Are women's rights a distraction from "important" issues?

[Chuz Life]

The 2nd amendment secures the right to keep and bear arms. . . It does not secure the right to buy them at Any age

I can't take someone seriously who would say that. Sorry man. You're full of it. With word parsing, you can clearly end every Constitutional right. And this is from the guy who wants a broad interpretation of Constitutional rights

That's rich. . . especially when it is coming from someone who parses words to deny even the most basic of rights to children in the womb.

Um...what words did I parse, Holmes? Abortion isn't in the Constitution. I even said that because it's not in the Constitution, the Federal government has no say in abortion and therefore Roe v. Wade is a Constitutional abomination. I'm pro-choice, but I'm against made up Constitutional rights.

You on the other had said the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed doesn't include the right to buy guns.

clearly the word parsing is being done by ... you ...

You can't even make your position on the Constitution clear. Do minors have Constitutional rights? Your answer so far is to pick and choose

Uhgmmm Holmes...

The Constitution says that ALL persons are entitled to the EQUAL protections of our laws and they can not be deprived of their right to their life without Due Process.

Legalized abortions DEPRIVE children in the womb of their rights AND due process.

YOU support that shit, Home Slice.

Own it.

"Cannot be deprived of their life without due process" means THE GOVERNMENT cannot deprive them of their lives, ie. cannot execute them, without due process. The clues are 1) the use of the phrase "without due process of law", and 2) the fact that the Constitution is about limiting the power of GOVERNMENT, not individuals.

Abortion, like homicide, should be an issue to be defined and dealt with at the state level. It has no business being a federal issue.

And when THE GOVERNMENT decides an entire group of human beings are not persons, so THE GOVERNMENT can deny them the equal protections of our laws. . .

Then, what?

 

[kaz]

I can't take someone seriously who would say that. Sorry man. You're full of it. With word parsing, you can clearly end every Constitutional right. And this is from the guy who wants a broad interpretation of Constitutional rights

That's rich. . . especially when it is coming from someone who parses words to deny even the most basic of rights to children in the womb.

Um...what words did I parse, Holmes? Abortion isn't in the Constitution. I even said that because it's not in the Constitution, the Federal government has no say in abortion and therefore Roe v. Wade is a Constitutional abomination. I'm pro-choice, but I'm against made up Constitutional rights.

You on the other had said the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed doesn't include the right to buy guns.

clearly the word parsing is being done by ... you ...

You can't even make your position on the Constitution clear. Do minors have Constitutional rights? Your answer so far is to pick and choose

Uhgmmm Holmes...

The Constitution says that ALL persons are entitled to the EQUAL protections of our laws and they can not be deprived of their right to their life without Due Process.

Legalized abortions DEPRIVE children in the womb of their rights AND due process.

YOU support that shit, Home Slice.

Own it.

"Cannot be deprived of their life without due process" means THE GOVERNMENT cannot deprive them of their lives, ie. cannot execute them, without due process. The clues are 1) the use of the phrase "without due process of law", and 2) the fact that the Constitution is about limiting the power of GOVERNMENT, not individuals.

Abortion, like homicide, should be an issue to be defined and dealt with at the state level. It has no business being a federal issue.

And when THE GOVERNMENT decides an entire group of human beings are not persons, so THE GOVERNMENT can deny them the equal protections of our laws. . .

Then, what?

Then you fight it out at the State level, where this discussion belongs

 

[rdean]

On Wednesday, Trump said during a forum on MSNBC that women who undergo abortions, if there were a ban on the procedure, should be punished. He later walked back his comment in a statement, but the remark drew backlash from leaders in both parties.

He (Bernie Sanders) then referred to it as “another stupid remark” by Trump that, Sanders suggested, is a distraction from “serious issues facing America.”

Clinton Knocks Sanders Over Response to Trump’s Abortion Comments

John Kasich prompts firestorm after telling female student not to 'go to parties where there's a lot of alcohol'

A first-year student at St. Lawrence University in Canton, New York, asked the Ohio governor during a Watertown, New York, town-hall event how he'd help her "feel safer and more secure regarding sexual violence, harassment, and rape" should he be elected president.

Kasich responded with what he called a "bit of advice."

"Don't go to parties where there's a lot of alcohol. OK? Don't do that," he said, as some in the audience applauded.

---------------------------------------

You would expect Republicans to ignore minority issues because they are 90% white. It was only a year ago that USMB Republicans were saying there was no more discrimination in their party. Now they go to kill the gays rallies and call Mexicans Rapists. So clearly, they are not "over it".

But even Bernie Sanders sees women's issues as "distracting". Do women feel their issues are just a distraction?

The abortion fight isn't over, so we have to keep it in our sights, but overall women's issues in this country aren't a primary concern. I saw the entirety of Kasich's response to the college student asking how to stay safe on campus. He was on point, and that last bit of fatherly advice is being unfairly twisted to seem unfair to women, imo.

Clearly he was blaming women for being attacked.

Well, you focused on the soundbite. Not the entire exchange. Your knee jerk reaction is typical lib.
Your first reaction is "she has the right...".....Actually no, she doesn't have "the right"...That would indicate no need for an invitation into a private residence. Just walk right in.
Now, that aside. Let's just say a woman decides to attend an event to which she has been invited.
Before going, one of her friends, lets her know that this is going to be a wild affair, lots of booze and mostly guys. Now ,as a responsible person, the woman should stop to consider the potential consequences of attending such an event. That was Kasich's message. Nothing more. Nothing less.
How you can make this great leap to "blaming the victim" when there hasn't been a victim is a mystery.
Kasich nor anyone else stated women "cannot" go to these parties. The question is "should" they go to these events....
Just because someone can do something does not necessarily mean they should do something.
This is common sense. This is also what separates us from the animals. The ability to analyze and reason.

