Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson Signs Into Law A Near-Total Abortion Ban

[pknopp]

And? Born ones do also.

Yes, except for those convicted of a capital crime

unborn children are guilty of nothing

Nor are those we drop bombs on.

What makes you think that? You really think the U.S. bombs people just for the hell of it?

No, it's to keep our 401k propped up.

What makes you think that dropping bombs has any connection whatsoever to that?

Do you have a better answer? No one else does. 20 years in Iraq, a country that did nothing to us, for what?

Saddam Hussein and his regime was a direct threat to the stability of the region and thus our interests.

"Our interest". Keeping our 401k's inflated.

 

[Cecilie1200]

And the alternative is death

there are post born real children going hungry every night ...

(R)s vote to cut SNAP & medicaid some more - 'cause BIGCORP needs a bigger tax cut.

Yeah, so they're better off dead. Sicko.

That's their problem. Any woman who would kill her own child deserves what she gets.

You should have a vasectomy.

Oh, yeah, the people who shouldn't be having children are those who actually want those children to live. Only those who kill their babies are fit to make them.

Brilliant logic.

There are many valid reasons why a woman shouldn't carry a pregnancy to term. You want that decision left to male religious fanatics or women and their doctors?

If the reason is inconvenience, that's a crime.

it's none of your business what the reason is.

Spoken like a true fascist.

It really isn't any of your business. Perhaps you should just exert your influence on your wife, mother, daughters and aunts.

It really is everyone's business whether or not killing someone is legal. Perhaps you should stop presuming to speak for all women, and just exert your opinions on your own life.

Nobody is insisting you have an abortion.

So if no one is trying to kill my family members, I shouldn't care about anyone else being killed? Do I even need to explain what a piece of shit you sound like?

 

[Dayton3]

And? Born ones do also.

Yes, except for those convicted of a capital crime

unborn children are guilty of nothing

Nor are those we drop bombs on.

What makes you think that? You really think the U.S. bombs people just for the hell of it?

No, it's to keep our 401k propped up.

What makes you think that dropping bombs has any connection whatsoever to that?

Do you have a better answer? No one else does. 20 years in Iraq, a country that did nothing to us, for what?

Saddam Hussein and his regime was a direct threat to the stability of the region and thus our interests.

"Our interest". Keeping our 401k's inflated.

You have any evidence of that?

Thought not.

 

[Dayton3]

And? Born ones do also.

Yes, except for those convicted of a capital crime

unborn children are guilty of nothing

Nor are those we drop bombs on.

What makes you think that? You really think the U.S. bombs people just for the hell of it?

No, it's to keep our 401k propped up.

What makes you think that dropping bombs has any connection whatsoever to that?

Do you have a better answer? No one else does. 20 years in Iraq, a country that did nothing to us, for what?

Saddam Hussein and his regime was a direct threat to the stability of the region and thus our interests.

No he wasn't.. Operation Mass Appeal was set up in 1998 to demonize him. He Kept the Shia in line and Iraq was stable under the Sunnis. Actually, the Dual Containment Policy worked splendidly for 20 years.

Containment is a loser policy.

 

[BS Filter]

And the alternative is death

there are post born real children going hungry every night ...

(R)s vote to cut SNAP & medicaid some more - 'cause BIGCORP needs a bigger tax cut.

Yeah, so they're better off dead. Sicko.

That's their problem. Any woman who would kill her own child deserves what she gets.

You should have a vasectomy.

Oh, yeah, the people who shouldn't be having children are those who actually want those children to live. Only those who kill their babies are fit to make them.

Brilliant logic.

There are many valid reasons why a woman shouldn't carry a pregnancy to term. You want that decision left to male religious fanatics or women and their doctors?

If the reason is inconvenience, that's a crime.

it's none of your business what the reason is.

Spoken like a true fascist.

It really isn't any of your business. Perhaps you should just exert your influence on your wife, mother, daughters and aunts.

It really is everyone's business whether or not killing someone is legal. Perhaps you should stop presuming to speak for all women, and just exert your opinions on your own life.

Nobody is insisting you have an abortion.

