion, so therefore, I believe that we should NOT turn America into any religious-fundamentalist country, much like what Iran is.

Elvis, I've heard about enough from you. Over the past week, I've given you many chances to substantiate your argument. Your postings are almost borderline Chris-like with lack of substance and poor grammar and sentence structure. It's amazing as to how many conservatives on here are so un-intelligent. Crimson, on the other hand, seems to be quite intelligent. I'd love to go toe to toe with him.

Oh and it's hypochlorite, not "hippocrite." And it's nuclear, as in NOO-CLE-UR. Not nucular as in NOO-KYOO-LER.


----------



## elvis (Oct 25, 2008)

DavidS said:


> Palin wants to turn America into a Christian-fundamentalist country. This country was founded upon freedom of religion, so therefore, I believe that we should NOT turn America into any religious-fundamentalist country, much like what Iran is.
> 
> Elvis, I've heard about enough from you. Over the past week, I've given you many chances to substantiate your argument. Your postings are almost borderline Chris-like with lack of substance and poor grammar and sentence structure. It's amazing as to how many conservatives on here are so un-intelligent. Crimson, on the other hand, seems to be quite intelligent. I'd love to go toe to toe with him.



It's intelligent compare Sarah Palin to the Ayatollah?  It's hate speech.  Has Palin ever recommended the death penalty for people of different faiths?  No. 

I didn't know the grammar police were going to infultrate this site.  I am perfectly capable of good sentence structure.  It is difficult to even know how to respond to the ugliness that appears in your threads.  Your hippocracy is just plain stunning.  
As for my intelligence, my IQ is 130.  You should not have put an "and" between substance and poor and another "and" between grammar and sentence.  It's poor sentence structure.  I go onto these threads to relax, not to prepare term papers.  

It is irritating the way you go around on here throwing polls in people's faces telling them to admit defeat.  People have the "audacity of hope" and somehow pray that the race turns around and you just say it's impossible. 
 Then you compare people's candidates to the Ayatollah Khoemeni.  I haven't seen anything that ugly on this entire site.

Oh and another thing, how intelligent is it to put "the bird" in your avatar?


----------



## chloe (Oct 25, 2008)

DavidS said:


> They live in Florida and are both fed up with the negative attack ads from both sides. There's a lot of mis-information being spread around and they're nervous on who to vote for.
> 
> Virtually on every issue, including the economy, they weren't sure who to vote for.
> 
> ...



When asked why they will not vote for a third party candidate, many people will respond by saying something like, "He cannot win." Or, "I dont want to waste my vote." It is true: America has not elected a third party candidate since 1860. Does that automatically mean, however, that every vote cast for one of the two major party candidates is not a wasted vote? I dont think so.

In the first place, a wasted vote is a vote for someone you know does not represent your own beliefs and principles. A wasted vote is a vote for someone you know will not lead the country in the way it should go. A wasted vote is a vote for the "lesser of two evils."

Albert Einstein is credited with saying that insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, and expecting a different result. This is truly insane! 

Take a look at the recent $700 billion Wall Street bailout: both John McCain and Barack Obama endorsed and lobbied for it. Both McCain and Obama will continue to bail out these international banksters on the backs of the American taxpayers.

Ladies and gentlemen, Barack Obama is headed for an electoral landslide victory over John McCain. John McCain can no more beat Barack Obama than Bob Dole could beat Bill Clinton. 

I ask, therefore, Are not conservatives and Christians who vote for John McCain guilty of the same thing that they accuse people who vote for third party candidates of doing? Are they not voting for someone who cannot win? Indeed, they are. In fact, conservatives and Christians who vote for John McCain are not only voting for a man who cannot win, they are voting for a man who does not share their own beliefs and principles. If this is not insanity, nothing is!

So, why not (for once in your life, perhaps) cast a vote purely for principle!
For Someone who would stop spending billions and trillions of dollars for foreign aid. Someone who would prosecute the Wall Street bankers who defrauded the American people out of billions of dollars. Someone who would work to repeal NAFTA, CAFTA, GATT, the WTO, and stop the NAFTA superhighway. Someone who would say a resounding "No" to the New World Order. Someone who would stop using our brave men and women in uniform as global cops for the United Nations. Someone who would stop Americas global adventurism and interventionism. Someone who would steadfastly support and defend the right of the people to keep and bear arms. 

John Quincy Adams said, "Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost." 

Chuck Baldwin


----------



## Missourian (Oct 25, 2008)

DavidS said:


> And yes, I am indeed comparing a first trimester *cluster of cells *to bacteria and insects.



I don't want to turn this into another abortion thread, but I wanted to correct this well circulated myth of the "cluster of cells".


A trimester is 3 months.  By the end of the FIRST month, about the time a woman may realize she is more than "a little late":

*Week Five*​


*First heartbeats begin* - If you have an early ultrasound you may not be able to recognize this tiny being as a baby, but there is no mistaking what it feels like seeing your child's heartbeat on that screen. That rhythmic beat is echoed in your own heart. 

*Umbilical cord develops *- This is your baby's lifeline in utero. It bears the responsibility of pumping in oxygen, removing waste, and supplying the necessary nutrients for the remainder of your pregnancy. 

*Blood is now pumping *- All four heart chambers are now functioning, insuring your baby's body will receive all it needs over not only the remainder of your pregnancy but throughout life. 

*Most other organs begin to develop* - Your infant's lungs start to appear, along with her brain. Already your little one is preparing for a quest for lifelong learning! 

*Arm and leg buds appear *- While they may not appear to be much at this stage it is ok to dream of the future. Just imagine your ballerina twirling and jumping around your kitchen floor. Or perhaps you will have the precocious boy that throws the perfect pitch -- right through the neighbor's window. 

*Week Six*​
*The arms and legs continue to develop *- These limbs are stretching out more and more. Later on you will be feeling those feet and elbows up close and personal right in your bladder! 

*Brain is growing well *- Did you know that over the course of the remaining months that your baby's brain will develop over 100 billion neurons? This is just the beginning! 

*Lenses of the eyes appear *- If you could catch a glimpse inside, you would notice your baby's appearance becoming increasing like a newborn's. 

*Nostrils are formed *- The position of the nose seems to shift into its proper place as well. Soon, the nerves running from the nose to the brain appear. 

*Intestines grow *- Initially these are actually located outside the baby's body within the umbilical cord. 

*Pancreas* - Your baby is now equipped to deal with digestive enzymes and take on processing the insulin and glucagons the body needs to function. 







Link.


.​


----------



## sparky (Oct 25, 2008)

what? nothing about gun control? i thought these wedge issues followed each other like dominoes...?


----------



## editec (Oct 25, 2008)

The Republicans have running on the XENOPHOIC ticket for 8 years now.  

At the same time they kept telling everyone how great the economy fundamentals were, and to anyone who disagreed, they called us class envious, or chickenlittles.

Then the sky actually fell down just as some of us have been saying it would all along.

Anyone who is not a billionaire, or who isn't a servant of same, who votes Republican this time around is simply dumber than a post.


----------



## sparky (Oct 25, 2008)

what has this administration NOT f'd up Editec?


----------



## Red Dawn (Oct 25, 2008)

elvis3577 said:


> congrats.  you're helping to slaughter more babies.  .....snip.



Holy sh*t!

After republicans endlessly  recycled the "terrorist, communist, socialist, radical muslim!" talking points to see if they'd stick, I predicted that "child molester!" would be the next smear coming on Obama.  

"Baby slaughterer!" is close enough....  Damn, I'm good!


----------



## The Paperboy (Oct 25, 2008)

DavidS said:


> They live in Florida and are both fed up with the negative attack ads from both sides. There's a lot of mis-information being spread around and they're nervous on who to vote for.
> 
> Virtually on every issue, including the economy, they weren't sure who to vote for.
> 
> ...



I live in Florida and the biggest piece of misinformation on the TV airwaves is Obama's commercial on McCain wanting to privatize social security. It is a complete lie and deemed "bogus" by Factcheck.org. It is designed to scare senior citizens.


----------



## GigiBowman (Oct 25, 2008)

sparky said:


> what? nothing about gun control? i thought these wedge issues followed each other like dominoes...?



