Log in

View Full Version : And yet another Republican sex scandal



Pages : 1 [2] 3

ArmySGT.
02-12-2011, 11:10 AM
Silly people. You still believe Politicians are honest and keep their promises..............

The would be selling cars if they were uglier.

penandink1019
02-12-2011, 11:19 AM
The reality...is that the Republican members of Congress are only concerned about making the wealthiest Americans even wealthier than they already are, at the expense of everyone else, and imposing their backward religious beliefs on everyone else. The Republican Congress is full of misogynists and hypocritical religious nuts. It's obvious to everyone in the reality-based world. One needs to look no further than their actions since taking power. We're currently going through our worst economic crisis in 80 years, with unemployment close to 10 percent, and what was one of the first bills the Republicans came out with? A bill that prevents some rape victims from getting federal funding from abortions, and allows doctors to deny treatment to dying pregnant woman, if an abortion is necessary to save them.



^^ Yes. What he said. Perfect retort.

bem401
02-12-2011, 11:30 AM
The reality...is that the Republican members of Congress are only concerned about making the wealthiest Americans even wealthier than they already are, at the expense of everyone else, and imposing their backward religious beliefs on everyone else. The Republican Congress is full of misogynists and hypocritical religious nuts. It's obvious to everyone in the reality-based world. One needs to look no further than their actions since taking power. We're currently going through our worst economic crisis in 80 years, with unemployment close to 10 percent, and what was one of the first bills the Republicans came out with? A bill that prevents some rape victims from getting federal funding from abortions, and allows doctors to deny treatment to dying pregnant woman, if an abortion is necessary to save them.


...The problems this country has have only escalated under Obama and the recent Congress. The republicans aim to have people become more self-sufficient and if that means establishing a tax system that doesn't discourage business owners from expanding and hiring, so be it. There should be a flat tax anyhow and far less entitlements ( or at least entitlements which don't perpetuate).

Please explain why any of Obama's policies are in the best interest, especially long-term, of this country. He has taken the mess which began under bush and put it on steroids. Every single position of his only does damage to this country.

Trem
02-12-2011, 11:44 AM
The problems this country has have only escalated under Obama and the recent Congress.

...Over the past two years Obama has pulled this country from the brink of another Great Depression, we now have a recovering economy and the lowest unemployment numbers in two years. There isn't one single measure by which you can say our problems have escalated, not one. The country is better off than it was when Obama took office and much much better off than the ruin we would be if Republicans were still in control.

Djoser
02-12-2011, 12:20 PM
OK I tried to clean this up while letting people have their say. It's gotten very pooey in here, though, and I'm going to move it to 'Games and Puzzles' if it keeps up.


I was raised Republican, but my mom started voting Democratic when she saw how the Republicans were allying themselves with Right Wing Christians who wanted women kept down in an inferior position.

'The Moral Majority' was founded by right wing Republicans. Sure the Democrats will spout off the same inane rhetoric about Family Values (albeit to a much lesser extent from what I have seen), but that's because the prevailing moral climate in this country makes that imperative. When asked about Family Values, spew out the asskissing bullshit so you can get elected.

What I look for is the proportion of politicians of each party who are trying to shut down sexually oriented business, and how much energy they are dedicating to this end. Sadly for the republicans, I see a lot more anti-sex rhetoric and attempted legislation than I do coming from the Democrats. So while both parties are full of shit for always saying they are always right about everything, I tend to vote democratic because they are not trying to legislate morality and shut down my business nearly so much as the republicans.

To me, being 'anti-sex' is being anti-American. But of course there are many who disagree.

Djoser
02-12-2011, 12:33 PM
It's technically not even a "sex scandal" More like a "first base scandal" lol

More like a 'cheesy picture scandal' ;D


Yeah body looks decent, but that face screams 50.

Not just the face. He's getting that softness around the neck that is one of the hardest things to hide.

He's in great shape for 46--not that that is saying very much at all lol. He wouldn't last long in any kind of serious bout.



Yes, Egypt will hopefully stand as an example of how to move toward self-determination in stark contrast to the failed top-down approach forced upon Iraq.

Should Clinton have resigned for defiling the Office? Perhaps. But GW didn't step down and he fucked nearly everyone in America. :D

:rotfl:


Yes, please! More political humor, less personal attack!

bem401
02-12-2011, 01:16 PM
...Over the past two years Obama has pulled this country from the brink of another Great Depression, we now have a recovering economy and the lowest unemployment numbers in two years. There isn't one single measure by which you can say our problems have escalated, not one. The country is better off than it was when Obama took office and much much better off than the ruin we would be if Republicans were still in control.

Well, for starters, unemployment was 7.6% when he took office. It is now 9% and was pushing 10%. The recovery of the last month could possibly be due only to less people looking and because of the weather. Time will tell. Please explain to me how 9.0 is less than 7.6.