So women shouldn't go to parties because if they do, they could get raped and it will be their fault.

Is that how Republicans raise their sons? To be threats? It's her fault for going?

 

[rdean]

On Wednesday, Trump said during a forum on MSNBC that women who undergo abortions, if there were a ban on the procedure, should be punished. He later walked back his comment in a statement, but the remark drew backlash from leaders in both parties.

He (Bernie Sanders) then referred to it as “another stupid remark” by Trump that, Sanders suggested, is a distraction from “serious issues facing America.”

Clinton Knocks Sanders Over Response to Trump’s Abortion Comments

John Kasich prompts firestorm after telling female student not to 'go to parties where there's a lot of alcohol'

A first-year student at St. Lawrence University in Canton, New York, asked the Ohio governor during a Watertown, New York, town-hall event how he'd help her "feel safer and more secure regarding sexual violence, harassment, and rape" should he be elected president.

Kasich responded with what he called a "bit of advice."

"Don't go to parties where there's a lot of alcohol. OK? Don't do that," he said, as some in the audience applauded.

---------------------------------------

You would expect Republicans to ignore minority issues because they are 90% white. It was only a year ago that USMB Republicans were saying there was no more discrimination in their party. Now they go to kill the gays rallies and call Mexicans Rapists. So clearly, they are not "over it".

But even Bernie Sanders sees women's issues as "distracting". Do women feel their issues are just a distraction?

Abortion is murder of a human being. Try worrying about REAL women's rights. Like equal pay for equal work.

If you only help the fetus and not the baby, you don't give a shit. You are only playing politics.

 

[Fair&Balanced]

On Wednesday, Trump said during a forum on MSNBC that women who undergo abortions, if there were a ban on the procedure, should be punished. He later walked back his comment in a statement, but the remark drew backlash from leaders in both parties.

He (Bernie Sanders) then referred to it as “another stupid remark” by Trump that, Sanders suggested, is a distraction from “serious issues facing America.”

Clinton Knocks Sanders Over Response to Trump’s Abortion Comments

John Kasich prompts firestorm after telling female student not to 'go to parties where there's a lot of alcohol'

A first-year student at St. Lawrence University in Canton, New York, asked the Ohio governor during a Watertown, New York, town-hall event how he'd help her "feel safer and more secure regarding sexual violence, harassment, and rape" should he be elected president.

Kasich responded with what he called a "bit of advice."

"Don't go to parties where there's a lot of alcohol. OK? Don't do that," he said, as some in the audience applauded.

---------------------------------------

You would expect Republicans to ignore minority issues because they are 90% white. It was only a year ago that USMB Republicans were saying there was no more discrimination in their party. Now they go to kill the gays rallies and call Mexicans Rapists. So clearly, they are not "over it".

But even Bernie Sanders sees women's issues as "distracting". Do women feel their issues are just a distraction?

Abortion is murder of a human being. Try worrying about REAL women's rights. Like equal pay for equal work.

If you only help the fetus and not the baby, you don't give a shit. You are only playing politics.

As are you , you left wing turd.

 

[rdean]

Funny, Republicans feel they should have the right to control women's bodies. But when they refuse to vaccinate their children, making them a danger to both those children and everyone around them, they say fuck off.

Funny, Republicans feel they should have the right to control women's bodies

And Democrats feel they have the right to take other peoples money.

Ronald Reagan raised taxes 7 times in 8 years.

Bush put two wars on a credit card. Took away the wealthy's responsibility of taking care of the country where they were able to get rich.

Help send millions of American jobs to China while closing over 42,000 factories in this country.

Republicans destroyed our economy, and ruined the future of our children and then have the nerve and the sheer gall of saying "Democrats feel they have the right to take other peoples money". Republicans prove every day what traitorous assholes they are. Worse, they are proud of it.

As proud as you are being a liar?

Bush nor the Republicans had anything to do with sending jobs overseas or closing factories. Republicans don't do such things--Democrats do those things.

Democrats do those things by creating more intrusive laws against businesses like Commie Care. Democrats do such things by taxation which is why all the roll-your-own cigarette shops across America had to close. Democrats do such things by supporting their union thugs who make labor cost so much that businesses cannot afford to produce in this country. Democrats do such things by increasing the minimum wage.

Don't be such a stupid fuck. I've tried to educate your kind but for some of you, it obviously doesn't "take".

Whitehouse says companies get a tax break for moving jobs overseas

There is little debate that the current system allows companies to get a tax break for their expenses when they send jobs outside the U.S.

We rate Whitehouse's statement True.

That was right at the end of George Bush's presidency. Millions of jobs lost. Over 42,000 factories closed.

The US Chamber gives to Republicans 10 to 1 over Democrats for a reason. Those stats have been posted at the USMB many times.

--------------------

The Chamber’s CEO, Tom Donohue, frequently defends outsourcing: for example, in 2004, he said “there are legitimate values in outsourcing — not only jobs, but work.” Recently, the Chamber came out against a Senate bill that would have discouraged outsourcing. As Campaign Money Watch report found that more than 1.4 million jobs were outsourced since 1994 in the nine states in which the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is spending significant money.

An invitation to teach business how to move to China.

U.S. Chamber of Commerce receives direct foreign donations to the same 501(c)(6) political account the Chamber is using to run an unprecedented $75 million attack ad campaign against progressives.