Here I am, bang bang


----------



## DavidS (Oct 25, 2008)

The Paperboy said:


> I live in Florida and the biggest piece of misinformation on the TV airwaves is Obama's commercial on McCain wanting to privatize social security. It is a complete lie and deemed "bogus" by Factcheck.org. It is designed to scare senior citizens.


 
Excerpts from a speech by Senator John McCain on Social Security (Commentary)




[youtube]ZgvgBpXPMko&feature=related[/youtube]

So he was for privitizing social security before he was against it?
Just like he was against cutting taxes before he was for it?


----------



## DavidS (Oct 25, 2008)

Missourian said:


> I don't want to turn this into another abortion thread, but I wanted to correct this well circulated myth of the "cluster of cells".


 
Again, if it cannot survive outside the womb, it is your right to do whatever you wish to do to it.


----------



## xsited1 (Oct 25, 2008)

DavidS said:


> They live in Florida and are both fed up with the negative attack ads from both sides.



So when are you planning on moving out of their basement?


----------



## Toro (Oct 25, 2008)

If you are looking for factual information, the election is the last place to look.


----------



## Caligirl (Oct 25, 2008)

elvis3577 said:


> congrats.  you're helping to slaughter more babies.  Obama will put people in there that allow babies to suffocate after they survive an abortion.  or at very least promote partial birth abortion.  you get pissed when people talk about the obama-ayers connection, and now you're comparing Sarah Palin to Ahmadinijad. hippocrite.



People in poverty have abortion at *four times the rate *of people not in poverty. That is according to the guttmacher institute, you can google it. 

The quickest way to reduce abortion is to introduce jobs, and help get people, especially young girls, out of poverty. 

Period. 

This is what clinches my vote for Obama.


----------



## The Paperboy (Oct 25, 2008)

Caligirl said:


> People in poverty have abortion at *four times the rate *of people not in poverty. That is according to the guttmacher institute, you can google it.
> 
> The quickest way to reduce abortion is to introduce jobs, and help get people, especially young girls, out of poverty.
> 
> ...



Obama's policies will reduce jobs. The more you increase taxes and redistribute wealth the less jobs are created. Who is it you think creates jobs? Well, it's not the government. What the government can do is have economic policies that create an environment for people to start businesses. Bush reduced taxes and government revenues went up 20%. Why? More jobs were created by small businesses.


----------



## JimH52 (Oct 25, 2008)

Please take a look at any Electoral Map.  I look at cnn.com and rasmussen.com.  It is over for McCain.  He was once a maverick, as advertised, but reduced himself to a Booooosh lapdog in order to gain the GOP nomination.  That is the end of the line for him.

Sadly, Boooosh and his run away adminstration are about to inflict on the Grande Old Party a kiss of death.  It will take generations for the GOP to regain prominence depending on how much the Democrats screw up when they gain total power.

The addage still applied with the Demos:  "Total Power Corrupts Totally."


----------



## elvis (Oct 25, 2008)

Caligirl said:


> People in poverty have abortion at *four times the rate *of people not in poverty. That is according to the guttmacher institute, you can google it.
> 
> The quickest way to reduce abortion is to introduce jobs, and help get people, especially young girls, out of poverty.
> 
> ...



But he's expanding it.


----------



## elvis (Oct 25, 2008)

DavidS said:


> Again, if it cannot survive outside the womb, it is your right to do whatever you wish to do to it.



So a baby who needs to be in an incubator; it can't survive outside the womb.  I guess we'll kill that one, too.


----------



## Larkinn (Oct 25, 2008)

elvis3577 said:


> So a baby who needs to be in an incubator; it can't survive outside the womb.  I guess we'll kill that one, too.



Umm, an incubator is outside the womb...


----------



## DavidS (Oct 25, 2008)

The Paperboy said:


> Obama's policies will reduce jobs. The more you increase taxes and redistribute wealth the less jobs are created. Who is it you think creates jobs?



Small business owners. How many small business owners generate more than $250,000 a year in NET revenue? There are approximately 25.8 million businesses in the United States and over 99 percent of all employers are small businesses, according to the U.S. Small Business Administration. According to the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, "several hundred thousand small business owners, at most, would have incomes high enough to be affected by the higher rates on income, capital gains and dividends that Obama proposes." Under Obama's plan, small businesses get more tax credits and their capital gains taxes are ELIMINATED. This would encourage more investors in small business.



> Well, it's not the government. What the government can do is have economic policies that create an environment for people to start businesses. Bush reduced taxes and government revenues went up 20%. Why? More jobs were created by small businesses.



Again, I will continue my refrain. 3 million jobs were created under Bush's. Over 20 million jobs were created under Clinton. 

Clinton's tax brackets: 39%.
Bush's tax brackets: 36%

Do you REALLY think a 3% tax hike coupled with many small business credits, being able to write off 50% of healthcare expenses as tax credits is going to hurt businesses that make over $250,000 a year in net revenue?


----------



## elvis (Oct 25, 2008)

DavidS said:


> Small business owners. How many small business owners generate more than $250,000 a year in NET revenue? There are approximately 25.8 million businesses in the United States and over 99 percent of all employers are small businesses, according to the U.S. Small Business Administration. According to the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, "several hundred thousand small business owners, at most, would have incomes high enough to be affected by the higher rates on income, capital gains and dividends that Obama proposes." Under Obama's plan, small businesses get more tax credits and their capital gains taxes are ELIMINATED. This would encourage more investors in small business.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I don't believe that that is Obama's tax plan.  I know that's what he says it is. But I don't believe it.


----------



## Caligirl (Oct 25, 2008)

The Paperboy said:


> Obama's policies will reduce jobs. The more you increase taxes and redistribute wealth the less jobs are created. Who is it you think creates jobs? Well, it's not the government. What the government can do is have economic policies that create an environment for people to start businesses. Bush reduced taxes and government revenues went up 20%. Why? More jobs were created by small businesses.



Here's a graph of job losses from 1984 to ~2003.

Both Bushes have done a horrific job. Clinton did well.






Here's another view comparing Clinton and Bush directly.

It's your choice.


----------



## DavidS (Oct 25, 2008)

elvis3577 said:


> I don't believe that that is Obama's tax plan.  I know that's what he says it is. But I don't believe it.



Well, I can't believe John McCain. The guy has switched positions on taxes so often, I've lost count. Obama's been consistent with his message about taxes.


----------



## elvis (Oct 25, 2008)

DavidS said:


> Well, I can't believe John McCain. The guy has switched positions on taxes so often, I've lost count. Obama's been consistent with his message about taxes.



That is correct.  He has been consistently telling the same lie.


----------



## DavidS (Oct 25, 2008)

elvis3577 said:


> I don't believe that that is Obama's tax plan.  I know that's what he says it is. But I don't believe it.



Well, I can't believe John McCain. The guy has switched positions on taxes so often, I've lost count. Obama's been consistent with his message about taxes.


----------



## chloe (Oct 25, 2008)

The reform debate is strictly about politics and not serious economics. Both sides use demagoguery but dont propose truly significant tax reductions. Both sides use the outrageous expression cost to government when talking about the impact of tax legislation on revenues. This implies that government owns everything, and that any tax rate less than 100% costs government some of its rightful bounty.

Government spending is the problem! When the federal government takes $2.5 trillion dollars out of the legitimate private economy in a single year, whether through taxes or borrowing, spending clearly is out of control. Deficit spending creates a de facto tax hike, because deficits can be repaid only by future tax increases. By this measure Congress and the president have raised taxes dramatically over the past few years, despite the tax-cutting rhetoric. The real issue is total spending by government, not tax reform. 


Who wants a 40% flat tax? Who wants a national sales tax if it adds 35% to the retail price of everything we buy? In other words, why change the tax structure if spending stays the same? Once we accept that Congress needs $2.5 trillion from us  and more each year  the only question left is from whom it will be collected. Until the federal government is held to its proper constitutionally limited functions, tax reform will remain a mirage.

The most important promise a president makes is his promise to obey the Constitution. In realizing this, we know that the Constitution was written in order to restrain the federal government, but was meant to retain the rights and privileges & obligations to the states and to the people. Today, we have drifted a long way from that, and now we have jurisdictional fights over what we ought to do.

