Great. One guy wears leak-proof, the other guy wears evil-proof.
Neither one of these clowns has a chance.
Roe v. Wade has been the law of the land for a generation and the republic has survived. And nobody’s coming to take your pop-pops.
Masturbatory fantasy candidates like Fred Thompson or Newt Gingrich will only hand the country over to Shrillary or Ubangi.
If you want somebody who can win AND actually make it work, then there’s only Rudy…
Bunkerboy: Clowns? I think you underestimate both.
Also, your estimation of Roe v. Wade’s impact on the republic is naive. You can trace every social ill of today back to RvW or at least the philisophical mindset that eminates from the punumbra of RvW. Yes, we have survived as a republic despite RvW, well at least those of us who weren’t terminated. But, is merely surviving proof that we are better off because of RvW. I think not. The guy who would have discovered the cure for cancer was terminated March 13, 1974. He would have discovered the cure on January 17, 2015, but, alas he is gone. Oh, and the woman who was to end our reliance on Oil with her discovery of a cheap clean energy source was…you guessed it… terminated July 4, 1976 (oh, the irony of that date). Finally, the man who would have discovered the cure for AIDS and solved the problem of world hunger, he was going to be the grandson of that woman who was terminated on July 4, 1976. So, the people who were terminated and the generations that ended as a result of those terminations have something to say regarding your cavalier approach to RvW. That message is: You are wrong.
So, we are left with your assertion that only Rudy can win. I think McCain and Romney can both cream Shill and Ubangi in the debates. But, you would have us believe that the only way to win against them in the general election is to pick someone who is socially liberal in order to sway the independants and soft liberals to vote for him. That sounds a bit like saying you need to sellout your conservative ideals just to allow a Republican to win. And that doesn’t sound like something most of the republicans I know agree with.
Pick the candidate who most closely agrees with the conservative Republican platform and who is intellectually sharp enough to disect the Democrats and you’ll have your winner. Oh, buy the way, there are a few good candidates that fit the bill: Romney, Huckabee, Hunter and even Grampa McCain.
I think maybe Johnny has made himself unelectable. Mr. Hannity was telling his audience that the Washington elite (of which McCain is a proud and arrogant member) are beside themselves with confusion. The are truly shocked and awed at the negative response from “we the people”. They have been inundated with e-mails and phone calls urging them to get rid of the “Amnesty” bill.
You can fool some of the people some of the time but you can’t fool all of the people all of the time, other wise the Slickmiester would still be president. Hannity won’t call for people to write or call their representatives but he shouldn’t have too. That’s a no brainer. If you think amnesty is wrong e-mail your congressman, woman, person, thing……whatever. Do it now!
oh no… I just checked and found out that Ron Paul is my representative… I know that he’s a nutjob in general, but does anyone know what he’s been saying about this bill?
Hey scotty, you left out a few!
The man who would have been the nation’s most vicious drug lord was aborted August 15, 1977. The man who would have led black Muslims in a separatist revolt that kills thousands was aborted November 30, 1986. And the man who will sell Al-Qaeda a briefcase nuke that kills a hundred thousand was aborted February 7, 1975.
Anyone can play that game. Sure abortion is wrong and repugnant, but there’s no doubt it’s eliminated a lot of lowlifes.
Bunkerboy and Scotty, both of you have points; it’s simply that they are not the relevant issue. By and large the vast majority of abortions were elections of convenience and a manifestation of a personal failure to accept responsibility for one’s actions and choices. I’m not going to get into the rape or incest trap because, statistically, they are in the smallest group of abortion cases. A woman gets an abortion principally because she allows someone to screw her and doesn’t want to accept all the potential natural consequences of that choice. That mindset is symptomatic of our whole society, in which everyone appears to have been elevated to the status of “victim” of some sort of repressive relationship or astral alignment or corrosive environment.
