What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Obama XI: Turn And Face The Strange

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Obama XI: Turn And Face The Strange

rufus said:
Those who cry the longest and loudest about abortion, are also those who cry the longest and loudest about providing contraception aid or education to women, and then about government providing subsistence to women or families who can't provide for their children on their own.
.
Click to expand...

Free birth control is tough to find
 
Re: Obama XI: Turn And Face The Strange

rufus said:
Basically, they don't really care about abortion as an issue, they just want to control women and what they do with their bodies. If they were truly concerned about the reducing the numbers of abortions, they'd be all for increased contraception. and yet, they're not.
Click to expand...

They just don't want women to have sex...which is a terrible idea.... :p
 
Re: Obama XI: Turn And Face The Strange

pirate said:
To me it felt like people were arguing over abortion based on political party membership. I'm no pro-lifer and recognize that if something is a law then until it is changed, if ever, then that is the law. But reducing the subject to which politicall party would try to make more hay out of the 5 kids/Downes comment is an example, again to me, of how politics becomes the issue, not the actual law, tax, policy etc.

Excluding rape, incest, risk to the mother etc. (which are not the majority of the cases but are always mentioned so we can all rationalize the decision) we're talking about people choosing to terminate a life. If we're going to charge someone with two counts of murder for killing a pregnant woman then the law has recognized that it is a life.

So, people are killing other human beings...that is a fact. Aside from the reasons above, what is the next reason for killing the person...convenience?, finances? There is a federal safety net to provide services, along with adoption, so I don't put much stock in the 'it would be cruel to bring another infant into the world' rationalization either. It is legal according to the law.

I find it ironic that one political party would spend more time, effort, money etc. trying to protect death row inmates, who themselves killed 1 or more people than they would trying to protect unborn people.

You and others will ignore what I just typed to pronounce me a republican and bring up a bunch of things republicans do that are also ironic/hypocritical vs. spending one second thinking that perhaps it is possible to support ideas on both sides of the aisle.

So, if somebody made a joke on TV, or maybe just a mistake, that was offensive to black citizens, they would be fired. But, it is fair game to make jokes about abortion, and use it as a political weapon. Again, to me it is ironic that 'the party' that would be first to cry for the offender's head in the racial comment, is the 'the party' that defends the person making the abortion joke.

It is the law...but it isn't a joking matter in my opinion.
Click to expand...

Are you trying to be obtuse...the whole thing stemmed from one man, on Faux News saying you can't paint the Tea Party people with a broad brush because some of them are crazy, and then The Daily Show showing he did the exact same thing by saying Liberals would never do what Palin did. This is not a referendum on abortion...that you are turning it into one is what is really wrong with the media and politics today. The point is the hypocrisy, not abortion.

Do me a favor, go back and just take abortion out of it and look at the scenario again.

I don't care if you are pro choice or pro life, it is about as relevant to what everyone else is talking about as whether you like Coke or Pepsi. Get it?
 
Re: Obama XI: Turn And Face The Strange

Handyman said:
Are you trying to be obtuse...the whole thing stemmed from one man, on Faux News saying you can't paint the Tea Party people with a broad brush because some of them are crazy, and then The Daily Show showing he did the exact same thing by saying Liberals would never do what Palin did. This is not a referendum on abortion...that you are turning it into one is what is really wrong with the media and politics today. The point is the hypocrisy, not abortion.

Do me a favor, go back and just take abortion out of it and look at the scenario again.

I don't care if you are pro choice or pro life, it is about as relevant to what everyone else is talking about as whether you like Coke or Pepsi. Get it?
Click to expand...

I'm a root beer kind of guy. How does that fit into this?
 
Re: Obama XI: Turn And Face The Strange

rufus said:
Not really, it's all connected.

Those who cry the longest and loudest about abortion, are also those who cry the longest and loudest about providing contraception aid or education to women, and then about government providing subsistence to women or families who can't provide for their children on their own.

I could take their concerns about the abortion issue more seriously, if they weren't so hard headed and outspoken on these other matters as well.

In short, their position is, they don't want abortion, but they also don't want contraception, or government aid to poor families. Basically, they don't really care about abortion as an issue, they just want to control women and what they do with their bodies. If they were truly concerend about the reducing the numbers of abortions, they'd be all for increased contraception. and yet, they're not.
Click to expand...

And you are really making the point I was driving at...the parties have to take polar opposite positions on issues like this and gun control and immigration (you name it)and therefore nothing gets done. I'm in complete agreement that there should be more effort spent on reducing pregnancies but the right wing will fight that and put pressure on the reds to not compromise...and while that may be 'fine' on immigration...it is not fine when the outcome is the killing of people intentionally...again, I'm not religious, not a pro-lifer just a person saying that this is an unacceptable outcome of the political cold-war.


If we started the country again today, with no political parties, do you really think abortion would be such a problem? A small minority drive this issue and reasonable people would not create this standoff and watch as this continues to happen. In my book, both sides are unreasonable on this issue and for the left to claim only the right is hypocritical is just plain dumb.
 