So if no one is trying to kill my family members, I shouldn't care about anyone else being killed? Do I even need to explain what a piece of shit you sound like?

Same mentality as Nazi Germany. These are very sick creatures.

 

[surada]

And? Born ones do also.

Yes, except for those convicted of a capital crime

unborn children are guilty of nothing

Nor are those we drop bombs on.

What makes you think that? You really think the U.S. bombs people just for the hell of it?

No, it's to keep our 401k propped up.

What makes you think that dropping bombs has any connection whatsoever to that?

Do you have a better answer? No one else does. 20 years in Iraq, a country that did nothing to us, for what?

Saddam Hussein and his regime was a direct threat to the stability of the region and thus our interests.

No he wasn't.. Operation Mass Appeal was set up in 1998 to demonize him. He Kept the Shia in line and Iraq was stable under the Sunnis. Actually, the Dual Containment Policy worked splendidly for 20 years.

Containment is a loser policy.

It worked beautifully.. After we invaded Iraq we made Iran ascendant. Stupid move ..

 

[pknopp]

And? Born ones do also.

Yes, except for those convicted of a capital crime

unborn children are guilty of nothing

Nor are those we drop bombs on.

What makes you think that? You really think the U.S. bombs people just for the hell of it?

No, it's to keep our 401k propped up.

What makes you think that dropping bombs has any connection whatsoever to that?

Do you have a better answer? No one else does. 20 years in Iraq, a country that did nothing to us, for what?

Saddam Hussein and his regime was a direct threat to the stability of the region and thus our interests.

"Our interest". Keeping our 401k's inflated.

You have any evidence of that?

Thought not.

Evidence? You stated the same thing that I did.

 

[Dayton3]

And? Born ones do also.

Yes, except for those convicted of a capital crime

unborn children are guilty of nothing

Nor are those we drop bombs on.

What makes you think that? You really think the U.S. bombs people just for the hell of it?

No, it's to keep our 401k propped up.

What makes you think that dropping bombs has any connection whatsoever to that?

Do you have a better answer? No one else does. 20 years in Iraq, a country that did nothing to us, for what?

Saddam Hussein and his regime was a direct threat to the stability of the region and thus our interests.

No he wasn't.. Operation Mass Appeal was set up in 1998 to demonize him. He Kept the Shia in line and Iraq was stable under the Sunnis. Actually, the Dual Containment Policy worked splendidly for 20 years.

Containment is a loser policy.

It worked beautifully.. After we invaded Iraq we made Iran ascendant. Stupid move ..

Policy failures in no way invalidate the justifications for the initial decisions.

Iran was always going to dominate the region unless the U.S. did what it should and crushed the Iranians once and for all.

 

[pknopp]

And? Born ones do also.

Yes, except for those convicted of a capital crime

unborn children are guilty of nothing

Nor are those we drop bombs on.

What makes you think that? You really think the U.S. bombs people just for the hell of it?

No, it's to keep our 401k propped up.

What makes you think that dropping bombs has any connection whatsoever to that?

Do you have a better answer? No one else does. 20 years in Iraq, a country that did nothing to us, for what?

Saddam Hussein and his regime was a direct threat to the stability of the region and thus our interests.

No he wasn't.. Operation Mass Appeal was set up in 1998 to demonize him. He Kept the Shia in line and Iraq was stable under the Sunnis. Actually, the Dual Containment Policy worked splendidly for 20 years.

Containment is a loser policy.

It worked beautifully.. After we invaded Iraq we made Iran ascendant. Stupid move ..

Policy failures in no way invalidate the justifications for the initial decisions.

Iran was always going to dominate the region unless the U.S. did what it should and crushed the Iranians once and for all.

Like we have done in Afghanistan? Lol

Syria? Vietnam? Korea?

 

[Dayton3]

And? Born ones do also.

Yes, except for those convicted of a capital crime

unborn children are guilty of nothing

Nor are those we drop bombs on.

What makes you think that? You really think the U.S. bombs people just for the hell of it?

No, it's to keep our 401k propped up.

What makes you think that dropping bombs has any connection whatsoever to that?