‘US’ Chamber Of Commerce Hosts Seminars With Chinese Gov Officials To Teach American Firms How To Outsource

Custom Sheet Metal Fabrication, Sheet Metal Fab China

The Chamber has been taking money from foreign corporations and holding clinics on how to outsource American jobs, such as one sponsored by billionaire Sheldon Adelson “inviting local businesses in Florida to come to Jacksonville and learn about outsourcing from Chinese government officials like Li Haiyan, the Counselor for Economic Affairs for the People’s Republic of China, U.S. Chamber lobbyist Joseph Fawkner, and BChinaB.”

USW President: U.S. Chamber Has Become ‘A Consulting Firm To Teach Companies’ About Outsourcing

-------------------

And you have the nerve to blame this on Democrats. Chinese workers live 5 to a room, eat in cafeterias and make $172 a month. And you blame that on US Government regulations????????? Ignorant bitch.

GOP, U.S. Chamber Of Commerce Beat Back Bill To Combat Outsourcing

Senate Republicans beat back an effort by Democrats Tuesday to end tax breaks for companies who send jobs offshore only to import products back into the United States.

In 2004, Chamber head Tom Donohue made the case that outsourcing shouldn’t be a concern because only “two, maybe three million jobs, maybe four” would be lost. “American companies employ 140 million Americans,” Donohue said in a CNN interview that Chamber opponents are happy to remind him of. “They provide health care for 160 million Americans. They provide training in terms of 40 billion a year. The outsourcing deal over three or four or five years and the two or three sets of numbers are only going to be, you know, maybe two, maybe three million jobs, maybe four.”

The bill included a payroll tax holiday for companies that bring jobs back from overseas, ended tax breaks for plants that shut down to go elsewhere, and blocked companies from deferring their tax bill year to year by keeping money out of the U.S.

“The question is this: Do Republicans think that middle class families should pay through their tax subsidies for plants to close up and the cost of shipping jobs overseas to be on their back?”

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Funny, Republicans feel they should have the right to control women's bodies. But when they refuse to vaccinate their children, making them a danger to both those children and everyone around them, they say fuck off.

Funny, Republicans feel they should have the right to control women's bodies

And Democrats feel they have the right to take other peoples money.

Ronald Reagan raised taxes 7 times in 8 years.

Bush put two wars on a credit card. Took away the wealthy's responsibility of taking care of the country where they were able to get rich.

Help send millions of American jobs to China while closing over 42,000 factories in this country.

Republicans destroyed our economy, and ruined the future of our children and then have the nerve and the sheer gall of saying "Democrats feel they have the right to take other peoples money". Republicans prove every day what traitorous assholes they are. Worse, they are proud of it.

As proud as you are being a liar?

Bush nor the Republicans had anything to do with sending jobs overseas or closing factories. Republicans don't do such things--Democrats do those things.

Democrats do those things by creating more intrusive laws against businesses like Commie Care. Democrats do such things by taxation which is why all the roll-your-own cigarette shops across America had to close. Democrats do such things by supporting their union thugs who make labor cost so much that businesses cannot afford to produce in this country. Democrats do such things by increasing the minimum wage.

Don't be such a stupid fuck. I've tried to educate your kind but for some of you, it obviously doesn't "take".

Whitehouse says companies get a tax break for moving jobs overseas

There is little debate that the current system allows companies to get a tax break for their expenses when they send jobs outside the U.S.

We rate Whitehouse's statement True.

That was right at the end of George Bush's presidency. Millions of jobs lost. Over 42,000 factories closed.

The US Chamber gives to Republicans 10 to 1 over Democrats for a reason. Those stats have been posted at the USMB many times.

--------------------

The Chamber’s CEO, Tom Donohue, frequently defends outsourcing: for example, in 2004, he said “there are legitimate values in outsourcing — not only jobs, but work.” Recently, the Chamber came out against a Senate bill that would have discouraged outsourcing. As Campaign Money Watch report found that more than 1.4 million jobs were outsourced since 1994 in the nine states in which the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is spending significant money.

An invitation to teach business how to move to China.

U.S. Chamber of Commerce receives direct foreign donations to the same 501(c)(6) political account the Chamber is using to run an unprecedented $75 million attack ad campaign against progressives.

‘US’ Chamber Of Commerce Hosts Seminars With Chinese Gov Officials To Teach American Firms How To Outsource

Custom Sheet Metal Fabrication, Sheet Metal Fab China

The Chamber has been taking money from foreign corporations and holding clinics on how to outsource American jobs, such as one sponsored by billionaire Sheldon Adelson “inviting local businesses in Florida to come to Jacksonville and learn about outsourcing from Chinese government officials like Li Haiyan, the Counselor for Economic Affairs for the People’s Republic of China, U.S. Chamber lobbyist Joseph Fawkner, and BChinaB.”

USW President: U.S. Chamber Has Become ‘A Consulting Firm To Teach Companies’ About Outsourcing

-------------------

And you have the nerve to blame this on Democrats. Chinese workers live 5 to a room, eat in cafeterias and make $172 a month. And you blame that on US Government regulations????????? Ignorant bitch.

GOP, U.S. Chamber Of Commerce Beat Back Bill To Combat Outsourcing

Senate Republicans beat back an effort by Democrats Tuesday to end tax breaks for companies who send jobs offshore only to import products back into the United States.