When political oppression is accompanied by serious economic problems, the people will frequently, after years of suffering, overthrow the tyrants. But a wealthy nation, grown soft on the prosperity produced by a previously free generation, tends to vote for that individual who promises the biggest piece of the pie to his constituents. Ironically the prosperity that comes from a free society is the fuel that feeds the fire which brings on the demise of that society. Materially we are much better off today than people were in 1776, but our philosophy of freedom is in much worse shape.

Ron Paul


----------



## xsited1 (Oct 25, 2008)

Caligirl said:


> People in poverty have abortion at *four times the rate *of people not in poverty. That is according to the guttmacher institute, you can google it.
> 
> The quickest way to reduce abortion is to introduce jobs, and help get people, especially young girls, out of poverty.
> 
> ...



Huh?  Obama isn't going to get people out of poverty.  He's going to lower the quality of life for everyone until at least 2010.


----------



## xsited1 (Oct 25, 2008)

DavidS said:


> Obama's been consistent with his message about taxes.



Which explains why the stock market is doing so poorly.


----------



## Shattered (Oct 25, 2008)

Caligirl said:


> People in poverty have abortion at *four times the rate *of people not in poverty. That is according to the guttmacher institute, you can google it.
> 
> The quickest way to reduce abortion is to introduce jobs, and help get people, especially young girls, out of poverty.
> 
> ...



The quickest way tto reduce abortion is to stop having unprotected sex if you can't afford to have children!


----------



## Caligirl (Oct 25, 2008)

xsited1 said:


> Huh?  Obama isn't going to get people out of poverty.  He's going to lower the quality of life for everyone until at least 2010.



Hmmm, you ought to tell him that because that isn't anything like what his platform promises. 

Jobs baby, jobs.


----------



## Caligirl (Oct 25, 2008)

Shattered said:


> The quickest way tto reduce abortion is to stop having unprotected sex if you can't afford to have children!



Hear hear!

Where do you stand on abstinence only education? 

Yet another reason to vote democrat this time around!


----------



## GigiBowman (Oct 25, 2008)

xsited1 said:


> Huh?  Obama isn't going to get people out of poverty.  He's going to lower the quality of life for everyone until at least 2010.





No, you are wrong xsited! When Obama is President everything wrong in the world will be right!  Get with the program


----------



## Shattered (Oct 25, 2008)

Caligirl said:


> Hear hear!
> 
> Where do you stand on abstinence only education?
> 
> Yet another reason to vote democrat this time around!



Oh yeah, cuz voting Democrat is going to make people smarten up.  Pul-eeze.


----------



## xsited1 (Oct 25, 2008)

Caligirl said:


> Hmmm, you ought to tell him that because that isn't anything like what his platform promises.
> 
> Jobs baby, jobs.



I know what he's promising, but historically increasing taxes the way he's promised will SLOW the economy.  He needs some better economic advisors, unless of course he wants to America to become more socialistic.  Then his policies make sense.


----------



## elvis (Oct 25, 2008)

GigiBowman said:


> No, you are wrong xsited! When Obama is President everything wrong in the world will be right!  Get with the program



That's right. Say the  sinner's prayer and embrace the Messiah!!!


----------



## Caligirl (Oct 25, 2008)

xsited1 said:


> Which explains why the stock market is doing so poorly.



Are you nuts? 

Greenspan and two other REPUBLICANS (the entire PANEL) disagreed with this blatantly far right stupidity.


----------



## xsited1 (Oct 25, 2008)

GigiBowman said:


> No, you are wrong xsited! When Obama is President everything wrong in the world will be right!  Get with the program



He has promised that kittens will never grow up and I believe him.

"A Lightworker (Obama) -- An Attuned Being with Powerful Luminosity and High-Vibration Integrity who will actually help usher in a New Way of Being"

-- Mark Morford


----------



## Caligirl (Oct 25, 2008)

xsited1 said:


> I know what he's promising, but historically increasing taxes the way he's promised will SLOW the economy.  He needs some better economic advisors, unless of course he wants to America to become more socialistic.  Then his policies make sense.



_Historically _he wants to get the clinton policies back in place, policies which saw fantastic job growth. 

the talking points don't get traction, because they don't make any sense.


----------



## Caligirl (Oct 25, 2008)

xsited1 said:


> He has promised that kittens will never grow up and I believe him.
> 
> "A Lightworker (Obama) -- An Attuned Being with Powerful Luminosity and High-Vibration Integrity who will actually help usher in a New Way of Being"
> 
> -- Mark Morford



There are those people on the right calling Obama a savior again.


----------



## xsited1 (Oct 25, 2008)

Caligirl said:


> Are you nuts?
> 
> Greenspan and two other REPUBLICANS (the entire PANEL) disagreed with this blatantly far right stupidity.



I'm talking about Obama's economic policies and you start talking about the 'far right stupidity'?  Let me know when you want to talk about Obama's economic policies again.


----------



## xsited1 (Oct 25, 2008)

Caligirl said:


> There are those people on the right calling Obama a savior again.



People on the right?  I wouldn't know about that, but I do know the people on the Left are describing Obama as a Messiah.  Doesn't that scare you?

Is Barack Obama the Messiah?


----------



## xsited1 (Oct 25, 2008)

Caligirl said:


> _Historically _he wants to get the clinton policies back in place, policies which saw fantastic job growth.
> 
> the talking points don't get traction, because they don't make any sense.



Clinton policies slowed the economy as they did when he was governor of Arkansas.  Just look at the lack of growth from 1992-1994.  This didn't change until real fiscal conservatives took over in 1994 (1/95).


----------



## Caligirl (Oct 25, 2008)

xsited1 said:


> People on the right?  I wouldn't know about that, but I do know the people on the Left are describing Obama as a Messiah.  Doesn't that scare you?
> 
> Is Barack Obama the Messiah?



I would say that that is a weird website, I had never seen it before and have no idea if it's a farce. 

I don't know anyone on the left that thinks he is a messiah (remember though, they're mostly atheists and agnostics and godless heathens to begin with) but the right keeps saying it so I guess the republicans think he is the messiah.


----------



## Caligirl (Oct 25, 2008)

xsited1 said:


> I'm talking about Obama's economic policies and you start talking about the 'far right stupidity'?  Let me know when you want to talk about Obama's economic policies again.



Saying that the stock market is crashing because of Obama is not discussing his policies, it is regurgitating Limbaugh talking points.


----------



## DavidS (Oct 25, 2008)

xsited1 said:


> Which explains why the stock market is doing so poorly.


 
Stop watching Neil Cavuto and Bill O'Reilly. They're just puppets for Karl Rove. The stock market is doing poorly because of the global recession and everything linked to the global recession. Obama did not create the global recession.


----------



## DavidS (Oct 25, 2008)

Shattered said:


> The quickest way tto reduce abortion is to stop having unprotected sex if you can't afford to have children!


 
So says a woman. It doesn't make a lick of difference to women. To men, they'd rather be reading a newspaper about the history of law in Brazil than to be using a rubber.


----------



## DavidS (Oct 25, 2008)

xsited1 said:


> Clinton policies slowed the economy as they did when he was governor of Arkansas. Just look at the lack of growth from 1992-1994. This didn't change until real fiscal conservatives took over in 1994 (1/95).


 
Really? That's the first I heard of it. What laws did Newt Gringrich and Bob Dole work on together that were passed that stimulated the economy in the mid 1990s?


----------



## Navy1960 (Oct 25, 2008)

You know, when I read the title to this thread it reminded me of a conversation I had with my own father  a few day's ago.  My father expressed his concerns for exact different reasons than David's parents and they are  very afriad of Obama.  They see his populist message  very much the same as  Castro's message in Cuba. You must understand though my Father was  born in Cuba and is very anti-communist and  he himself see's Obama as a communist and calls him that openly. The message of  Barack Obama's social agenda has  influenced  my father  much the same way McCains message has   brought fear to David's parents. So fear is not something that is the  total property of one side of the other, and the only thing I would add to this is that when speaking to my father, I always tell him that change always brings fear  if that change is bad or good  it doesn't matter somewhere someplace someone is going to be afriad.