Do you have a better answer? No one else does. 20 years in Iraq, a country that did nothing to us, for what?

Saddam Hussein and his regime was a direct threat to the stability of the region and thus our interests.

"Our interest". Keeping our 401k's inflated.

You have any evidence of that?

Thought not.

Evidence? You stated the same thing that I did.

I said nothing nor implied anything about "401ks"

You of course implying that profits for defense contractors is the reason policy decisions are made.

Which is completely ignorant and idiotic.

 

[Dayton3]

And? Born ones do also.

Yes, except for those convicted of a capital crime

unborn children are guilty of nothing

Nor are those we drop bombs on.

What makes you think that? You really think the U.S. bombs people just for the hell of it?

No, it's to keep our 401k propped up.

What makes you think that dropping bombs has any connection whatsoever to that?

Do you have a better answer? No one else does. 20 years in Iraq, a country that did nothing to us, for what?

Saddam Hussein and his regime was a direct threat to the stability of the region and thus our interests.

No he wasn't.. Operation Mass Appeal was set up in 1998 to demonize him. He Kept the Shia in line and Iraq was stable under the Sunnis. Actually, the Dual Containment Policy worked splendidly for 20 years.

Containment is a loser policy.

It worked beautifully.. After we invaded Iraq we made Iran ascendant. Stupid move ..

Policy failures in no way invalidate the justifications for the initial decisions.

Iran was always going to dominate the region unless the U.S. did what it should and crushed the Iranians once and for all.

Like we have done in Afghanistan? Lol

Syria? Vietnam? Korea?

What's wrong with Korea? South Korea turned into a very stable, highly prosperous democracy.

 

[surada]

And? Born ones do also.

Yes, except for those convicted of a capital crime

unborn children are guilty of nothing

Nor are those we drop bombs on.

What makes you think that? You really think the U.S. bombs people just for the hell of it?

No, it's to keep our 401k propped up.

What makes you think that dropping bombs has any connection whatsoever to that?

Do you have a better answer? No one else does. 20 years in Iraq, a country that did nothing to us, for what?

Saddam Hussein and his regime was a direct threat to the stability of the region and thus our interests.

No he wasn't.. Operation Mass Appeal was set up in 1998 to demonize him. He Kept the Shia in line and Iraq was stable under the Sunnis. Actually, the Dual Containment Policy worked splendidly for 20 years.

Containment is a loser policy.

It worked beautifully.. After we invaded Iraq we made Iran ascendant. Stupid move ..

Policy failures in no way invalidate the justifications for the initial decisions.

Iran was always going to dominate the region unless the U.S. did what it should and crushed the Iranians once and for all.

There were NO justifications.. Iraq was crippled by 20 years of war and sanctions.. The US didn't crush Iran.. Are you confused about Iraq and Iran? You've never been to either, have you?

 

[surada]

And? Born ones do also.

Yes, except for those convicted of a capital crime

unborn children are guilty of nothing

Nor are those we drop bombs on.

What makes you think that? You really think the U.S. bombs people just for the hell of it?

No, it's to keep our 401k propped up.

What makes you think that dropping bombs has any connection whatsoever to that?

Do you have a better answer? No one else does. 20 years in Iraq, a country that did nothing to us, for what?

Saddam Hussein and his regime was a direct threat to the stability of the region and thus our interests.

No he wasn't.. Operation Mass Appeal was set up in 1998 to demonize him. He Kept the Shia in line and Iraq was stable under the Sunnis. Actually, the Dual Containment Policy worked splendidly for 20 years.

Containment is a loser policy.

It worked beautifully.. After we invaded Iraq we made Iran ascendant. Stupid move ..

Policy failures in no way invalidate the justifications for the initial decisions.

Iran was always going to dominate the region unless the U.S. did what it should and crushed the Iranians once and for all.

Like we have done in Afghanistan? Lol

Syria? Vietnam? Korea?

What's wrong with Korea? South Korea turned into a very stable, highly prosperous democracy.