A gallon of gas was less than $2 when he took office and now it is in the vicinity of $3.50 and climbing.

The national debt was about $10 trillion when he took office. Halfway through his first (and hopefully only) term, it is now $14 trillion.


Numbers don't lie. You wanted measures ? There you go, a hat trick of them.

Trem
02-12-2011, 01:40 PM
Well, for starters, unemployment was 7.6% when he took office. It is now 9% and was pushing 10%. The recovery of the last month could possibly be due only to less people looking and because of the weather. Time will tell. Please explain to me how 9.0 is less than 7.6.

Before Obama took office we were losing 750k jobs a month, just because we haven't caught up to the same level we were at before doesn't mean things aren't a lot better. It takes more than a couple years to fix the disaster the republicans made of this country. We have gained jobs almost every month for over a year, gaining jobs is better than losing jobs which was the situation he inherited.


A gallon of gas was less than $2 when he took office and now it is in the vicinity of $3.50 and climbing.

I'm sure you can tell me how this has anything whatsoever to do with Obama and his policies.


The national debt was about $10 trillion when he took office. Halfway through his first (and hopefully only) term, it is now $14 trillion.

You spend money to get out of recessions, that's how the economy works. I have absolutely no problem with a president spending money to save our country, it takes republicans to be handed a surplus and a booming economy and turn it into a total catastrophe and of course they will treat the guy who fixes their mess like the devil.



Numbers don't lie. You wanted measures ? There you go, a hat trick of them.

You'll have to do a whole lot better than that.

bem401
02-12-2011, 01:57 PM
Before Obama took office we were losing 750k jobs a month, just because we haven't caught up to the same level we were at before doesn't mean things aren't a lot better. It takes more than a couple years to fix the disaster the republicans made of this country. We have gained jobs almost every month for over a year, gaining jobs is better than losing jobs which was the situation he inherited.

You said we currently have the lowest unemployment figures in 2 years. That's simply not true. As far as adding jobs is concerned, they are adding government jobs, not fixing the economy.




I'm sure you can tell me how this has anything whatsoever to do with Obama and his policies.

How about the fact that he will not allow exploration or digging in Alaske, North Dakota (rumored to possibly be the greatest potential oil supply on the planet), or off our coasts. This policy sends a message to our suppliers that they can charge as they wish because we nmeither can nor are interested in ending our dependence on them.


You spend money to get out of recessions, that's how the economy works. I have absolutely no problem with a president spending money to save our country, it takes republicans to be handed a surplus and a booming economy and turn it into a total catastrophe and of course they will treat the guy who fixes their mess like the devil.

You do not get out of a recession by increasing government spending and increasing taxes. You reduce taxes to encourage private industry to invest in their business and the future. Keynesian economics has proven to be totally withoput merit.

Like President Reagan said, " Government isn't the solution to the problem, government is the problem".

Trem
02-12-2011, 02:00 PM
How about the fact that he will not allow exploration or digging in Alaske, North Dakota (rumored to possibly be the greatest potential oil supply on the planet), or off our coasts. This policy sends a message to our suppliers that they can charge as they wish because we nmeither can nor are interested in ending our dependence on them.


That whole "drill baby drill" stuff is nothing but a republican talking point. We spend 25% of the worlds oil, we own about 3% of it, any solution that involves more drilling in our own lands is bullshit.

Trem
02-12-2011, 02:04 PM
You said we currently have the lowest unemployment figures in 2 years. That's simply not true. As far as adding jobs is concerned, they are adding government jobs, not fixing the economy.


Actually that wasn't me, it was all over the news a few days ago. Here i found a relevant quote:


This morning, at 8:30 AM ET, the Bureau of Labor Statistics released its Non-Farm Payrolls report for January 2011. More commonly called “the jobs report”, the government’s data showed a large decrease in the number of working Americans as compared to December, but a sizable drop in the Unemployment Rate.

The job growth figures were much lower than consensus estimates:

* Expected job growth in January : +148,000 jobs
* Actual job growth in January : +36,000 jobs

January’s Unemployment Rate surprised analysts, too, but not in a bad way, falling from 9.4 percent in December to 9.0 percent last month. This is the nation’s lowest Unemployment Rate in nearly 2 years.

Also according to this (http://www.google.com/publicdata?ds=usunemployment&met=unemployment_rate&tdim=true&dl=en&hl=en&q=unemployment+rate) unemployment was already over 9% a couple months after Obama took over.

bem401
02-12-2011, 02:07 PM
That whole "drill baby drill" stuff is nothing but a republican talking point. We spend 25% of the worlds oil, we own about 3% of it, any solution that involves more drilling in our own lands is bullshit.

Well, lets go coal, natural gas, or nuclear then, all things he's trying to prevent.