Re: Obama XI: Turn And Face The Strange

pirate said:
the parties have to take polar opposite positions on issues like this and gun control and immigration (you name it)and therefore nothing gets done.
Click to expand...

Financial regulation might be another example, unfortunately. There should be broad bipartisan support for oversight and regulation after the Meltdown -- the differences should be technical issues regarding scope and enforcement. But because both parties are obsessed with not handing the other side a "victory," the debate is translated into loud, ideological terms.

The Capitalist/Socialist dichotomy that's driving political rhetoric just doesn't map to a complex 21st century economy. Actual policy has nothing to do with Dickensian laissez faire or a Soviet command economy. The rhetoric is, literally, a century out of date. It's as if we tried to debate the finest details of policy regarding modern telecommunications using only the terminology of 19th century telegraphy.
 
Last edited:
Re: Obama XI: Turn And Face The Strange

Interesting turn of events in North Carolina:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/18/AR2010041803713.html?hpid=topnews

So next time you're out there and criticize the GOP for "purity" look in the mirror.

Heck why don't all the middles form the Central Party?? Then we get the looney left, the righteous right, and the big lump in the middle.

Oh and consider this -- nobody said Slick was stupid. Sometimes thought with the wrong part of the body, but stupid, rarely -- http://townhall.com/columnists/Caro.../interested_in_hillarys_plans_just_watch_bill
 
Re: Obama XI: Turn And Face The Strange

Kepler said:
Financial regulation might be another example, unfortunately. There should be broad bipartisan support for oversight and regulation after the Meltdown -- the differences should be technical issues regarding scope and enforcement. But because both parties are obsessed with not handing the other side a "victory," the debate is translated into loud, ideological terms.

The Capitalist/Socialist dichotomy that's driving political rhetoric just doesn't map to a complex 21st century economy. Actual policy has nothing to do with Dickensian laissez faire or a Soviet command economy. The rhetoric is, literally, a century out of date. It's as if we tried to debate the finest details of policy regarding modern telecommunications using only the terminology of 19th century telegraphy.
Click to expand...

And while it may seem like spitting into the wind, I won't support either party but instead try to sift through the liars, cheaters and thieves to find a few people with integrity and their own ideas. I am consistently astounded at the numbr of folks that will agree that issue A is one on which they disagree with their party but since they do agree with them on issue B, which is more important to them as an individual, they go along with the flow on A.

If we deconstructed everything and held a popular vote on the issues, I suspect we'd come up with several things that most of us agree upon but are held hostage by political parties.
 
Re: Obama XI: Turn And Face The Strange

Bill said:
Good commentary on the Goldman Sachs fraud case:

http://moneymorning.com/2010/04/19/goldman-sachs-fraud-case/
Click to expand...

Very interesting link, thank for posting.

One thing, though. The author maintains that this is "a heavily anti-Wall-Street Congress in power right now." I would say that on the contrary both Congress and the executive branch seem to be heavily compromised in their oversight by a cozy connection with major powers on Wall Street, and that's part of the problem. Many of the top government advisors are the very people who presided over the epic fail of the financial sector.
 
Re: Obama XI: Turn And Face The Strange

The link points the ongoing schism on the left, one similar to the one on the right:

left segment 1: lunch pail blue collar workers (union, don't mind govt svcs)
left segment 2: intellectual elitists (as coulter would call them...best fit for me)
right segment 1: moral conservatives (god, guns, country)
right segment 2: financial voters (rich and/or focused on taxes and govt size)
 
Re: Obama XI: Turn And Face The Strange

5mn_Major said:
The link points the ongoing schism on the left, one similar to the one on the right:

left segment 1: lunch pail blue collar workers (union, don't mind govt svcs)
left segment 2: intellectual elitists (as coulter would call them...best fit for me)
right segment 1: moral conservatives (god, guns, country)
right segment 2: financial voters (rich and/or focused on taxes and govt size)
Click to expand...
Me R1.5

Would you also say that "strict constuctionalists" are more on the right and the "living constitution" more on the left? And then there are the parenthetical constitutionionalist which believe that "Congress shall make no law (except when it benefits us).." :)
 
Re: Obama XI: Turn And Face The Strange

Kepler said:
Financial regulation might be another example, unfortunately. There should be broad bipartisan support for oversight and regulation after the Meltdown -- the differences should be technical issues regarding scope and enforcement. But because both parties are obsessed with not handing the other side a "victory," the debate is translated into loud, ideological terms.
Click to expand...

I think I agree with this, however the current regulation bill is a joke. Letting Chris Dodd, who has been in the pockets of bankers for a long long time be the leader for the bill is shameful, and I have no problem with anyone who opposes it.
 
Re: Obama XI: Turn And Face The Strange

5mn_Major said:
The link points the ongoing schism on the left, one similar to the one on the right:

left segment 1: lunch pail blue collar workers (union, don't mind govt svcs)
left segment 2: intellectual elitists (as coulter would call them...best fit for me)
right segment 1: moral conservatives (god, guns, country)
right segment 2: financial voters (rich and/or focused on taxes and govt size)
Click to expand...

joecct said:
Me R1.5
Click to expand...

Me segment 2 overall (leaning left)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top