----------



## WillowTree (Oct 25, 2008)

DavidS said:


> Again, if it cannot survive outside the womb, it is your right to do whatever you wish to do to it.






"It" cannot simply live outside the womb. You have to take an active part is taking care of "it". So by those standards you can do whatever you want with "it" until you no longer have to take care of "it." That would include all liberals cause they surely need someone to take care of them.


----------



## DavidS (Oct 25, 2008)

WillowTree said:


> "It" cannot simply live outside the womb. You have to take an active part is taking care of "it". So by those standards you can do whatever you want with "it" until you no longer have to take care of "it." That would include all liberals cause they surely need someone to take care of them.


 
Let me be specific then. First trimester abortions I consider a mother's right to choose. First half of second, you better have a good reason. Second half of second and third trimester only in the case of mother's help. Exemptions include rape and incest.


----------



## xsited1 (Oct 25, 2008)

Caligirl said:


> I would say that that is a weird website, I had never seen it before and have no idea if it's a farce.
> 
> I don't know anyone on the left that thinks he is a messiah (remember though, they're mostly atheists and agnostics and godless heathens to begin with) but the right keeps saying it so I guess the republicans think he is the messiah.



The quotes are real.  They are easily validated.  Now that you know about it, perhaps you'll investigate it further.


----------



## xsited1 (Oct 25, 2008)

Caligirl said:


> Saying that the stock market is crashing because of Obama is not discussing his policies, it is regurgitating Limbaugh talking points.



I'm saying that one reason the stock market is crashing IS because Obama is discussing his economic policies.  Evidently, this is opposite to what Limbaugh is talking about.  You would know better than I since I don't listen to Limbaugh.


----------



## xsited1 (Oct 25, 2008)

DavidS said:


> Really? That's the first I heard of it. What laws did Newt Gringrich and Bob Dole work on together that were passed that stimulated the economy in the mid 1990s?



They worked to reduce the impact of government on the American taxpayer.  It worked.  There was virtually nothing Bill Clinton could do fiscally when the Republicans took control of Congress.  Now, of course, Obama will have the full-backing of Democrats in Congress.  Expect a tough 2 years.


----------



## Shattered (Oct 25, 2008)

DavidS said:


> Let me be specific then. First trimester abortions I consider a mother's right to choose. First half of second, you better have a good reason. Second half of second and third trimester only in the case of mother's help. Exemptions include rape and incest.



What about the fathers right to choose?


----------



## Caligirl (Oct 25, 2008)

xsited1 said:


> I'm saying that one reason the stock market is crashing IS because Obama is discussing his economic policies.



Alright, detail that for me.

And, is the credit freeze due to the same thing?


----------



## xsited1 (Oct 25, 2008)

Shattered said:


> What about the fathers right to choose?



Good point!  The father essentially has no rights according to the current laws.  Eventually, medical science will progress to the point where a 6 week old fetus will be considered viable.  Then what?


----------



## Caligirl (Oct 25, 2008)

Maybe the father can carry it if he wants it.

POP! The First Human Male Pregnancy - Mr. Lee Mingwei


----------



## Shattered (Oct 25, 2008)

xsited1 said:


> Good point!  The father essentially has no rights according to the current laws.  Eventually, medical science will progress to the point where a 6 week old fetus will be considered viable.  Then what?



You're asking the wrong person.

My take is if the woman wants the baby, and the father doesn't, she takes full responsibility for it, and he's off the hook.

If the father wants the baby, and the woman doesn't, then he takes full responsibility for it, and she's off the hook.

In any case, I don't believe abortion *should* be an option for two people who just had an "ooops".. There's really no excuse for that type of mistake.


----------



## Shattered (Oct 25, 2008)

Caligirl said:


> Maybe the father can carry it if he wants it.
> 
> POP! The First Human Male Pregnancy - Mr. Lee Mingwei



So...regardless of the fact that it takes two to tango, the second party to said "transaction" has no say-so whatsoever, in your mind, simply because carrying said baby would be an inconvenience to YOU?

You sure as hell thought enough of him to MAKE a baby with him.. (you = collective)


----------



## DavidS (Oct 25, 2008)

xsited1 said:


> They worked to reduce the impact of government on the American taxpayer. It worked. There was virtually nothing Bill Clinton could do fiscally when the Republicans took control of Congress. Now, of course, Obama will have the full-backing of Democrats in Congress. Expect a tough 2 years.


 
I'm sorry, I don't think you answered question. What bills did the House of Representatives and United States Senate from 1995-1996 that Clinton either passed or veoted and the Senate over-rode that led to "fiscal respoinsiblity" in the government?


----------



## Caligirl (Oct 25, 2008)

Shattered said:


> So...regardless of the fact that it takes two to tango, the second party to said "transaction" has no say-so whatsoever, in your mind, simply because carrying said baby would be an inconvenience to YOU?
> 
> You sure as hell thought enough of him to MAKE a baby with him.. (you = collective)



I'm reiterating your statement that if the father wants it he needs to take full responsibility for it.


----------



## Shattered (Oct 25, 2008)

Caligirl said:


> I'm reiterating your statement that if the father wants it he needs to take full responsibility for it.



That's pathetic, and you know it.  Could you possibly stoop any lower?


----------



## DavidS (Oct 25, 2008)

xsited1 said:


> I'm saying that one reason the stock market is crashing IS because Obama is discussing his economic policies.


 
Where is your proof for this? And please don't say "Look at the market" I want proof. You seem to have vast knowledge of either economics or the stock market very well, which was something I was not aware of. Where did you receive your doctorite in economics? 

By the way, the stock market plunged when McCain was in the lead.

Everyone I'm talking to gives me the pending global recession and the causes of the recession as a reason why the market is crashing.


----------



## DavidS (Oct 25, 2008)

Shattered said:


> What about the fathers right to choose?


 
If you dangle, you have no rights.


----------



## Shattered (Oct 25, 2008)

DavidS said:


> If you dangle, you have no rights.



*shrug*  I disagree.


----------



## Caligirl (Oct 25, 2008)

Shattered said:


> That's pathetic, and you know it.  Could you possibly stoop any lower?



Uh, you really lost me here.  men are now carrying babies, if you don't think that is pertinent to the issue, as well as to your stated position, then...whatever. 

I certainly did not make any statement about abortion in this, mind you.


----------



## xsited1 (Oct 25, 2008)

Shattered said:


> You're asking the wrong person.
> 
> My take is if the woman wants the baby, and the father doesn't, she takes full responsibility for it, and he's off the hook.
> 
> ...



My question was more rhetorical.  I should not have asked you specifically.  I agree with you.


----------



## Larkinn (Oct 25, 2008)

Shattered said:


> You're asking the wrong person.
> 
> My take is if the woman wants the baby, and the father doesn't, she takes full responsibility for it, and he's off the hook.
> 
> ...



Do explain how the woman can be "off the hook" considering she would be carrying the baby for 9 months...


----------



## xsited1 (Oct 25, 2008)

Caligirl said:


> Alright, detail that for me.
> 
> And, is the credit freeze due to the same thing?



There's not much to detail.  Obama's tax policies will have a negative effect on the economy and the wealthy will simply move their money out of the stock market to avoid punitive taxation.  

The credit freeze is due to a myriad of problems.  There are really 3 main factors:  a lax monetary policy, pressure to expand home loan volume, and the failure to monitor home lending quality.  The unconstitution bail-out was the wrong thing to do, but that didn't stop certain people from voting for it.  These people include:  George W. Bush, John McCain, Barack Obama and Joe Biden.  The tragedy is that one is a sitting President and another will become President of the United States.


----------



## Shattered (Oct 25, 2008)

Larkinn said:


> Do explain how the woman can be "off the hook" considering she would be carrying the baby for 9 months...



Big friggen deal - she had no problem taking part in making the baby.. After's not really the time to be a selfish bitch, is it?


----------



## Caligirl (Oct 25, 2008)

xsited1 said:


> There's not much to detail.  Obama's tax policies will have a negative effect on the economy and the wealthy will simply move their money out of the stock market to avoid punitive taxation.



Where will they put their money?

We are thinking it is a good time to buy. Warren Buffet is saying the same.