In fact the reserves under North Dakota and neighboring (I think) Saskatchewan are thought to be plentiful beyond anything in the middle east.

If our country uses 25% of the world's oil, why are you opposed to trying to produce more than the 4 (not 3) % we currently produce?

Dirty Ernie
02-12-2011, 02:50 PM
Like President Reagan said, " Government isn't the solution to the problem, government is the problem".


You mean the guy who raised taxes 11 times during his term, including a payroll tax hike to pay for Social security and Medicare? Apparently you must not have a problem with raising taxes to pay for gov't provided healthcare when a Republican does it. Toss in raising the gas tax and the largest corporate tax rate increase in history combined with a massive expansion of gov't and it's clear the Reagan Myth is just that.

Yes he did cut the top marginal rate from 70% to 28% over his term, but he grabbed back more than half and placed the burden on the backs of the working class. And yet the Republican Party continues to successfully delude working Americans in the Middle of the country to vote against their self-interests in the name of religious principles which are never realized. Abortion is still legal, there is still a wall (battered but standing) between religion and gov't, and gay marriage is on the way. And yet they continue to vote Republican. They are outraged over any perceived threat to the 2nd Amendment, but are silent on the gutting of the 4th.

At least when I vote for a Democrat I know up front I'm getting a free-spending, hedonistic, atheist.

Trem
02-12-2011, 02:54 PM
You mean the guy who raised taxes 11 times during his term, including a payroll tax hike to pay for Social security and Medicare? Apparently you must not have a problem with raising taxes to pay for gov't provided healthcare when a Republican does it. Toss in raising the gas tax and the largest corporate tax rate increase in history combined with a massive expansion of gov't and it's clear the Reagan Myth is just that.

Yes he did cut the top marginal rate from 70% to 28% over his term, but he grabbed back more than half and placed the burden on the backs of the working class. And yet the Republican Party continues to successfully delude working Americans in the Middle of the country to vote against their self-interests in the name of religious principles which are never realized. Abortion is still legal, there is still a wall (battered but standing) between religion and gov't, and gay marriage is on the way. And yet they continue to vote Republican. They are outraged over any perceived threat to the 2nd Amendment, but are silent on the gutting of the 4th.

At least when I vote for a Democrat I know up front I'm getting a free-spending, hedonistic, atheist.

On top of giving amnesty to illegals and making deals with terrorists, how Reagan ended up a conservative hero is beyond me.

bem401
02-12-2011, 03:14 PM
Once again, the only way Obama supporters can debate is not to defend what he's doing with facts but to attack others(in some cases unfairly and inaccurately) in an attempt to deflect attention from him and his policies not in the best interests of the country.

Trem
02-12-2011, 03:16 PM
We already defended him, if you can't understand that pulling us from the brink of economic collapse and taking us from losing three quarter million jobs a month to gaining jobs every month is a good thing there really isn't any point in arguing with you.

bem401
02-12-2011, 03:25 PM
We already defended him, if you can't understand that pulling us from the brink of economic collapse and taking us from losing three quarter million jobs a month to gaining jobs every month is a good thing there really isn't any point in arguing with you.

He hasn't pulled us from the brink of collapse. I think it actually was Bush who talked about that, but he has just grown this government at the expense of its future. We are undoubtedly in far worse shape now than we were when he took office, and not just economically speaking.

Trem
02-12-2011, 03:29 PM
Well i was talking about the economy, your fears about big goverment are your own issue.

bem401
02-12-2011, 03:45 PM
Well i was talking about the economy, your fears about big goverment are your own issue.

Yes, and unemployment is higher than he inherited, gas has nearly doubled, he's added 40% to the national debt, and there is a strong feeling the worst is yet to come.

eagle2
02-12-2011, 09:38 PM
Conservatives like to ignore the fact that President Obama took office right in the middle of the worst financial crisis in 80 years, and pretend he took office with a blank slate. You are ignoring the fact the economy was in economic free-fall and we were losing over 700,000 jobs a month, and it looked like we were headed for a complete economic collapse. You also ignore the fact that there was already a projected deficit of over a trillion dollars for 2009 before Obama was even sworn into office. By every measurement his policies were as successful as possible, given the fact that the Republican Party was doing everything in their power to fight every attempt to fix the economy. We're no longer on the brink of an economic collapse. Our major financial institutions are no longer facing bankruptcy and are paying back the money from the bailouts. The bailouts of our major auto manufacturers, which were widely mocked by conservatives, were a complete success, and GM and Chrysler are now profitable. If conservatives had their way, both companies would have gone out of business, and hundreds of thousands of jobs, perhaps millions, would have been lost. The stock market has gone through on of it's biggest run-ups ever, and American corporations are having record profits.

eagle2
02-12-2011, 09:48 PM
You do not get out of a recession by increasing government spending and increasing taxes. You reduce taxes to encourage private industry to invest in their business and the future. Keynesian economics has proven to be totally withoput merit.