In 2004, Chamber head Tom Donohue made the case that outsourcing shouldn’t be a concern because only “two, maybe three million jobs, maybe four” would be lost. “American companies employ 140 million Americans,” Donohue said in a CNN interview that Chamber opponents are happy to remind him of. “They provide health care for 160 million Americans. They provide training in terms of 40 billion a year. The outsourcing deal over three or four or five years and the two or three sets of numbers are only going to be, you know, maybe two, maybe three million jobs, maybe four.”

The bill included a payroll tax holiday for companies that bring jobs back from overseas, ended tax breaks for plants that shut down to go elsewhere, and blocked companies from deferring their tax bill year to year by keeping money out of the U.S.

“The question is this: Do Republicans think that middle class families should pay through their tax subsidies for plants to close up and the cost of shipping jobs overseas to be on their back?”

Once again, from FactCheck.org:

FULL ANSWER:

It’s true that Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have associated the transfer of U.S. jobs overseas with tax breaks, or loopholes, for companies that practice off-shoring:

Obama, Nov. 3, 2007: When I am president, I will end the tax giveaways to companies that ship our jobs overseas, and I will put the money in the pockets of working Americans, and seniors, and homeowners who deserve a break.

Clinton, Nov. 19, 2007: And we are going to finally close the tax loopholes and stop giving tax breaks to companies that ship jobs overseas. Enough with outsourcing American jobs using taxpayer dollars.

Both candidates are referring to a feature of the U.S. tax code that allows domestic companies to defer taxes on “unrepatriated income.” In other words, revenue that companies earn through their overseas subsidiaries goes untaxed by the IRS as long as it stays off the company’s U.S. books.

But economists, including left-leaning ones, do not agree that eliminating this provision will bring an end to off-shoring. And here’s why: In the U.S., companies are taxed 35 percent on earnings of $10 million to $15 million or on all earnings over $18.3 million. That’s one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world, making an overseas move somewhat attractive to companies that wish to avoid the U.S. tax rate. But that’s not the leading reason companies send jobs overseas. According to a 2005 report by the Government Accountability Office, global technological advancement, increased openness of countries such as China and India, the higher education level of foreign workers in technological fields, and the reduced cost per foreign worker are all contributing factors to off-shoring.

We first addressed this popular theme in 2004, when we reported on a John Kerry campaign ad in which he blamed President George W. Bush for providing tax incentives to companies “outsourcing” jobs overseas. At the time we found that such tax breaks, which do exist, pre-dated the Bush administration and that even Democratic-leaning economists did not support the idea that changing the corporate tax code would end the movement of jobs overseas.

Three years later, in Dec. 2007, we reported on an ad launched by a labor group in support of John Edwards. The ad implied that corporate tax breaks were responsible for the shipment of jobs overseas from an Iowa Maytag plant. We found that the jobs were actually sent to Ohio and that, again, eliminating such tax breaks would not go far in stanching the flow of jobs overseas.

Oil and Gas Company Tax Breaks

Yeah, huge tax breaks. The only deductions businesses are allowed is to deduct moving expenses which is not all that much and certainly no reason to move a company from the US to another country:

FULL ANSWER

Do companies get a tax break for shipping U.S. jobs overseas? Several readers asked us that question after it came up during the first debate between President Obama and Mitt Romney.

Obama claimed that “companies that are shipping jobs overseas” get tax breaks, saying that they “can actually take a deduction for moving a plant overseas.” But Mitt Romney said that he had “no idea” what the president was talking about, adding that “the idea that you get a break for shipping jobs overseas is simply not the case.” And both men are right, in a way.

There is no specific tax break for the sole purpose of relocating a U.S. job to another country, as Romney said. But the tax code does allow companies to deduct business expenses when calculating their tax liability. And those expenses can include the costs of moving a job to another state or even to another country, according to tax experts with whom we spoke. The White House confirmed in an email that that is what Obama was referring to in the debate.

“Firms can generally deduct business expenses,” said Kimberly Clausing, the Thormund A. Miller and Walter Mintz Professor of Economics at Reed College. “Thus, of course, if firms incurred expenses in moving abroad, they would be able to deduct those expenses.”

“My interpretation is that the President’s statement was accurate,” she said in an email to FactCheck.org

William McBride, chief economist for the pro-business Tax Foundation, agreed with her point about the ability of companies to deduct moving costs as a business expense.

“There are no special tax provisions that provide incentives to move overseas, but, of course, in general, the IRS allows companies to deduct business expenses, one of which is moving expenses, whether within the U.S. or abroad,” he said.

Obama has called for Congress to change current law so that firms can no longer reduce their tax payments by deducting costs associated with moving their operations outside of the country.

Talking Tax Breaks for Offshoring

 

[Cecilie1200]

I can't take someone seriously who would say that. Sorry man. You're full of it. With word parsing, you can clearly end every Constitutional right. And this is from the guy who wants a broad interpretation of Constitutional rights

That's rich. . . especially when it is coming from someone who parses words to deny even the most basic of rights to children in the womb.

Um...what words did I parse, Holmes? Abortion isn't in the Constitution. I even said that because it's not in the Constitution, the Federal government has no say in abortion and therefore Roe v. Wade is a Constitutional abomination. I'm pro-choice, but I'm against made up Constitutional rights.

You on the other had said the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed doesn't include the right to buy guns.

clearly the word parsing is being done by ... you ...

You can't even make your position on the Constitution clear. Do minors have Constitutional rights? Your answer so far is to pick and choose

Uhgmmm Holmes...

The Constitution says that ALL persons are entitled to the EQUAL protections of our laws and they can not be deprived of their right to their life without Due Process.

Legalized abortions DEPRIVE children in the womb of their rights AND due process.