> The credit freeze is due to a myriad of problems.  There are really 3 main factors:  a lax monetary policy, pressure to expand home loan volume, and the failure to monitor home lending quality.  The unconstitution bail-out was the wrong thing to do, but that didn't stop certain people from voting for it.  These people include:  George W. Bush, John McCain, Barack Obama and Joe Biden.  The tragedy is that one is a sitting President and another will become President of the United States.



The stock market is also due to myriad problems, not Obama talking about his economic plan.

I am happy to agree to disagree.


----------



## xsited1 (Oct 25, 2008)

DavidS said:


> Where is your proof for this? And please don't say "Look at the market" I want proof. You seem to have vast knowledge of either economics or the stock market very well, which was something I was not aware of. Where did you receive your doctorite in economics?
> 
> By the way, the stock market plunged when McCain was in the lead.
> 
> Everyone I'm talking to gives me the pending global recession and the causes of the recession as a reason why the market is crashing.



I have several College degrees (mainly technical: Physics, Mathematics, Electrical Engineering), but I've also been in the financial markets since the late 70s.  The market is declining because of the credit crunch, but there is also tremendous uncertainty with an Obama Presidency, especially since his stated economic policies WILL have a negative impact on the economy.  Those who forget history will be forced to repeat it.  This happened with George W. Bush and Bill Clinton during his first 2 years.


----------



## greenpartyaz (Oct 25, 2008)

DavidS said:


> She's an extreme right-wing fundamentalist whose views do not fall in line with main stream America's views. And no, I did not compare her to Ahmadinejad, I compared her to ayatollah khomeini. She won't even denounce abortion clinic bombings. She believes a woman who is brutally raped shouldn't have the right to have an abortion. She's old school, as in 100 years ago old school and is an extremely dangerous person.
> 
> Removing a fetus from your body is not slaughtering a baby. It's removing a fetus. Do you take anti-biotics, Elvis? You're killing a life form! Have you ever killed an insect? Murderer! And yes, I am indeed comparing a first trimester cluster of cells to bacteria and insects.
> 
> ...



Finally a dose of truth!


----------



## xsited1 (Oct 25, 2008)

Caligirl said:


> Where will they put their money?
> 
> We are thinking it is a good time to buy. Warren Buffet is saying the same.



Warren Buffet will most likely be right for the long term, but the next two years will be shaky.  Warren has enough wealth to ride out the storm.  The rich will continue to put their money in bonds, real estate and gold.  



> The stock market is also due to myriad problems, not Obama talking about his economic plan.
> 
> I am happy to agree to disagree.



I respect you and your opinion.


----------



## DavidS (Oct 25, 2008)

Shattered said:


> *shrug* I disagree.


 
You don't dangle. But that's very interesting. You're the first woman who has said that the father should have rights. Most other women say that the man doesn't have to go through the whole pregnancy thing with their bodies. I disagree. When my girlfriend was pregnant, before we knew she was, I going through quite a bit, physically. Anyway, tmi... sorry.


----------



## DavidS (Oct 25, 2008)

xsited1 said:


> There's not much to detail. Obama's tax policies will have a negative effect on the economy and the wealthy will simply move their money out of the stock market to avoid punitive taxation.


 
This is garbage. Did that happen the last time capital gains tax was 20%? No, it didn't. In fact, the stock market grew at incredible speeds in the late 1990s. Income tax levels were also at 39% for the richest. There's absolutely no proof of this whatsoever.


----------



## Skeptik (Oct 25, 2008)

AVG-JOE said:


> I'm in Florida now and I can confirm that they're right about the airwaves being flooded with ads.  The ones McCain approves are negative, the ones sponsored by various Republican groups are frightening; Obamas are about 50 / 50 positive / negative and I haven't seen any from Democratic side groups regarding the big race.
> 
> The hardest ones to stomach are the fear mongering ads from the Republican side groups - especially the ones aimed at Florida's seniors.
> 
> ...



I'm in California, which is painted dark blue on the map, so we don't get a lot of campaign ads.

I don't miss them.

The best advice to anyone in a swing state is to TIVO the TV, then skip  the ads.  None of them add a thing to any kind of reasonable dialogue, nor do they give one reason to vote for one candidate over another.  I've seen hundreds of campaign ads over the years, and they all have the same thing in common:  They are full of crap, all of them from both parties.

The best thing to do is to look at the issues, then decide which candidate agrees with your position more than the other, then ask yourself if there is more than a snowball's chance that your pick might begin to sort of straighten out the mess left by the past administration, or if they're likely to make things worse.

Make yourself a balance, put the plusses and minuses of each candidate on a chart, then base your vote on the result.

Then, don't expect the candidate to actually keep all of the promises made during the campaign.  Neither one of them will be able to do that.  One big minus for both of them is that they tell the voters what they want to hear.

Of course, if they didn't tell us what we want to hear, we wouldn't vote for them.

And, remember, we're not electing a king.  The president can't make laws, can't do really any of the things that they say they want to do without the active participation of Congress.

Thank God for the Constitution.


----------



## xsited1 (Oct 25, 2008)

DavidS said:


> This is garbage. Did that happen the last time capital gains tax was 20%? No, it didn't. In fact, the stock market grew at incredible speeds in the late 1990s. Income tax levels were also at 39% for the richest. There's absolutely no proof of this whatsoever.



Uh, no.  Lower government spending was able to offset the higher taxes, but there was also the problem with the dot com bubble which could have been prevented by lowering taxes.  Cuts in government spending are expansionary, making economies boom.  However, you still have to understand that lower tax rates are also expansionary.  Ireland is a perfect example of this.  They have a 15 percent tax on corporate profits, a 20 percent tax on inflation-indexed capital gains and lower tax rates on labor.  Government needs to do it's job.  Lowering taxes is the way to go.  I often quote this Harvard study because it takes a lot of data from 18 large economies over a few decades and proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that lowering taxes works.

http://fmwww.bc.edu/EC-P/WP504.pdf

Happy reading.


----------



## DavidS (Oct 25, 2008)

xsited1 said:


> Uh, no. Lower government spending was able to offset the higher taxes, but there was also the problem with the dot com bubble which could have been prevented by lowering taxes. Cuts in government spending are expansionary, making economies boom. However, you still have to understand that lower tax rates are also expansionary. Ireland is a perfect example of this. They have a 15 percent tax on corporate profits, a 20 percent tax on inflation-indexed capital gains and lower tax rates on labor. Government needs to do it's job. Lowering taxes is the way to go. I often quote this Harvard study because it takes a lot of data from 18 large economies over a few decades and proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that lowering taxes works.
> 
> http://fmwww.bc.edu/EC-P/WP504.pdf
> 
> Happy reading.


 
I'm still waiting for you to tell me what bills the House and Senate passed in 1995 and 1996 that caused the economy to improve and lower government spending?


----------



## Larkinn (Oct 25, 2008)

Shattered said:


> Big friggen deal - she had no problem taking part in making the baby.. After's not really the time to be a selfish bitch, is it?



So your saying shes NOT "off the hook".   

And yeah...pregnancy is sort of a "big friggen deal".   

Its nice how that if the guy wants the girl to go through 9 months of labor to have a kid for her, its "not really the time to be a selfish bitch", but if the woman wants the guy to pay for child support its all good for you.   Nice level of consistency there.


----------



## xsited1 (Oct 25, 2008)

DavidS said:


> I'm still waiting for you to tell me what bills the House and Senate passed in 1995 and 1996 that caused the economy to improve and lower government spending?



Here you go:

Contract with America - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This explains the bills that did and did not pass.  Pay particular attention to the bills pertaining to tax relief and fiscal responsibility.  Non-defense government spending DECREASED during this period by about 0.7%.


----------



## Shattered (Oct 25, 2008)

Larkinn said:


> So your saying shes NOT "off the hook".
> 
> And yeah...pregnancy is sort of a "big friggen deal".
> 
> Its nice how that if the guy wants the girl to go through 9 months of labor to have a kid for her, its "not really the time to be a selfish bitch", but if the woman wants the guy to pay for child support its all good for you.   Nice level of consistency there.