Real freedom is the ability to take responsibility for ourselves. I believe the converse of that statement is true, as well. We cannot be truly free until we can accept responsibility for our own actions. Roe v. Wade, while not the first, is certainly a landmark in our slide down the big swirly toward anarchy and (perhaps even worse) the nanny state.
Frankly, I could give a rat’s ass less about who gets an abortion. There are people around who probably should be aborted in their sixtieth trimester. Abortion is simply a symptom of what’s wrong with this society.
“Roe v. Wade has been the law of the land for a generation and the republic has survived.”
Slavery was around for ninety years with the U.S. surviving and even then we only went into a war because people tried to stop it. If it’s right, it’s right. If it’s wrong, it’s wrong-screw whether we can survive or not.
I’ve actually been warming up to Giuliani, but the position of “I personally think it’s wrong, but others disagree and it’s their choice” is something I just will never understand. If you honestly believe it’s the equivalent of murder, a ton of people who commit murder think that what they’re doing is ok. Many people in the past have thought their victims shouldn’t count as human. If someone honestly thinks it is murder, if they think it’s a human being, that it’s the equivalent of stabbing someone, I don’t get how you can sit on the sidelines just because the other person thinks it’s alright. You can allow a lot of other things under this line of reasoning that I think you really don’t want to allow.
bunkerboy: Your point is well taken that some lowlifes were no doubt aborted; however, the ends don’t justifiy the means in this case. You cannot justify tens of millions of abortions by saying that a few thousands of bad people were in the mix. The logical outcome of that math is elimination of all human life, which is what I think is wrong with the type of thinking that comes from RvW. That is, it cheapens the value of human life.
I am very surprised that you indicate that abortion is wrong and repugnant. If so, why not work to end it?
Hehehe
Great. One guy wears leak-proof, the other guy wears evil-proof.
Neither one of these clowns has a chance.
Roe v. Wade has been the law of the land for a generation and the republic has survived. And nobody’s coming to take your pop-pops.
Masturbatory fantasy candidates like Fred Thompson or Newt Gingrich will only hand the country over to Shrillary or Ubangi.
If you want somebody who can win AND actually make it work, then there’s only Rudy…
Bunkerboy: Clowns? I think you underestimate both.
Also, your estimation of Roe v. Wade’s impact on the republic is naive. You can trace every social ill of today back to RvW or at least the philisophical mindset that eminates from the punumbra of RvW. Yes, we have survived as a republic despite RvW, well at least those of us who weren’t terminated. But, is merely surviving proof that we are better off because of RvW. I think not. The guy who would have discovered the cure for cancer was terminated March 13, 1974. He would have discovered the cure on January 17, 2015, but, alas he is gone. Oh, and the woman who was to end our reliance on Oil with her discovery of a cheap clean energy source was…you guessed it… terminated July 4, 1976 (oh, the irony of that date). Finally, the man who would have discovered the cure for AIDS and solved the problem of world hunger, he was going to be the grandson of that woman who was terminated on July 4, 1976. So, the people who were terminated and the generations that ended as a result of those terminations have something to say regarding your cavalier approach to RvW. That message is: You are wrong.
So, we are left with your assertion that only Rudy can win. I think McCain and Romney can both cream Shill and Ubangi in the debates. But, you would have us believe that the only way to win against them in the general election is to pick someone who is socially liberal in order to sway the independants and soft liberals to vote for him. That sounds a bit like saying you need to sellout your conservative ideals just to allow a Republican to win. And that doesn’t sound like something most of the republicans I know agree with.
Pick the candidate who most closely agrees with the conservative Republican platform and who is intellectually sharp enough to disect the Democrats and you’ll have your winner. Oh, buy the way, there are a few good candidates that fit the bill: Romney, Huckabee, Hunter and even Grampa McCain.