YOU support that shit, Home Slice.

Own it.

"Cannot be deprived of their life without due process" means THE GOVERNMENT cannot deprive them of their lives, ie. cannot execute them, without due process. The clues are 1) the use of the phrase "without due process of law", and 2) the fact that the Constitution is about limiting the power of GOVERNMENT, not individuals.

Abortion, like homicide, should be an issue to be defined and dealt with at the state level. It has no business being a federal issue.

And when THE GOVERNMENT decides an entire group of human beings are not persons, so THE GOVERNMENT can deny them the equal protections of our laws. . .

Then, what?

I guess that would depend on which government, and the method and context in which they did it.

 

[Markle]

Womens' "rights" are the rights to make our own decisions about our bodies and our health. Womens' "rights" are the rights to make as much money as men in the same postition. Womens' "rights" are the rights to be taken seriously when it comes to making policy decisions in this country. We are half of the population and over half of the voters. Men who want to treat us as if we're still "the little woman" in the kitchen are in for a rude awakening. Jobs, the economy, military defense, all these things affect our lives, too. As for Kasich's remark, once again, the onus is on the woman to be vigilant against the man who may be a predator. Why isn't the man taught from birth that women are not his to abuse as he likes? Why are we fair game? If you're around alcohol, out after dark,dressed a certain way, or with a man in general, you're "asking for it".

If you quit swallowing the propaganda put out by Progressives, you would know that women earn about a nickel less than men for the same job. That's FACT, not your illusion.

Where in government are women NOT taken seriously in policy decisions?

Are you seriously going to try to pawn off on us that many, millions of women, given the option, do NOT prefer to stay home and take care of the house and perhaps, perhaps take up a career later in life? They're forced to work because of the draconian taxes we have today.

You're being foolish saying that men and especially women should be cautious, vigilant and aware of their surroundings? What are several effects of alcohol?

 

[Markle]

what a sad place we are in. When the citizens are more worried over the killing of their offspring/human beings: over Jobs, the economy, a way to make a living. instead they want to make sure they have that way to kill off our Society. 58million potential American citizens have been sucked out of women bodies and flushed down a drain SO FAR and counting. but that isn't enough evidently
as if these progressive/democrats give a crap about you women AND the guilt you suffer afterwards.

That would have been 58 million more jobseekers, i.e. 58 million more people without jobs today.

Women should feel ZERO guilt over a 1st trimester abortion. The entity had no consciousness, no humanity. It lacked a brain developed enough to even be capable of thought, feeling, individuality.

It's people like YOU who try to create unnecessary feelings of guilt because you have certain beliefs about your god.

It wasn't an entity. It was a human life.

Human life but not a human being. A skin cell is human life. There should be no guilt about destroying either.

A first trimester looks like a little human towards the end, but inside there is no humanity. There is not a functional brain beyond involuntary functionality as all the pieces of the brain have not come together in the right place yet. There is no possibility of consciousness or thought, therefore it is not a human being, it is an entity that can be destroyed without guilt.

Of course it's human life. The DNA has already been set on the x and y. That interaction between the sperm and egg locks in the specific instruction for human life. There is no denying this.

Where did I deny that? I deny that it is a human being during first trimester. My belief is it becomes a human being sometime in the 2nd trimester based on the brain developing the capability of thought and awareness.

If in your opinion, a fetus "BECOMES A HUMAN SOME TIME in the 2nd trimester, why do some states consider it murder if the fetus is killed in a DUI or being stabbed or shot?

 

[Markle]

It wasn't an entity. It was a human life.

Human life but not a human being. A skin cell is human life. There should be no guilt about destroying either.

A first trimester looks like a little human towards the end, but inside there is no humanity. There is not a functional brain beyond involuntary functionality as all the pieces of the brain have not come together in the right place yet. There is no possibility of consciousness or thought, therefore it is not a human being, it is an entity that can be destroyed without guilt.

Of course it's human life. The DNA has already been set on the x and y. That interaction between the sperm and egg locks in the specific instruction for human life. There is no denying this.

Where did I deny that? I deny that it is a human being during first trimester. My belief is it becomes a human being sometime in the 2nd trimester based on the brain developing the capability of thought and awareness.

Biology FAIL!

HUMAN Beings do not have sex to create living SUB human creatures that only later become HUMAN BEINGS (after they somehow surpass your arbitrarily drawn standards.)

A child in the womb is a HUMAN being from the moment of conception.

They are defined by the attributes they HAVE and not by those traits that they only temporarily lack.

It is insane to hold the view that a child is not a child until it lives too long and looks too much like a child to be denied any longer.

None of that is science. It is your emotional reaction based on your religious beliefs. What is INSANE is your view that a fertilized zygote, a single cell, is a human being worthy of legal protection.

When does a fetus become WORTHY of legal protection?

 

[Markle]

Funny, Republicans feel they should have the right to control women's bodies. But when they refuse to vaccinate their children, making them a danger to both those children and everyone around them, they say fuck off.

Funny, Republicans feel they should have the right to control women's bodies

And Democrats feel they have the right to take other peoples money.

Ronald Reagan raised taxes 7 times in 8 years.

Bush put two wars on a credit card. Took away the wealthy's responsibility of taking care of the country where they were able to get rich.

Help send millions of American jobs to China while closing over 42,000 factories in this country.

Republicans destroyed our economy, and ruined the future of our children and then have the nerve and the sheer gall of saying "Democrats feel they have the right to take other peoples money". Republicans prove every day what traitorous assholes they are. Worse, they are proud of it.