Were you born this friggen dumb?  If the guy doesn't want the kid, and the woman does, why should he have to pay child support?  Or did you completely MISS that post of mine while you were slobbering all over your keyboard in a fit of fury?


----------



## Larkinn (Oct 25, 2008)

Shattered said:


> Were you born this friggen dumb?  If the guy doesn't want the kid, and the woman does, why should he have to pay child support?  Or did you completely MISS that post of mine while you were slobbering all over your keyboard in a fit of fury?



If the guy wants the kid, and the woman doesn't, why should she have to go through 9 months of labor?

I understand your point, dumbshit.   I'm attempting to get you to realize how hypocritical it is.   Try some reading comprehension lessons, eh?


----------



## Shattered (Oct 25, 2008)

Larkinn said:


> If the guy wants the kid, and the woman doesn't, why should she have to go through 9 months of labor?
> 
> I understand your point, dumbshit.   I'm attempting to get you to realize how hypocritical it is.   Try some reading comprehension lessons, eh?



If the guy wants the kid, and the woman doesn't, why should she get to kill it?  She needed his consent to make it, she should need his consent to kill it.


----------



## Immanuel (Oct 25, 2008)

Caligirl said:


> People in poverty have abortion at *four times the rate *of people not in poverty. That is according to the guttmacher institute, you can google it.
> 
> The quickest way to reduce abortion is to introduce jobs, and help get people, especially young girls, out of poverty.
> 
> ...



Please help me to understand how this clinches your vote for Obama.  Obama's presidency will be bad for American business and what is bad for American business is bad for the poor.  Jobs will be lost under Obama.  Businesses that hire the poor will close and if you are correct about introducing jobs to reduce abortion then abortions will increase.

Immie


----------



## Larkinn (Oct 25, 2008)

Shattered said:


> If the guy wants the kid, and the woman doesn't, why should she get to kill it?  She needed his consent to make it, she should need his consent to kill it.



Because.   She.   Is.   Required.   To.   Go.   Through.   Nine.   Months.   Of.  Labor.   

And around and around in circles we go...


----------



## Shattered (Oct 25, 2008)

Larkinn said:


> Because.   She.   Is.   Required.   To.   Go.   Through.   Nine.   Months.   Of.  Labor.
> 
> And around and around in circles we go...



Big. Fucking. Deal.

She had no problem spreading her legs for the man without some form of birth control.  She. can. suck. it. the. fuck. up.

Clear enough for you?


----------



## Larkinn (Oct 25, 2008)

Shattered said:


> Big. Fucking. Deal.
> 
> She had no problem spreading her legs for the man without some form of birth control.  She. can. suck. it. the. fuck. up.
> 
> Clear enough for you?



The man had no problem fucking some chick with no birth control, so he can pay for the baby if the woman wants to keep it.

Clear enough for you?   Do you get how those two circumstances are EXACTLY the same?


----------



## Shattered (Oct 25, 2008)

Larkinn said:


> The man had no problem fucking some chick with no birth control, so he can pay for the baby if the woman wants to keep it.
> 
> Clear enough for you?   Do you get how those two circumstances are EXACTLY the same?



Well, gee.  If all men, and all women thought like you, this wouldn't be an issue, would it?

However, they don't, and it is.

What do YOU suggest is to be done about it?


----------



## Larkinn (Oct 25, 2008)

Shattered said:


> Well, gee.  If all men, and all women thought like you, this wouldn't be an issue, would it?



Umm, all I've been doing is showing how your view is inconsistent.   You still don't get that?  



> What do YOU suggest is to be done about it?



Basically how it is now.   Its flawed, but it has to be flawed because one gender carries the baby to term for 9 months, and one doesn't.   You can't whine and scream about "equality for everyone" if their situations are inherently unequal.   Treating them the exact same fucks over the woman.


----------



## Shattered (Oct 25, 2008)

Larkinn said:


> Umm, all I've been doing is showing how your view is inconsistent.   You still don't get that?
> 
> 
> 
> Basically how it is now.   Its flawed, but it has to be flawed because one gender carries the baby to term for 9 months, and one doesn't.   You can't whine and scream about "equality for everyone" if their situations are inherently unequal.   Treating them the exact same fucks over the woman.



Where am I "whining and screaming" about anything?  I simply think the guy should be given some choices in the matter.

Have you ever seen the face of a guy who found out his girlfriend was pregnant, and THEN found out she had an abortion?


----------



## Shattered (Oct 25, 2008)

Given the ability to kill at will, you aren't really making me sympathetic to the women declaring "oops" when they irresponsibly get pregnant.

And yes, women DO have more responsibility to prevent unwanted pregnancy than men, because it IS their body.


----------



## elvis (Oct 25, 2008)

Shattered said:


> Big. Fucking. Deal.
> 
> She had no problem spreading her legs for the man without some form of birth control.  She. can. suck. it. the. fuck. up.
> 
> Clear enough for you?



I like your style. 


Uh. shadooby shattered shattered.


----------



## Larkinn (Oct 25, 2008)

Shattered said:


> Where am I "whining and screaming" about anything?  I simply think the guy should be given some choices in the matter.



There isn't any "some choice".   Its all or nothing if we are looking at it from a legal standpoint.   



> Have you ever seen the face of a guy who found out his girlfriend was pregnant, and THEN found out she had an abortion?



Ah, the sympathy ploy.   Ever seen the face of a woman who got pregnant and had to choose between getting an abortion, or being a single mother?   



> Given the ability to kill at will, you aren't really making me sympathetic to the women declaring "oops" when they irresponsibly get pregnant.



But yet your sympathetic towards the men declaring "oops, got you pregnant, peace, see around (or not)"?



> And yes, women DO have more responsibility to prevent unwanted pregnancy than men, because it IS their body.



Really?   So its not a joint thing?   So you didn't mean it when you said:



> So...regardless of the fact that it takes two to tango, the second party to said "transaction" has no say-so whatsoever, in your mind, simply because carrying said baby would be an inconvenience to YOU?
> 
> You sure as hell thought enough of him to MAKE a baby with him.. (you = collective)


----------



## Redneck (Oct 25, 2008)

Larkinn said:


> Because.   She.   Is.   Required.   To.   Go.   Through.   Nine.   Months.   Of.  Labor.
> 
> And around and around in circles we go...


Nine months of labor? 
I would suggest ya get a biology book and read about human reproduction....


----------



## elvis (Oct 25, 2008)

Redneck said:


> Nine months of labor?
> I would suggest ya get a biology book and read about human reproduction....



yeah nine months of labor would be rough.


----------



## Larkinn (Oct 25, 2008)

Redneck said:


> Nine months of labor?
> I would suggest ya get a biology book and read about human reproduction....



Anything useful to add?   Or do you just want to bitch because I used the word labor instead of pregnancy?


----------



## Shattered (Oct 25, 2008)

Larkinn said:


> There isn't any "some choice".   Its all or nothing if we are looking at it from a legal standpoint.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Obviously the whole kill'em all; anything else be damned system works for you then.  Whatever.  You're still an idiot, and YOUR mother should have swallowed.


----------



## elvis (Oct 25, 2008)

Larkinn said:


> Anything useful to add?   Or do you just want to bitch because I used the word labor instead of pregnancy?



how about a little of both?


----------



## Redneck (Oct 25, 2008)

Larkinn said:


> Anything useful to add?   Or do you just want to bitch because I used the word labor instead of pregnancy?



Hon if ya wanna play..Ya gotta pay the piper....
If ya wanna make a point using the correct word comes in handy.
Otherwise ya just look silly and peeps will point and laugh.


----------



## elvis (Oct 25, 2008)

Shattered said:


> Obviously the whole kill'em all; anything else be damned system works for you then.  Whatever.  You're still an idiot, and YOUR mother should have swallowed.



larkin's in tatters,  he's been shattered. splattered all over.......  this board.


----------



## Redneck (Oct 25, 2008)

elvis3577 said:


> larkin's in tatters,  he's been shattered. splattered all over.......  this board.



Thanks for the earworm...


----------



## Larkinn (Oct 25, 2008)

Redneck said:


> Hon if ya wanna play..Ya gotta pay the piper....
> If ya wanna make a point using the correct word comes in handy.
> Otherwise ya just look silly and peeps will point and laugh.