The invasion of Iraq came from Clean Break Strategy in 1996 which was adopted by the PNAC.. ALL the oil men, the Arabs, historians, Diplomats knew it was a huge blunder. Cheney cooked the intelligence. Bandar was recalled because he couldn't influence Dubya not to do it. Its was one of the two or three major dumbass foreign policy moves the US has made.

 

[pknopp]

And? Born ones do also.

Yes, except for those convicted of a capital crime

unborn children are guilty of nothing

Nor are those we drop bombs on.

What makes you think that? You really think the U.S. bombs people just for the hell of it?

No, it's to keep our 401k propped up.

What makes you think that dropping bombs has any connection whatsoever to that?

Do you have a better answer? No one else does. 20 years in Iraq, a country that did nothing to us, for what?

Saddam Hussein and his regime was a direct threat to the stability of the region and thus our interests.

"Our interest". Keeping our 401k's inflated.

You have any evidence of that?

Thought not.

Evidence? You stated the same thing that I did.

I said nothing nor implied anything about "401ks"

You of course implying that profits for defense contractors is the reason policy decisions are made.

Which is completely ignorant and idiotic.

I will note, you didn't come up with a better answer. Neither has anyone.

 

[pknopp]

And? Born ones do also.

Yes, except for those convicted of a capital crime

unborn children are guilty of nothing

Nor are those we drop bombs on.

What makes you think that? You really think the U.S. bombs people just for the hell of it?

No, it's to keep our 401k propped up.

What makes you think that dropping bombs has any connection whatsoever to that?

Do you have a better answer? No one else does. 20 years in Iraq, a country that did nothing to us, for what?

Saddam Hussein and his regime was a direct threat to the stability of the region and thus our interests.

No he wasn't.. Operation Mass Appeal was set up in 1998 to demonize him. He Kept the Shia in line and Iraq was stable under the Sunnis. Actually, the Dual Containment Policy worked splendidly for 20 years.

Containment is a loser policy.

It worked beautifully.. After we invaded Iraq we made Iran ascendant. Stupid move ..

Policy failures in no way invalidate the justifications for the initial decisions.

Iran was always going to dominate the region unless the U.S. did what it should and crushed the Iranians once and for all.

Like we have done in Afghanistan? Lol

Syria? Vietnam? Korea?

What's wrong with Korea? South Korea turned into a very stable, highly prosperous democracy.

As it was before hand. Our intervening made no difference but we don't let that stop us.

 

[playtime]

And the alternative is death

there are post born real children going hungry every night ...

(R)s vote to cut SNAP & medicaid some more - 'cause BIGCORP needs a bigger tax cut.

Yeah, so they're better off dead. Sicko.

That's their problem. Any woman who would kill her own child deserves what she gets.

You should have a vasectomy.

Oh, yeah, the people who shouldn't be having children are those who actually want those children to live. Only those who kill their babies are fit to make them.

Brilliant logic.

There are many valid reasons why a woman shouldn't carry a pregnancy to term. You want that decision left to male religious fanatics or women and their doctors?

If the reason is inconvenience, that's a crime.

it's none of your business what the reason is.

Spoken like a true fascist.

It really isn't any of your business. Perhaps you should just exert your influence on your wife, mother, daughters and aunts.

It really is everyone's business whether or not killing someone is legal. Perhaps you should stop presuming to speak for all women, and just exert your opinions on your own life.

^^^ irony at its best ^^^

 

[surada]

And the alternative is death

there are post born real children going hungry every night ...

(R)s vote to cut SNAP & medicaid some more - 'cause BIGCORP needs a bigger tax cut.

Yeah, so they're better off dead. Sicko.

That's their problem. Any woman who would kill her own child deserves what she gets.

You should have a vasectomy.

Oh, yeah, the people who shouldn't be having children are those who actually want those children to live. Only those who kill their babies are fit to make them.

Brilliant logic.

There are many valid reasons why a woman shouldn't carry a pregnancy to term. You want that decision left to male religious fanatics or women and their doctors?

If the reason is inconvenience, that's a crime.

it's none of your business what the reason is.

Spoken like a true fascist.

It really isn't any of your business. Perhaps you should just exert your influence on your wife, mother, daughters and aunts.