Taxes have not been increased. That's another conservative myth. Keynesian economics has been proven a success. China's government implemented a massive stimulus program when the financial crisis began and within a few months, their economy was growing at 8%.

President Bush significantly cut taxes. How did that turn out? Where was all the economic growth we were supposed to have from tax cuts? What do we have to show for Bush's tax cuts other than another $5 trillion in debt? The unemployment rate was much higher after Bush left office than it was before he cut taxes.



Like President Reagan said, " Government isn't the solution to the problem, government is the problem".

Given how badly his economic policies failed over the long term, I hardly consider his quotes relevant.

jester214
02-12-2011, 11:34 PM
You mean the guy who raised taxes 11 times during his term, including a payroll tax hike to pay for Social security and Medicare? Apparently you must not have a problem with raising taxes to pay for gov't provided healthcare when a Republican does it. Toss in raising the gas tax and the largest corporate tax rate increase in history combined with a massive expansion of gov't and it's clear the Reagan Myth is just that.

Yes he did cut the top marginal rate from 70% to 28% over his term, but he grabbed back more than half and placed the burden on the backs of the working class. And yet the Republican Party continues to successfully delude working Americans in the Middle of the country to vote against their self-interests in the name of religious principles which are never realized. Abortion is still legal, there is still a wall (battered but standing) between religion and gov't, and gay marriage is on the way. And yet they continue to vote Republican. They are outraged over any perceived threat to the 2nd Amendment, but are silent on the gutting of the 4th.

At least when I vote for a Democrat I know up front I'm getting a free-spending, hedonistic, atheist.

Can you explain to me how people (usually liberals) can tell me that Reagan both cut taxes... And decry how horrible it was... Then later tell me how he raised taxes and again say it was a bad thing?

You can't have it both ways...

jester214
02-12-2011, 11:35 PM
Conservatives like to ignore the fact that President Obama took office right in the middle of the worst financial crisis in 80 years, and pretend he took office with a blank slate. You are ignoring the fact the economy was in economic free-fall and we were losing over 700,000 jobs a month, and it looked like we were headed for a complete economic collapse. You also ignore the fact that there was already a projected deficit of over a trillion dollars for 2009 before Obama was even sworn into office. By every measurement his policies were as successful as possible, given the fact that the Republican Party was doing everything in their power to fight every attempt to fix the economy. We're no longer on the brink of an economic collapse. Our major financial institutions are no longer facing bankruptcy and are paying back the money from the bailouts. The bailouts of our major auto manufacturers, which were widely mocked by conservatives, were a complete success, and GM and Chrysler are now profitable. If conservatives had their way, both companies would have gone out of business, and hundreds of thousands of jobs, perhaps millions, would have been lost. The stock market has gone through on of it's biggest run-ups ever, and American corporations are having record profits.

Liberals like to ignore this when they talk about Bush... It's another reasons people on both sides are insane. No one wants to consider what a new politician is left with by an old politician.

Kellydancer
02-12-2011, 11:52 PM
OK I tried to clean this up while letting people have their say. It's gotten very pooey in here, though, and I'm going to move it to 'Games and Puzzles' if it keeps up.


I was raised Republican, but my mom started voting Democratic when she saw how the Republicans were allying themselves with Right Wing Christians who wanted women kept down in an inferior position.

'The Moral Majority' was founded by right wing Republicans. Sure the Democrats will spout off the same inane rhetoric about Family Values (albeit to a much lesser extent from what I have seen), but that's because the prevailing moral climate in this country makes that imperative. When asked about Family Values, spew out the asskissing bullshit so you can get elected.

What I look for is the proportion of politicians of each party who are trying to shut down sexually oriented business, and how much energy they are dedicating to this end. Sadly for the republicans, I see a lot more anti-sex rhetoric and attempted legislation than I do coming from the Democrats. So while both parties are full of shit for always saying they are always right about everything, I tend to vote democratic because they are not trying to legislate morality and shut down my business nearly so much as the republicans.

To me, being 'anti-sex' is being anti-American. But of course there are many who disagree.

The rightwing moral majority people are truly scary. Take hot topics like abortion and gay rights out of the picture for a minute and their other views are 17th century at best (I don't want to discuss abortion or gay rights because those get long and same old). For intance, many aren't aware that these religious wackjobs want women to go back into the house. They believe women should be paid less (or better yet not work) and think women should be submissive to men. I've mentioned a few times my experience dealing with people with these views and it horrified me. Many of them are even against women voting. Not to mention their racist views (many of these so called "Christians" are also members of the KKK).