I think maybe Johnny has made himself unelectable. Mr. Hannity was telling his audience that the Washington elite (of which McCain is a proud and arrogant member) are beside themselves with confusion. The are truly shocked and awed at the negative response from “we the people”. They have been inundated with e-mails and phone calls urging them to get rid of the “Amnesty” bill.
You can fool some of the people some of the time but you can’t fool all of the people all of the time, other wise the Slickmiester would still be president. Hannity won’t call for people to write or call their representatives but he shouldn’t have too. That’s a no brainer. If you think amnesty is wrong e-mail your congressman, woman, person, thing……whatever. Do it now!
oh no… I just checked and found out that Ron Paul is my representative… I know that he’s a nutjob in general, but does anyone know what he’s been saying about this bill?
Prolix In answer to your question, “No, I don’t.”
I’m guesing it sounds like, “We’re to blame for this!”
Hey scotty, you left out a few!
The man who would have been the nation’s most vicious drug lord was aborted August 15, 1977. The man who would have led black Muslims in a separatist revolt that kills thousands was aborted November 30, 1986. And the man who will sell Al-Qaeda a briefcase nuke that kills a hundred thousand was aborted February 7, 1975.
Anyone can play that game. Sure abortion is wrong and repugnant, but there’s no doubt it’s eliminated a lot of lowlifes.
Bunkerboy and Scotty, both of you have points; it’s simply that they are not the relevant issue. By and large the vast majority of abortions were elections of convenience and a manifestation of a personal failure to accept responsibility for one’s actions and choices. I’m not going to get into the rape or incest trap because, statistically, they are in the smallest group of abortion cases. A woman gets an abortion principally because she allows someone to screw her and doesn’t want to accept all the potential natural consequences of that choice. That mindset is symptomatic of our whole society, in which everyone appears to have been elevated to the status of “victim” of some sort of repressive relationship or astral alignment or corrosive environment.
Real freedom is the ability to take responsibility for ourselves. I believe the converse of that statement is true, as well. We cannot be truly free until we can accept responsibility for our own actions. Roe v. Wade, while not the first, is certainly a landmark in our slide down the big swirly toward anarchy and (perhaps even worse) the nanny state.
Frankly, I could give a rat’s ass less about who gets an abortion. There are people around who probably should be aborted in their sixtieth trimester. Abortion is simply a symptom of what’s wrong with this society.
Not to get off topic.. but did anybody like the Sombrero?
“Roe v. Wade has been the law of the land for a generation and the republic has survived.”
Slavery was around for ninety years with the U.S. surviving and even then we only went into a war because people tried to stop it. If it’s right, it’s right. If it’s wrong, it’s wrong-screw whether we can survive or not.
I’ve actually been warming up to Giuliani, but the position of “I personally think it’s wrong, but others disagree and it’s their choice” is something I just will never understand. If you honestly believe it’s the equivalent of murder, a ton of people who commit murder think that what they’re doing is ok. Many people in the past have thought their victims shouldn’t count as human. If someone honestly thinks it is murder, if they think it’s a human being, that it’s the equivalent of stabbing someone, I don’t get how you can sit on the sidelines just because the other person thinks it’s alright. You can allow a lot of other things under this line of reasoning that I think you really don’t want to allow.
*** off topic (ping- as in pong)
The sombrero was a masterful touch Mr. Duck. As for the rakish tilt, that was just gravy.
*** off topic (ping- as in pong)
The sombrero was a masterful touch Mr. Duck. As for the rakish tilt, that was just gravy.
bunkerboy: Your point is well taken that some lowlifes were no doubt aborted; however, the ends don’t justifiy the means in this case. You cannot justify tens of millions of abortions by saying that a few thousands of bad people were in the mix. The logical outcome of that math is elimination of all human life, which is what I think is wrong with the type of thinking that comes from RvW. That is, it cheapens the value of human life.
I am very surprised that you indicate that abortion is wrong and repugnant. If so, why not work to end it?
RightWingDuck: Que el sombrero es no muy bueno, sino su cara es impresionante.