It really is everyone's business whether or not killing someone is legal. Perhaps you should stop presuming to speak for all women, and just exert your opinions on your own life.

Nobody is insisting you have an abortion.

So if no one is trying to kill my family members, I shouldn't care about anyone else being killed? Do I even need to explain what a piece of shit you sound like?

You should probably mind your own business. How many babies did you say you'd adopted?

 

[BS Filter]

And the alternative is death

there are post born real children going hungry every night ...

(R)s vote to cut SNAP & medicaid some more - 'cause BIGCORP needs a bigger tax cut.

Yeah, so they're better off dead. Sicko.

That's their problem. Any woman who would kill her own child deserves what she gets.

You should have a vasectomy.

Oh, yeah, the people who shouldn't be having children are those who actually want those children to live. Only those who kill their babies are fit to make them.

Brilliant logic.

There are many valid reasons why a woman shouldn't carry a pregnancy to term. You want that decision left to male religious fanatics or women and their doctors?

If the reason is inconvenience, that's a crime.

it's none of your business what the reason is.

Spoken like a true fascist.

It really isn't any of your business. Perhaps you should just exert your influence on your wife, mother, daughters and aunts.

It really is everyone's business whether or not killing someone is legal. Perhaps you should stop presuming to speak for all women, and just exert your opinions on your own life.

Nobody is insisting you have an abortion.

So if no one is trying to kill my family members, I shouldn't care about anyone else being killed? Do I even need to explain what a piece of shit you sound like?

You should probably mind your own business. How many babies did you say you'd adopted?

Oh, so we're supposed to kill babies that aren't wanted. Spoken like a true nazi.

 

[Dayton3]

And? Born ones do also.

Yes, except for those convicted of a capital crime

unborn children are guilty of nothing

Nor are those we drop bombs on.

What makes you think that? You really think the U.S. bombs people just for the hell of it?

No, it's to keep our 401k propped up.

What makes you think that dropping bombs has any connection whatsoever to that?

Do you have a better answer? No one else does. 20 years in Iraq, a country that did nothing to us, for what?

Saddam Hussein and his regime was a direct threat to the stability of the region and thus our interests.

No he wasn't.. Operation Mass Appeal was set up in 1998 to demonize him. He Kept the Shia in line and Iraq was stable under the Sunnis. Actually, the Dual Containment Policy worked splendidly for 20 years.

Containment is a loser policy.

It worked beautifully.. After we invaded Iraq we made Iran ascendant. Stupid move ..

Policy failures in no way invalidate the justifications for the initial decisions.

Iran was always going to dominate the region unless the U.S. did what it should and crushed the Iranians once and for all.

There were NO justifications.. Iraq was crippled by 20 years of war and sanctions.. The US didn't crush Iran.. Are you confused about Iraq and Iran? You've never been to either, have you?

Learn to read.

 

[Dayton3]

And? Born ones do also.

Yes, except for those convicted of a capital crime

unborn children are guilty of nothing

Nor are those we drop bombs on.

What makes you think that? You really think the U.S. bombs people just for the hell of it?

No, it's to keep our 401k propped up.

What makes you think that dropping bombs has any connection whatsoever to that?

Do you have a better answer? No one else does. 20 years in Iraq, a country that did nothing to us, for what?

Saddam Hussein and his regime was a direct threat to the stability of the region and thus our interests.

No he wasn't.. Operation Mass Appeal was set up in 1998 to demonize him. He Kept the Shia in line and Iraq was stable under the Sunnis. Actually, the Dual Containment Policy worked splendidly for 20 years.

Containment is a loser policy.

It worked beautifully.. After we invaded Iraq we made Iran ascendant. Stupid move ..

Policy failures in no way invalidate the justifications for the initial decisions.

Iran was always going to dominate the region unless the U.S. did what it should and crushed the Iranians once and for all.

Like we have done in Afghanistan? Lol

Syria? Vietnam? Korea?

What's wrong with Korea? South Korea turned into a very stable, highly prosperous democracy.

As it was before hand. Our intervening made no difference but we don't let that stop us.

South Korea was a mess prior to the Korean War.