I realize I am kind of siding with both sides of the fence, but like I've said I consider myself more a Libertarian at this point because I am socially liberal yet fiscally conservative (though even these views vary). I don't like either party and I wish people would realize neither party has their interests in mind.

Dirty Ernie
02-13-2011, 12:01 AM
Can you explain to me how people (usually liberals) can tell me that Reagan both cut taxes... And decry how horrible it was... Then later tell me how he raised taxes and again say it was a bad thing?

You can't have it both ways...

It's called the wealth gap.

bem401
02-13-2011, 06:13 AM
The rightwing moral majority people are truly scary. Take hot topics like abortion and gay rights out of the picture for a minute and their other views are 17th century at best (I don't want to discuss abortion or gay rights because those get long and same old). For intance, many aren't aware that these religious wackjobs want women to go back into the house. They believe women should be paid less (or better yet not work) and think women should be submissive to men. I've mentioned a few times my experience dealing with people with these views and it horrified me. Many of them are even against women voting. Not to mention their racist views (many of these so called "Christians" are also members of the KKK).

I realize I am kind of siding with both sides of the fence, but like I've said I consider myself more a Libertarian at this point because I am socially liberal yet fiscally conservative (though even these views vary). I don't like either party and I wish people would realize neither party has their interests in mind.

If the Republicans are so anti-women, how would you explain the prominence of Palin and Bachmann presently and Condoleeza Rice when Bush was President. While I have my differences with some of what the GOP advocates, I've not read or heard a single comment by anyone of any stature regarding women staying in the house, being paid less, or being denied the right to vote. I think you are jumping to conclusions with no basis for doing so.

Racist views? Can you say Condi Rice, Colin Powell, Clarence Thomas, Michael Steele, JC Watts, Alan Keyes......? The true racists here are the liberal Democrats, who play the race card every chance they get and have instituted a system of entitlements that serves the same purpose as slavery. They pass out handouts to the poor to keep them placated generation after generation living off the government rather than implement a system that encourages them to endure some short-term hardship to start moving one's life to a better place down the road, especially for future generations. Minorities continue to support the party that gives them the freebies. Actually long term recipients of public assistance do that regardless of their race. Is someone better off being fed or being shown how to feed one's self and family?

On top of all this, the KKK, home to more prominent Democrats than Republicans historically speaking, is essentially defunct now.

firemaiden04
02-13-2011, 10:16 AM
On top of all this, the KKK, home to more prominent Democrats than Republicans historically speaking, is essentially defunct now.

Oh, come on. If you knew your History, you would know that the Republicans have not always been conservative, nor have the Democrats always been liberal. The Republican party as we know it today was founded in 1854 as a liberal opposition to the existing Democratic party, which was conservative and pro-slavery. Almost all the Southern states were Democrats during Civil War Reconstruction, and don't even get me started on the election of Rutherford B. Hayes and the agreement he made with the Southern Democrats to remove Union troops from all Southern states if they awarded him enough votes to win the presidency. That deal effectively ended the process of Reconstruction in the South and cause the economy to collapse (again). Southern Democrats then put in place the various Jim Crow laws, such as laws that stated no one could vote unless he was literate, could pay the poll tax, OR whose grandfather had been able to vote. This process virtually eliminated the ability of any blacks to vote. The KKK was an organization founded in the late 1860's or so and was mainly headed by CONSERVATIVE POLITICIANS who, among other things, wanted to get the LIBERAL POLITICIANS out of office.

So let me say it again. The Republicans were originally LIBERAL. The Democrats were originally CONSERVATIVE. Haven't you ever taken an American History class? You should know this.

And you're very, very misinformed if you think the KKK is defunct, or that it has no hold on politics anymore. I'm from the South, I've seen KKK meetings being held. Just cause it doesn't make the news doesn't mean it's not happening. There are laws in place to prevent most of their violent acts, but don't forget about the 1st Amendment that all hate-mongers hide behind.

firemaiden04
02-13-2011, 10:25 AM
Oh, and as for the Republican Party opposing Women's Rights...Sarah Palin, in addition to opposing ANY form of abortion EVEN in situations of rape or incest and promoting abstinence-only sex education, while she was mayor of Wasilla, she started BILLING RAPE VICTIMS FOR THEIR RAPE KITS.

I have a hard time believing anyone with a vagina would even think to do such a thing, but here you are. You explain to me how that is pro-women's rights.

penandink1019
02-13-2011, 11:24 AM
Can't social conservatives abandon SW and go find a site more in line with their retrograde belief systems?

bem401
02-13-2011, 11:25 AM
The KKK, idiots that they are, are down in membership around 90% since their heyday. The most prominent recent member I'm aware of is the late Robert Byrd, the once most senior US Senator, a democrat from WV. They are absolutely a non-factor nowadays. The overwhelming majority of conservatives could not care less what they say or think.