 

[Markle]

On Wednesday, Trump said during a forum on MSNBC that women who undergo abortions, if there were a ban on the procedure, should be punished. He later walked back his comment in a statement, but the remark drew backlash from leaders in both parties.

He (Bernie Sanders) then referred to it as “another stupid remark” by Trump that, Sanders suggested, is a distraction from “serious issues facing America.”

Clinton Knocks Sanders Over Response to Trump’s Abortion Comments

John Kasich prompts firestorm after telling female student not to 'go to parties where there's a lot of alcohol'

A first-year student at St. Lawrence University in Canton, New York, asked the Ohio governor during a Watertown, New York, town-hall event how he'd help her "feel safer and more secure regarding sexual violence, harassment, and rape" should he be elected president.

Kasich responded with what he called a "bit of advice."

"Don't go to parties where there's a lot of alcohol. OK? Don't do that," he said, as some in the audience applauded.

---------------------------------------

You would expect Republicans to ignore minority issues because they are 90% white. It was only a year ago that USMB Republicans were saying there was no more discrimination in their party. Now they go to kill the gays rallies and call Mexicans Rapists. So clearly, they are not "over it".

But even Bernie Sanders sees women's issues as "distracting". Do women feel their issues are just a distraction?

Abortion is murder of a human being. Try worrying about REAL women's rights. Like equal pay for equal work.

You really need to inform yourself instead of chugging down the Progressive Cool Aid! As you know too, women's pay is but a nickel or less lower than that of men.

 

[Markle]

Not having constitutional rights does not mean we can't chose to give them the rights we chose to give them, it just means they aren't automatically entitled to them.

If a child in the womb is a 'person' they are automatically Constitutionally entitled to the equal protections of our laws.

True or False?

If they had Constitutional rights, think about it, can a 10 year old vote? If they have Constitutional rights, it would be illegal to deny them the vote.

Ummmm, not all rights are the same. Are they?

The right to vote is a 'qualified' vote. It's still a Constitutional right but you have to first meet the age and other 'qualifications.'

The ONLY legal qualification for 'personhood' is that you be a living Human Being and a "human being" even in the womb MEETS that legal definition.

Think about how many other things they can't do. You can't pick and choose where the Constitution applies. We can pick and chose which ones we decide to grant them.

You clearly don't understand the difference between a qualified right (like the right to vote) and an unqualified right (like the right to the protections of our laws.)

You are picking and choosing here. No, a fetus nor a child has constitutional rights. A 10 year old does not have the right to bear arms. If a school calls the police to search a kids locker because he was acting suspicious, they do not need to obtain a warrant and the child cannot sue the city for a violation of his Forth Amendment rights. He or she doesn't have any rights.

Funny that you guys don't comprehend the difference between a natural / absolute Constitutional right (like the right to life) and a qualified right. . Like the right to vote.

I understand that our nation enshrines the idea of a natural, absolute right to life. The point is that the Constitution itself does not address the issue except to say that the several governments within the United States cannot deprive you of your life without due process of law. The responsibility for actually protecting the right to life and punishing the taking of it falls on lesser laws passed by the specific jurisdiction.

If someone murders you. . . Are they simply violating a local law. . .or are they also violating your Constitutional rights?

Simple solution! Copy and paste here where the text appears in the Constitution prohibiting murder. The specific wording please.

 

[Markle]

On Wednesday, Trump said during a forum on MSNBC that women who undergo abortions, if there were a ban on the procedure, should be punished. He later walked back his comment in a statement, but the remark drew backlash from leaders in both parties.

He (Bernie Sanders) then referred to it as “another stupid remark” by Trump that, Sanders suggested, is a distraction from “serious issues facing America.”

Clinton Knocks Sanders Over Response to Trump’s Abortion Comments

John Kasich prompts firestorm after telling female student not to 'go to parties where there's a lot of alcohol'

A first-year student at St. Lawrence University in Canton, New York, asked the Ohio governor during a Watertown, New York, town-hall event how he'd help her "feel safer and more secure regarding sexual violence, harassment, and rape" should he be elected president.

Kasich responded with what he called a "bit of advice."

"Don't go to parties where there's a lot of alcohol. OK? Don't do that," he said, as some in the audience applauded.

---------------------------------------

You would expect Republicans to ignore minority issues because they are 90% white. It was only a year ago that USMB Republicans were saying there was no more discrimination in their party. Now they go to kill the gays rallies and call Mexicans Rapists. So clearly, they are not "over it".

But even Bernie Sanders sees women's issues as "distracting". Do women feel their issues are just a distraction?

The abortion fight isn't over, so we have to keep it in our sights, but overall women's issues in this country aren't a primary concern. I saw the entirety of Kasich's response to the college student asking how to stay safe on campus. He was on point, and that last bit of fatherly advice is being unfairly twisted to seem unfair to women, imo.

Clearly he was blaming women for being attacked.

Well, you focused on the soundbite. Not the entire exchange. Your knee jerk reaction is typical lib.
Your first reaction is "she has the right...".....Actually no, she doesn't have "the right"...That would indicate no need for an invitation into a private residence. Just walk right in.
Now, that aside. Let's just say a woman decides to attend an event to which she has been invited.
Before going, one of her friends, lets her know that this is going to be a wild affair, lots of booze and mostly guys. Now ,as a responsible person, the woman should stop to consider the potential consequences of attending such an event. That was Kasich's message. Nothing more. Nothing less.
How you can make this great leap to "blaming the victim" when there hasn't been a victim is a mystery.
Kasich nor anyone else stated women "cannot" go to these parties. The question is "should" they go to these events....
Just because someone can do something does not necessarily mean they should do something.
This is common sense. This is also what separates us from the animals. The ability to analyze and reason.