Sorry I didn't realize I had to speak so precisely so as not to bewilder and confuse you.


----------



## Redneck (Oct 25, 2008)

Larkinn said:


> Sorry I didn't realize I had to speak so precisely so as not to bewilder and confuse you.



Hon, I wasn't confused...I was pointin and laughin...


----------



## elvis (Oct 25, 2008)

Redneck said:


> Thanks for the earworm...



better than some earworms...


----------



## Larkinn (Oct 25, 2008)

Shattered said:


> Obviously the whole kill'em all; anything else be damned system works for you then.  Whatever.



Umm, no.   Not so much.   But after explaining the same damn thing to you three times, I'm not really surprised that you still can't comprehend the simple point I am explaining.



> You're still an idiot, and YOUR mother should have swallowed.



How terribly original of you.


----------



## Redneck (Oct 25, 2008)

elvis3577 said:


> better than some earworms...



You sound evil.....I like...


----------



## Larkinn (Oct 25, 2008)

elvis3577 said:


> larkin's in tatters,  he's been shattered. splattered all over.......  this board.



Wow, your a Republican and you think the other Republican won the argument?

I'm shocked that you would think that.   Just shocked.


----------



## Larkinn (Oct 25, 2008)

Redneck said:


> Hon, I wasn't confused...I was pointin and laughin...



Its ok that you were confused.   Shattered is having a very hard time understanding simple concepts as well.   Such sweet love you two could have.  It would be perfect because neither of you would be intelligent enough to realize what the other was saying, but you are both so stupid you would never realize the other person didn't realize


----------



## Shattered (Oct 25, 2008)

Larkinn said:


> Wow, your a Republican and you think the other Republican won the argument?
> 
> I'm shocked that you would think that.   Just shocked.



Wow.  You're not a Republican, and you don't think the Republican won the argument?

How shocking AND terribly original of you.

Put the friggen bottle down and go to bed already.


----------



## Redneck (Oct 25, 2008)

Larkinn said:


> Wow, your a Republican and you think the other Republican won the argument?
> 
> I'm shocked that you would think that.   Just shocked.


Well if ya believe what ya just posted, I would suggest ya quit thinkin, I smell somethin burnin(must be brain cells)
*I'm not now, or never been a Republican.*


----------



## Redneck (Oct 25, 2008)

Larkinn said:


> Its ok that you were confused.   Shattered is having a very hard time understanding simple concepts as well.   Such sweet love you two could have.  It would be perfect because neither of you would be intelligent enough to realize what the other was saying, but you are both so stupid you would never realize the other person didn't realize


I see reading comprehension is a problem for ya....


----------



## Larkinn (Oct 26, 2008)

Shattered said:


> Wow.  You're not a Republican, and you don't think the Republican won the argument?



Yes, I thought I won the argument because I agree with my own beliefs more than I agree with yours.   Thats because both me and myself are both liberals.   Wow...what an awesome argument there.   



> How shocking AND terribly original of you.
> 
> Put the friggen bottle down and go to bed already.



Sorry, I don't drink at home.   I wonder if the same can be said for you...


----------



## Redneck (Oct 26, 2008)

Larkinn said:


> Yes, I thought I won the argument because I agree with my own beliefs more than I agree with yours.   T*hats because both me and myself are both liberals*.   Wow...what an awesome argument there.
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry, I don't drink at home.   I wonder if the same can be said for you...



Bet both of ya are voting also....


----------



## Larkinn (Oct 26, 2008)

Redneck said:


> Well if ya believe what ya just posted, I would suggest ya quit thinkin, I smell somethin burnin(must be brain cells)
> *I'm not now, or never been a Republican.*



Did you say



> larkin's in tatters, he's been shattered. splattered all over....... this board.



No?   Then I probably wasn't responding to you when I was calling someone a Republican.  



> I see reading comprehension is a problem for ya....



Oh, my bad.   I was asserting that you were confused even though you claimed you weren't.   Sorry, I forgot I had to spell everything out as if I was talking to a child with you.

Is that clear enough?   By the way, just in case this isn't clear to you.   When I am responding to someone elses comment, I'm not talking to you.   Just in case that concept is a bit hard for you to understand, I just wanted to help you out.


----------



## Shattered (Oct 26, 2008)

Wow.. I don't think I've ever seen anyone other than Modbert hit the refresh button so hard and so fast in an attempt to get the most last words in all in one shot.. I'll leave you to it.. Everyone needs those small victories in life.

Night, dipshit.


----------



## Redneck (Oct 26, 2008)

Larkinn said:


> Did you say
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Are ya stoned or just freakin stupid?
Don't get a burr up your ass at me just coz someone else handed ya your ass.


----------



## Larkinn (Oct 26, 2008)

Shattered said:


> Wow.. I don't think I've ever seen anyone other than Modbert hit the refresh button so hard and so fast in an attempt to get the most last words in all in one shot.. I'll leave you to it.. Everyone needs those small victories in life.
> 
> Night, dipshit.



Actually when there are 3 people arguing against you, by the time you reply there is always another comment, so there is no "hitting the refresh button".

Kicking your ass in an argument isn't a "small victory".   Its sort of like being able to breath and walk around, things that I generally take for granted as givens.

G'night yourself, fuckwit.


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 26, 2008)

Larkinn said:


> Because.   She.   Is.   Required.   To.   Go.   Through.   Nine.   Months.   Of.  Labor.
> 
> And around and around in circles we go...


uh. no. she. isnt.
labor is very seldom more than hours
and the worst i have heard of is 3 days
small price to pay to keep from killing an innocent child


----------



## Larkinn (Oct 26, 2008)

Redneck said:


> Are ya stoned or just freakin stupid?



Man...you can't even realize that I wasn't talking to you when I referenced someone elses comment and said they were a Republican?

Now your just making me feel bad for you.   



> Don't get a burr up your ass at me just coz someone else handed ya your ass.



/pat you.   If you say so.


----------



## Larkinn (Oct 26, 2008)

DiveCon said:


> uh. no. she. isnt.
> labor is very seldom more than hours
> and the worst i have heard of is 3 days
> small price to pay to keep from killing an innocent child



Try reading the thread.


----------



## Redneck (Oct 26, 2008)

Larkinn said:


> Man...you can't even realize that I wasn't talking to you when I referenced someone elses comment and said they were a Republican?
> 
> Now your just making me feel bad for you.
> 
> ...


You're the DUmmie who said "nine months of labor" then freaked when peeps point and laugh...Hell I'm still laughin...wanna spin some more? I'm gettin a kick outta watchin the show.


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 26, 2008)

Redneck said:


> Nine months of labor?
> I would suggest ya get a biology book and read about human reproduction....


oops, you beat me to it


----------



## Larkinn (Oct 26, 2008)

Redneck said:


> You're the DUmmie who said "nine months of labor" then freaked when peeps point and laugh...Hell I'm still laughin...wanna spin some more? I'm gettin a kick outta watchin the show.



Wow...either your WillowTree, or you have the exact same illness as her

This is hilarious, but sort of really sad.


----------



## Redneck (Oct 26, 2008)

Larkinn said:


> Wow...either your WillowTree, or you have the exact same illness as her
> 
> This is hilarious, but sort of really sad.


Watchin ya spin, spit and sputter is very amusing to me....


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 26, 2008)

Larkinn said:


> Try reading the thread.


i am, asswipe
i'm caught up now
and you are still an idiot


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 26, 2008)

Redneck said:


> Watchin ya spin, spit and sputter is very amusing to me....


hes good at that
buyt its all he has


----------



## Redneck (Oct 26, 2008)

DiveCon said:


> hes good at that
> buyt its all he has



Reminds me of this:


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 26, 2008)

Redneck said:


> Reminds me of this:


yes, he does
but we have another that fits it even more
i'm sure you will run into him eventually


----------



## Redneck (Oct 26, 2008)

DiveCon said:


> yes, he does
> but we have another that fits it even more
> i'm sure you will run into him eventually


I have a habit of just pointin and laughin....why let words on a page get ya bent...


----------



## Larkinn (Oct 26, 2008)

Aww, how cute.   You two are having a little circle jerk.