As far as abortion is concerned, conservatives believe it is immoral and wrong unless the life of the mother is in jeopardy. While it is tragic that rapes and incest cause unwanted pregnancies, I (and other conservatives) am not sure killing the fetus is an acceptable solution. Two wrongs don't make a right and leaving that door open will only encourage women desiring abortions to claim that as a reason for wanting or needing one if they have to. Somehow or other, you equate pro-life with being anti-woman despite the fact that half of the lives saved by outlawing abortion would be females.

I don't see how "abstinence-only" is a feasible policy, but it is hardly anti-woman. It is anti-premarital sex and practicing it, especially in one's teens, can save people, especially females, from some heart wrenching dilemmas.

I know nothing about billing for rape kits but would assume that is covered in the ER. If its a medical procedure, why shouldn't it be treated as such?

firemaiden04
02-13-2011, 11:37 AM
I know nothing about billing for rape kits but would assume that is covered in the ER. If its a medical procedure, why shouldn't it be treated as such?

That is a very good question. You should ask Sarah Palin.

Kellydancer
02-13-2011, 11:46 AM
If the Republicans are so anti-women, how would you explain the prominence of Palin and Bachmann presently and Condoleeza Rice when Bush was President. While I have my differences with some of what the GOP advocates, I've not read or heard a single comment by anyone of any stature regarding women staying in the house, being paid less, or being denied the right to vote. I think you are jumping to conclusions with no basis for doing so.

Racist views? Can you say Condi Rice, Colin Powell, Clarence Thomas, Michael Steele, JC Watts, Alan Keyes......? The true racists here are the liberal Democrats, who play the race card every chance they get and have instituted a system of entitlements that serves the same purpose as slavery. They pass out handouts to the poor to keep them placated generation after generation living off the government rather than implement a system that encourages them to endure some short-term hardship to start moving one's life to a better place down the road, especially for future generations. Minorities continue to support the party that gives them the freebies. Actually long term recipients of public assistance do that regardless of their race. Is someone better off being fed or being shown how to feed one's self and family?

On top of all this, the KKK, home to more prominent Democrats than Republicans historically speaking, is essentially defunct now.

I didn't say the Republicans, I was talking about the rightwingers. People like Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson. I didn't even call these people Republican in my post.

As for some of those women you mention, many are only popular because they have the right look. Do you think Palin would be popular if she was ugly? Nope. She's popular because she's pretty and stupid, and that's how the rightwingers (not I am not calling them Republicans) like women.

Btw, you can attack the welfare system and the Democrats all you want, I am not going to defend that because I AM NOT A DEMOCRAT.

Kellydancer
02-13-2011, 11:53 AM
The KKK, idiots that they are, are down in membership around 90% since their heyday. The most prominent recent member I'm aware of is the late Robert Byrd, the once most senior US Senator, a democrat from WV. They are absolutely a non-factor nowadays. The overwhelming majority of conservatives could not care less what they say or think.

As far as abortion is concerned, conservatives believe it is immoral and wrong unless the life of the mother is in jeopardy. While it is tragic that rapes and incest cause unwanted pregnancies, I (and other conservatives) am not sure killing the fetus is an acceptable solution. Two wrongs don't make a right and leaving that door open will only encourage women desiring abortions to claim that as a reason for wanting or needing one if they have to. Somehow or other, you equate pro-life with being anti-woman despite the fact that half of the lives saved by outlawing abortion would be females.

I don't see how "abstinence-only" is a feasible policy, but it is hardly anti-woman. It is anti-premarital sex and practicing it, especially in one's teens, can save people, especially females, from some heart wrenching dilemmas.

I know nothing about billing for rape kits but would assume that is covered in the ER. If its a medical procedure, why shouldn't it be treated as such?

What gives you the right to tell a woman what to do with a fetus that was the result of rape? As a man you have no idea what it feels like to be raped and possibly get pregnant because of it. I do because I was raped and have long suspected I may have become pregnant because of it. Luckily I either miscarried or wasn't pregnant. If I had been it would have completely messed me up and there is a possibility I may have committed suicide or become severely depressed.

Btw, before you call me one of those liberal feminists, I'd suggest you read many of my posts. I am more conservative than quite a few women here and have stated I would ONLY have an abortion in the case of rape, my health and possibly (though not likely) depending on the health of the baby.

eagle2
02-13-2011, 12:08 PM
I don't see how "abstinence-only" is a feasible policy, but it is hardly anti-woman. It is anti-premarital sex and practicing it, especially in one's teens, can save people, especially females, from some heart wrenching dilemmas.


Preventing women from education about, or access to contraception isn't anti-woman?

bem401
02-13-2011, 12:21 PM
I didn't say the Republicans, I was talking about the rightwingers. People like Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson. I didn't even call these people Republican in my post.