So women shouldn't go to parties because if they do, they could get raped and it will be their fault.

Is that how Republicans raise their sons? To be threats? It's her fault for going?

You're a few fries short of a Happy Meal aren't you?

I doubt there are any demographics on party registration among the prison population. If there were, given the current prison population, would you say the majority are Democrats, Republicans or Independents?

Please share with us who has made this stupid comment? "So women shouldn't go to parties because if they do, they could get raped and it will be their fault."

If you cannot, would you say that was a lie?

Do you want us to swallow that at a frat party or any other party, primarily of young people, with the youthful hormones flowing, and the alcohol flowing, a woman has no responsibility if she gets drunk and starts hitting on a guy? That never happens? Really? Wow...you live in a different world than I.
Is she responsible? Nope. Could she have prevented it by better behavior? Sure.

 

[Dragonlady]

What rights don't women have?

Women are not equal under the law. Period. The Constitution Amendment failed to pass. It shameful.

 

[Markle]

What rights don't women have?

Women are not equal under the law. Period. The Constitution Amendment failed to pass. It shameful.

Yet you are incapable of listing even one area where women do not have equal rights.

The ERA Amendment was found to be, and rightfully so, unnecessary. It was even given an extension for the states to vote for passage and it obviously still failed.

 

[Jeddahite]

Interesting article, Ray from Cleveland, however I don't like your gun pointing at my face. One thing that leaped out at me was the statement that Indian and Chinese workers were better educated technologically than Americans. Why don't we promote technical education here, and I don't mean the phony trade schools that offer an expensive diploma or certificate in nine months? I always feel that American students are being shortchanged, especially when tuition is so high. I see my grandkids with high student debt. They could have bought a house!

 

[rdean]

Funny, Republicans feel they should have the right to control women's bodies. But when they refuse to vaccinate their children, making them a danger to both those children and everyone around them, they say fuck off.

Funny, Republicans feel they should have the right to control women's bodies

And Democrats feel they have the right to take other peoples money.

Ronald Reagan raised taxes 7 times in 8 years.

Bush put two wars on a credit card. Took away the wealthy's responsibility of taking care of the country where they were able to get rich.

Help send millions of American jobs to China while closing over 42,000 factories in this country.

Republicans destroyed our economy, and ruined the future of our children and then have the nerve and the sheer gall of saying "Democrats feel they have the right to take other peoples money". Republicans prove every day what traitorous assholes they are. Worse, they are proud of it.

As proud as you are being a liar?

Bush nor the Republicans had anything to do with sending jobs overseas or closing factories. Republicans don't do such things--Democrats do those things.

Democrats do those things by creating more intrusive laws against businesses like Commie Care. Democrats do such things by taxation which is why all the roll-your-own cigarette shops across America had to close. Democrats do such things by supporting their union thugs who make labor cost so much that businesses cannot afford to produce in this country. Democrats do such things by increasing the minimum wage.

Don't be such a stupid fuck. I've tried to educate your kind but for some of you, it obviously doesn't "take".

Whitehouse says companies get a tax break for moving jobs overseas

There is little debate that the current system allows companies to get a tax break for their expenses when they send jobs outside the U.S.

We rate Whitehouse's statement True.

That was right at the end of George Bush's presidency. Millions of jobs lost. Over 42,000 factories closed.

The US Chamber gives to Republicans 10 to 1 over Democrats for a reason. Those stats have been posted at the USMB many times.

--------------------

The Chamber’s CEO, Tom Donohue, frequently defends outsourcing: for example, in 2004, he said “there are legitimate values in outsourcing — not only jobs, but work.” Recently, the Chamber came out against a Senate bill that would have discouraged outsourcing. As Campaign Money Watch report found that more than 1.4 million jobs were outsourced since 1994 in the nine states in which the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is spending significant money.

An invitation to teach business how to move to China.

U.S. Chamber of Commerce receives direct foreign donations to the same 501(c)(6) political account the Chamber is using to run an unprecedented $75 million attack ad campaign against progressives.

‘US’ Chamber Of Commerce Hosts Seminars With Chinese Gov Officials To Teach American Firms How To Outsource

Custom Sheet Metal Fabrication, Sheet Metal Fab China

The Chamber has been taking money from foreign corporations and holding clinics on how to outsource American jobs, such as one sponsored by billionaire Sheldon Adelson “inviting local businesses in Florida to come to Jacksonville and learn about outsourcing from Chinese government officials like Li Haiyan, the Counselor for Economic Affairs for the People’s Republic of China, U.S. Chamber lobbyist Joseph Fawkner, and BChinaB.”

USW President: U.S. Chamber Has Become ‘A Consulting Firm To Teach Companies’ About Outsourcing

-------------------

And you have the nerve to blame this on Democrats. Chinese workers live 5 to a room, eat in cafeterias and make $172 a month. And you blame that on US Government regulations????????? Ignorant bitch.

GOP, U.S. Chamber Of Commerce Beat Back Bill To Combat Outsourcing

Senate Republicans beat back an effort by Democrats Tuesday to end tax breaks for companies who send jobs offshore only to import products back into the United States.