DC will work well as your partner as well, little redneck.


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 26, 2008)

Larkinn said:


> Aww, how cute.   You two are having a little circle jerk.
> 
> DC will work well as your partner as well, little redneck.


awe, you got your feelins hurt


----------



## Redneck (Oct 26, 2008)

Larkinn said:


> Aww, how cute.   You two are having a little circle jerk.
> 
> DC will work well as your partner as well, little redneck.


WOW ya really are stupid...Two peeps don't make a circle....But ya just keep tellin "both" of ya that...If it makes ya "feel" good....


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 26, 2008)

Redneck said:


> WOW ya really are stupid...Two peeps don't make a circle....But ya just keep tellin "both" of ya that...If it makes ya "feel" good....


well, if two can make a circle, then he can have one all by himself


----------



## frazzledgear (Oct 26, 2008)

DavidS said:


> They live in Florida and are both fed up with the negative attack ads from both sides. There's a lot of mis-information being spread around and they're nervous on who to vote for.
> 
> Virtually on every issue, including the economy, they weren't sure who to vote for.
> 
> ...




Yeah great.  I don't know how old your parents are, but most older people aren't this "torn" at all since they are far more likely to have a very good grasp on their own political principles as they get older -not a weaker grasp.  Are they a couple of old people voting to inflict the next generation with a system of government THEY never had to suffer under before they kick the bucket as THEIR last legacy or what?  I would guess that neither served during WWll did they?  Ask me how I could tell.


----------



## frazzledgear (Oct 26, 2008)

DavidS said:


> They live in Florida and are both fed up with the negative attack ads from both sides. There's a lot of mis-information being spread around and they're nervous on who to vote for.
> 
> I asked them, "Let's say our next President has to appoint two new justices to the Supreme Court. How can you get an idea of what justices they will appoint? Well, look at who he chose to be his running mate." They hate Sarah Palin. *They're socially moderate *and believe in gay marriage and abortion rights for first term mothers. While McCain said he will have no litmis test, we can get an idea of who he'll appoint to the Supreme Court via Sarah Palin. She doesn't believe in science, she hunts wolves from helicopters and she wants to turn this country into a Christian version of Iran.
> 
> ...



 ROFLMAO!  Wow -I hardly know where to start with this misinformation in THIS post!

1.  Your definition of "socially moderate" is loopy.  Since the OVERWHELMING vast majority in this country oppose gay marriage, that leaves your parents OUT of the definition of "socially moderate".  Right off the bat.

2.  Of course they HATE Palin -that is a liberal thing.  I wonder if they can verbalize EXACTLY why they HATE her so much though.  If you disagree with someone's political positions, that means you should personally HATE that person, right?  Can't possibly admire the fact this woman actually has some pretty impressive accomplishments to her name while also disagreeing with her political positions, right?  It is something that requires personal hatred if a liberal.  I suggest that says your parents, with their HATRED of Palin and support of an issue that the vast majority of Americans oppose -means they are LIBERALS.  So where are they "torn" here I wonder?  LOL

3.  Sorry, but unless you think Obama will only make Supreme Court nominations that Biden personally approves -it doesn't make much sense to pretend that Palin will be the guiding influence of those under a McCain administration.  Oh sure, he chose Palin for her opinion about who to appoint as a Justice?  ROFLMAO!  Of all possible Republicans who could be running -THIS guy is by far and away more likely to appoint someone the left approves of over any other.  What a stretch you have to go to criticize McCain on this one bozo.  And hate to disappoint you but Palin isn't anywhere near as conservative as you liberals pretend she is anyway.  Please don't tell me you are falling for your own side's bullshit propaganda.  Or do you want to admit that you just can't get over the fact she refused to kill her kid once she found out he had Down's syndrome and want to pretend that must mean she is a whacko extremist?  Even though that would require you to explain how it is possible for a whacko extremist from either side to garner an 80% approval rating as governor from ANY state in this country?  ROFL

4.  And talk about MISINFORMATION on the wolves and helicopters thing.   You had to have chosen to be misinformed on this one.  It has NOTHING to do with HUNTING whatsoever.  It has to do with predator control and is not carried out as a civilian hunting opportunity AT ALL!  Alaska wildlife can only support so many predators per square mile -just as my own state can support only so many deer per year.  You want to see wolves wipe out Alaskan wildlife and then starve during the winter or what?  Of course it would give you another reason to bash her, wouldn't it -after all, she had been warned the state had too many predators per square mile and if she didn't act, then it would be her fault if wolves overran their prey population and then died of starvation during the winter, right?

My OWN state has DEER population control because we inevitably have too many deer going into winter which would mean they STARVE to death.  After hunting season, if enough have not been killed -a specific number are killed by government shooters from -GASP -helicopter.  And when they have to do that -it isn't considered to be "hunting".  Alaskan government control of their predator population had nothing to do with "hunting" either.


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 26, 2008)

frazzledgear said:


> ROFLMAO! Wow -I hardly know where to start with this misinformation in THIS post!
> 
> 1. Your definition of "socially moderate" is loopy. Since the OVERWHELMING vast majority in this country oppose gay marriage, that leaves your parents OUT of the definition of "socially moderate". Right off the bat.
> 
> ...


 

yeah, he spreads it, and then complains about others doing it


----------



## elvis (Oct 26, 2008)

DiveCon said:


> yeah, he spreads it, and then complains about others doing it



yeah and compares palin to ayatollah khoemeni.


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 26, 2008)

elvis3577 said:


> yeah and compares palin to ayatollah khoemeni.


yet ignores any and all possible links of Obama to less than credible individuals


----------



## elvis (Oct 26, 2008)

DiveCon said:


> yet ignores any and all possible links of Obama to less than credible individuals



of course.  we cant talk about the Messiah that way.


----------



## WillowTree (Oct 26, 2008)

frazzledgear said:


> ROFLMAO!  Wow -I hardly know where to start with this misinformation in THIS post!
> 
> 1.  Your definition of "socially moderate" is loopy.  Since the OVERWHELMING vast majority in this country oppose gay marriage, that leaves your parents OUT of the definition of "socially moderate".  Right off the bat.
> 
> ...







Very good post!


----------



## WillowTree (Oct 26, 2008)

Caligirl said:


> Where will they put their money?
> 
> *We are thinking it is a good time to buy. Warren Buffet is saying the same.*
> 
> ...






Well, I'm certainly no expert but from what I'm hearing from the talking heads economic guys now's the time to buy only if you can afford to lose. Warren Buffet can, can you?


----------



## Caligirl (Oct 26, 2008)

Some stocks are pretty low, like a few bucks each, but we don't really know enough about investing. I guess it just seems to me that for all the dives the market is taking, there's got to be an opportunity if you know how to work with it. 

It might be interesting to buy a few cheap stocks for the kids, though, as a sort of 'hey kids watch your money grow' sort of thing.


----------



## Chris (Oct 26, 2008)

DavidS said:


> They live in Florida and are both fed up with the negative attack ads from both sides. There's a lot of mis-information being spread around and they're nervous on who to vote for.
> 
> Virtually on every issue, including the economy, they weren't sure who to vote for.
> 
> ...



Good job, David. 

Sarah Silverman will be proud of you.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AgHHX9R4Qtk[/ame]


----------



## DavidS (Oct 26, 2008)

Chris said:


> Good job, David.
> 
> Sarah Silverman will be proud of you.
> 
> YouTube - Sarah Silverman and The Great Schlep



My Aunt and Uncle who live in Long Island are voting for McCain, though. First time since Reagan they're voting for a Republican. Doesn't matter. New York will be blue.


----------



## Skeptik (Oct 26, 2008)

xsited1 said:


> Here you go:
> 
> Contract with America - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> This explains the bills that did and did not pass.  Pay particular attention to the bills pertaining to tax relief and fiscal responsibility.  Non-defense government spending DECREASED during this period by about 0.7%.



Oh, yes, the Republican Contract with America, with its proposed "balanced budget amendment."  I remember that.  

We haven't heard much about it in the past eight years, have we?

And, we certainly haven't heard about any balanced budgets.

Is it possible to sue a political party for breach of contract?


----------