As for some of those women you mention, many are only popular because they have the right look. Do you think Palin would be popular if she was ugly? Nope. She's popular because she's pretty and stupid, and that's how the rightwingers (not I am not calling them Republicans) like women.

Btw, you can attack the welfare system and the Democrats all you want, I am not going to defend that because I AM NOT A DEMOCRAT.

Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson? Are they even still alive? I read a lot of conservative literature and its been more than a decade since I've read or heard either of those names as being influential.

I'm evaluating those women based on what they stand for. I wouldn't know even Bachmann on sight. Its somewhat strange though that the liberals attack conservative women on the basis of their appearance

My position on abortion is that I am looking out for the fetus. While I agree any woman pregnant because of rape is an incredibly unfortunate victim, I'm just not of a mind to tacitly approve of abortions. It also provides an avenue to abortion for those not raped willing to say they were. My sympathies to you for the hardships you've been forced to deal with. My opinion is that the only reason justifying abortion is the life of the mother. Its strictly my opinion but I don't feel anything short of that is reason enough for an abortion.

bem401
02-13-2011, 12:28 PM
Preventing women from education about, or access to contraception isn't anti-woman?

Once again, you add 1 and 1 and get 3. Where did I talk about refusing to educate? No one talks about "abstinence-only" for adults to a significant extent. Teenagers however is a different story. I teach high school and have been approached by girls on numerous occasions dealing with pressure from their BF's to have sex. I never said "just make sure you have protection". I always told them it was a bad idea to be sexually active that young IMO. I suppose you'd have preferred I passed out condoms?

Kellydancer
02-13-2011, 12:40 PM
Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson? Are they even still alive? I read a lot of conservative literature and its been more than a decade since I've read or heard either of those names as being influential.

I think Robertson is still alive but even if he isn't active, there are still many people like him alive and active, like Ralph Reed. I know, I've met quite a few. My exboyfriend belonged to a church with that mindset and there are these people out there and they are trying to overtake politics to push their agenda. We had a far right Republican run for governor who voted against a bill making sure women were paid fairly. If you want to research yourself, the guy is named Bill Brady. There's many bad things I can say about this guy, which is why he didn't get my vote. I did vote for several Republicans in Illinois, because like I said I am NOT a liberal, I am libertarian and they vary on many issues.


I'm evaluating those women based on what they stand for. I wouldn't know even Bachmann on sight. Its somewhat strange though that the liberals attack conservative women on the basis of their appearance

I'm not a liberal and I didn't even bring up Bachmann. I brought up Palin to make a point that if she was ugly, no one would give her any credibility. She's a joke. And befre you say that there are jokes in the Democratic party, I would agree, but that's not the question.


My position on abortion is that I am looking out for the fetus. While I agree any woman pregnant because of rape is an incredibly unfortunate victim, I'm just not of a mind to tacitly approve of abortions. It also provides an avenue to abortion for those not raped willing to say they were. My sympathies to you for the hardships you've been forced to deal with. My opinion is that the only reason justifying abortion is the life of the mother. Its strictly my opinion but I don't feel anything short of that is reason enough for an abortion.

But are you worried about the fetus once it becomes a baby? Many conservatives who claim to be for the fetus want to eliminate all forms of social assistance programs. That I find hypocritical, and no I am not for all the programs either as I have stated often. Because I went through the experience that makes me more of an expert on it than you. You'll never have to worry about giving birth to a rapist's child. It also doesn't mean one approves of abortion. I know many strongly anti abortion yet support it in this case. I have also stated that I would likely never have an abortion, and am repulsed by women who use it as birth control. Btw, in most rape cases the life of the mother IS in jeopardy because many of these women would kill themselves if they had to give birth to a baby like this.

bem401
02-13-2011, 12:47 PM
I would advocate for adoption over abortion, that's all. I've not walked in your shoes so I respect your right to feel as you do. Perhaps given the same experience i'de be on the same page as you.

You did comment on attractive female conservatives. Bachmann would qualify and again I evaluate these women on their positions. While I agree with a lot of Palin's positions, I can't stand the way she presents herself.

And as far as extremists are concerned, they are plentiful at both ends of the spectrum. My views are largely libertarian as well.

eagle2
02-13-2011, 12:57 PM
Once again, you add 1 and 1 and get 3. Where did I talk about refusing to educate? No one talks about "abstinence-only" for adults to a significant extent. Teenagers however is a different story. I teach high school and have been approached by girls on numerous occasions dealing with pressure from their BF's to have sex. I never said "just make sure you have protection". I always told them it was a bad idea to be sexually active that young IMO. I suppose you'd have preferred I passed out condoms?