In 2004, Chamber head Tom Donohue made the case that outsourcing shouldn’t be a concern because only “two, maybe three million jobs, maybe four” would be lost. “American companies employ 140 million Americans,” Donohue said in a CNN interview that Chamber opponents are happy to remind him of. “They provide health care for 160 million Americans. They provide training in terms of 40 billion a year. The outsourcing deal over three or four or five years and the two or three sets of numbers are only going to be, you know, maybe two, maybe three million jobs, maybe four.”

The bill included a payroll tax holiday for companies that bring jobs back from overseas, ended tax breaks for plants that shut down to go elsewhere, and blocked companies from deferring their tax bill year to year by keeping money out of the U.S.

“The question is this: Do Republicans think that middle class families should pay through their tax subsidies for plants to close up and the cost of shipping jobs overseas to be on their back?”

Once again, from FactCheck.org:

FULL ANSWER:

It’s true that Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have associated the transfer of U.S. jobs overseas with tax breaks, or loopholes, for companies that practice off-shoring:

Obama, Nov. 3, 2007: When I am president, I will end the tax giveaways to companies that ship our jobs overseas, and I will put the money in the pockets of working Americans, and seniors, and homeowners who deserve a break.

Clinton, Nov. 19, 2007: And we are going to finally close the tax loopholes and stop giving tax breaks to companies that ship jobs overseas. Enough with outsourcing American jobs using taxpayer dollars.

Both candidates are referring to a feature of the U.S. tax code that allows domestic companies to defer taxes on “unrepatriated income.” In other words, revenue that companies earn through their overseas subsidiaries goes untaxed by the IRS as long as it stays off the company’s U.S. books.

But economists, including left-leaning ones, do not agree that eliminating this provision will bring an end to off-shoring. And here’s why: In the U.S., companies are taxed 35 percent on earnings of $10 million to $15 million or on all earnings over $18.3 million. That’s one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world, making an overseas move somewhat attractive to companies that wish to avoid the U.S. tax rate. But that’s not the leading reason companies send jobs overseas. According to a 2005 report by the Government Accountability Office, global technological advancement, increased openness of countries such as China and India, the higher education level of foreign workers in technological fields, and the reduced cost per foreign worker are all contributing factors to off-shoring.

We first addressed this popular theme in 2004, when we reported on a John Kerry campaign ad in which he blamed President George W. Bush for providing tax incentives to companies “outsourcing” jobs overseas. At the time we found that such tax breaks, which do exist, pre-dated the Bush administration and that even Democratic-leaning economists did not support the idea that changing the corporate tax code would end the movement of jobs overseas.

Three years later, in Dec. 2007, we reported on an ad launched by a labor group in support of John Edwards. The ad implied that corporate tax breaks were responsible for the shipment of jobs overseas from an Iowa Maytag plant. We found that the jobs were actually sent to Ohio and that, again, eliminating such tax breaks would not go far in stanching the flow of jobs overseas.

Oil and Gas Company Tax Breaks

Yeah, huge tax breaks. The only deductions businesses are allowed is to deduct moving expenses which is not all that much and certainly no reason to move a company from the US to another country:

FULL ANSWER

Do companies get a tax break for shipping U.S. jobs overseas? Several readers asked us that question after it came up during the first debate between President Obama and Mitt Romney.

Obama claimed that “companies that are shipping jobs overseas” get tax breaks, saying that they “can actually take a deduction for moving a plant overseas.” But Mitt Romney said that he had “no idea” what the president was talking about, adding that “the idea that you get a break for shipping jobs overseas is simply not the case.” And both men are right, in a way.

There is no specific tax break for the sole purpose of relocating a U.S. job to another country, as Romney said. But the tax code does allow companies to deduct business expenses when calculating their tax liability. And those expenses can include the costs of moving a job to another state or even to another country, according to tax experts with whom we spoke. The White House confirmed in an email that that is what Obama was referring to in the debate.

“Firms can generally deduct business expenses,” said Kimberly Clausing, the Thormund A. Miller and Walter Mintz Professor of Economics at Reed College. “Thus, of course, if firms incurred expenses in moving abroad, they would be able to deduct those expenses.”

“My interpretation is that the President’s statement was accurate,” she said in an email to FactCheck.org

William McBride, chief economist for the pro-business Tax Foundation, agreed with her point about the ability of companies to deduct moving costs as a business expense.

“There are no special tax provisions that provide incentives to move overseas, but, of course, in general, the IRS allows companies to deduct business expenses, one of which is moving expenses, whether within the U.S. or abroad,” he said.

Obama has called for Congress to change current law so that firms can no longer reduce their tax payments by deducting costs associated with moving their operations outside of the country.

Talking Tax Breaks for Offshoring

But the tax code does allow companies to deduct business expenses when calculating their tax liability. And those expenses can include the costs of moving a job to another state or even to another country,

Thanks for proving what I said.

Republicans, under Bush were able to use reconciliation three times. You can only use it once a year, but that means they had total control of the government for over three years. They could have passed just about anything. So did they pass anything substantial that would help the majority of Americans? No, of course not. Anything to protect jobs. No, of course not. Anything that would stop medical bills from being the number on cause of bankruptcy? No, of course not.
What exactly was it they did do?
Perhaps you should spend some time to find out.

 

[rdean]

Interesting article, Ray from Cleveland, however I don't like your gun pointing at my face. One thing that leaped out at me was the statement that Indian and Chinese workers were better educated technologically than Americans. Why don't we promote technical education here, and I don't mean the phony trade schools that offer an expensive diploma or certificate in nine months? I always feel that American students are being shortchanged, especially when tuition is so high. I see my grandkids with high student debt. They could have bought a house!

One, our politicians don't understand technology, and two, Republicans fight education. A double whammy.