There should be a nurse or counselor on-site at the school who is qualified to assist students with issues regarding sex, so they wouldn't have to approach you. In addition, students should receive a comprehensive sex education that includes all the ways to prevent pregnancies and STD's, not just abstinence.

eagle2
02-13-2011, 01:00 PM
I would advocate for adoption over abortion, that's all. I've not walked in your shoes so I respect your right to feel as you do. Perhaps given the same experience i'de be on the same page as you.

Are you in favor of allowing women to get abortions if that is their choice?



You did comment on attractive female conservatives. Bachmann would qualify and again I evaluate these women on their positions. While I agree with a lot of Palin's positions, I can't stand the way she presents herself.

And as far as extremists are concerned, they are plentiful at both ends of the spectrum. My views are largely libertarian as well.

There aren't many extremists in the Democratic Party. If anything, many Democrats have moved to the right of the spectrum. As Bill Maher said, the Democratic Party has moved to the right and the Republican Party has moved to the insane asylum.

bem401
02-13-2011, 01:35 PM
There should be a nurse or counselor on-site at the school who is qualified to assist students with issues regarding sex, so they wouldn't have to approach you. In addition, students should receive a comprehensive sex education that includes all the ways to prevent pregnancies and STD's, not just abstinence.

They've had health education but they are going to go to a person they are comfortable approaching with the moral and social consequences of what they are dealing with. I've always been considered one of the most "approachable" teachers by my students. Telling them to go talk to someone they barely know hardly seems appropriate.

bem401
02-13-2011, 01:44 PM
Are you in favor of allowing women to get abortions if that is their choice?



There aren't many extremists in the Democratic Party. If anything, many Democrats have moved to the right of the spectrum. As Bill Maher said, the Democratic Party has moved to the right and the Republican Party has moved to the insane asylum.

As I've stated several times already on this thread, I would only approve of an abortion if the life of the mother was being jeopardized by remaining pregnant.

Bill Maher, he's a real voice of reason. You want extremists, start at the top, Obama. Also on the list would be Gore, Reid, Pelosi, Weiner, Frank, Jackson, Sharpton, Whitehouse, Kerry, Jackson-Lee, Rangel, Holder, Sanders, Dean, etc. You are right though. Its hard to refer to one of them as extremist when they are all so out of the mainstream. Think about it, this is a party JFK wouldn't recognize.

kthnx
02-13-2011, 05:21 PM
Can't social conservatives abandon SW and go find a site more in line with their retrograde belief systems?

is there a dislike button made yet? lol

Athenathefabulous
02-13-2011, 05:29 PM
can we take a break from all of the political arguments so we can discuss what is really important... which is the fact that this whole sex scandal is fucking HILARIOUS.


I mean look at this...

http://hotchickswithdouchebags.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/RepChrisLee-380x228.jpg


LOL!!!!! :rotfl:

eagle2
02-13-2011, 05:32 PM
can we take a break from all of the political arguments so we can discuss what is really important... which is the fact that this whole sex scandal is fucking HILARIOUS.


I mean look at this...

http://hotchickswithdouchebags.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/RepChrisLee-380x228.jpg


LOL!!!!! :rotfl:

I agree! That's why I posted this.

Trem
02-13-2011, 05:36 PM
As I've stated several times already on this thread, I would only approve of an abortion if the life of the mother was being jeopardized by remaining pregnant.


What you don't get is that what you approve and don't approve should in no way shape or form control what a woman can and can't do. You are free to disapprove of anything you like as long as you don't try to force your views on someone elses body.

Athenathefabulous
02-13-2011, 05:48 PM
I agree! That's why I posted this.

ya. its ashame it turned into a heated political debate.

regardless of political party, the cellphone grainy bathroom picture is hilarious. the fact that he was using the craigslist dating site to meet women is also hilarious. and the fact that he was dumb enough to do this as a public figure and didnt think it would become public news is even more hilarious.

that picture though... lol.

bem401
02-13-2011, 06:13 PM
ya. its ashame it turned into a heated political debate.

regardless of political party, the cellphone grainy bathroom picture is hilarious. the fact that he was using the craigslist dating site to meet women is also hilarious. and the fact that he was dumb enough to do this as a public figure and didnt think it would become public news is even more hilarious.

that picture though... lol.

I'm guessing the pic is just the tip of the iceberg with this guy.

Athenathefabulous
02-13-2011, 06:56 PM
I'm guessing the pic is just the tip of the iceberg with this guy.


lol. im assuming he is the guy on the dating sites that always sends the pictures of his penis.

Kellydancer
02-14-2011, 12:43 PM
Because it's not your decision to make.

This is why I get so angry when MEN think abortion should be illegal. They will never give birth, or deal with labor/delivery or the pregnancy itself. They won't have to take off a few weeks after birth to recover (though personally I wouldn't have a baby unless my husband would). Childbirth is painful and life threatening at times.